How to Read a Book
Reading Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren’s book, How to Read a Book brought to mind a quote I read years ago by Petrarch, “Books give delight to the very marrow of one’s bones. They speak to us, consult with us, and join us in a living and intense intimacy.” Being a lifelong bibliophile, Adler and Van Doren reminded me how easy it is to get sloppy in habitual practices and delights, which are important to nurturing our souls and minds.
The book was first published in 1940 and revised and updated by Simon and Schuster in 2014. How to Read a Book is a meaningful rudder, helping readers navigate books for increasing competency and satisfaction, whether for personal pleasure or academic clarity. Adler and Van Doren make a strong case that reading more books is not the point. It is about learning to read better.
From a practical standpoint, after having read thousands of books over the 65 years of my life, the practice of pre-reading struck me the most. I have never been challenged to consider it a valuable exercise. Whether due to impetuosity or a lack of self-discipline, I never really inculcated it into my reading habits.
Taking the time to look at the publishing data, table of contents, education, and qualifications of the writer is a valuable exercise. It is clarifying to discover the book’s overall theme and the perspective of the author who is writing. Adler and Van Doren make it quite clear that taking the time to pre-read will help us to determine which parts of the book are most important in our research and will help steer us to the parts most relevant to our interests. So far, I have found this very insightful and helpful, as simple as it seems.
Actively reading and engaging books, as in a conversation, is also a great reminder. It is so easy to read the words in a book as sterile from their context, which usually leads to misunderstandings and assumptions that are not meant to exist. Reading actively requires discipline, and in many ways, stamina. This is a lost art. When people do read today, they often read a lot of drivel, rarely inviting the other senses into the process. Adler and Van Doren challenge us to go deeper. They encourage the reader not to satisfy themselves with a cursory examination of books, but to allow them to inform us and to increase our understanding of life.
Adler and Van Doren’s classification, or levels of types of reading was also very helpful. They posited four levels of reading. They are considered levels because you can’t grasp the higher levels without mastery of the preceding ones. These levels of reading are additive. The first level is Elementary reading. It is the level where most people settle. The rudimentary reading skill allows us to put meaning to words, but not necessarily deeper conceptual thoughts. This level allows us to move from illiteracy to fundamental literacy. It is not necessarily a level of reading well but a level of grasping the meanings of words. Reading more does not especially move you to a higher level. The Greeks had a name for people who read too widely and not well; they called them sophomores.
The second reading level is Inspectional reading, skillfully browsing a book with brevity. This reading level prepares our brains to engage with what we are about to read and helps us decide if we want to invest time and energy into reading the entire book.
The third level, also known as Analytical reading, is presented as a means to better understand what you are reading. Analytical reading is comprehensive, exhaustive, or good reading— it is the finest reading we can do.
The last and fourth level of reading is Subtopical. It is the most difficult and complex kind of reading we can do. It is complex because it is not a linear process that most Western readers are accustomed to. It involves reading not just one book on a subject but may require a host of works on a particular matter. The level of complexity is immense because it involves serious thinking at multiple levels, and it shapes the reader’s understanding through intense analysis of multiple works. At this level, genuine understanding is generally achieved.
Adler and Van Doren’s initial works in the 40’s and 70’s were a monumental achievement and were emphatically received by the academic, educational, and publishing community. Their work remains a significant piece of discourse, even into the 21st century.
About the Author
David Weston
3 responses to “How to Read a Book”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
David,
I agree that it is SO easy to read books sterile from their context. For that matter, its easy just to read them as sterile. I have been in that place for a long time. I like to think that it was due to ignorance of the other styles of reading and not a lack of discipline. But if I am honest with myself, it’s probably 50/50 for which one it is.
I am not sure that I have ever considered reading a book as a conversation. But I am excited to try that in an environment of others who are learning (or relearning) the same thing.
David,
This statement of yours regarding syntoptical reading caught my eye: “it is complex because it is not a linear process that most Western readers are accustomed to.”
Having lived in a few different nations and cultures, this resonated with me, and I found myself wondering how our cultural lenses affect even our approach to reading a book. I wondered if there was any research into whether linearity or circularity in thinking patterns has an impact on reading styles and what types of books different people gratitate to. It could be interesting!
Thanks for writing.
David, I agree with your thoughts on the pre-reading format. I have fallen victim to situations where I would purchase a book only to get 1-2 chapters deep, and years later, there it still sits with the bookmark somewhere on a shelf. But this new (1940) practice has given me hope to rekindle that flame. I also resonate with the fact that it takes discipline and stamina to be successful in this practice. Like any significant behavioral change, you can easily fall prey to old habits and lose effectiveness.
Acknowledging Adler is not a new (1940) resource or cause for change is astonishing (and fun). In my repertoire of operations teachings, I have a book from 1984 in my portfolio, which is invaluable for instruction and creating operational change. And similarly, you would think, “What can a book over 40 years old teach me today? What is the relevance? Everything is different!” My argument constantly circles back to the principles.
How do you view your ability to pivot and lean in as we move forward together?