logo

Articles

No. 2(25) (2023): The Unbearable Lightness of Free Time

The Social Life of Reading: The Social Distinction of Leisure Reading

Submitted
2 November 2024
Published
08-05-2025

Abstract

This article discusses the social dimensions of reading practices and aesthetic choices in Poland. Attention is focused on leisure reading – reading books on the basis of the reader’s spontaneous choice and ability to find satisfaction from this pastime. A nationwide survey on the social readership of books, which has been conducted by the National Library since the early 1990s, and annually since 2012, allows us to track continuity and changes in the reading preferences of Poles, including the socio-demographic determinants of the choice of reading as an attractive form of spending leisure time. In Poland, the systematic reading of books (i.e., a minimum of seven per year) is a leisure hobby pursued only by people distinguished by the highest cultural capital. The article shows to what extent there are “cultural omnivores” among the readers, preferring literary genres from various aesthetic levels. Spontaneous reading choices were analysed and a category of aesthetically engaged readers, that is, readers reading at least two books of the same type, was distinguished. The analysis pointed to genre literature – crime, thriller, and romance novels – as the most important and common reading choice for Poles.

References

  1. Alexander J., Smith P. 2003. The strong program in cultural sociology: Elements of a structural hermeneutics, [w:] The Meanings of Social Life: A Cultural Sociology, red. J. Alexander, Oxford University Press, s. 11–26.
  2. Ankudowicz J. 1982. Publiczność literacka – publiczność czytająca (kilka uwag o badaniach cz ytelnictwa), [w:] Publiczność literacka, red. S. Żółkiewski, M. Hopfinger, Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich–Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk, s. 105–120.
  3. Asplund S.B., Egeland B.L, Olin-Scheller Ch. 2024. Sharing is caring: Young people’s narratives about Booktok and volitional reading, „Language and Education”, nr 38(4), s. 635–651, https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2024.2324947.
  4. Atkinson W. 2016. The structure of literary taste: Class, gender and reading in the UK, „Cultural Sociology”, nr 10(2), s. 247–266.
  5. Bauman Z. 2006. Płynna nowoczesność, Wydawnictwo Literackie.
  6. Bourdieu P. 2005. Dystynkcja. Społeczna krytyka władzy sądzenia, tłum. P. Biłos, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
  7. Burton D., Hamilton M., Ivanič R., red. 1999. Situated Literacies: Reading and Writing in Context, Routledge.
  8. Caroll N. 2004. Filozofia horroru albo paradoksy uczuć, tłum. M. Przylipiak, słowo/obraz terytoria.
  9. Chymkowski R., Zasacka Z. 2021. Stan czytelnictwa w Polsce w 2020 roku, Biblioteka Narodowa, https://bn.org.pl/download/document/1621420376.pdf.
  10. Csíkszentmihályi M. 2005. Przepływ, tłum. M. Wajda-Kacmajor, Moderator.
  11. Dawidowicz-Chymkowska O., Michalak D. 2015. Stan czytelnictwa w Polsce w 2012 roku: transmisja kultury pisma, Biblioteka Narodowa
  12. De Certeau M. 2008. Wynaleźć codzienność, tłum. K. Thiel-Jańczuk, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
  13. Di Maggio P. 1992. Social structure institutions and cultural goods: The case of the United States, [w:] Social Theory for a Changing Society, red. P. Bourdieu, J.S. Coleman, Z. Walaszek, Routledge–Taylor and Francis Group, s. 133–165.
  14. Dumazedier J. 1974. Sociology of Leisure, Elsevier.
  15. Felski R. 2016. Literatura w użyciu, tłum. J. Borkowska i in., Wydawnictwo PSP.
  16. Fiske J. 1989. Understanding Popular Culture, Routledge.
  17. Friedman S., Kuipers G. 2013. The divisive power of humour: Comedy, taste and symbolic boundaries, „Cultural Sociology”, nr 7(2), s. 179–195.
  18. Gans H.J. 2008. Popular Culture and High Culture: An Analysis and Evaluation of Taste, Basic Books.
  19. Gerrig R.J. 1998. Experiencing Narrative Worlds: On the Psychological Activities of Reading, Westview Press.
