One of the things I love about the bookish life is how one thing so often leads to another. This is often true of the interwebs too. Take, for instance, Cynthia Ozick’s review of Saul Bellow’s letters (sadly, the full article is not available online) which prompted a response by Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times, which was then mentioned on NPR, and is now reaching my bloggy front porch.
Saul Bellow is not the topic. The thread begins with Ozick saying that death is cruel to writers, especially to ones who were considered great while they were alive and then are all but forgotten after they die. She then proceeds to make a list of just some of those writers. While I agree that some of the writers are not often read anymore, I don’t agree that they have been forgotten. It is this list that leads Roger Ebert, yes that Roger Ebert of film critic fame, to muse on what it means to be well read. Ebert, it turns out, is quite the reader and even once thought he might be an English professor.
Ebert declares he has always read for pleasure. He has followed no list or pattern, and yet, reading just for the joy of it has led him to a great many authors and works that might be called important. He has not read all of the authors on Ozick’s list, nor does he feel compelled to. Why should he? I must agree with him. Reading from a list of authors that we are “supposed to” read takes all the fun out of it. This is not to say that lists and projects are bad, they aren’t if the reader wants to read the books.
Ebert considers himself well read, and why not? He has read has read quite a lot. Does having read a lot count as being well read? What does well read mean these days when there are thousands of books published every year and thousands from years past and a limited lifespan in which to read? And if we are going to create a list of the books one should read to be considered well read, you know what kind of trouble that will get us into.
The NPR article reminds us of both our mortality and the mass of material that we have to make decisions about. And we do have to make decisions. We have to decide what we will read and what we won’t read because we can’t read everything. Culling and surrender the article calls it. Culling, the choosing you do, deciding what is worth your time and what isn’t. Surrender, the realization that you don’t have time for everything worthwhile and that “this fact doesn’t have to threaten your sense that you are well-read.”
The article reminds us that being well read is not a destination, a very good point that I admit to forgetting about on occasion. I think we all forget, especially when it comes to the game we have all played at one time or other where we admit what important/famous/classic book we have not read. Why should anyone be embarrassed or feel guilt over a book they have not read? By reading that one book, would I suddenly be bathed in a rosy spotlight at the foot of a staircase descending from the heavens, lined with the ranks of the well read inviting me to join the club? I don’t think so. More likely I’d discover there was another book that I hadn’t read that I suddenly needed to feel embarrassed about.
I like that the NPR article defines well read as “making a genuine effort to explore thoughtfully.” It keeps reading from becoming a sport of one-upmanship and instead frames it as a lifetime journey in which we can, as Ebert does, read only for pleasure.
I must give a shout out to Valerie, coworker and law librarian extraordinaire who sent me the Ebert and NPR links. Thanks Valerie!
Fascinating post and great resources. Thank you for sharing this.
“I myself would rather be well-read than dead, but I have a strong hunch about which will come first.” – Joseph Epstein, “Joseph Epstein’s Lifetime Reading Plan”
I’m a big one for projects and lists to guide my reading, but I do love reading on a whim as well. And I’ve accepted that I will never get to read all that I’d like to – there are simply way too many good books out there.
Actually, I sometimes think that if I were to admit that I had actually managed at last to finish ‘Wuthering Heights’ I would be ‘bathed in a rosy spotlight at the foot of a staircase descending from the heavens, lined with the ranks of the well read inviting me to join the club”. You have no idea of the ‘wuthering’ looks I get whenever I say I just cannot read that book. (So much angst!). I have SIX copies, all given to me by well meaning people who feel I simply can’t be well-read without it.
I’m a big believer in the adage, the more you know, the more you realise all that you don’t know; teaching literature only ever made me aware of all the hundreds of books I hadn’t got around to. But I read something I liked (can’t remember where though – is that a failure to be well read?) that pointed out that to prioritise means to pick one thing – you can’t have more than one priority at a time. I like that, too. Whatever book is in my hands is my priority (even if I have two or three on the go) because it gets my full attention and I attend to it in depth. I’d always plump for reading well in the moment than for an abstract sense of being well read.
I sometimes tremble before certain ‘serious’ works and put off reading them for fear that I won’t get everything I should from them without a teacher. When I told a friend how I felt, he advised me to jump into those works and just get whatever I could from them. They weren’t written to be studied, or if they were, maybe they’re not worth reading. Writers should write for readers, not for students. If I don’t get everything, I can always read it again. Or not.
Susan E, you’re welcome, and thank you!
Amateur Reader, LOL! Excellent quote! Thanks for sharing it.
Michelle, projects and lists as a guide are quite useful. When the projects and lists become an obligation rather than fun is where the problem lies. I’ve got books of lists and love looking them over from time to time, they help me cull from the vast herds of choice books the ones that might be worthwhile reading.
Annie, gasp! You’ve never been able to finish Wuthering Heights?! Scandal!
I had to read WH in high school and didn’t like it at all. I didn’t see what the big deal was. I had to read it in college too but moderately enjoyed it that time around. Still, not my favorite book. That’s pretty funny about friends buying you copies of it so you will read it. Every book its reader, and sometimes we aren’t the right reader for a particular book.
Litlove, I am in complete agreement with you and your adage. Reading well is much more meaningful to me as you suggest than being able to read quickly through large quantities of books just to be able to say I read them.
