Not Reading For Dummies

Now that I have read about the obsolete importance of orientation in the so called "collective library," a concept that consists of books being part of a systematic map, I am ever more convinced and simultaneously troubled by the idea that 'not-reading' is preferable for the cultivated man than reading. As is argued by Pierre Bayard, the understanding of this map is what makes one cultivated or not. The emphasis of this first chapter lies in that reading is in reality not a necessity when it comes to fighting ignorance. Rather reading makes the reader ignorant, for instead of seeing reading a single book as an activity that "cultivates" it is seen as one that simply proves and represents that when choosing a book, one is neglecting the rest. Bayard argues that it takes only to know the name of the book to discuss it in an intelligent way, something I relate and find true when it comes to people. You need only to know the name and where the person goes to school to embark on a conversation solely about them, without even knowing what they look like. And while this concept may be true, I remain unconvinced that not reading can result in knowledge rather than ignorance. I argue with myself that books and people are simply not the same, but find myself conflicted. I try to name the similarities and differences between them and find that there are more similarities than differences.

People        vs.      Books
Complex              Complex
Living                  Aren't the characters of any book alive as well?
Conflicted            A book can indeed be very conflicted through its characters or its plot

Regardless of the fact that I can't find a way to convincingly argue how books and people can't be compared, I still believe it's true and as a result disagree with Bayard. Be that as it may, Bayard insists that reading is a "dangerous activity," embarking on more reasons why throughout the next chapter. In it he explains how a full on article can be written and efficiently argued about a book without having read it but rather just skimmed it. We step from discussing orally to writing publicly about it, a big step when it comes to voicing opinions if you ask me.

That the reader should avoid linking the author's life to his or her writing is a completely foreign concept to me the first time I read about it in How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read. It is one of the many concepts argued by the author by using the examples of great literary critiques such as Paul Valery, the "master of non-reading," as he talks about how to talk about books that you have skimmed as opposing to the ones you haven't even cracked the spine of. While for the ladder one must learn to navigate the collective library, the former consists merely of perspective. By perspective, Bayard means applying the recently acquired orientation skills to a single volume instead of to the whole collective library. In order to do so I can attest that the only thing needed for the so called reader or critique is a few 'pin points' throughout the book that enable the reader to grasp at the books' "inherent depth and richness without getting lost in the details." This unfortunately is something that I can not only not argue against, but practice over and over again. I find myself realizing that this may not be the best book for me to read, since it will only encourage me to not read the books that are assigned to me in my various languages classes.

It's influence has been so far to confuse me and slowly make me realize that the only reading worth investing time and energy in, is the chick lit that I enjoy and love. The books that I have been educated to believe have no literary value whatsoever and are therefore simply objects to sill up excessive free time with. Things that keep me occupied and entertained at a low intellectual price. I also wonder if the only thing I need to do to continue writing blogs about this book is to skim it and read its table of contents.

The vital questions are: Should I and am I ready for that level of 'not-reading'?

Vocabulary
Eulogize - to praise highly in speech or writing

Multifarious - many and of various types