When can you claim to have read a book?

[J_BlueFlower]

When can you claim to have read a book?

Most people can read the first few page pages of Einstein's original paper on general relativity, but beyond page five around 99.9% will understand nothing. You can sit and look at all the words. But have you then read it?

I am trying to read Ulysses. Soon I will finish and I have sat and looked at every word in the book left to right. I have smiled at many puns and references, but most of it I did not understand. After each episode I read Sparknotes summery and analysis, and typically found that I had missed the most important points in each episode.

To what degree would you say that “having read” requires understanding?

[Gabrielle]

In my opinion, whatever the reason, if you give up reading a book after 5 pages or 5 chapters, you can't say you have read the book.
But, in your example, you read entirely Ulysses, even if you recognize you didn't understand it or parts of it. You can say you've read the book. If this happened to me, I would simply write in my review: I read the book but didn't understand it.

I read The Snows of Kilimanjaro last week. Entirely. I didn't rate it, because I didn't see what was the point of the story, the purpose of it's author, which I said in my review. Maybe I missed it totally, never mind, I read it... I lost my time, but that's another story! 😊

[J_BlueFlower]

So you could say you had read Einstein's original paper on general relativity after having looked at all the words?

(Yes, I am not making it easy ;-)

[Rosemarie]

I think it might be a good idea to determine why you read the book or the genre.
If it is fiction, and you finished the book, after reading it carefully, you can say that you have read it, even if you didn't understand it entirely.
I read Ulysses last year, an annotated edition, and finished the book. I can tell you what it was about. But it wasn't an easy book.
When I was in university I had to read books for literature courses. I have absolutely no recollection of some of the books I read, not even the names of any of the characters. So technically I may have read the book, but not really.

[Gabrielle]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "So you could say you had read Einstein's original paper on general relativity after having looked at all the words?

(Yes, I am not making it easy ;-)"

No, you don't make it easy, Blueflower!
And yes, I maintain I would say I've read "Einstein's original paper on general relativity after having looked at all the words", but I would add, to be honnest, that I didn't understand it at all!
In fact, I guess I won't open Einstein's book, or any difficult maths book, so I don't have to ask myself this question!
About The Snows of Kilimanjaro, if it wasn't a very short story, I would have stop before the end, so I wouldn't have to determinate if I read it or not.
There are lot of books, during the past years, I started and abandoned, until I decided to read books that pleased me.
You can read books which you find "too difficult" for you, it's very good when a book makes you think. But maybe one just has to find the subject or the subjects one will be happy to think about. Because I don't think one has to know a little bit of everything. I think it's better to know well one or two subject.
So...! If you missed Ulysses, it's maybe that it wasn't the book for you.

[Gabrielle]

Rosemarie wrote: "I think it might be a good idea to determine why you read the book or the genre.
If it is fiction, and you finished the book, after reading it carefully, you can say that you have read it, even if ..."

I agree with this, Rosemarie: "I think it might be a good idea to determine why you read the book or the genre."

And sometimes, Blueflower, we're not in a mood to read a book, but we rediscover it years later, because, fortunately, we change.

[Erin]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "So you could say you had read Einstein's original paper on general relativity after having looked at all the words?

(Yes, I am not making it easy ;-)"

So long as you read it in a language in which you are fluent, then yes, in my opinion. (Looking at every word in German if you do not know the language doesn’t count!) Of course there will probably still be much that is not understood, but that is another thing entirely.

[Kathleen]

I agree with Erin. "Of course there will probably still be much that is not understood, but that is another thing entirely." We can almost always get more out of a book. A re-read will often bring lots of new understandings that we missed.

I appreciate your admission of reading Sparknotes and realizing you didn't get the main points. That has happened to me many times!

[Loretta]

Question: When can you claim to have read a book?

Hmmm, let's see. When you're finished reading the book would be my answer.

[Darren]

I know what you mean JBF
I "read" Beckett's Molloy recently and feel none the wiser!
I intend (one day!) to read up some critical theory and try reading it again!

[Alia]

Every time you read Einstein's paper on relativity, you understand it a little better; therefore, all your readings count toward your understanding of it.

[J_BlueFlower]

It was just an example. But actually, I don't think so. You need to know tensor field math, or it is like it was written in another language.

