Thais And Books

[Glauka]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are Star Wars novels okay?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, those novels are a MUST...

I have not read any are they any good?

[Tippaporn]

And my favorite posting is . . .

I'm with you. While I think reading is generally good for people, as it has the ability to expand some parts of your brain that other activities can't, there is too much looking down on people who do not like reading.

Well said, Meadish. I think the above quote succinctly sums up this topic. I'd like to add to it, if I may, even if my perspective may seem to digress a little.

I feel that there's an underlying, unspoken, and extremely judgemental implication running throughout this topic: it's a bad thing if you don't read. (One can substitute any number of synonyms for the word "bad," depending on how harsh or soft one would like their judgement to appear.)

This judgement then logically concludes that if people don't read then there must be something wrong with their picture.

Furthermore, even within reading itself there seems to be judgement placed on what type of material is "worthy" and what isn't.

Now, to digress slightly, and to offer a hypothesis - if the goal in life is happiness then what happens to the question of the right or wrong of reading? It miraculously disappears. What happens to the question of whether or not the Thais need to be reformed in that Thailand should become a land of avid readers? Gone, too. What happens to the question of whether it's "appropriate" to read comic books? Likewise, dissipated into thin air.

Would it be inappropriate, or possibly even obscene, to aver: "If it makes you happy, do it. If it doesn't, don't?" This could be restated: "If it interests you, indulge. If not, then don't."

Next question - is it anyone's place to decide for another what would make them happy, or what should interest them? I believe it would be quite necessary to be intimate with their personal intentions firstly. An impossible task, IMHO!

There are, no doubt, a lot of people who have benefited tremendously on a personal level from reading. (Myself included. I went for 10 years without owning a TV; but I had 1,500 books in my "library" at the time.) Whether reading was pursued strictly for enjoyment or to satisfy a number of intentions simultaneously, such as also broadening one's knowledge, it obviously satisfied a desire of one sort or another for the individual. All seems to be quite well with that.

Next question, or questions - isn't the diversity in the world grand? Doesn't the flavor of Thailand appeal to many of us, precisely because it is so much different from that which we have known all our lives? Isn't it awesome to revel in the thrill of discovery each and every day, all of our senses fully immersed in the difference? And as different as it is harmony still exists? The opportunity to satisfy ones self in a multitude of ways is here, now?

If the Thais, whether by and large or not, have other interests besides reading, and yet they, as with anyone else, have personal intentions which they are able to fulfill pursuing other avenues, and thereby finding that which makes them happy, is there any need to "correct" anything? Are they "missing" something important that is intrinsic to a life of true happiness.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with the picture here regarding reading. One of the attitudes that I feel exists aplenty in this land is a "live and let live" attitude. How I cherish that!!! No more long-nosed neighbors for me, viewing me as a broken and inadequate soul who desperately needs their wisdom and guiding light to save me from a life that is surely doomed to travel a tragic and wasteful existence.

Excuse me for what can certainly be construed as a crude and rude remark, for that is viewing a helpful hand rather harshly, I know. And yet you don't insist to tie a six-year-old's shoe once he's ready to do it for himself. Rather, you applaud his efforts and ability to satisfy his own desires and intentions to become . . . what he wants to become.

There's a huge difference in viewing something, or someone, as broken - because they don't do or act as you would for yourself - versus enthusiastically "turning them on" to something that has brought happiness to yourself. The former turns you into a missionary, the latter into a playmate. The missionary's attitude is that something needs to be saved (from God knows what, but usually from ones self) whereas the playmate disregards the rejection to play a particular game, unperturbed, and so seeks to offer another game that is fun for both.

Thailand has, no doubt, developed along different lines than the west. Is it right or wrong? Is the west a state of perfection? Or perhaps it is the best of both worlds that people would like to see here. Noble desires on the part of each and everyone, I can assure you all. A necessity? That may be very questionable.

I'll append this here and now that I hope I have not given offense to anyone. I only wish to view the same object from yet another angle.

Edited December 14, 2005 by Tippaporn

[Glauka]

And my favorite posting is . . .

I'm with you. While I think reading is generally good for people, as it has the ability to expand some parts of your brain that other activities can't, there is too much looking down on people who do not like reading.

