Reading Schedule

[Thomas]

Crime and Punishment is a fairly long novel, and we plan to read it carefully, so we'll be taking it in easy stages over a rather long period of time. The schedule is set for 11 weeks, which will give everyone ample time to pore over each and every detail. Hopefully this classic of Russian literature can withstand our close scrutiny. ;-)

Aug. 30: Part One, Chap 1-3
Sep. 6: Part One, Chap 4-7
Sep 13: Part Two, Chap 1-4
Sep 20: Part Two, Chap 5-7
Sep. 27: Part Three, Chap 1-3
Oct. 4: Part Three, Chap 4-6
Oct. 11: Part Four, Chap 1-3
Oct 18: Part Four, Chap 4-6
Oct. 25: Part Five, Chap 1-5
Nov. 1: Part Six, Chap 1-4
Nov. 8: Part Six, Chap 5-8 and Epilogue

[Lily]

I've been playing recently with "how to read." As most of you probably know, a number of books have been written on the subject. At the moment, I can't lay my hands on the essay by Fadiman in one of the later editions of his books on lifetime reading plans, but I do recall that one of his admonitions is to take a look at the overall lay of the book. Thomas has given us a good overall one for C&P with his schedule above -- it took my reading elsewhere to recognize that he has grouped it to conform with the six parts plus Epilogue into which C&P is divided.

I wonder how many of us who learned to read young and have remained avid readers throughout are lives have learned to consciously hone our reading skills, I am currently watching the Great Courses DVD on "Reading." It is useful, but I am not sure it is giving me the skills to take on a lengthy book with a plot that does not entice me -- of which C&P is one. If others here have reading skills that they know serve well in analogous situations for them, I'd love to hear them.

[David]

I have always relied on How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading, by Adler and Van Doren. They recommend active reading which is basically sitting in an upright position that is not too comfortable and taking notes, asking questions prompted by your reading, and trying to answer them during the course of the book.

That may help you stay awake, but I am not sure it will do much to change your enthusiasm for a book that does not interest you. Beyond that you can just go through the motions and eventually realize its not the dreaded chore it appeared to be.

Or you can try a page from cognitive therapy. Perform an experiment by writing down a number betweeb 1 to 10, with 1 being the worst and 10 being the best, on how bad you think reading the book will be. Then read the book and rate how bad it really was. You should generally find the second number is better than the first.

[Lily]

David wrote: "I have always relied on How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading, by Adler and Van Doren...."

You're right, it is Adler and Van Doren, rather than Fadiman, that I have buried somewhere. This PDF has one good summary of their major points (although I don't necessarily agree with all of them, especially for our format here of discussing as we read):
keck.ucsf.edu/~craig/Mortimer_Adler_H...

The whole book is apparently here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=adler...

With C&P for me, the problem is more staying engaged than it is staying awake.

[Lily]

I like this from Van Doren:

"If we consider men and women generally, and apart from their professions or occupations, there is only one situation I can think of in which they almost pull themselves up by their bootstraps, making an effort to read better than they usually do. When they are in love and are reading a love letter, they read between the lines and in the margins; they read the whole in terms of the parts, and each part in terms of the whole; they grow sensitive to context and ambiguity, to insinuation and implication; they perceive the color of words, the odor of phrases, and the weight of sentences.They may even take the punctuation into account. Then, if never before or after, they read."

[Xan]

David wrote: "I have always relied on How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading, by Adler and Van Doren. They recommend active reading which is basically sitting in an upright po..."

As a test subject I can tell you, no, sitting up in an uncomfortable position and taking notes won't keep me awake if the book doesn't interest me. I can fall asleep anywhere in middle of anything. However, I still think those are good suggestions.

[Xan]

Lily wrote: "I like this from Van Doren:

"If we consider men and women generally, and apart from their professions or occupations, there is only one situation I can think of in which they almost pull themselve..."

You might even write poetry. Which is a very bad idea.

[Jeremy]

I recently read Time Enough for Love by Heinlein and I had a hard time getting into the book. I labored through it because someone told me it had interesting ideas about political philosophy. It didn't. It was a fairly standard libertarian viewpoint wrapped up in a lot of cliché sci-fi. I generally like Heinlein, but I didn't care for this book. I remember Dune was the same way. I've tried three times to read the book and could never get past the first 100 pages. Sometimes readers and books just don't connect.

