News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Nov. 7, 2007
Word got around some months ago that a French psychoanalyst had published a guide to talking about books without reading them. After seeing a few blog conversations on this development, news that the volume would be translated into English seemed anticlimactic — redundant, even.
I have not yet laid eyes on a copy of Pierre Bayard’s How to Talk About Books You Haven’t Read (Bloomsbury USA), much less read it. Nor does it seem necessary to say another word about the book here. Once you have read one article about it, you’ve read them all, though the recent piece in New York magazine can be recommended for hitting all the basic points with some flair.
The only thing worth adding might be a reminder that David Lodge got there first. In Changing Places, the first of his campus novels, Lodge did Bayard one better by inventing the game “Humiliation.” Rumor has it that Humiliation is sometimes played at faculty dinner parties. I have to doubt this: As with an urban legend, the report always comes from somebody who heard about it from somebody else. But the rules of Humiliation are simple enough, and it’s not impossible that people do occasionally start to play, though things probably don’t reach quite the extreme that Lodge describes.
Players of Humiliation take turns naming a classic book they’ve never read. Things get interesting once the element of competition takes over and people try to outdo each other in making confessions. You get credit for being shameless. Admitting that you haven’t read “all” of Proust won’t count for much. But if you never finished the 50-page overture to Remembrance of Things Past, that’s potentially embarrassing. Even more so if you admit you never even tried. And so on, with one-upsmanship being the real driving force. The English professor in Changing Places who admits that he’s never read Hamlet is definitely playing a trump card. (He wins the game, but things turn out badly for him.)
Someone ought to write a different sort of self-help work — one offering guidance for a situation exactly the opposite of that implied by Bayard’s title. I mean the experience of finding it impossible to talk about things you have read.
This has been happening to me, off and on, for about a year. It’s an experience of momentary brain failure that can be quite bewildering and infuriating. I am at present 44 years of age, which may be pertinent. (The nice thing about writing a column is that when a midlife crisis begins, you get to bring along guests.) But a colleague points out that the same condition probably also afflicts people who have to read a lot for graduate school. Whatever the causal factors, here are notes from a case study.
The first incident occurred when, in the course of a discussion of contemporary politics among a few friends, somebody wondered aloud about whether Tony Judt’s Postwar might throw some light on a specific issue. The question ended up being directed my way. I’d read it and even written about it. My marked-up set of galleys for Postwar was on a shelf in the study. The book had dominated my life for at least a week. The question was a general one — about the argument, not some minute fact from its pages— but no answer seemed forthcoming. For an agonizing few minutes, the only thing that I could recall was that Postwar had been very long indeed.
Given a short spell with my copy, it would have been easy to find a passage or annotation that applied to the topic at hand. Instead, I just sat there trying to locate the folder in my brain containing whatever ideas and impressions had formed months earlier. But that folder was gone.
Eventually I did find a mental note card’s worth of something to say, and offered to look up more details later. Similar cerebral brownouts have occurred since then, though none was quite so awkward.
Apart from the embarrassment (deer, headlights) the incident was puzzling.
Being able to talk about a book is, among other things, a social skill. It is subject to whatever laws of reputation-economy have inspired Bayard and Lodge. But drawing a total blank on something you know you’ve read involves a different kind of transaction — one that is intra- rather than inter-personal.
It may be that there are different segments of the self involved in reading. There is one part that actually puts in the time with the book (article, Web site, etc.) and brings together however much power of concentration you have available at a given moment. A different part of you handles the “take away”: whatever substance you extracted from a text. Still another internal functionary is charged with integrating that material into larger patterns of interest — digesting, rather than chewing, per Francis Bacon.
Finally some other aspect of the self manages all of the rest. It deals with the outside world as well. It is the part that engages in conversation. Also, it knows where to look to find your glasses.
It would be good to think that all of you are on the same team. But sometimes, no, you clearly aren’t. Sometimes there is a communication breakdown.
