I am a confirmed bibliophile. I love books. I love buying them, reading them, talking about them, and putting them up on the bookshelf that features prominently in the living room of my home. When I visit someone\u2019s home, I always notice whether or not they have a bookshelf, which books are on that shelf, and then I judge accordingly.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
This was my background as I sat down to read the humorously titled, \u201cHow To Talk About Books You Haven\u2019t Read\u201d by Pierre Bayard. From the start, Bayard lays out his thesis and purpose, which is to challenge the prevailing orthodoxy about what it means to \u201cread\u201d a book, and the ways that we engage with the ideas and writings that are important in our lives.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Bayard writes, \u201cthe notion of the book-that-has-been read is ambiguous\u201d[1]<\/a>, which he explains as the problem of what we mean by \u201creading a book\u201d. He shows how some people have heard of a book and know a lot about it, others have \u201cskimmed\u201d a book and gained some insight, there are others who have diligently read most<\/em> of a book, but never fully finished it, and still others who read every word, but forgot everything that they read! He is asking the question, \u201cwho is really qualified to talk about this book?\u201d Who is the true reader?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n This is a thorny question, because Bayard is someone who represents himself as someone who loves books, learning, conversations and ideas. He is not saying, \u201cthere is no value in books\u201d, nor \u201cwe should do away with books.\u201d Instead, what Bayard suggests in his writing, is that there are a myriad of ways to faithfully and authentically talk about books that you have not, in fact, read.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n His chapters expand on this central idea, as he introduces us to various examples from literature, of people who exemplify this notion. It is really entertaining to read about Musil in the library, Valery giving literary criticism, Martins delivering a book talk, Bohannan discussing Hamlet in the bush, and more. Even for those who would dispute much of what Bayard is trying to do, must admit, it is an entertaining book to read.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n For me, it is my understanding, that a changing relationship with books and reading is a necessary part of doctoral studies. To be a student in this way, will lead to being in the position that Pierre Bayard describes, where one is asked to have educated opinions about a vast array of books, articles and written material. It is clearly much more than any one person can take in or read fully. This is the point that is made in the very first chapter, when the character Musil visits a great library looking for a particular idea. What he learns, and what Bayard wants us to learn, is that no one can read everything. And this is true.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n But at the same time, I do want to read some<\/em> things. Books that are enjoyable, or important for my work, or that might lead me to new ways of thinking. Even as I develop a new relationship with books, and seek to \u201coperationalize\u201d them, as has been suggested, there is still something in me that loves to read a book cover to cover.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Surely, some of this desire to read in this way is vanity. To add the book to the list that I keep next to my bed of every book that I have finished reading (and to compare it to my wife\u2019s list). Or, to see a book on someone else\u2019s shelf and to proudly state that \u201cI too\u201d have read this book. Or, maybe it is what Bayard lifts up about \u201cnot being ashamed\u201d, and how the circles that I move in hold reading as a high value, and how they also see “not reading” as a kind of character flaw.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n But at the same time, I want my \u201cinner library\u201d[2]<\/a> to continue to grow, and to let the work that I do be based on more than a cursory glance at a book. But still, there is much for me to learn from this book. There is freedom in learning a new approach to books and reading, and there is also the self-examination that leads me to say, \u201cmaybe he is right about some of this!\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n In the end, I will take Pierre Bayard\u2019s encouragement to heart. He says, \u201cAs long as you have the courage, therefore, there is no reason not to say frankly that you haven\u2019t read any particular book, nor to abstain from expressing your thoughts about it.\u201d[3]<\/a> For me, I will always be a reader, and a person who highly values reading (in the sense of \u201creading the book cover to cover\u201d). Maybe I am a \u201cfundamentalist\u201d in this respect, but at least I hope to be a self-critical one.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The impact of this book for me, is to give me a new approach to thinking about reading, some literary examples to point to, and some grace, for myself and others, that there may be more than one way to really read a book. And grace is what all fundamentalists (myself included) seem to need most in the end.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Pierre Bayard, How To Talk About Books You Haven\u2019t Read<\/em>, (Bloomsbury: New York), xx (preface)<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Pierre Bayard, How to Talk About Books You haven\u2019t Read<\/em>, 102<\/p>\n