From an interview about reading with the novelist Ruth Ware (NYT).
You probably already know this advice, but just in case.
Personally I figured it out half a century ago. I read this in Doris Lessing's "The Golden Notebook":
And shortly thereafter, I threw "The Golden Notebook" aside. 
I don't know if Ruth Ware will ever, like Doris Lessing, win the Nobel Prize, but I always remembered Lessing's advice to throw the book aside, and I had to go back and reread what Ware said to do with the book — "drop it and walk away." The book gets to stay and I'm supposed to leave? I prefer Lessing's advice. I stay where I am and the book gets flung.
Posts
37 comments:
Lessing was very big in the 1970s. Women were starved for a great feminist novel and thought The Golden Notebook was it. When girls were reading Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret, their moms and older sisters were reading Lessing. Lawrence Durrell's Alexandria Quartet was also big in those days.
I have always had multiple books started, laying around, or paused on Kindle- moving from one to another, fiction to non-fiction, until I find the right one for my state of mind, today, now. But I do tend to get back to those unread eventually. Sometimes it takes months, or even years, but I get back to them. And if they don't grab me on the next round, I'm pretty much done trying. Maybe another time in my life that book would have worked. I'm different now than I was in the 70s, 80s. Less patient. Less apt to put up with bad storytelling or worse, bad writing.
Just a quick inventory in my life today- I've got 4 books that have been started. One has me staying with it.
I read The Golden Notebook twice. To me it was the dreary world my parent had to navigate, with the same modernist assumptions. It gave me a little more sympathy tbh.
If I get bored with a passage I switch to a different book and usually keep four or five going at once.
I read The Golden Notebook twice. To me it was the dreary world my parent had to navigate, with the same modernist assumptions. It gave me a little more sympathy tbh.
If I get bored with a passage I switch to a different book and usually keep four or five going at once.
the sunk cost fallacy.
The thing of it is.. If you stop, and someone (somehow) convinces you to try again, you'll need to start from the top, 'cause you're not going to remember.. So now you've read the book twice (well, a time and a half).
If you make it through the 1st time. And someone tells you to read it, you can say
been there, done that.. didn't like it.
I guess that's the goodness of "throw it out" You don't have it to restart if you don't have it.
On the other hand, i can think of at least one book* that that i quit reading because it was stupid, and then FINALLY reread; and found that it got VERY interesting literally on the next page from where i quit.
one book* This midget was walking across the country, with these Other little people; and there were Really stupid songs, and 'bad' people grabbed them, but they got away, and then other 'bad' people grabbed them and they got stuck in this huge cave, and the midget got separated and was crawling around the cave in the dark (for a LONG TIME), when he got stopped by an underground lake (BORING!).
On the next page.. The midget found a Ring.. A PRECIOUS RING
I’m reading a book now that I’m slogging through. I already read ahead to the ending. Time to throw it aside. Thanks for this post! I’m not even going to feel guilty about it.
I could probably say it fancier but: Does the concept apply to readings on the internet? I think so.
The unread tome takes the reader nowhere, hence the need for reader perambulation.
I'm reading a 971-page novel, The Pillars of the Earth, about the construction of an English cathedral in the 1100s. Last night I reached page 466.
I rarely read fiction. I read War and Peace (in Russian) when I was in college, but otherwise I never have read such a long novel.
I keep thinking that I might stop reading The Pillars of the Earth, but whenever I begin reading the next chapter, I get hooked in again. So, I might finish this novel after all.
...but books are too often still treated like medicine. You’ve got to finish the course, even if you’re not enjoying it.
I get the feeling that authors do write as if they have a "now I got you" attitude toward their readers/book buyers.
Digesting a non-fiction book should be a process over time. It should come with (1) a summary of all relevant themes readable in one sitting, and (2) the full detail text which the reader can explore over time as ideas and questions develop upon reflection and consideration.
books are too often still treated like medicine. You’ve got to finish the course, even if you’re not enjoying it
That's because they are not just "books," they are LITERATURE! Our betters, such as professors and teachers, have told us that these are important essential writers. Even after we are no longer in class and no longer are unable to write a report saying, "The book is crap and I refused to read beyond page 20," still that prejudice is there. But in fact, not a few of the giants of "literature" are not very good writers, or they are too full of their writing ability to never bother with telling a story or conveying information. Or the person who translated it from another language is not very good at their job either.
Yes, I know that writing styles have changed since the onset of motion pictures and TV, where in the past it was necessary to provide a word picture IN EVERY SCENE to give the reader a sense of the scene (by the way, I'm working from home, sitting at a desk in my spare bedroom, wearing the t-shirt I slept in and gym shorts), and perhaps the older works can be forgiven that. But still, reading should not be a hard slog.
"books are too often still treated like medicine"
By middle-class women over 50 and a few college professors?