Since all of you seems to agree that reading includes the case of “looking at all the words in order”, I am starting to suspect that “read” in English does not have exactly the same meaning as the Danish word (læst).

Could it be that the meaning has changed to not imply understanding. I am thinking about all these endless end user agreements where you scroll down and tick “yes, I have read”. This could devaluate the meaning of the word reading?

[Erin]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "It was just an example. But actually, I don't think so. You need to know tensor field math, or it is like it was written in another language.

Since all of you seems to agree that reading includes..."

Some basic level of understanding is required, but that seems difficult to define precisely.

You make an interesting point: Certainly in the U.S. there is copious legalize that one is not meant to read (all evidence to the contrary) much less understand!

[Rosemarie]

When I was getting my teaching degree, I learned the difference between reading and decoding. In reading, you understand the meaning of the word, sentence, paragraph, etc. In decoding, the beginning reader can say the words, but has no idea what they mean.
As an adult, I have read a couple of pages of a book and had no clue of what I had just read. I am pretty certain it was for a university course and ploughed through the book, glad that it was a first year pass/fail course. I think it was called The Lime Twig.

[siriusedward]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "So you could say you had read Einstein's original paper on general relativity after having looked at all the words?

(Yes, I am not making it easy ;-)"

Of course you can.... you may not have understood it all... but you have read it...its that easy ,for me...
Youcan reread it or usea guide to understand it...
Generally we are the ones that make a simple thing complicated. .don't you think...?

[siriusedward]

Erin wrote: "J_BlueFlower wrote: "So you could say you had read Einstein's original paper on general relativity after having looked at all the words?

(Yes, I am not making it easy ;-)"

So long as you read it ..."

Of course,you are right Erin...

By read ,I too mean reading a book in a language which we are fluent in ..or at least are trying to learn...

[Melanti]

I'd probably say I read it but then admit I really didn't get it. It'd be inaccurate to say I didn't read it, but I'd feel dishonest if I didn't add a caveat of some sort.

(I must say, this makes me feel a bit better about attempting and failing to read Ulysses over the past month. )

[Kathleen]

There is probably some tipping point, a level of understanding needed to consider having read a book.

And I think we can't compare fiction and non-fiction. I think you have to "get" much more in non-fiction to consider a book read and absorbed. But with fiction, especially the great stuff, there are worlds to be mined and I accept that multiple readings will be required to discover them all, if it is even possible.

[Bat-Cat]

I have been following this thread and find the comments quite interesting and provocative so... I thought I would chime in with my own. :-)

Firstly, I think there must be a distinction in what ones reason for reading a particular book is - ranging from reading to enjoy the book without going into any depth (summer beach read) to reading to get as much comprehension as possible during the time of that reading (first reading of a classic book here on CuoC) to studying in order to test for ultimate comprehension and understanding (school studies and non-fiction). I feel that all of these forms of reading merit being able to declare that "one has read the book".

Secondly, I think that what one "gets" out of a reading of a book varies tremendously depending on their age, sex, race, religion, country of origin, family structure... basically it depends on ones thoughts, beliefs and understanding of life instilled in them since birth up to and including the time that they read said book. To me it would be impractical to expect a child of 5 to get the same understanding out of reading Huckleberry Finn as a high school student or someone in their 40's. The 5 year old would comprehend what he/she is capable of comprehending based on a multitude of factors that are completely different from anyone else. But just because they might not understand it to the extent that someone else does, in my eyes, that does not preclude them from being able to say that they have, in fact, read the book.

Thirdly, I think that people are constantly changing and learning (even when they think they are not) and assuming that they must completely or mostly comprehend a book the first time through is being overly critical and unrealistic. If the book is worth anything it will take multiple readings, sometimes a lifetime of study, in order to comprehend it fully - if that is even possible.

And lastly, I fully believe that a person gets something from everything that they read even if they don't think that they do. Little ideas or seeds are planted that may or may not take root and sprout at a later time. Opinions are tweaked and altered in ways that one might not have previously thought possible. Beliefs are reinforced or activated that have the potential to affect and influence not only that person but everyone that person comes into contact with.