Well said, Meadish. I think the above quote succinctly sums up this topic. I'd like to add to it, if I may, even if my perspective may seem to digress a little.

I feel that there's an underlying, unspoken, and extremely judgemental implication running throughout this topic: it's a bad thing if you don't read. (One can substitute any number of synonyms for the word "bad," depending on how harsh or soft one would like their judgement to appear.)

This judgement then logically concludes that if people don't read then there must be something wrong with their picture.

Furthermore, even within reading itself there seems to be judgement placed on what type of material is "worthy" and what isn't.

Now, to digress slightly, and to offer a hypothesis - if the goal in life is happiness then what happens to the question of the right or wrong of reading? It miraculously disappears. What happens to the question of whether or not the Thais need to be reformed in that Thailand should become a land of avid readers? Gone, too. What happens to the question of whether it's "appropriate" to read comic books? Likewise, dissipated into thin air.

Would it be inappropriate, or possibly even obscene, to aver: "If it makes you happy, do it. If it doesn't, don't?" This could be restated: "If it interests you, indulge. If not, then don't."

Next question - is it anyone's place to decide for another what would make them happy, or what should interest them? I believe it would be quite necessary to be intimate with their personal intentions firstly. An impossible task, IMHO!

There are, no doubt, a lot of people who have benefited tremendously on a personal level from reading. (Myself included. I went for 10 years without owning a TV; but I had 1,500 books in my "library" at the time.) Whether reading was pursued strictly for enjoyment or to satisfy a number of intentions simultaneously, such as also broadening one's knowledge, it obviously satisfied a desire of one sort or another for the individual. All seems to be quite well with that.

Next question, or questions - isn't the diversity in the world grand? Doesn't the flavor of Thailand appeal to many of us, precisely because it is so much different from that which we have known all our lives? Isn't it awesome to revel in the thrill of discovery each and every day, all of our senses fully immersed in the difference? And as different as it is harmony still exists? The opportunity to satisfy ones self in a multitude of ways is here, now?

If the Thais, whether by and large or not, have other interests besides reading, and yet they, as with anyone else, have personal intentions which they are able to fulfill pursuing other avenues, and thereby finding that which makes them happy, is there any need to "correct" anything? Are they "missing" something important that is intrinsic to a life of true happiness.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with the picture here regarding reading. One of the attitudes that I feel exists aplenty in this land is a "live and let live" attitude. How I cherish that!!! No more long-nosed neighbors for me, viewing me as a broken and inadequate soul who desperately needs their wisdom and guiding light to save me from a life that is surely doomed to travel a tragic and wasteful existence.

Excuse me for what can certainly be construed as a crude and rude remark, for that is viewing a helpful hand rather harshly, I know. And yet you don't insist to tie a six-year-old's shoe once he's ready to do it for himself. Rather, you applaud his efforts and ability to satisfy his own desires and intentions to become . . . what he wants to become.

There's a huge difference in viewing something, or someone, as broken - because they don't do or act as you would for yourself - versus enthusiastically "turning them on" to something that has brought happiness to yourself. The former turns you into a missionary, the latter into a playmate. The missionary's attitude is that something needs to be saved (from God knows what, but usually from ones self) whereas the playmate disregards the rejection to play a particular game, unperturbed, and so seeks to offer another game that is fun for both.

Thailand has, no doubt, developed along different lines than the west. Is it right or wrong? Is the west a state of perfection? Or perhaps it is the best of both worlds that people would like to see here. Noble desires on the part of each and everyone, I can assure you all. A necessity? That may be very questionable.

I'll append this here and now that I hope I have not given offense to anyone. I only wish to view the same object from yet another angle.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

WELL SAID

[meemiathai]

I was going to say "And my favorite posting is . . .

Now, to digress slightly, and to offer a hypothesis - if the goal in life is happiness then what happens to the question of the right or wrong of reading?  It miraculously disappears.  What happens to the question of whether or not the Thais need to be reformed in that Thailand should become a land of avid readers?  Gone, too.  What happens to the question of whether it's "appropriate" to read comic books?  Likewise, dissipated into thin air.

" but must say that the rests are as good. I don't know about other people, but my goal in life sure is happiness!