  20. Griswold W. 2007. Regionalism and the Reading Class, University of Chicago Press.
  21. Griswold W., Lenaghan E., Naffziger M. 2011. Readers as audiences, [w:] The Handbook of Media Audiences, red. V. Nightingale, Blackwell Publishing, s. 19–40.
  22. Griswold W., McDonnell T., Wright N. 2005. Reading and the reading class in the twenty-first century, „Annual Review of Sociology”, nr 31, s. 127–141, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.31.041304.122312.
  23. Hanquinet L. 2017. Exploring dissonance and omnivorousness: Another look into the rise of eclecticism, „Cultural Sociology”, nr 11(2), s. 165–187.
  24. Holt D.B. 1997. Distinction in America? Recovering Bourdieu’s theory of tastes from its critics, „Poetics”, nr 25(2–3), s. 93–120.
  25. Ivey G., Johnston P.H. 2013. Engagement with young adult literature: Outcomes and processes, „Reading Research Quarterly”, nr 48(3), s. 255–275.
  26. Jarness V. 2017. Cultural vs economic capital: Symbolic boundaries within the middle class, „Sociology”, nr 51(2), s. 357–373.
  27. Koopman E., Hakemulder F. 2015. Effects of literature on empathy and self-reflection: A theoretical-empirical framework, „Journal of Literary Theory”, nr 9(1), s. 79–111.
  28. Lahire B. 2008. The individual and the mixing of genres: Cultural dissonance and self-distinction, „Poetics”, nr 36(2–3), s. 166–188.
  29. Logan S., Johnston R.S. 2009. Gender differences in reading ability and attitudes: Examining where these differences lie, „Journal of Research in Reading”, nr 32(2), s. 199–214.
  30. Long E. 2012. O społecznej naturze czytania, tłum. M. Maryl, „Teksty Drugie”, nr 6(138), s. 136–166.
  31. López-Sintas J., Garcia Alavarez E. 2004. Omnivore versus univore consumption and its symbolic properties: Evidence from Spaniards’ performing arts attendance, „Poetics”, nr 32(6), s. 463–484.
  32. Martens M., Balling G., Higgason K.A. 2022. #BookTokMadeMeRead It: Young adult reading communities across an international, sociotechnical landscape, „Information nad Learning Sciences”, nr 123(11/12), s. 705–722, https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ils-07-2022-0086/full/html, dostęp: 20.09.2024.
  33. Martuszewska A. 2008. Radosne gry. O grach/zabawach literackich, słowo/ obraz terytoria.
  34. Merga M.K. 2014. Peer group and friend influences on the social acceptability of adolescent book reading, „Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy”, nr 57(6), s. 483–491.
  35. Merga M.K. 2021. How can Booktok on TikTok inform readers’ advisory services for young people?, „Library and Information Science Research”, nr 43(2), art. 101091, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2021.101091.
  36. Mizerkiewicz T. 2024. Cz ytanie postkrytyczne. Teorie i praktyki literaturoznawcze po konstruktywizmie, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.
  37. Miall D.S. 2006. Literary Reading: Empirical and Theoretical Studies, Peter Lang.
  38. Modleski T. 2007. Loving with a Vengeance: Mass-Produced Fantasies for Women, Routledge
  39. Mroczkowska D. 2020. Zrozumieć czas wolny. Przeobrażenia, tożsamość, doświadczanie, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.
  40. Nell V. 1988. Lost in a Book: The Psychology of Reading for Pleasure, Yale University Press.
  41. Olave M.A.Th. 2020. Book love: A cultural sociological interpretation of the attachment to books, „Poetics”, nr 81, s. 1–11.
  42. Peterson R.A., Kern R.M. 1996. Changing highbrow taste: From snob to omnivore, „American Sociological Review”, nr 61(5), s. 900–907.
  43. Pianzola F., Rebora S., Lauer G. 2020. Wattpad as a resource for literary studies: Quantitative and qualitative examples of the importance of digital social reading and readers’ comments in the margins, „PLoS ONE”, nr 15(1), s. 1–48, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226708.
  44. Prieur A., Savage M. 2011. Updating cultural capital theory: A discussion based on studies in Denmark and in Britain, „Poetics”, nr 36(6), s. 566–580.
