More tips on getting a doctorate without reading or something (at least slightly) more important?
What do you mean you haven’t read everything, ever?
Through much of Pierre Bayard’s, How to Talk About Books You Haven’t Read I put this text alongside the other preliminary work (most notably Adler, How to Read a Book) we have been assigned as we ‘ramp up’ into the meat and serious study of our doctoral program. And to be clear, it definitely contains some helpful hints and tips when you find yourself in the position of needing to speak on a text that you haven’t read, not the least of which is the idea that it may in fact be easier, at least in some instances, to do justice to a book if you haven’t ever opened it (preface).
On the face of it, it seems almost ridiculous to claim such a thing, but this is the first hint that Bayard gives that there is more going on in this book than a ‘cheat’ or ‘shortcut’ to skating through class discussions without ever having read the assigned text. The point that Bayard is making is two-fold.
First, we must assent to the fact that it is entirely possible to speak about a book, and to be clear – speak with some intelligence and even insight – without having read it. Some of us will have already known this, either by intuition or, more likely, because we have found ourselves in situations at one time or another of having to do just this: comment on, discuss or address a text that we haven’t read. (In fact, as you are read this blog post, you might wonder, have I even read this book?) Once we have admitted that this type of discussion is possible, Beyard articulates the many ways in which this takes place, using a number of examples drawn from literature and the literary world. The extracted bit of understanding here, is that using a combination of our cultural understanding, i.e. what we know about the world and culture into which the book was written, and other people’s reactions to this work, we can meaningfully comment on and sometimes even capture the essential essence of a text.
Some of the most useful and interesting elements that Bayard introduces are the concepts of an inner library and that of a virtual library. Bayard says the inner library is ‘a subset of the collective library— around which every personality is constructed, and which then shapes each person’s individual relationship to books and to other people.’ (p.72) We all have our own inner libraries and in a very real way the contents of those libraries help us to ‘read’ or not read, but still talk about other books.
The virtual library, is similar to the inner library, but instead of residing inside of ourselves it is shared among all of us as we participate in as we engage with each other in culture. The virtual library is also different in that it is, for lack of a better term, more virtual, than our inner libraries in that it is less real. It is made up, not of the actual collective works of literature that relevant or dominant in our culture, but rather our impressions of these works. To borrow from an earlier post, the virtual library is sort of our collective and agreed upon ‘Cliff’s Notes’ to each of these works, but we have all agreed that we will never acknowledge the existence of the Cliff’s Notes we are all relying on.
The second aspect of what Beyard is asserting here is something more profound. The virtual library isn’t real, but not because people intentionally choose to make it false, but rather as soon as we have interacted with a text (or anything, really) our understanding of it is not an object in and of itself – it is, of course, wrapped up in all of those other texts in our inner libraries and our memories and our expectations and what we have already learned about the text from others. As Beyard says, ‘For we are more than simple shelters for our inner libraries; we are the sum of these accumulated books. Little by little, these books have made us who we are (p. 73). Not only have the books made us who we are, but they are also the lens through which we see and understand all that we read going forward.
For me, however, the most profound aspect of this book is the direct and honest way that Bayard addresses the reason that we pretend we have read books we haven’t and why we pretend about so many other things as well: shame. We often find ourselves in situations where we feel like we ‘have’ to talk about books we haven’t read simply because we can’t stomach the idea of simply admitting the truth that we haven’t read something, or that we have – as Bayard describes it – ‘gaps’ in our cultural literacy.
Bayard, in what feels to me like the real heart of his message, says this:
As long as we strive for an image of cultural literacy that only serves to disguise us from others and ourselves, our more or less unconscious shame about the real nature of our interaction with books will weigh on all our relations with them and everything we say about them. If we really intend to find adequate solutions to our daily confrontations with our shortcomings, we need to recognize this shame and analyze its foundations. Only in doing so can we hope to survive the avalanche of fragments of books that threatens to engulf us, in the face of which our deepest identity is revealed to be in permanent danger (p.120)
Bayard’s work may help us understand how and why we are able to talk about books when we haven’t read them, but as long as we refuse to address the root motivation for us to do so, robs us of the real benefit of being able to do talk about books without reading them.
This is critical….. All of what we have learned from Bayard is well and good and some of it will no doubt – or possibly already has – come in handy, but we must always be honest with ourselves, and to ensure that honesty we must let go of the shame of having not read and stop pursuing the impossible to achieve ‘gapless cultural literacy’.
I will end with Bayard’s own words: Truth destined for others is less important than truthfulness to ourselves, something attainable only by those who free themselves from the obligation to seem cultivated, which tyrannizes us from within and prevents us from being ourselves (p.130)
When we let go of the shame we face, we inch that much closer to the truth destined for ourselves, which is definitely something worth reading about.
About the Author
Chip Stapleton
Follower of Jesus Christ. Husband to Traci. Dad to Charlie, Jack, Ian and Henry. Preacher of Sermons, eater of ice cream, supporter of Arsenal. I love to talk about what God is doing in the world & in and through us & create space and opportunity for others to use their gifts to serve God and God's people.12 responses to “More tips on getting a doctorate without reading or something (at least slightly) more important?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You picked up on the shame aspect, as did Jennifer. Maybe we should all come clean and confess the “classic” books that we have never read? Although, as a counterpoint, Bayard writes about the expected pretence, or at least level of vagueness, within academic circles, whereby we all contribute to the virtual library with our fragments of knowledge and reading, without explicitly stating that we have not read certain books: “life in the virtual library would quickly become unlivable if not for a certain amount of ambiguity around the truth of our statements”. So do we fess up, or continue to fake it til we make it?! I notice, Mr Stapleton, that you skate around the issue of whether you have read the book or not rather skilfully…
Geoff, I have no idea what you are getting at . . . .I don’t even know how skate 🙂 Either way, I am talking about it, and isn’t that the point?
