Anything for Speed
I thought it was interesting that the first book of the required reading was a book dealing with “speed” and comprehension. Understandably the book was “How to Read a Book” by Mortimer Adler and Charles Van Doren, but I thought that was a given. Yet as I delved into the pages, at not quite snails pace, something was hoping to glean every tidbit that would be helpful as we began this DMin journey.
Adler deals with a necessary tension that is needed between the author and the reader. He likens it the game of baseball and the various positions on the field. “Catching the ball is just as much an activity as pitching or hitting it. The pitcher or batter is the sender in the sense that his activity initiates the motion of the ball. The catcher or fielder is the receiver in the sense that his activity terminates it. Both are active, though the activities are different.”[1] Proper reading is active and not passive.
I had taken a speed reading class many years ago. The emphasis was on the eye movement and scanning. Adler does not disagree but takes it another couple steps up. A large amount of emphasis is placed on locating the important words, or words that seem to make a difference. His next major step is to dissect both the book and the author.
Dissecting the book is the task of classifying the book to what particular kind and subject matter that will be dealt with. By scanning the cover notes, contents page, introduction and conclusion one should find and discover a brief content overview. As Adler alluded said that most people do not even pay attention to these portions of the books they read.
Dissecting the author is a bit different. Adler refers to coming to terms with the author. Is the author competent and are they offering a solution that is discoverable within the book? Adler promotes getting to “know” the author while reading and enter into a mental bantering and conversation that is taking place with the author as you read.
Reading is more than the regurgitations of word for word from the author. It is gaining the insight in a way that “your” words become paramount over the author. Reading a book for all that its worth is active, challenging, thought provoking, and even life changing. Adler speaking of the success of the great writers in history was because they had mastered the books they read, “they became peers with their authors”.[2]
Sometimes the compulsion of anal retentive or OCD kicks in and I may want to read every single word. But after jumping into this book there seems to be a deeper conviction to explore both what is on the page and the who that put it there. This leads to two terms that Adler uses throughout the book, inspectional reading and analytical reading.
After all is said and done the book challenged me to read with a different twist. Speed becomes evident when coupled with the right tools of the trade. Now where will Roadrunner be looking next?
[1] Adler, Mortimer, and Charles Van Doren. How to Read a Book. New York, New York: Simon and Schuster. 5.
[2] Adler and Van Doren, 164.
5 responses to “Anything for Speed”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Phil, as you deal with the comparison of speed reading verses analyzing, where do you find yourself? Since you’ve had training in speed reading, do you find that training at odds with analyzing and reading for understanding, or is it possible to exercise speed reading and still work for comprehension as Adler advocates?
Do you have any tips for those of us who have not had speed reading training, whereby we can increase our speed as we read analytically?
Marc:
Great question. I would say that Adler is more “training” of the eye not just the movement of the eye. Speed reading was what Adler talked about in the beginning…..moving the hand down so the eyes will scan horizontally. Speed reading did increase “highlights” for the eyes or picking out major words.
Any tips I would offer would seem elementary against Adler’s advice. If anything keep the eyes moving and remember you are not reading from a stationary/static mindset. Our job is to interact with the book….that was my take away from Adler. Have active eyes and mind when you read. Embrace the content and challenge the author.
Hope that helps.
Great post, Phil!
You brought up some fascinating points, especially on the topic of skim reading.
I’m naturally an in-depth reader. My books are covered in handwritten notes, asterisks and rainbow highlights. Adler’s chapters on Philosophy and Critical Reading were easy to digest and put to use; however, these passages left me arguing with the text and demanding the right to scribble my thoughts on each page. As I peered deeper into the book, I realized that I was more comfortable fixating on the part, instead of seeing the author’s unifying point. “A well-stated unity indicates the major parts that compose the whole; you cannot comprehend a whole without somehow seeing its parts. But it is also true that unless you grasp the organization of its parts, you cannot know the whole comprehensively” (Adler, 83). Adler sought to engage the reader with the whole thought. He sought to bring us into the full picture and give us the tools to make our argument and assessment. I agree with your statement, “But after jumping into this book there seems to be a deeper conviction to explore both what is on the page and the who that put it there.” Adler not only caused me to reflect on my interpretation of the text, but my presentation of the text as well. In order to convey my thoughts as writer, I must first seek to comprehend the thoughts of fellow authors. Have you found that this has affected your communication style through speech and written word?
Colleen:
You are very correct in the affect on public speaking. Once you grasp the power of yourself as the “teacher” and the listener is engaging you and “examining” you, it changes your thought process.
The great challenge is that you have spent time with your subject and your listener/reader is hearing/reading for the very first time. You want to engage them in as many ways as possible.
Another thought in regards to writing in the margin….how imperative is it for the listener to have something to write down their thoughts as you communicate WITH them and not TO them? Your thoughts…..
Phil
Hi Phil. For me, the wonderful and exhausting thing about reading is your point how we are active when we read, not passive. It seems that speed reading (or skimming) almost requires more activeness. Do you agree?