  45. Radway J.A. 1991. Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature, The University of North Carolina Press.
  46. Ramos M.R., Li D., Bennett M.R., Mogra U., Massey D.S., Miles Hewstone M. 2024. Variety is the spice of life: Diverse social networks are associated with social cohesion and well-being, „Psychological Science”, nr 35(6), s. 665–680.
  47. Rojek Ch. 1995. Decentring Leisure: Rethinking Leisure Theory, Sage.
  48. Rojek Ch. 2005. Leisure Theory: Principles and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan.
  49. Rosenblatt L.M. 1994. The Reader, the Text, the Poem: The Transactional Theory of the Literary Work, with a New Preface and Epilogue, SIU Press.
  50. Scholes L. 2018. Boys, Masculinities and Reading: Gender Identity and Literacy as Social Practice, Routledge.
  51. Simmel G. 2005. Socjologia, tłum. M. Łukasiewicz, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
  52. Smagorinsky P. 2001. If meaning is constructed, what is it made from? Toward a cultural theory of reading, „Review of Educational Research”, nr 71(1), s. 133–169, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3516069, dostęp: 20.09.2024.
  53. The State of the Nation’s Adult Reading. 2024. The State of the Nation’s Adult Reading: 2024 Report, The Reading Agency, https://readingagency.org.uk/adult-reading-research-report-2024/, dostęp: 20.09.2024.
  54. Straus G., Wolff K. 1996. Czytanie i kupowanie książek w Polsce w 1994 r., Biblioteka Narodowa.
  55. Straus G., Wolff K. 1998. Zainteresowanie książką w społeczeństwie polskim w 1996 r., Biblioteka Narodowa.
  56. Straus G., Wolff K. 2000. Czytać, nie czytać… Kupować, nie kupować…, Biblioteka Narodowa.
  57. Sztompka P. 2008. Życie codzienne – temat najnowszej socjologii, [w:] Socjologia codzienności, red. P. Sztompka, M. Bogunia-Borowska, Znak, s. 15–52.
  58. Tarkowska E. 2001. Czas społeczny a czas wolny: koncepcje i współczesne przemiany, [w:] Kobieta i kultura czasu wolnego, red. A. Żarnowska, A. Szwarc, Wydawnictwo DiG, s. 17–33.
  59. Van Eijck K., Knulst W. 2005. No more need for snobbism: Highbrow cultural participation in a taste democracy, „European Sociological Review”, nr 21(5), s. 513–528.
  60. Warde A., Wright D., Gayo-Cal M. 2007. Understanding cultural omnivorousness or the myth of the cultural omnivore, „Cultural Sociology”, nr 1, s. 143–164.
  61. Wentzel K.R., Wigfield A. 1998. Academic and social motivational influences on students’ academic performance, „Educational Psychology Review”, nr 10, s. 155–173.
  62. Wnuk-Lipiński E. 1981. Budżet czasu – struktura społeczna – polityka społeczna, Wydawnictwo IFiS PAN.
  63. Wright D. 2011. Making tastes for everything: Omnivorousness and cultural abundance, „Journal for Cultural Research”, nr 15(4), s. 355–371.
  64. Zasacka Z. 2008. Zagubieni w lekturze – czas wykorzystany czy stracony, [w:] „Czas ukoi nas?”: jakość życia i czas wolny we współczesnym społeczeństwie, red. W. Muszyński, Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek, s. 239–249.
  65. Zasacka Z. 2020. Czytelnictwo młodzieży szkolnej 2017, „Rocznik Biblioteki Narodowej”, nr 51, s. 11–242.
  66. Zasacka Z., Chymkowski R. 2022. Stan czytelnictwa książek w Polsce w drugim roku pandemii (2021–2022), Biblioteka Narodowa, https://www.bn.org.pl/download/document/1656416398.pdf, dostęp: 20.09.2024.
  67. Zasacka Z., Chymkowski R. 2023. Stan czytelnictwa książek w Polsce w 2022 roku, Biblioteka Narodowa, https://www.bn.org.pl/download/document/1688127220.pdf, dostęp: 20.09.2024.
  68. Zasacka Z., Chymkowski R. 2024. Stan czytelnictwa w Polsce w 2023 roku, Biblioteka Narodowa, https://www.bn.org.pl/download/document/1717404995.pdf, dostęp: 20.09.2024.
  69. Zavisca J. 2005. The status of cultural omnivorism: A case study of reading in Russia, „Social Forces”, nr 84(2), s. 1233–55.
  70. Zunchine L. 2006. Why We Read Fiction: Theory of Mind and the Novel, The Ohio State University Pres.
  71. Żółkiewski S. 1973. Kultura literacka 1918–1932, Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 21

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.