I love the idea of playing the ‘humiliation’ game…. well, I should say I both love it and am terrified by it.
And the idea that the ambiguity is a central aspect of keeping our virtual library functioning is definitely an accurate observation – and who wants to be the one that tells the emperor that he has no clothes? (see what I did there?)
“Truth destined for others is less important than truthfulness to ourselves, something attainable only by those who free themselves from the obligation to seem cultivated, which tyrannizes us from within and prevents us from being ourselves” (p.130)
This quote was so powerful! First “Truth destined for others is less important than truthfulness to ourselves.”
WOW being true to ourselves is such a challenge. In our society we seem to attain knowledge and truth as a means to share it with others and not to reveal truth to ourselves.
Second ” something attainable only by those who free themselves from the obligation to seem cultivated..”
Oh to be free from the obligation to seem cultivated. I love that. He didn’t say that we were cultivated but we are bound by the appearance that we are. In order to find truth meaningful to myself I must first become free from the obligation and facade. Ouch I had to sit with that for a minute.
Third “which tyrannizes us from within and prevents us from being ourselves”
The tyranny we face within is always the battle. What does it mean to be our true self? I guess we would have to sit in truth long enough to all it to be revealed. So for many or even most of us we live daily in the crux of the tension from the tyranny of feeling obligated to appear cultivated vs. being our true self.
I think Bayard is saying – not in these words exactly – that the tyranny often takes the form of shame and if we aren’t careful we may not be able to tell our ‘true selves’ from the virtual selves we have created….. facebook, anyone?
I see you picked up on some of the themes that I found important in Bayard’s book. I would go further and say that there were really many underlying serious intentions to Bayard’s case studies. If we see the book as a satire (I couldn’t help but think of the Houyhnhnms, don’t know exactly why) we can dig down to a deeper level. I agree with you and Cristal that truth to ourselves is one of them. I also thought that Bayard had strong criticisms of arrogance.
Great post, Chip!
Mary, we definitely had some convergence – I have decided that I won’t look at anyone else’s posts until mine are up – mostly because I know that it will definitely affect me and my experience of the reading.
When it comes to arrogance, I think you are right, and I think he sees arrogance as almost a defense mechanism – we try to use it to hide our shame
Chip, enjoyed the post. ” as long as we refuse to address the root motivation for us to do so, robs us of the real benefit of being able to do talk about books without reading them.” This is a great point! I was thinking, in a humorous way, maybe the English language is not expressive enough to describe the type of reading we must do for this program. To remove the guilt and shame aspect, maybe we could create a new verb. For example, “to reaDMin.” When I say, “yes, I readmin that book!” we will all know it means that we acted in a way that is clearly not reading every word but getting the information necessary for our DMin context of study! No shame, no guilt and an honest expression of our interaction with the text. 🙂
Love this idea, Jim! I plan on ‘readmining’ as little as possible!
On a slightly more serious note, I did have an American born theology professor in seminary that told us he wrote all of his theology books in German, because it was much easier to be both technical and expressive in German than in English….. so, I think you might be onto something there.
Ooh, I like that concept, Jim, readmin; will make use of that. 🙂
I think this is how many of us read, for specific purposes. When preparing a sermon or Bible study, a class lesson, or even when I’m teaching a class, I don’t necessarily read through an entire book to glean from it, teach from it or understand. But in other contexts, I dig deep into the text. Context and purpose for reading matters.
Great post Chip. I like how you picked up that underlying theme of shame. That spoke to me as well. I also like the quotes you used, which seemed to speak to so much more than learning how to talk about books you haven’t read, but more about the inner workings and complexities of “life”. It was a powerful reminder you gave about how our context to life is comprised of the books we have read. Makes me think about who has been an inspiration with their writing for me. Any favorites for you?
I really had to stop and think about the issue of shame, Chip. As a “yuge” reader, I think I very often contribute to the shame of others who haven’t read as much as I have, especially certain “classics.” Maybe because of this I rarely experience shame when admitting I haven’t read a book – I mean, I’ve read a bunch so why should I feel bad if I missed some? My own lack of shame could easily contribute to the shame of others. (Well, now I feel like a jerk. Kind of.) I need to think more about this because I don’t want to be a part of the shaming process. Instead, I would rather be a part of the virtual library for someone who hasn’t had the time/interest to read what I’ve read, and draw on what others have read.
Okay, Many of our cohorts commented on your post. I will not be shamed by Bayard. In my immature days, I believed and was made to believe that I needed to be versatile in conversation.If I wasn’t knowledgeable in what they were, then I was less than. As a mature person, I am happy with my inner library. I no longer believe that I need to prove to others my intellectual abilities. As a person, I can communicate and contribute to a conversation by listening,validating their view (because it’s their feelings), and nodded every now and then. 🙂 Bayard challenges your “this is the way I have always done it” views. And it makes you doubt.
Overall, It is great to recognize the challenges in one’s life, understand what you are willing the change, and accept what you accept about yourself.