The Dorothy Parker quote springs immediately to mind. “This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.”
These days, i rarely buy books. They usually come from the library, which gives me 3 weeks to read it. If i enjoy the book, I'll finish it before my time is up. If i don't finish it, it's because i didn't like it enough to give it the time. Either way, finished our not, after three weeks it has to go back.
I love my book club because I finish books that I otherwise would give up on. But not always.
I agree. Its just a novel. And if its nonfiction, nobody gets upset if you skip around. Or just read part of it.
Starting after WW II, lots of authors/books starting winning prizes and getting high praise for things other than artistic merit. I didn't realize that for a long time. So, I wasted time forcing myself to get through a lot of "Great, prize winning Novels". Now, I just quit when I'm bored. BTW, novels, like movies, rarely get better as they go along. If they change in quality, the best part is usually in the first third.
And of course, after I read enough, I realized I didn't like certain types of novels just like I don't like apricots or Ham. I'm not going to change, so there's no reason for me to read them.
Plus there's literature and there's literature. If you don't like Dorothy Lessing or John Updike, so what? OTOH if you don't like Dickens or Hemingway or Tolstoy or Shakespeare - just realize the problem is YOU - not them.
People no longer read in order to kill time. Writers no longer publish their stories serial-style a chapter at a time in a magazine. Readers don't need the minutiae and have the entire book all at once (like the difference between watching a TV series week-by-week vs. binge watching later). They are just interested in the story.
Is this like abandoning a streaming series, and having it still in your 'continue watching' queue, silently mocking you?
It took me a long time to read "Moby Dick"; I kept starting, putting it down, etc., because I found (and still do) some of the chapters just a complete waste of time and entirely uninteresting. But then you get to a section where it almost takes your breath away. I also slogged through "War and Peace" for a while before finding it fascinating though; took me like 5 years to get through.
I have a book of Emily Dickinson poems and I find 9 out of 10 (or maybe a larger percentage) are Meh, but then you hit one and it's "Wow".
So, I dunno. I've started but never finished "Ulysses" and I don't care, "Gravity's Rainbow" and I don't care, I'm sure there are others.
I tend to be a finisher. If I paid for a book, I generally want to get my money's worth. OTOH, I do sometimes find that a book is not worth reading and just drop it.
Or, I really do want to finish it but set it aside for a week, a month, a year eventually planning to come back and finish. Sometimes I do.
But what about Kindle samples? I gave up completely on paper books a dozen years ago. After 50 years of reading a couple books a week, I have not read any since my son got me my first Kindle. I still read a couple books a week on Kindle but am unable to even begin a paper book.
One of the nice things about Kindle is the ability to sample books for free. I probably download 5-10 samples for every book I buy. Some I buy as soon as I get to the end of the sample. Others I leave in my library as potentials and others I just delete. I probably have 100 samples in my library at the moment. My next book will probably come from one of them.
Does not buying the book after reading the sample count as not finishing?
John LGBTQBNY Henry
Blogger Mike Sylwester said...
I'm reading a 971-page novel, The Pillars of the Earth, about the construction of an English cathedral in the 1100s. Last night I reached page 466.
I read it about 15 years ago. I don't remember why, I had the impression that I would not like it at all. I wound up really enjoying it.
I read War and Peace (in Russian)
I had never read the novel but then I watched the BBC miniseries (1972 with Anthony Hopkins as Pierre) and fell in love with it. That was maybe 6 years ago and I've seen it 4-5 times since. Currently rewatching it. Thinking that I might like the novel, I tried to read it.
I found the novel excellent for a while, then Tolstoy would get into a stretch of philosophical meanderings. Then he would get back to the story and it would get good again. I got about a third of the way through and was about to enter another philosophical desert. I put it aside meaning to come back to it but have not yet.
Great story, though.
John LGBTQBNY Henry
'I read War and Peace (in Russian)'
I did too.
Didn't understand a goddamn word but it was a quick read : )
I tend to read books I like over and over. I don't watch TV and usually have several books underway all the time. I will read one for a while get bored and set it aside. I will return to it after a few weeks or months. Mostly, I read nonfiction but I recently discovered a fellow who writes very well about WWI. They are novels but I keep checking his facts and they all are true. That has gotten me reading more non-fiction about WWI.
"but books are too often still treated like medicine."
As others have noted, this comes from the horribleness known as high school and college English classes. Forced to read things because some literary theorists have deemed them necessary. Their acolytes graduate to become high school English teachers. Meanwhile, bright students are turned off from reading and taught to despise literature.
And the same goes for the forced writing about such literature. Instead of teaching students how to write, which teaches them how to think, students are forced to emulate the writings of the English professors from 20 years prior. Writings which even other English professors of the time period never read.