My hunch is that this is especially likely to happen to people who do a great deal of reading that is task-directed rather than autotelic. It is probably also influenced by just how much material gets processed via this division of labor. People who consume two or three books a month, for example, might be less susceptible to moments of total overload than those who read two or three a week.
Some situations require learning to handle texts like a meat packer carving up pigs on an assembly line. Certain skills are involved, and they are good skills to have. You can learn to wield the blade with some precision without losing a finger. But efficiency counts, because there’s always another pig coming at you.
Winning points at a salon or dinner party has its uses, of course. Still, I’d appreciate a guide to how to get through my stint at the packing house in one piece and still be lucid and sociable at the end of the day. If somebody publishes How to Talk About Books You’ve Actually Read, I will do my best to follow the advice, provided I can remember it.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Scott, While I concur that much of what we recall with ease it tied to our emotive engagement, I suppose at 49 I suffer as well from the abundance of NutraSweet and damaged dendrites. This notion of making connections is, indeed, a serious matter. The recent “Made to Stick” book (Random) by Heath and Heath addresses this, and does have a chapter on “Emotional.” I’d love to take Chips class at Stanford on this subject (go to the last chapter). Also, pp. 246-47 afford a quick look at the book’s key points. Another new book of some connection to your “problem” is by Anthony K. Kronman—certainly on the firing line of some for its thesis (Yale, Education’s End: Why Our Colleges and Universities Have Given Up on the Meaning of Life). However, his notion of important questions hits at this very notion of connecting long term to what we read. Your link to autotelic is helpful. I was not aware of this piece. The overview of Csikszenmihaly’s place in “flow theory” is rather helpful, especially in the light of his penchant for prolixity. And for those not familiar with your work, the list of articles via your link prove engaging. I recall your timely piece on Kurt Vonnegut (http://insidehighered.com/views/2007/04/18/mclemee). Though I resonate more with Tim Lacy’s comment at the bottom than Vonnegut fans, there is this magnetic appeal in his life that you seem to capture—and that sticks. Thanks for today’s article, for your enticing look at something attached to a deeper issue within the academy.
Jerry Pattengale, AVP for Scholarship and Grants at Indiana Wesleyan University, at 7:30 am EST on November 7, 2007
As an historian who has read all of John D. MacDonald and Clive Cussler’s books, I have discovered that you can always humiliate yourself in academic circles by simply admitting what you enjoy reading. It is a pleasing alternative to listing what you have not read. The shocked looks, sighs, and eye rolling are simply marvelous. But what’s priceless is when a leading classical world archaeologist quietly admits after the dinner that he reads them too!
But if you’re Hell-bent on competing by sharing your not-to-do list, you can always use the tactics developed by a former graduate student. He use to hand out instructions to his students titled, “How to Gut a Book and Not Read It.” His instructions were simple. Read the dust jacket, read the conclusion, dig up one published review, and then skim the book until you find a typo. Then summarize the dust jacket and review in your own written review. To give the illusion that you know what the Hell you’re talking about, include the phrase, “I found an annoying typo on page 378!” In an altered form, this tactic also works with all committee reports and any literature concerning assessment. It may keep you ignorant but saves so much time (notice I say former graduate student)! Good to see your post, Dr. P.
John F. DeFelice, Associate Professor of History at University of Maine at Presque Isle, at 8:35 am EST on November 7, 2007
Funny article Scott. Why just this past weekend I pulled out my old copy of the Joyce compilation I never read, and turned to the page whose corner I bent in 2003...and promptly closed it again after slogging through ten minutes of The Joycian Riddle known and dreaded by untold numbers of English majors nearly as much as Beowulf and, yes, yes, Proust.
Do they still print Cliff Notes??
feudi pandola, at 10:56 am EST on November 7, 2007
Scott, this gave me a much needed laugh:"efficiency counts, because there’s always another pig coming at you.” I don’t have advice, I can only say I am glad I am not alone. Just a few weeks ago I found myself unable to say one thing about Bishop’s “The Fish” that wasn’t evident from the title, despite having spent a month of my life and 20 pages analyzing it. My misery appreciates your company.
