How to talk about books you haven’t read – Pierre Bayard
“It is not the quantity that is read, but the manner of reading, that yields us profit. Those who read fast, reap no more advantage, than a bee would by only skimming over the surface of the flower, instead of waiting to penetrate into it, and extract its sweets.” (Madame Guyon – A Short & Very Easy Method of Prayer)
I was reminded of this image from Madame Guyon as I read Bayard’s work on how to read quickly and superficially, or how not to read at all. Admittedly, Madame Guyon is talking about prayerful and meditative reading (perhaps closest to the analytical reading of Adler, or the “gutting of a book” by Jason Clark) and she goes on to say: “Much reading is rather for scholastic subjects, than divine truths”. I do find myself asking the question, however, about how much we really benefit and learn when we fly quickly over single or multiple texts, having a sniff here, and a lick there (I am continuing the metaphor, not revealing some strange penchant for licking books), rather than reading more slowly and carefully and meditatively.
The answer has to be: it depends. I understand and agree with Bayard’s reference to the importance of placing the work in the wider literary context (reading syntopically – Adler) and having an overall perspective. And it appears that Adler and Madame Guyon and Bayard all agree on the need to read extensively, and somewhat superficially, to gain mastery over ‘scholastic subjects’. I also find myself confronted with a large swathe of material that I have to review and understand and contextualise as I start my DMin research. It would be impossible to read slowly and deeply in these areas – neither would I want to, when it comes to the likes of Pink.
And yet: my personal preference at this stage remains to read slowly and deeply, and even to reread books, to feel that I am learning something and digesting and imbibing it. It feels like the difference between wolfing down a McDonalds and eating at a Michelin restaurant. It reminds me of two vignettes, both of which I experienced in France on holiday.
The first is my memory of reading Peterson’s The Contemplative Pastor, sitting on a veranda overlooking the mountain valleys in the Ardeche region. I would read slowly, with a cup of coffee and a journal, and reflect on each chapter. It was a wonderful slow process which I found relaxing and rewarding.
The second is a meal at a French farm, eaten with German friends. The meal lasted three hours or so. The French chef had picked the ingredients fresh from the garden, we ate slowly and drank and relaxed in the sunshine of a French valley. It was a memorable meal.
And I guess that the last two paragraphs prove Bayard’s point of how, ultimately, when we talk and write about books, we really end up speaking about ourselves and our inner book. We spend less time speaking of the actual real content of the book itself, which is a moving object, and begin to create our own stories and points of reference. This will be happening throughout this process. As we blog and comment on each others’ thoughts and blogs, it seems sometimes that the factual content of the book itself recedes into the background.
Ultimately, it is important to realise the different types of reading and reviewing covered by Bayard and Adler, and to apply them according to the context we find ourselves in.
It’s just that, personally, I would rather be sitting in the French mountains, with the sun rising, as I sip coffee and mull over Eugene Peterson, than skim-reading Pink’s Visual Ethnography at a rate of knots. But it all adds to my inner library!
About the Author
Geoff Lee
8 responses to “How to talk about books you haven’t read – Pierre Bayard”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Geoff I could not agree more that I too would rather “be sitting in the French mountains, with the sun rising, as I sip coffee and mull over Eugene Peterson, than skim-reading Pink’s Visual Ethnography at a rate of knots.” 🙂
I believe certain books when read in certain circumstances/life context warrant a variance of attention and “gutting”. In the case of our program we get the pleasure of “reading” a plethora of books and having to immediately discuss and apply what we have read. I feel as though the value of doing the readings is the asynchronous discussions. They provide each of us insight and jewels from each book. I enjoy seeing what someone drew from the same text and how they engaged in the text. To me, that is where the true “encounter” begins to take place 🙂
Geoff: I agree when you say, “my personal preference at this stage remains to read slowly and deeply, and even to reread books, to feel that I am learning something and digesting and imbibing it.” I find myself reverting to this style of reading and have to push myself to get through the vast amounts of reading. When I read others posts, I see that I have missed some of the finer details. but like you, the discussions help to see that everyone sees both the same and different things in each book. I too would take the view of the French mountains.
“when we talk and write about books, we really end up speaking about ourselves and our inner book. ”
I especially feel this way about biographies. While many books can convey knowledge, I have discovered that reading biographies seem to help me gain wisdom, and a heart connection. I especially remember the feeling of finishing the book “Unbroken.” When I finished the book, I was actually sad that it was over. I immediately went to YouTube and watched as much video as I could find about Louis Zamperini. I was honestly sad when he died.
I loved that book too, Stu – one of the best I have read in a long time. My whole family read it – and all were completely absorbed!
Geoff tell us how you really feel about the author Pink! It was refreshing to read your post.
If you had to decide which author’s methods to use, whose would you choose to apply first?
Oh, Geoff, you spoke my words. Bees, savoring a good meal in a good place with good friends, The Contemplative Pastor…. This is the kind of reading I also prefer; slow, rich, meaningful. But the joy of feasting partially comes from its juxtaposition with ordinary eating.
As Robert Farrar Capon says,
“Let us eat. Festally, first of all, for life without occasions is not worth living. But ferially, too, for life is so much more than occasions, and its grand ordinariness must never go unsavory. But both ways let us eat with a glad good will, and with a conscience formed by considerations of excellence, not by fear of Ghosts.”
I think we must live, read, and eat both ways.
Geoff, I get that about enjoying a good book or meal slowly, savoring every word or bite. It is the most pleasurable experience in the world and I hope that that is what we get to do for eternity in Heaven. Reading slowly and deeply is my personal preference too.
Here on earth, however, I also get that we can be discerning as Bayard suggests and skim or speed-read some books. We don’t have time for them all.
I really appreciated the breadth of examples that Bayard used. I think he was teaching us something as he was teaching us something. His book deserves to be thoughtfully read because of the layers of wisdom in it.
Yes, Geoff, I could totally relate with the leisure of digesting a book comfortably and slowly. To be in a beautiful space, digesting thought-provoking concepts that shift your reality, and taking your time to ponder is a delightful experience that seems lost on the author. I would rather read one sentence that alters my reality and behavior for the better than read a bookcase of books just for the sake of reading. To find the meaning behind the words that reach your spirit and rattles your subconscious takes time and space that appears to be an unafforded luxury in the academic world due to the vast amounts of required reading. As I read his book and your blog, I found myself grieving the leisure process of reading. Good thoughts. Makes me want to make time for that coveted leisure reading.
Also, I found myself wanting to visit France and try out those fabulous restaurants you referenced. Sounds delicious!