It didn't have to be that way. Even in 1913, the problem was recognized.
"Nothing can be more hypocritical than for young
people who are still in the rudiments of literature to be forced
into pronouncing objective judgments as to the worth of
literature. Students instinctively feel this, and resent all
attempts to get them to pretend a knowledge which they do
not possess. On the other hand, they are beginning to be
dissatisfied with judging books and other works of art on the
ground of mere impulsive like or dislike. It is time, then, for
something less ambitious than criticism, and more thoughtful
than caprice. "
--Freshman Rhetoric, John Rothwell Slater, Ph.D. Professor of Rhetoric and English Literature in the University of Rochester, (1913)
I liked Moby Dick. It helps if you are sick or on lockdown. I liked Tolstoy, but couldn't finish. Nowadays, if you don't like Hemingway, it is his problem.
Mike Sylwester said..."I'm reading a 971-page novel, The Pillars of the Earth,..."
Mike, my wife has reminded me more than a few times that it was maybe the best book she's ever read. It's not even on my list, but probably should be.
I don't think I have ever abandoned a novel in that I have never started reading and not finished. I am careful to select what it is that I read- I put in some preliminary effort at finding reviewers that I trust or carefully examining the book at the bookstore or library before buying or checking out.
I walk out on movies that bore me but some people will sit through a movie they hate, just because they paid the money. Reminds me of the old joke
First lady: The food here is terrible
Second Lady: Yes, its the worst ever.
First lady: And such small portions.
I very rarely give up on a book I started but as my 'to-read' pile grows and my time shrinks I'm more willing. I tried to read "A Room With A View" a couple of months ago but gave it up. A boring book about boring people doing boring things. Occasionally a book that meets is also about boring people doing boring things keeps me going just because I like the author's way with words (I'm looking at you Virginia Woolf). With most so-called great literature, Moby Dick for example, the trick is to read it for pleasure. If you treat it like an assigned text that you must extract great meaning from, it's all over and you'll hate it.
I am currently ready Byline by Hemingway. It is a series of dispatches by Hemingway the reporter/correspondent for the Toronto Star, Esquire, etc. It is the best and worst of books.
His pieces on Europe from the post WWI chaos 20s, and then from the 30's in which he ridicules Mussolini and presciently predicts the coming war are fascinating.
His pieces on fishing are uninteresting to this non-fisherman.
All of the essays are relatively short, so there's no need to bail-out; just plow through and hope for something better coming up.
'I tried to read "A Room With A View" a couple of months ago but gave it up. A boring book about boring people doing boring things.'
Better to watch the '85 movie with Helena Bonham Carter at peak hotness...
Years ago, when I still read novels, I got through Anthony Powell's massive A Dance to the Movement of Time. I have mixed feelings about the series, but it does have lessons about how to hold readers' interest. Have a core of characters who recur and change throughout the series, as well as new characters who pass in and out of the books. Change scenes. War, then peace, business, then the arts, then journalism. Writers don't really get around and see different sides of life nowadays, so their books are more monotone.
For a while now, I have had a greater appreciation for the short story. And for anything I read, I'm often checking to see how many pages I've read in that sitting and how many more pages I have to go to reach some predetermined number or end of a chapter.
Mike Sylvester: you will never regret finishing The Pillars of the Earth. I read the book myself and told my husband about it. We listened to it together on a cross country drive.
I got some book advice from a librarian who read lots & lots of books. She said read the first 50 pages. If it hasn’t grabbed you pick a chapter about 1/3 the way in. Read it-if still not interested-drop the book immediately and move on. It’s worked for me.
"Byline: Ernest Hemingway" has a great piece about getting his hair cut at a barber college. The newer the student, the cheaper the hair cut. He decides to get the cheapest cut possible, then chickens out and goes with a (slightly) more experienced barber student. It had a lot of resonance for me, since there was a barber college on 4th Avenue and 11th Street when I lived in the East Village, offering more or less the same deal. I never had the nerve.
What we choose to read and what we read more than once makes no sense to anyone other than ourselves, and maybe not even to ourselves.
I read Tom Sawyer twice, but I've read Huckleberry Finn several times. I might read it again. I've tried to read the Brothers Karamazov several times, but I just can't hack it, and I'm tired of trying.
In high school senior honors English I read Moby Dick (but in the FORBIDDEN Readers Digest edition), and in later life when I tried to read the full thing, I realized why the shorter version was so appealing.
Those who read some great literature in the original language have nothing but respect from me -- I managed to read Zeit zu Leben Zeit su Sterben in German, but once I passed my foreign language requirement I was done.
I have read the Lord Of the Rings at least 8 times (the first time when I was in law school (1965-68)) and I expect to read it once more, if I live long enough. In fact, that might be keeping me alive!
Post a Comment