Please recieve a "wai" with the most respectful manner from me.

Meadish's post was good of course. His posts have always been good anyway.

One of the attitudes that I feel exists aplenty in this land is a "live and let live" attitude. How I cherish that!!!

EXACTLY! One of the first good things I noticed and learned in Thailand.

I went for 10 years without owning a TV; but I had 1,500 books in my "library" at the time

I can see that you did learn from reading.

There's a huge difference in viewing something, or someone, as broken - because they don't do or act as you would for yourself - versus enthusiastically "turning them on" to something that has brought happiness to yourself. The former turns you into a missionary, the latter into a playmate. The missionary's attitude is that something needs to be saved (from God knows what, but usually from ones self) whereas the playmate disregards the rejection to play a particular game, unperturbed, and so seeks to offer another game that is fun for both.

This is so ###### good!

I feel that there's an underlying, unspoken, and extremely judgemental implication running throughout this topic: it's a bad thing if you don't read. (One can substitute any number of synonyms for the word "bad," depending on how harsh or soft one would like their judgement to appear.)

No one said so?

They only said it was stupid.

I don't read books, I am stupid. I don't read books, I am stupid.

I don't read books, I am stupid. I don't read books, I am stupid.

I don't read books, I am stupid. I don't read books, I am stupid.

I don't read books, I am stupid. I don't read books, I am stupid.

I don't read books, I am stupid. I don't .............

[thaibebop]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are Star Wars novels okay?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, those novels are a MUST...

I have not read any are they any good?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh Yes. They are very fun lite reading. They really fill it the world that you see in the movies.

[bina]

ok,

tippaporn, GREAT STUFF

and my own two more cents:

i am a book worm... i eat books, from lack of english books when i first came to israel, i read cornflake boxes, instruction manuals of appliances (i said i was desparate didnt i)... and learned to read in hebrew very quickly...

now i am starting on thai, and i see that my partner who has discoverd the internet, reads voraciously, he just never had time or money (no shcool either, self taught like many rural thai)... yesterday i saw him take the engl/thai dictionary, type a thai word in the google, and read all the results... he said he wants to learn more... i thought that was a creative way to learn...

my three kids are dylexic and one only can read in english (fiction) and hebrew (instructional) but not the other way around. one cant really read but she sings and dances and learns orally, the third reads but w/o a computer cant really write intelligably... they are all bright intelligent creative humans...

i grew up on books (is it a jewish thing?) but books are not the end, just a means ....

i grew up in a family of intellectuals, culture etc... but music storytelling, art, dance, folk songs etc were /are equally treasured ... and not the name of the present book u read today... the bible was considered just as good, as was the talmud, the koran, and the latest dragons and dungeons epics, or steven hawkins....

how u apply what u learn and how inquisitive your mind is...(in whatever form, from studying a plant as a farmer, to putting leggo together with an intstruction manual, or watching ants carry kernals of corn) that matters... the written word is just an other tool among so many, to be used and applied, not the end itself

its not thais and books... its people and learning , and information in this day and age is more valued then the art of growing rice, or learning a long long folk song/story... and we are not any healthier or happier for it either as far as i can see....

[saraburioz]

My wife is Thai and reads books, lots of them - but she is different, obviously in the fact that she is well travelled and married a farang.

Any Thai with a similar education to yourself will read as many books. it is the ones that have had a bad education that don't read books, which unfortunately is most of them.

[Glauka]

My wife is Thai and reads books, lots of them - but she is different, obviously in the fact that she is well travelled and married a farang.

Any Thai with a similar education to yourself will read as many books. it is the ones that have had a bad education that don't read books, which unfortunately is most of them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

oh my gosh!!!!

normally I don´t care people political inclination, what they think about ecology, inmigration...I think everybody has to be respected for what they think...even tHOugh I don´t agree...most of the times I try to respect other people opinions

but with you I am going to make an exception...

Oh MY GOSH!!!!!

Edited December 15, 2005 by Glauka

[sadman]

Right.

Everybody must read lots of high brow books. If they don't, they're stupid.

If you read comics, you're stupid.

If you watch TV instead of reading a book, you're stupid.

No Thais read.

All Thais are stupid.