Joan, you and your friend make a very good point. Just jump in to those ‘serious’ works and get what you can. They were indeed written to be read. I think it is the rare and probably mostly unread writer who writes for students. And you are right, if you don’t get everything the first time through but enjoyed yourself, the book can always be reread (or not)
I believe it doesn’t matter what you read or how “well read” you might be, or all the important books you haven’t read, but rather how you read, how deeply and seriously you read whatever you read, even if it means you read slowly which is inevitable if you read carefully. And today it also means that you even read.
You know, I have to say that one of the biggest moments of my young reading life was when I realized JUST HOW MANY BOOKS were in my public library. And then JUST HOW MANY LIBRARYS were in my town, let alone my city, state, country, or the world at large. Needless to say, this was quite the mindblowing fact for a book-hungry seven year old. I ran to my mom, crying that I’d never be able to read all the books in the world, and I’ve never forgotten what she told me:
“You don’t need to read them all. You just need to read.”
Ever since then, that’s what I’ve tried to do. Yes, I’ve made God knows how many book lists, joined a bajillion challenges (a very technical term, a bajillion, but you know) and even forced myself to follow a class syllabus or two. But I’ve never tried to guilt myself in to reading “classic” books just because they’re classic. To me, that implies that there are themes or lessons there that I can’t get anywhere else. But I learned about the dangers of war and the blessings of peace just as much from reading Dress Blues , a young adult novel about a girl who gets admitted to West Point, than I did from reading War and Peace . So I say who cares if I’m well read by someone elses standards, at least I’m read *throws up fist of power*!
*libraries. I really do know how to spell. Honest.
Great post! I totally agree with the point that “being well-read is not the destination.” And finding a definition for “well-read” may just be futile.
As for Ozick’s list, am I correct to say that it’s made up mostly of 20th C. authors? She has a point maybe for these writers, but I do believe all the ‘classics’ before 20th C. are not forgotten. Well, Ebert should know how many of them are made into movies nowadays. Take e.g. Jane Eyre, it has over 20 adaptations. Look at Jane Austen’s works and movies, or Shakespeare, Fitzgerald, Hardy, Tolstoy, Maugham, Capote, Tolkien, Lewis… I think literature has films to thank for keeping them fresh in the public’s collective memories. Some upcoming ones include The Bell Jar, Atlas Shrugged (albeit gathering negative reviews), Anna Karenina, 1984, Brave New World, Don Quixote, East of Eden, On the Road, Tender is the Night… True, whether we’ll read the source material is another matter, but at least, we have not forgotten the authors or the titles.
The older I get the more I feel a sense of panic about the books I haven’t yet read but mean to and let’s face it that list grows by the day! So the idea that it is the journey and not the destination that counts makes me feel a bit calmer!
I have always read what interests me in the same way I eat what I like. I recall you having a blog a while back where you asked a question something like… What books do you wish you hadn’t read? Most of the books mentioned have shown up on someones Must Read list. If you spend your life following the crowd sooner or later the cliff will be there…..
Richard, well said! I am in complete agreement with you
Chelsea, wow, you realized that when you were 7? Took me awhile longer and some days I’m still in denial about it. I am familiar with that bajillion number
And the older I get the more I refuse to feel any sort of guilt about what I read or don’t read. There is not time for it and it takes away from the pleasure I’ve gotten from what I have read.
Arti, thanks! Yup, Ozick’s list is all 20th C authors. I think her concern is that those she lists were all considered important when they were alive and were widely read. The were the literary “scene” and now readers have moved on. But as you say, there are lots of authors from an even earlier time that have not been forgotten. And you and I both know as readers that sometimes the ones that don’t get read anymore are rediscovered. It is the nature of books and reading.
Kathleen, the continually growing list is a bit frightening, isn’t it? I find comfort in the idea of the journey rather than a destination too.
Brian, good memory! I like your cliff analogy, it is so true. Follow the crowd like a lemming and sooner or later you’re going to go over the edge. Books and reading are not meidcine afterall, they are more akin to food and there is no reason why we shouldn’t “eat” what we like, right?
I rarely try to attain the “well-read” state because then I get all intimidated, but do try to balance the crap books with books of substance. After all, you only get to read so many books! And can I just say that some of those “someday” classics are SO WORTH READING. How the heck did I get away without reading To Kill A Mockingbird? It’s a crime! I adored it. Now I wonder what other “must-reads” I have been putting off, that I would love…
There are fleeting moments when I think I am “well read” but then I see all the books (different books than me) that others read and I think I am not at all well read. Circuitous thinking….but I much prefer the idea of exploring books thoughtfully! I have those panic moments, too, but no matter how many books I start….I think I won’t ever get to them all. Sigh. Thanks for the links–I’m going to check them out!
I like the idea of being well-read as a process we go through rather than a destination. I would hate to arrive there and feel disappointed somehow! The process is so very fun. I don’t know about the culling and surrender, though. I prefer your idea that we are immortal and will eventually read everything
Daphne, I think finding a balance and reading what you like but being willing to take a risk too is a good way of going about things.
Danille, I think you can rest and conisder yourself well read! There will always be books we can’t read and there will always be others who have read them and who have read more books than we have. But it doesn’t matter. What matters is how well we read the books we do choose. Hard to remember and not panic over, I know, especially when bloggers start putting up their end of year stats.
Dorothy, LOL, yeah, wouldn’t it be terrible to arrive at the “well read” station and find yourself wondering, is that all? Immortality is definitely the way to go and solves quite a few problems
Pingback: Volley and Thunder « Time's Flow Stemmed