<p>Is a well-read person someone who omnivorously reads many different genres, including classic novels, nonfiction, fiction, and so on?
Can someone who only reads nonfiction be said to be well-read?</p>
<p>Well, my husband reads voraciously, but only non-fiction (biographies are one of his favorites). The last time he read a fictional book or a novel was probably for a required class. He has a PhD, has worked in a fairly prominent college library, and is currently a college professor. I consider him very well read.</p>
<p>I believe one who reads only nonfiction can be considered “well read.” I also believe one who reads fiction can be considered well read without necessarily reading the “classics.” And some who have read the classics may be widely considered well read, but may be boneheads! Just like everything else in life, we are not what we do … we are so much more than that.</p>
<p>I disagree with kelsmom. The spirit of the term “well read” implies more than just reading a lot. This doesn’t mean that one must read a wide variety of genres–although that’s probably ideal–but if one focuses on a single genre, I wouldn’t consider him well read unless he reads widely within that genre. In the case of fiction, that means a nice dose of the classic and the contemporary.</p>
<p>Interesting question.</p>
<p>Thanks for making me think, as I am still puzzling over what the real definition of ‘well read’ is. I know my son is, as he reads from every section of a bookstore or library. </p>
<p>I am not, as I lack the variety.</p>
<p>I pointed out to someone just the other day: go into a large bookstore. Assume that 90 percent of the titles are crap. How long will it take you to read the remaining 10 percent?</p>
<p>No one can read it all. Everyone is bound to have “holes” in their knowledge, even the “well read.” But to the OP, someone who doesn’t read fiction has some major holes in their knowledge; fiction tells us a lot about the human condition in a way that biography, psychology, etc., can only begin to approach. My bad that I don’t read more poetry, which really does so in spades.</p>
<p>My dad is an engineer. He loves to read, but hates fiction. “What do I want to read other people’s daydreams for?” he said. (btw, I was a lit major).</p>
<p>I’ll sometimes get on a kick and read most of a particular fiction author’s books - James Patterson, Cussler, Baldacci, etc. but I don’t feel that I’m particularly well-read at that time just because I read a lot of books because realistically, they’re all so similar in theme and style that there’s not much being added when reading another by the same author (but they’re good airplane books). </p>
<p>I’ll also get on a kick where I’ll read a lot of disparate novels and non-fiction on many different subjects by different authors. At that time I feel more well-read since each book has added to my knowledge and mind expansion.</p>
<p>atomom,</p>
<p>Your dad’s sentiment sounds awfully familiar; I hear that a lot from folks who only read non-fiction. I just think of what Faulkner said, “Facts have very little to do with the truth.”</p>