Anyway, here are three books about reading I've read over the last few years:

How to Read and Why by Harold Bloom. I like Bloom, but I didn't like this book.

How to Read Literature by Terry Eagleton. Eagleton is a Marxist, but this isn't a "How to read like a Marxist" book. (He's written other books for that). Overall I liked the book and enjoy Eagleton's style.

Reading Between the Lines: A Christian Guide to Literature. This is half "how to read" and half "intro to literature" and it's explicitly Christian.

I doubt there's much in any of the three books that you don't already know though. And certainly nothing that will help you with a book you're not enjoying. But I don't think Van Doren and Adler cover that topic either.

[Marlon]

Lily wrote: "I've been playing recently with "how to read." As most of you probably know, a number of books have been written on the subject. At the moment, I can't lay my hands on the essay by Fadiman in one o..."

Hi Lilly,

I'm also interested in the topic of how to read well, I've read Adler's How To Read, but am looking for further suggestions.
Do you have any suggestions?

[Tamara]

I think how we read depends on what we are reading.

For example, if I am reading a poem, which, by definition, has to be more focused/dense than a novel with every word carefully chosen, I tend to be more intense when I read it. I look for imagery, word choice (why did the poet choose this particular word instead of another?), rhythm, tone, etc. etc.

My focus is not quite as intense when I read a short story. I am still looking for some of the same basic elements that are in poetry in addition to character development, plot, etc. etc., but I don't scrutinize every word the way I do when I read a poem.

Reading a novel is a different experience since it is more a question of sustaining some of these same elements over a longer period. Again, I don't scrutinize every word, but I am looking for clues: what does this say about a character? how does a character's dialogue reflect his/her personality? does the plot flow? Is there foreshadowing? etc. etc.

In a sense, reading a novel entails holding some of the same elements you find in a poem or a short story in abeyance for a longer period of time, i.e. for the duration of the novel.

So for me, how I read depends on what I'm reading.

[Lily]

@7Xan Shadowflutter wrote: "You might even write poetry. Which is a very bad idea. ..."

Xan -- haven't figured out how to interpret your meaning (rejection of Van Doren's statement, cynicism about it, that it was bad poetry, ...). (If you looked at the PDF of his book, you realize V.D. makes a passionate case for very aware reading and disputes whether many of us do it.)

But if the "you" in your statement is referring to "me", I'll agree 100%! Poetry I do not write! ;-0 ;-)

[Xan]

Hi, Lily. I meant the collective you -- actually all of us non-poets.
Love can make non-poets write poetry, and it's almost always bad.

[Lily]

Marlon wrote: "I'm also interested in the topic of how to read well, I've read Adler's How To Read, but am looking for further suggestions. Do you have any suggestions? ..."

Marlon -- my first is to peruse what is written here. My second is to re-read Adler. The third is to keep poking people on the subject. I find many people seem to recoil from considering the topic. But, like here, if one pushes hard enough, little tidbits emerge.

Do keep looking for articles, presentations, books, ... that address the topic. I am not sorry to be listening to the Great Courses lectures Art of Reading by Timothy Spurgin, although I am not excited about it. Also, so far, Thomas C. Foster has not been particularly helpful for me. Note Jeremy's suggestions @8.

Perhaps most important is self-awareness -- how to make better use of something in which some of us invest a lot of time. Also, to keep picking up and incorporating bits and pieces of techniques and skills across a lifetime. Probably most difficult is selecting the level at which to stay aware and involved in a particular piece of writing.

PS -- Writing myself has also opened and changed my reading. I am much more aware of things like point of view, time, memory, organization, character development, .... Metaphor and simile and word choice have always tended to catch my ear when reading. One of my idiosyncrasies is a tiny cloud in the margin for descriptions of the sky.

[Lily]

Tamara wrote: "...Reading a novel is a different experience since it is more a question of sustaining some of these same elements over a longer period. ..."

Thank you, Tamara. I guessed there would be insights coming from your direction!

[Tamara]

Lily wrote: "Thank you, Tamara. I guessed there would be insights coming from your direction!.."

Oh, dear! There I go being predictable--again :)

[Lily]

Patrice wrote: "...the only problem was they were different translations but i bet you can find the same. actually i found the differences interesting...."

Thanks for your comments, Patrice. One of my favorite ways to read Tolstoy is to listen to one translation while following with another.