Anyone who disagrees with any of the above is either stupid or a bigot.

Give me a break. I read because I love it. I taught my children to read because they need it and it is a gift. If they choose not to read, that's fine - but at least they have the choice.

I don't care if other people don't want to read. It's none of my business. Several of my friends play a lot of golf. Golf bores the ar$e off me, so I choose not to play. What's the difference?

[Tippaporn]

ok,

tippaporn,  GREAT STUFF

and my own two more cents:

i am a book worm... i eat books, from lack of english books when i first came to israel, i read cornflake boxes, instruction manuals of appliances (i said i was desparate didnt i)... and learned to read in hebrew very quickly...

now i am starting on thai,  and i see that my partner who has discoverd the internet, reads voraciously, he just never had time or money (no shcool either, self taught like many rural thai)... yesterday i saw him take the engl/thai dictionary, type a thai word in the google, and read all the results... he said he wants to learn more... i thought that was a creative way to learn...

my three kids are dylexic and one only can read in english (fiction) and hebrew (instructional) but not the other way around.  one cant really read but she sings and dances and learns orally, the third reads but w/o a computer cant really write intelligably... they are all bright intelligent creative humans...

i grew up on books (is it a jewish thing?) but books are not the end, just a means ....

i grew up in a family of intellectuals, culture etc... but music storytelling, art, dance, folk songs etc were /are equally treasured ... and not the name of the present book u read today... the bible was considered just as good, as was the talmud, the koran, and the latest dragons and dungeons epics, or steven hawkins....

how u apply what u learn and how inquisitive your mind is...(in whatever form, from studying a plant as a farmer, to putting leggo together with an intstruction manual, or watching ants carry kernals of corn) that matters... the written word is just an other tool among so many, to be used and applied, not the end itself 

its not thais and books... its people and learning , and information in this day and age is more valued then the art of growing rice, or learning a long long folk song/story... and we are not any healthier or happier for it either as far as i can see....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well written, Bina. If it's fun for you and makes you happy that's what matters. If only the school systems would take the approach of focusing on the individual child's leanings and tendencies and nuture those rather than force-feeding them on topics they have no interest in, or at least interests they don't possess at the time. Oh my God, what did I start here??? Cancel that off-topic remark!

[Tippaporn]

Right.

Everybody must read lots of high brow books. If they don't, they're stupid.

If you read comics, you're stupid.

If you watch TV instead of reading a book, you're stupid.

No Thais read.

All Thais are stupid.

Anyone who disagrees with any of the above is either stupid or a bigot.

Give me a break. I read because I love it. I taught my children to read because they need it and it is a gift. If they choose not to read, that's fine - but at least they have the choice.

I don't care if other people don't want to read. It's none of my business. Several of my friends play a lot of golf. Golf bores the ar$e off me, so I choose not to play. What's the difference?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you play golf you are especially stupid! Just kidding, but it bores the hel_l out of me, too. What's worse (for me) is ever try watching it on TV? Who needs sleep seditives?

[Glauka]

ok,

tippaporn,  GREAT STUFF

and my own two more cents:

i am a book worm... i eat books, from lack of english books when i first came to israel, i read cornflake boxes, instruction manuals of appliances (i said i was desparate didnt i)... and learned to read in hebrew very quickly...

now i am starting on thai,  and i see that my partner who has discoverd the internet, reads voraciously, he just never had time or money (no shcool either, self taught like many rural thai)... yesterday i saw him take the engl/thai dictionary, type a thai word in the google, and read all the results... he said he wants to learn more... i thought that was a creative way to learn...

my three kids are dylexic and one only can read in english (fiction) and hebrew (instructional) but not the other way around.  one cant really read but she sings and dances and learns orally, the third reads but w/o a computer cant really write intelligably... they are all bright intelligent creative humans...

i grew up on books (is it a jewish thing?) but books are not the end, just a means ....

i grew up in a family of intellectuals, culture etc... but music storytelling, art, dance, folk songs etc were /are equally treasured ... and not the name of the present book u read today... the bible was considered just as good, as was the talmud, the koran, and the latest dragons and dungeons epics, or steven hawkins....

