[itsybitsycoder]

I don't know, in those stock photos I can picture them without the books and it doesn't seem as bad. They're all pictures of people in public places minding their own business. The pictures in the OP are families and friends, often in what looks like what's meant to be a social setting, staring at their feet instead of interacting.

Of course you can find examples of people reading at the table, but that doesn't mean it wasn't considered rude. Notice he says Amy was "caught" reading at the table. When you read at the table you're sending the message that the other people at the table are boring and unworthy of your attention. Not that I was never guilty of it, I was a pretty rude kid. :)

[dalke]

"They're all pictures of people in public places"

The third one was of a husband and wife at home.

Here are ones that are even less public; people reading in bed: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3203/3035922303_1cfa0001d6_o.... http://cdn1.stocksy.com/a/nuW000/z0/126529.jpg http://citizented.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Reading-in-... and https://41.media.tumblr.com/f46e012a1002708a99852d2acb5f4ae8... .

When I compare them to the first image of the qz page, I get the sense that it's the back-to-back composition which gives the sense of loneliness, not the lack of a smartphone. I couldn't find the same composition through an image search, but the last of these is head to foot, which is close.

You are reading too much into the "caught", and not enough into the present day equivalent. The sense with Amy Carter is identical to what would happen now if Malia Obama were "caught" using a smartphone during a state dinner. (Or do you really think that no one now would consider that rude?)

BTW, here's Art Buchwald poking fun at the 1977 event: https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1913&dat=19770303&id=... . The lead starts out by essentially saying it's dogshedding.

Then again, I may be reading too much into Carter's practice. According to https://books.google.com/books?id=3M1KlBNm7WcC&pg=PA46&dq=%2... , reading was allowed at the Carter table, but talking was not. So I checked with a Google Book search.

https://books.google.com/books?id=Lq9IKuhf24MC&pg=PA158&dq=%... says that the author's father would read at the lunch table, as would the children, and it took years before finding out that others considered it impolite.

https://books.google.com/books?id=0Cihcn_W0bsC&pg=PA111&dq=%... has someone reading at the table, and whose mother complains about the practice.

In checking a few more, I'm willing to accept that many people considered it rude, but a substantial minority did not.

Oooh! Here's a neat snippet from "The Marlburian" (1882) from https://books.google.com/books?id=HQUIAAAAQAAJ&q=%22read+dur... :

> Dear Sir - I wish to enter a humble but hearty protest against a practice which I believe have increased of late throughout the school. I refer to that of bringing books to read during dinner. It certainly does not aid digestion and is in may ways injurious to health. At dinner more than at other meals it is usual to relax the hard worked brain by conversation on general subjects, alias "shop" ...

Perhaps the rudeness level for books at dinner hasn't changed in 150 years?

Interesting question - which is more rude now; pulling out a book, or pulling out a phone?