I think I have at least three major problems with D -- First, I find many of his characters repulsive. (Yet, I've often said I didn't consider likability as an important character trait for story telling. Freud supposedly has said he has never discovered something about the human personality D hadn't already explored.) Second, his stories seem embedded in Russian history of political dissent, both internally and vis a vis Western (European) thought, and of Slavic/Orthodox Christianity. All of those are areas for which I feel lack of background depth. D. frustrates me as a pathway into another culture, whereas Tolstoy has always enlightened. Third, and this is one where I tread on particularly swampy ground, D feels to me oblivious to much of what the seventies and beyond have brought to broader cultural awareness of gender related issues. D is sometimes described as the author who penetrates the soul. But, is it the human soul, or more a gender specific soul? Don't know, but maybe Eman is right. Thomas will drag me into the discussion (and it will be as rich as the one on Joyce).

[Xan]

To me D.'s characters are all seized by fits of frenzy. Every time I come across dialog -- and much of D.'s writing is dialog -- I think it will end with at least one of the character's head exploding. I get the feeling every character is violating every other character's personal space, and from toe to toe to nose to nose they are verbal combatants, and I'm waiting for fisticuffs to break out. It takes some getting used to.

He's also not the tidiest author, abandoning some threads and characters halfway through. Once in a while a Character enters stage left, exits stage right, and everyone is left wondering from whence she or he came and to where he or she went.

Anyone else get this impression from D.?

But I guess what D. does well is explore the human psyche.

I thought Nastasya Filippovna (The Idiot) was a fascinating character, wounded, self-destructive, doomed, yet a fighter all the way.

[Lily]

Tamara wrote: "Lily wrote: "Thank you, Tamara. I guessed there would be insights coming from your direction!.."

Oh, dear! There I go being predictable--again :)"

[g] Tamara, I hope you consider that a good trait -- and not foreclosing the oft equally useful trait of being unpredictable!

[Lily]

@14 Xan Shadowflutter wrote: "Hi, Lily. I meant the collective you -- actually all of us non-poets. Love can make non-poets write poetry, and it's almost always bad."

Whew! Thx, Xan. And, true, true. Now, expressing love, well, it gets complicated, but even "bad" can be worse than rarity? ....

[Lily]

@ 19 Xan Shadowflutter wrote: " and much of D.'s writing is dialog..."

D... Ah, thx, Xan. I hadn't noticed that! One of those important skills, to notice such authorial choices....

[Shelley]

Xan Shadowflutter wrote: "I get the feeling every character is violating every other character's personal space, and from toe to toe to nose to nose they are verbal combatants, and I'm waiting for fisticuffs to break out."

This is such a wonderful description of D.!!! I haven't read that much by him (just Notes from the Underground and C&P but I do feel a little dirty reading him--as if I'm sniffing around the hidden, secret, grimy crevices of the human psyche... and enjoying it a little too much.

Re: reading, I think one of the best things I've done was just to slow down. In high school I tried to go for speed, skimming etc. When I started college I forced myself to slow down and really read and register every single word. This has enabled me to just get a much better feel for each book, each chapter, each page, each sentence. With time and experience I learned to read for character, read for language, read for structure--but slowing down was that necessary first step.

[David]

Lilly, there is another book that I have had my eye on for a while but have not made time for yet that may help us both: How to Read Literature Like a Professor: A Lively and Entertaining Guide to Reading Between the Lines, by Thomas C. Foster. From what I can tell, it is kind of a guidebook on decoding the symbolism often used in literature. i.e., a trip is not just a trip, its a journey of self-discovery, except when it is not.

Maybe someone here can tell us more about it?

[Lily]

David wrote: "Lily....Maybe someone here can tell us more about it? .."

My reaction is @15. But maybe I haven't given Foster a fair chance. I can be impatient with rather didactic treatises. Even Henry James' The Art of Fiction (which is HJ profundity) I can only take so much of before I have to set it aside. Part of the reason I appreciate these discussions -- lots of us oft trying to share the one-three points that have stood out for ourselves.

E.g., Shelley @23: "With time and experience I learned to read for character, read for language, read for structure--but slowing down was that necessary first step."

[Lily]

Patrice wrote: "i wont be reading along this time. its one of my all time favorite books ..."

Patrice -- would you share a line or two on "why" or "how" C&P is one of your all time favorites?

[Marlon]

Xan Shadowflutter wrote: "Hi, Lily. I meant the collective you -- actually all of us non-poets.
Love can make non-poets write poetry, and it's almost always bad."
Hi Lily,

Thanks a lot for your reply!