Robert A. Stebbins, The Committed Reader: Reading Utility, Pleasure, and Fulfillment in the Twenty-First Century. Lanham: Scarecrow Press, Inc., 2013, 143 pp., $40.00 paper (9780-8108-8596-7). I was at once intrigued by the title of Robert Stebbins' The Committed Reader, especially having received the book review in the midst of reading undergraduate final exams. The full title, suggesting a focus on the various types of reading we engage in and encounter in the 21st century, deepened my interest. After all, most of what we sociologists do involves the varieties of reading included in the subtitle: our research and teaching spread across reading utility, pleasure, and fulfilment; we strive to teach our students how to go beyond the mere Google-style of reading to engage with texts; and our plans sabbatical almost always, if unofficially, include finally reading for pleasure. It is unfortunate, then, that the lead of the title regarding the committed reader ends up disappearing in this work, leaving it more encyclopaedic in its approach to reading and readership than committed. Stebbins' approach in this work derives from a combination of library and information studies and the application of his own leisure perspective. That perspective, which starts from a definition of leisure as uncoerced, contextually framed activity engaged in during free time, which people want to do and, using their abilities and resources, actually do in either a satisfying or a fulfilling way (or both) (p. 24), is then opened up to classify three approaches to leisure activity (casual serious pursuits, or project-based leisure). After briefly addressing casual and project-based forms of Stebbins goes on to break down the category of serious pursuits into leisure, with three subcategories (amateur, volunteer, and hobbyist), and devotee work. The rest of the work of this book reflects the application of Stebbins' serious leisure perspective to the contact points between a variety of sociological factors and the types of reading mentioned in the title. So, instance, Stebbins' analysis of pleasure reading engages with a variety of purposes reading, including entertainment, imaginative play, as a trigger conversation, sensory stimulation, relaxation, and information or knowledge. Included in the discussion of each of these purposes are a range of sociological touch points, including the classification of forms of fiction and nonfiction pleasurable reading materials, the roles of entertainment and edutainment in society, and the social-psychological and societal benefits of pleasurable reading. Most of the data that provides the basis the analysis here is drawn from either governmental surveys and censuses or from a wide range of secondary research in the sociology of culture and library and information studies areas. The approach to the three other forms of reading proceeds in a similar manner. It should be noted that I would call Stebbins' serious leisure perspective taxonomic rather than phenomenological one very important reason--this work is oriented more to the identification of various types and constitutive elements of action (in this case, reading) rather than the subjective experience of those actional forms. This work reads more akin to a Weberian approach, a la his analysis of the ideal-types of social action, or the work of Diderot and the Encyclopedists, rather than approaching its topic in a manner closer to Merleau-Ponty or Schutz. It is precisely in this approach that I believe both the strength and the weakness of Stebbins' work lie. Its strength is this taxonomic effort. For readers who are interested in such a breakdown of the various approaches to the act of reading and their sociological and social-psychological touchpoints, this work will be a very useful contribution to their libraries. The intersection of Stebbins' serious leisure perspective and library and information studies will also be of interest to LIS scholars, as it could present a useful guide understanding and analyzing the approaches readers bring to bear on the act of reading and, to extrapolate wildly, of potentially reorganizing institutional and informational resources so as to meet the needs of readers more effectively. …
Read full abstract