Opening and cyclopedia and dictionaries at random and reading is something I loved to do as a kid. I can’t say I read an entire set of encyclopedia front to back, however! Great story, a good way to get started on reading and understanding the world.
Admittedly, I was a bit of an odd child. 😜 I think reading them front-to-back in alphabetical order was a subconscious effort to rein in my ADHD (of which I was unaware at the time.) Or, as I have sometimes considered, I may be a touch on the spectrum, and that could have contributed to my desire (need?) to read everything in order.
On my first pass through the collection, I relished the brief entries. Only when I reached the more interesting topics or on my second pass-through did I wish they were more complete. However, as a teacher, I have learned that sometimes, giving less information is better, as it creates more curiosity in the learners.
I always envied my friends who had sets of encyclopedias in their homes. Reading was big in our family, but always from the library. My bestie had World Book, which I always thought of as the budget version. Britannica was for the rich and fancy.
I felt strange having it in the house at first. Of course, I didn’t get it until I did. My father may not have read to me, as far as I recall, but he did set me up with the tools I needed. I still loved going to the stone town library in my hometown for the sheer variety of books available. While toy stores only engaged my ADHD bird brain, skipping from shiny object to shiny object, libraries and bookstores engaged my curiosity and focus. They still do.
One of the most frustrating experiences a reader can have is finding an encyclopedia entry that is too short or is somewhat unclear or lacking in describing its subject. Tolerable in the age of the internet, but in my largely internet-less childhood much less so.
As a teacher, I have learned that sometimes half-answers are better than full answers, as they engage curiosity. If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. If you give him half a fish, he is still hungry and motivated to learn how to get more. So to speak…
Aug 11·edited Aug 11Liked by M. E. Rothwell, Steve Henneberry
I still have Encyclopaedia Britannica, that I am finding too hard to part with. Reading them as a book, from cover to cover is a great idea. May be this is what I need to do.
It is certainly a better alternative to doom scrolling. I was not aware of it until reading your comment, but the Random link on Wikipedia would be an interesting alternative. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
The question becomes: Is it planned obsolescence, or is the sheer amount of available information growing too quickly for the printed encyclopedia model? I would hate to admit the latter, but any continued prints must include the publication date in bold.
Libraries must continue to exist, and the tactile experience of reading from physical pages has educational benefits. The question of profitability is certainly an issue, but I hope there is a solution that would allow such volumes to stay in distribution without endangering the objectivity of the information.
Logistics: space, cost, warehousing. Cyberspace is cheaper and doesn't take up the room (unless you want to talk about the size of servers coming our way).
We had a Colliers set in our home that was quite well read. My dad was a used book dealer and publisher. Among many books he was always looking for was the earlier Britanicas, the ones that still had the full length history of the Roman Empire. Reading those old tomes was quite an experience for a little guy. What a world they open.
Opening and cyclopedia and dictionaries at random and reading is something I loved to do as a kid. I can’t say I read an entire set of encyclopedia front to back, however! Great story, a good way to get started on reading and understanding the world.
Admittedly, I was a bit of an odd child. 😜 I think reading them front-to-back in alphabetical order was a subconscious effort to rein in my ADHD (of which I was unaware at the time.) Or, as I have sometimes considered, I may be a touch on the spectrum, and that could have contributed to my desire (need?) to read everything in order.
Love this! I too spent a lot of time with our encyclopedias, always frustrated that the entries were too short!
On my first pass through the collection, I relished the brief entries. Only when I reached the more interesting topics or on my second pass-through did I wish they were more complete. However, as a teacher, I have learned that sometimes, giving less information is better, as it creates more curiosity in the learners.
Agreed! Those short entries definitely left me hungry for more knowledge, not bored and flipping pages away.
I always envied my friends who had sets of encyclopedias in their homes. Reading was big in our family, but always from the library. My bestie had World Book, which I always thought of as the budget version. Britannica was for the rich and fancy.
I felt strange having it in the house at first. Of course, I didn’t get it until I did. My father may not have read to me, as far as I recall, but he did set me up with the tools I needed. I still loved going to the stone town library in my hometown for the sheer variety of books available. While toy stores only engaged my ADHD bird brain, skipping from shiny object to shiny object, libraries and bookstores engaged my curiosity and focus. They still do.
Ah, I remember well that phase my son went through as a boy, when his desire to acquire was satisfied equally well at the library as at the toy store.
One of the most frustrating experiences a reader can have is finding an encyclopedia entry that is too short or is somewhat unclear or lacking in describing its subject. Tolerable in the age of the internet, but in my largely internet-less childhood much less so.
As a teacher, I have learned that sometimes half-answers are better than full answers, as they engage curiosity. If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. If you give him half a fish, he is still hungry and motivated to learn how to get more. So to speak…
I still have Encyclopaedia Britannica, that I am finding too hard to part with. Reading them as a book, from cover to cover is a great idea. May be this is what I need to do.
It is certainly a better alternative to doom scrolling. I was not aware of it until reading your comment, but the Random link on Wikipedia would be an interesting alternative. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
A beautifully told story. Congratulations on your achievements.
Thank you, Maureen.
Updates every year. Information retrieved became planned obsolescence when internet programs collected more than any one could ever use.
The question becomes: Is it planned obsolescence, or is the sheer amount of available information growing too quickly for the printed encyclopedia model? I would hate to admit the latter, but any continued prints must include the publication date in bold.
Moot point. Lack of door to door salespeople. Volume of info, cost of publication.
Libraries must continue to exist, and the tactile experience of reading from physical pages has educational benefits. The question of profitability is certainly an issue, but I hope there is a solution that would allow such volumes to stay in distribution without endangering the objectivity of the information.
Space race. Libraries are limited. Visitors are becoming scarce. Holographic images next.
Logistics: space, cost, warehousing. Cyberspace is cheaper and doesn't take up the room (unless you want to talk about the size of servers coming our way).
Love Steve! I’m so glad to see you featured him.
Thank you, Andrei. You are too kind. 🙏
We had a Colliers set in our home that was quite well read. My dad was a used book dealer and publisher. Among many books he was always looking for was the earlier Britanicas, the ones that still had the full length history of the Roman Empire. Reading those old tomes was quite an experience for a little guy. What a world they open.
Really cool article