how u apply what u learn and how inquisitive your mind is...(in whatever form, from studying a plant as a farmer, to putting leggo together with an intstruction manual, or watching ants carry kernals of corn) that matters... the written word is just an other tool among so many, to be used and applied, not the end itself 

its not thais and books... its people and learning , and information in this day and age is more valued then the art of growing rice, or learning a long long folk song/story... and we are not any healthier or happier for it either as far as i can see....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well written, Bina. If it's fun for you and makes you happy that's what matters. If only the school systems would take the approach of focusing on the individual child's leanings and tendencies and nuture those rather than force-feeding them on topics they have no interest in, or at least interests they don't possess at the time. Oh my God, what did I start here??? Cancel that off-topic remark!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

AGAIN I AGREE (even with the off-topic remark)

Is so nice to find someone who thinks exactly the same as me (on this topic though) but who communicate those thoughs in such a good English...

[Bryan in Isaan]

My comments in green

And my favorite posting is . . .

I'm with you. While I think reading is generally good for people, as it has the ability to expand some parts of your brain that other activities can't, there is too much looking down on people who do not like reading.

Well said, Meadish. I think the above quote succinctly sums up this topic. I'd like to add to it, if I may, even if my perspective may seem to digress a little.

I feel that there's an underlying, unspoken, and extremely judgemental implication running throughout this topic: it's a bad thing if you don't read. (One can substitute any number of synonyms for the word "bad," depending on how harsh or soft one would like their judgement to appear.)

OK. It's probably bad if you don't read. How's that?

This judgement then logically concludes that if people don't read then there must be something wrong with their picture.

Furthermore, even within reading itself there seems to be judgement placed on what type of material is "worthy" and what isn't.

Now, to digress slightly, and to offer a hypothesis - if the goal in life is happiness then what happens to the question of the right or wrong of reading? It miraculously disappears. What happens to the question of whether or not the Thais need to be reformed in that Thailand should become a land of avid readers? Gone, too. What happens to the question of whether it's "appropriate" to read comic books? Likewise, dissipated into thin air.

As I understand your logic, if the goal in life is happiness then then whatever best accomplishes that goal is "right". It wasn't plain to me how the "rightness"of reading disappeared. Around our neighborhood most people think they would be happier if they had more money. Having more money is their goal. One of the best ways to accomplish that goal is to become better informed and smarter. One of the best ways to do that is to read, as a part of educating oneself. There are other ways, of course, but I submit that reading is one of the best ways. And I don't see how reading of comic books and tabloids will help them accomplish their goal of making more money. If so, fine, but I just don't think it will.

Would it be inappropriate, or possibly even obscene, to aver: "If it makes you happy, do it. If it doesn't, don't?" This could be restated: "If it interests you, indulge. If not, then don't."

Next question - is it anyone's place to decide for another what would make them happy, or what should interest them? I believe it would be quite necessary to be intimate with their personal intentions firstly. An impossible task, IMHO!

Not if they state their intentions and interests.

There are, no doubt, a lot of people who have benefited tremendously on a personal level from reading. (Myself included. I went for 10 years without owning a TV; but I had 1,500 books in my "library" at the time.) Whether reading was pursued strictly for enjoyment or to satisfy a number of intentions simultaneously, such as also broadening one's knowledge, it obviously satisfied a desire of one sort or another for the individual. All seems to be quite well with that.

Next question, or questions - isn't the diversity in the world grand? Doesn't the flavor of Thailand appeal to many of us, precisely because it is so much different from that which we have known all our lives? Isn't it awesome to revel in the thrill of discovery each and every day, all of our senses fully immersed in the difference? And as different as it is harmony still exists? The opportunity to satisfy ones self in a multitude of ways is here, now?

If the Thais, whether by and large or not, have other interests besides reading, and yet they, as with anyone else, have personal intentions which they are able to fulfill pursuing other avenues, and thereby finding that which makes them happy, is there any need to "correct" anything? Are they "missing" something important that is intrinsic to a life of true happiness.

If they are truly satisfied and happy, yes. We will leave those folks alone and not try to "correct" them. However, just like the French, the Australians, the Chinese, the Americans, the Nigerians; most Thais are dissatisfied and want to change their lives and/or better themselves. Why not offer helpful suggestions.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with the picture here regarding reading. One of the attitudes that I feel exists aplenty in this land is a "live and let live" attitude. How I cherish that!!! No more long-nosed neighbors for me, viewing me as a broken and inadequate soul who desperately needs their wisdom and guiding light to save me from a life that is surely doomed to travel a tragic and wasteful existence.

