For twelve years, from 2000 to 2012, I lived without a television. For the first six years I lived with my aunt in Mumbai. She didn’t believe in television. On September 11th 2001, a friend phoned me (it was landlines then) and shouted something about a terrorist attack on the US. It sounded so unbelievable, that I just pooh-poohed her and hung up. It was only later, when I watched the footage on my neighbour’s TV that I realised the magnitude of what had happened.
My aunt has a large collection of books. Without a TV, and surrounded by lovely, old, hard-bound books, I spent more time reading. A TV-less house is very conducive to reading. In homes where TV and books co-exist, you’ll often see the books fighting a losing battle. In homes of avid TV watchers, you’ll notice fewer books, if at all. There are houses with two or more television sets, but without bookcases (sob sob!).
From 2006 onwards I lived in Ahmedabad, again without a TV, but this time with a constant free supply of internet. The internet is a great substitute for TV, and it’s even more addictive. It also leaves books in second place.
I’m pretty convinced that homes without TVs create more readers. A room where no ads are blasting at you, no sitcoms are playing their packaged laughter, and no news headlines are depressing all and sundry, is a room for reading. Reading requires a nice comfy chair, some good lighting, and peace and quiet.
I recently heard about someone who grew up in a house without a TV. He believes it led to him and his sister to read a lot, and by lot, I mean a lot. This guy has not only swallowed fat tomes of fiction, but also plenty of books on religion, philosophy, quantum mechanics and whatnot. And today, he is one of those people who has completed writing his first book (still to be published), and has started on his second. So, I conclude that TV-less homes make for great readers and future writers. I rest my case!
My aunt has a large collection of books. Without a TV, and surrounded by lovely, old, hard-bound books, I spent more time reading. A TV-less house is very conducive to reading. In homes where TV and books co-exist, you’ll often see the books fighting a losing battle. In homes of avid TV watchers, you’ll notice fewer books, if at all. There are houses with two or more television sets, but without bookcases (sob sob!).
From 2006 onwards I lived in Ahmedabad, again without a TV, but this time with a constant free supply of internet. The internet is a great substitute for TV, and it’s even more addictive. It also leaves books in second place.
I’m pretty convinced that homes without TVs create more readers. A room where no ads are blasting at you, no sitcoms are playing their packaged laughter, and no news headlines are depressing all and sundry, is a room for reading. Reading requires a nice comfy chair, some good lighting, and peace and quiet.
I recently heard about someone who grew up in a house without a TV. He believes it led to him and his sister to read a lot, and by lot, I mean a lot. This guy has not only swallowed fat tomes of fiction, but also plenty of books on religion, philosophy, quantum mechanics and whatnot. And today, he is one of those people who has completed writing his first book (still to be published), and has started on his second. So, I conclude that TV-less homes make for great readers and future writers. I rest my case!
Armeen Kapadia
