The Right to Read Reviewed by
Dr. Renato Corsetti
Ph.D., Faculty of Psychology, University of Rome, Italy;
Book review editor of the international academic journal
Language Problems and Language Planning:

The century that has just come to a close was characterized by some very disturbing phenomena in the world of science. For all those active in the field of the human sciences, it is distressing to consider how certain "fashions" have pervaded the whole world in an uncontrolled and uncontrollable manner through the progress of communication media. The way in which these ideas were disseminated is regarded as sufficient cause that nobody should have the audacity to doubt their veracity, among the students of these phenomena, not to mention the politicians and those who in general have to make decisions on the financing of research projects.

Let me give an example. Up to the middle of the previous century, and even after that, famous linguists (who often themselves spoke several languages) maintained that bilingualism — not even mentioning multilingualism — was dangerous to the development of the cognitive capabilities of individuals, that it was a bearer of schizophrenia, of a disturbed personality, etc. Worse yet, during this whole period, the truth of such ideas was considered to be so self-evident, that only a lunatic would have doubted it.

Research in Canada and other places during the sixties served to completely overturn the convictions in this field. Further research helped to confirm their results and the media did the rest. Nobody, however, bothered to pay sufficient attention to the significance of the foregoing phenomenon, i.e. about the fact that an untruth could fix itself in the minds of scientists without finding anywhere a group of people who were willing to activate the critical reasoning that lies at the very basis of all scientific progress.

Those, who desire further examples, may analyze the history of the linguistic theories of N. Chomsky, which succeeded in pervading the whole world without even the minutest practical evidence of their congruity with reality. Only after decades of failures people started asking questions about the validity of these ideas.

The book of Strydom and Du Plessis deals with a similar phenomenon, which is even more dangerous because of its practical consequences in the lives of millions of children who have been declared dyslexic.

The first, theoretical part, from chapter 1 to chapter 10, is simply outstanding when it criticizes the prevailing ideas in this field. It deserves to be read by many teachers and researchers in the field of education. In fact, it is my impression that the theses held by Strydom are still largely inadequate, and that, on the other hand, recent developments in biology have tended to impose counteractive ideas upon the general public: "Everything is already written in the DNA, it is not necessary nor is it of any use to try and devote financial remedies towards the improvement of schools." The dangers involved in such a way of thinking necessitate the writing of many other books of the type of that of Strydom. But it does not seem as if the general public is willing to do much for the less fortunate individuals: "If they are less fortunate, their DNA is to blame."

As a lecturer in psycholinguistics and therefore to students, who in future may perhaps work also in schools, where they may be requested to assist dyslexic learners, I regard it as my duty to persuade them to read at least some of the first ten chapters of this book.

Also of the second part, which is from chapter 11 to the end, my appraisal is entirely positive. Naturally this conclusion is limited to that which is in the book itself, because I have no direct experience of the Audiblox 2000 program. I agree, however, with the general principle of this program, i.e. the necessity to spend time and devote constant practice to the fundamental skills, which is a prerequisite to a good reading ability.