One may live and let live while still offering opinions or making suggestions. If you have ever lived in a rural Thai village you might notice how neighbors often express their opinions about how the other person should live their lives. I dare say they do so even more often than people in most western countries.

Excuse me for what can certainly be construed as a crude and rude remark, for that is viewing a helpful hand rather harshly, I know. And yet you don't insist to tie a six-year-old's shoe once he's ready to do it for himself. Rather, you applaud his efforts and ability to satisfy his own desires and intentions to become . . . what he wants to become.

There's a huge difference in viewing something, or someone, as broken - because they don't do or act as you would for yourself - versus enthusiastically "turning them on" to something that has brought happiness to yourself. The former turns you into a missionary, the latter into a playmate. The missionary's attitude is that something needs to be saved (from God knows what, but usually from ones self) whereas the playmate disregards the rejection to play a particular game, unperturbed, and so seeks to offer another game that is fun for both.

The only difference is salesmanship.

Thailand has, no doubt, developed along different lines than the west. Is it right or wrong? Is the west a state of perfection? Or perhaps it is the best of both worlds that people would like to see here. Noble desires on the part of each and everyone, I can assure you all. A necessity? That may be very questionable.

An absolute necessity (to read). No. Are non readers stupid? No, but they would be smarter if they read.

I'll append this here and now that I hope I have not given offense to anyone. I only wish to view the same object from yet another angle.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not offended, but I still disagree with the consenus that seems to be developing in this thread that to not read is OK. And I also disagree with the notion that we shouldn't offer criticism, however constructive. I think it is better to read than not to read.

Edited December 15, 2005 by Bryan in Isaan

[Tippaporn]

My comments in green

And my favorite posting is . . .

I'm with you. While I think reading is generally good for people, as it has the ability to expand some parts of your brain that other activities can't, there is too much looking down on people who do not like reading.

Well said, Meadish. I think the above quote succinctly sums up this topic. I'd like to add to it, if I may, even if my perspective may seem to digress a little.

I feel that there's an underlying, unspoken, and extremely judgemental implication running throughout this topic: it's a bad thing if you don't read. (One can substitute any number of synonyms for the word "bad," depending on how harsh or soft one would like their judgement to appear.)

OK. It's probably bad if you don't read. How's that?

Just fine!

This judgement then logically concludes that if people don't read then there must be something wrong with their picture.

Furthermore, even within reading itself there seems to be judgement placed on what type of material is "worthy" and what isn't.

Now, to digress slightly, and to offer a hypothesis - if the goal in life is happiness then what happens to the question of the right or wrong of reading? It miraculously disappears. What happens to the question of whether or not the Thais need to be reformed in that Thailand should become a land of avid readers? Gone, too. What happens to the question of whether it's "appropriate" to read comic books? Likewise, dissipated into thin air.

As I understand your logic, if the goal in life is happiness then whatever best accomplishes that goal is "right".

It would be "right" for you. Very important to append that.

It wasn't plain to me how the "rightness"of reading disappeared. Around our neighborhood most people think they would be happier if they had more money. Having more money is their goal.

Money doesn't insure happiness and yet it certainly, more often than not, is perceived that it does. In which case people focus on money rather than happiness. IMHO they've put the cart before the beast of burden and it makes, in many cases, all the difference in the world as to whether one is able to experience the happiness they so desire or not. In any case, you made my point with your statement that "people think they would be happier if they had more money." Happiness is still the ultimate goal; money is merely the means to that end. There are endless things that provide happiness and it's certainly true that the poor can be the "wealthiest" of all.

One of the best ways to accomplish that goal is to become better informed and smarter. One of the best ways to do that is to read, as a part of educating oneself. There are other ways, of course, but I submit that reading is one of the best ways.

If making money is the goal so that you can be happy (which usually implies some futuristic date, in which case many put off being happy until that event transpires) then, yes, reading is an avenue, and a good one, too. Whether or not it is, indeed, the "best" way still depends on the individual's personal preferences. If other avenues exist, which they do, then couldn't, and wouldn't, those then be considered the "best?"