So, yes, I assert that a person can claim to have read a book if, as erin, blueflower and siriusedward stated, one reads it in a language that is known and understandable to them; if, as loretta and siriusedward implied, one reads it from start to finish; and if, as rosemarie and kathleen affirmed, one reads it with the intention of understanding it to the best of there ability. There will always be more for us to learn and understand about everything in life. In my view, to negate any form of progress or accomplishment made by a person to evolve and learn in life is to belittle their efforts and make them feel less than. We are all members of this book group because we love reading, love the classics and want to learn. We all have different life experiences and knowledge to bring to the table and we are all a crucial part of this book group with something important to offer. I choose to acknowledge everyone for their efforts and desire to grow as human beings and to be willing to share that with others. That's what I think reading is all about. :-)

[siriusedward]

Love the way you put your thoughts into words..I especially liked the second point.as every reader brings something to a book..maybe not what the author intends ,but then once a book is released into the world ,it is upto the reader to gain what he does from the book.Though I agree with all the points you made Bat-Cat...

[Alia]

So as long as you know tensor field math, you can say you understand Einstein's paper on relativity, even if you've never read it?

[J_BlueFlower]

At lot of good points, Bat-Cat.

You have read a book if, you have looked at all the words and they left some sort of change in the brain?

[J_BlueFlower]

Alia wrote: "So as long as you know tensor field math, you can say you understand Einstein's paper on relativity, even if you've never read it?"

Uhh! That example backfired! Ahem..... As far as I know tensor field math is the math used to formulate the theory, like calculus is used for a lot of physics. You can know calculus without knowing physics. So the short answers is “no”.

[Alia]

And you can know English without knowing Shakespeare. I know, I was being facetious.

But anything you experience leaves some sort of change in the brain, so let me be more concrete.

If you have read every word of a text either aloud or aloud-in-your-mind, does that count? You see, if you start reading a novel in a language you barely understand, you understand it much better by the middle of the book, and even better by the end.

[Bat-Cat]

siriusedward wrote: "Love the way you put your thoughts into words..I especially liked the second point.as every reader brings something to a book..maybe not what the author intends ,but then once a book is released in..."

Thanks siriusedward. I love your thoughts on books going out into the world and... that was very nicely said and makes me think of how a book's meaning would then be malleable based on who reads it. Hummmm, something to think about. :-)

[Bat-Cat]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "At lot of good points, Bat-Cat.

You have read a book if, you have looked at all the words and they left some sort of change in the brain?"

Hi BlueFlower. That is definitely an interesting way of phrasing it. I would say, I don't think that merely looking at the words would be enough, I think one would need to be consciously engaged in the process as well. I agree with you that the act of reading would necessitate changes to the brain but I also think that it would cause changes to other systems of the body, mainly the nervous system and the cardiovascular system (the heart field). There is an energetic resonance to everything in this universe (for all you Einstein lovers out there) and just the act of being engaged with a particular book (or anything for that matter) would affect a person's energy frequency which in turn would affect the body as a whole. So...I would have to say that reading a book would entail changes to not only the brain but ultimately ones entire being.

Thanks for making me think about it in such depth. :-)

[siriusedward]

Alia wrote: "And you can know English without knowing Shakespeare. I know, I was being facetious.

But anything you experience leaves some sort of change in the brain, so let me be more concrete.

If you have r..."

It is when you read more in a new language that you can learn more..it will of course mean you need to be engaged with the text...not necessarily trying to absorb everything but just reading critically(how much ,is ofcourse is upto that person)...I guess...

[Michele]

Loretta wrote: "Question: When can you claim to have read a book?

Hmmm, let's see. When you're finished reading the book would be my answer."

Mine too :)

[Maggie the Muskoka Library Mouse]

I would never say I had READ a book unless I actually finished it.

[J_BlueFlower]

The original question was about how much you needed to understand in the book, so say that you read it. Actually having looked at all the words in the book was a given.

[Anisha Inkspill]

for me, if some / most of the book has gone over my head then I'll finish it, accept I did not understand it all and try again down the line.

There have been books I've read 3+ times before I understood most / all of it. One of the things I love about books is that reading is a journey. I think we're v lucky there are many variety of books which cover a whole load of subjects. There's so many there's enough to suit anyone. The adventure is to discover what books there are for you and enjoy.