Bussey, Prof. at U Science and Arts of OK, at 11:40 am EST on November 7, 2007
Many years ago as a college student I signed up for an entire semester (16 weeks) of Moby Dick. Not only did I never read one word, but (somehow) managed to pass all the tests and write three papers.
Ida Kotyuk, at 12:00 pm EST on November 7, 2007
This sad commentary makes one consider why people continue to write books. Of course, academics do it for promotion and for enhanced self-importance. What you point out, though, is that it can’t be in order to share something genuinely important or worth thinking about. After all, if the great writers don’t engage readers sufficiently to cause anything to be remembered about their books, why should self-promotional writing do so? How can we expect our students to actually read and remember anything, or even consider it important enough to try to do so except for a grade?
Angelo, Prof. at Liberal Arts College, at 1:35 pm EST on November 7, 2007
I grew somewhat disturbed as I read not only the editorial but also the responses. The subject intrinsically generates some depressing thoughts and questions. What is the value of actually reading a work versus claiming to have read it? Does actually committing to reading something somehow handicap the person that makes that commitment? Is there something intrinsically wrong with the humanities when the responses to the review are overwhelmingly from humanities educators?
Then my day “brightened” a little. I realized this behavior is far more ubiquitous than the book and review and comments are giving it credit for. It — or its counterparts — exists in the sciences and engineering, the social sciences, business — in other words just about every sphere of human endeavor. No time to conduct that experimental trial? Just generate some numbers on a distribution, move a few off, et voila! No time to write the program for the assignment? Just crib it off the Internet, borrow from a friend and change some variable names, or hastily throw together a draft of what you think it might look like without actually running it! No time to master the technology required to develop a solution for your boss? No problem — get someone else to show you how, and present the research as your own! I’ve seen examples of all of these, and I suspect such activities are far more prevalent than their practioners would like to admit.
The person who actually does the work is actually at a disadvantage — because a response to work of any complexity is likely to be a) original and therefore more difficult to articulate, and also b) require a response which is also complex, which is less likely to be understood at all (much less initially, at the point of articulation). Furthermore this developed complexity of response is likely to be interpreted as BS or an attempt to obscure a lack of familiarity with the work in question. In today’s “plug-and-play” society, the glib answer trumps the considered verdict. Every time.
Scrawed, at 5:25 pm EST on November 7, 2007
I must say it was wonderful practice for the BSing I now do in my job, writing news releases on things I’ve barely had time to glance at.
Although do we really need to read something to know about it? I never saw Sex and the City, yet I know all the characters AND the names of their boyfriends.
Allison, at 5:30 pm EST on November 8, 2007
Actually, Bayard devotes an entire chapter to Lodge, taking in Changing Places and Small World. And a separate chapter discusses Montaigne and books that one has either read or written, and yet forgotten.
Not that reading either of the chapters are much more helpful than imagining them, but then again, that’s Bayard’s point.
Andrew, at 6:05 pm EST on November 10, 2007
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Join the Pack! A community with nearly 8,000 faculty and staff, and 30,000 students. NC State is one of the largest employers ... see job
Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
A leader in academe, the University of South Carolina holds the Carnegie Foundation’s highest research designation and is ... see job
The University is seeking a Director of Web Services. The position reports directly to the Chief Information Officer and is a ... see job
A career at Johnson County Community College is more than a job. We believe it’s important to invest in our employees and ... see job
For more information and application please visit our website http://www.losrios.edu and ... see job
Join the Pack! A community with nearly 8,000 faculty and staff, and 30,000 students. NC State is one of the largest employers ... see job
Position Summary: The Sawyer Business School at Suffolk University seeks faculty candidates who can deliver ... see job
Azusa Pacific University seeks applications for the Head of Instruction the University Libraries. see job
My Turn ...
Ulysses by James Joyce. I loved every word I didn’t read
Frizbane Manley, at 6:00 am EST on November 7, 2007