And I don't see how reading of comic books and tabloids will help them accomplish their goal of making more money. If so, fine, but I just don't think it will.

If they satisfy and bring delight then they are beneficial, regardless of whether or not everyone can "see" how.

Would it be inappropriate, or possibly even obscene, to aver: "If it makes you happy, do it. If it doesn't, don't?" This could be restated: "If it interests you, indulge. If not, then don't."

Next question - is it anyone's place to decide for another what would make them happy, or what should interest them? I believe it would be quite necessary to be intimate with their personal intentions firstly. An impossible task, IMHO!

Not if they state their intentions and interests.

If there were sole intentions and they were simply stated, yes. But often it's an intertwining of multiple intentions, and while the predominant ones are usually expressed the whole rarely is. Sometimes easy to ascertain within someone else, oftentimes not. Yet when not you can still be left with the erroneous assumption that you do. Hope that doesn't come across as too confusing. Think of instances within your own experience when you thought you understood someone only to find out that you really didn't at all.

There are, no doubt, a lot of people who have benefited tremendously on a personal level from reading. (Myself included. I went for 10 years without owning a TV; but I had 1,500 books in my "library" at the time.) Whether reading was pursued strictly for enjoyment or to satisfy a number of intentions simultaneously, such as also broadening one's knowledge, it obviously satisfied a desire of one sort or another for the individual. All seems to be quite well with that.

Next question, or questions - isn't the diversity in the world grand? Doesn't the flavor of Thailand appeal to many of us, precisely because it is so much different from that which we have known all our lives? Isn't it awesome to revel in the thrill of discovery each and every day, all of our senses fully immersed in the difference? And as different as it is harmony still exists? The opportunity to satisfy ones self in a multitude of ways is here, now?

If the Thais, whether by and large or not, have other interests besides reading, and yet they, as with anyone else, have personal intentions which they are able to fulfill pursuing other avenues, and thereby finding that which makes them happy, is there any need to "correct" anything? Are they "missing" something important that is intrinsic to a life of true happiness?

If they are truly satisfied and happy, yes. We will leave those folks alone and not try to "correct" them. However, just like the French, the Australians, the Chinese, the Americans, the Nigerians; most Thais are dissatisfied and want to change their lives and/or better themselves. Why not offer helpful suggestions.

As long as you don't attempt the "missionary style" of being helpful then I believe you'll avoid quite a bit of grief and frustration. If you've had kids I'm sure you'll be able to identify with the plight of a missionary! Despite your best efforts to lend a helping hand they more than often refuse, only to find their own way . . . to be who and what is is they want to be, regardless of whether or not it fits your mold or carries your seal of approval.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with the picture here regarding reading. One of the attitudes that I feel exists aplenty in this land is a "live and let live" attitude. How I cherish that!!! No more long-nosed neighbors for me, viewing me as a broken and inadequate soul who desperately needs their wisdom and guiding light to save me from a life that is surely doomed to travel a tragic and wasteful existence.

One may live and let live while still offering opinions or making suggestions. If you have ever lived in a rural Thai village you might notice how neighbors often express their opinions about how the other person should live their lives. I dare say they do so even more often than people in most western countries.

Exactly! Offering is fun and rewarding. Imposing, though, is a drag. And, yes, there are always people everywhere who enjoy claiming to know what's best for everyone else. Again, save yourself a lot of grief and don't repeat their mistakes.

Excuse me for what can certainly be construed as a crude and rude remark, for that is viewing a helpful hand rather harshly, I know. And yet you don't insist to tie a six-year-old's shoe once he's ready to do it for himself. Rather, you applaud his efforts and ability to satisfy his own desires and intentions to become . . . what he wants to become.

There's a huge difference in viewing something, or someone, as broken - because they don't do or act as you would for yourself - versus enthusiastically "turning them on" to something that has brought happiness to yourself. The former turns you into a missionary, the latter into a playmate. The missionary's attitude is that something needs to be saved (from God knows what, but usually from ones self) whereas the playmate disregards the rejection to play a particular game, unperturbed, and so seeks to offer another game that is fun for both.

The only difference is salesmanship.

Good point! I love salesmen . . . when I'm interested in their wares. And when not they are a total nuisance. Again, offer your wares and be happy to find those who are interested. There are enough customers out there to keep you busy. Try to push your product onto people who don't feel they have the slightest need for them (despite your perception of what their need is) and you may as well be selling refrigerators to Eskimos! (Are you sure you understand their intentions and interests and what's "best" for them?? Or is it more an issue of another behaving as you would like, because if they don't there's a part of you that can't find happiness, thus the easiest solution appearing to be to change their behavior rather than to change yourself in a way that allows you to be happy regardless of their choice? Not insinuating the case is yours, merely throwing out a question. )

Thailand has, no doubt, developed along different lines than the west. Is it right or wrong? Is the west a state of perfection? Or perhaps it is the best of both worlds that people would like to see here. Noble desires on the part of each and everyone, I can assure you all. A necessity? That may be very questionable.

An absolute necessity (to read). No. Are non readers stupid? No, but they would be smarter if they read.

I detect a huge prejudgement with that statement, both in terms of reaching some indefinable end (or rather a preferential end) and as to individual worth. Is there more worth in a sage than a simpleton? Certainly, if you are unable to understand the worth of a simpleton. I know that sounds like utter rubbish yet there's more there than readily meets the eye. I'll abstain from going there . . .

I'll append this here and now that I hope I have not given offense to anyone. I only wish to view the same object from yet another angle.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not offended, but I still disagree with the consensus that seems to be developing in this thread that to not read is OK. And I also disagree with the notion that we shouldn't offer criticism, however constructive. I think it is better to read than not to read.

To not read is O.K. Again, for some. These people are different from you and their desires may never be understood by you. Trust me, no one will ever be in a position to understand what all others choices are. There's too much diversity! Simply pick and choose for yourself and allow others to do the same. What's "right" for one does not apply to the lot, and never, ever will. I thank God (or whoever/whatever) for that. It's the accompanying judgement as to "good and bad," "right and wrong" that creates all of the distress. I truly believe that it our place to judge only for ourselves and absolutely not to judge others. For myself, I do not like to build standards for others with the expectation that they are to follow, nor attempt to narrow the expanse of existence to mirror simply myself.

I don't believe, though, that anyone here is adverse to the notion of extending criticism, especially as it is meant to benefit, but certainly not if it is to deride.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There's one other final point I'd like to make about reading with regards to learning. Life experience teaches. In that sense we are all learning one thing or another. That most definitely regards myself! My opinions are my own and I enjoy offering them, so please don't view me as a rabid lecturer.

[Bryan in Isaan]

My comments in green

(clipped for brevity - and for mercy on the ThaiVisa servers)

There's one other final point I'd like to make about reading with regards to learning. Life experience teaches. In that sense we are all learning one thing or another. That most definitely regards myself! My opinions are my own and I enjoy offering them, so please don't view me as a rabid lecturer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good clarifying post, Tippaporn. I won't go over it again point by point, but as you commented, one cannot ever fully understand the needs or intentions of another person, whether cross culturally or not.

What I offer is my opinion only. The term "missionary" was mentioned a few times. I think even a good missionary can suggest, offer opinions and persuade occasionally, but should not impose on those who are not interested.

Bryan

Edited December 16, 2005 by Bryan in Isaan

[Tippaporn]

My comments in green

(clipped for brevity - and for mercy on the ThaiVisa servers)

There's one other final point I'd like to make about reading with regards to learning. Life experience teaches. In that sense we are all learning one thing or another. That most definitely regards myself! My opinions are my own and I enjoy offering them, so please don't view me as a rabid lecturer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good clarifying post, Tippaporn. I won't go over it again point by point, but as you commented, one cannot ever fully understand the needs or intentions of another person, whether cross culturally or not.

What I offer is my opinion only. The term "missionary" was mentioned a few times. I think even a good missionary can suggest, offer opinions and persuade occasionally, but should not impose on those who are not interested.

Bryan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I absolutely agree. Hey, isn't that what I'm doing here? I thoroughly enjoyed your perspective as well, Bryan. And envy you for living in Isaan.