OCD interfering with reading habits.

I'm currently reading Middlemarch by George Eliot. I'm really enjoying the main plot but due to my OCD I'm becoming irate with all of the references. You see whenever I come across a bit of history or references to other literature I'm not familiar with I feel the need to research said reference. I've had this problem with several other novels I've read over the years. For instance I recently completed The Marble Faun and was constantly having to look up the references to Italian art, this made an other wise short novel a very long process to get through. I'm just curious if any one else has this problem?

Not to the same extent, I'm sure, but I can relate. I tend to get sidetracked by references, but I take note of them and come back later if/when I have the time. It's like the Arabian Nights Entertainment (sorry, this isn't helping is it?) In the Arabian Nights, Scheherazade never finished a story because she managed to introduce another story to take its place - all stories interlock and thereby prolong her execution. There is a beauty in the analogy: we all have our own eventual "executions" and feel the need to constantly fill our time with stories. But unlike Scheherazade, our time is a fair bit longer.

I guess my point is, there is nothing wrong with gaining knowledge to better understand the references, I hope you at least find what you look up interesting. If you are becoming frustrated with the interruption to your reading, then try to force yourself to jot down the references and look them up later (unless they are central to the understanding of the story.) Middlemarch has a lot of references to mid-19th century Provincial England: but little of it is necessary to appreciating Eliot's amazing writing style, or the characters.

If you actually have obssesive compulsive disorder then you have my sympathy. It's a truly awful condition that can decimate a person's life.
It's just a shame that that, more often than not, the term 'ocd' is appropriated by morons who think that it's some kind of 'random' quirk. If this compulsive 'need' to explore literary references doesn't interfere with your day-to-day life in any significant way then the chances are that you don't have OCD.

Can you find a version of the text without the references? I doubt that, but if one existed it may be some relief. What about setting a timer to read for 20 minutes and then using 10 for reference look up? That may not make sense, because you need the reference to keep reading, but you may be able to figure a way to control the impulse if you make minor changes to the environment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Samsa

If you actually have obssesive compulsive disorder then you have my sympathy. It's a truly awful condition that can decimate a person's life.
It's just a shame that that, more often than not, the term 'ocd' is appropriated by morons who think that it's some kind of 'random' quirk. If this compulsive 'need' to explore literary references doesn't interfere with your day-to-day life in any significant way then the chances are that you don't have OCD.

---

I agree that we live in a society that makes rapid judgments and labels far too often. Honestly I've never been diagnosed with OCD per se although I have been diagnosed with depression and PTSD yet these are quite different I suppose. With out going into a lot of detail I would say that I probably have a minor form of OCD. I often find myself counting when I should be concentrating and I have other symptoms of that particular diagnosis. I don't have morning rituals or any thing that extreme so I'm not really sure. I had a fairly traumatic childhood (due to health reasons, I was never abused or any thing like that) and have had about twenty surgeries in the thirty-two years I've been alive. My mom must have every thing even and definitely exhibits traits of at least mild OCD. My compulsive needs are more of an irritant than huge problems. Any way, thanks for responding, you've given me some thing to think about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charles Darnay

Not to the same extent, I'm sure, but I can relate. I tend to get sidetracked by references, but I take note of them and come back later if/when I have the time. It's like the Arabian Nights Entertainment (sorry, this isn't helping is it?) In the Arabian Nights, Scheherazade never finished a story because she managed to introduce another story to take its place - all stories interlock and thereby prolong her execution. There is a beauty in the analogy: we all have our own eventual "executions" and feel the need to constantly fill our time with stories. But unlike Scheherazade, our time is a fair bit longer.

I guess my point is, there is nothing wrong with gaining knowledge to better understand the references, I hope you at least find what you look up interesting. If you are becoming frustrated with the interruption to your reading, then try to force yourself to jot down the references and look them up later (unless they are central to the understanding of the story.) Middlemarch has a lot of references to mid-19th century Provincial England: but little of it is necessary to appreciating Eliot's amazing writing style, or the characters.

---

In the edition that I'm reading there are footnotes for some of the more obscure references. I usually read the entire chapter and then go back to look at the footnotes. Your paragraph regarding Scheherazade and "Arabian Nights" is quite interesting. I hadn't thought of it in that way but you've definitely given me some thing very insightful to think about. Thanks for your reply, you've helped me a great deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buh4Bee

Can you find a version of the text without the references? I doubt that, but if one existed it may be some relief. What about setting a timer to read for 20 minutes and then using 10 for reference look up? That may not make sense, because you need the reference to keep reading, but you may be able to figure a way to control the impulse if you make minor changes to the environment.

---

I mentioned this in my post above but I do usually wait until I finish the chapter before looking into the references. I definitely couldn't see myself reading any sort of abridged version. Part of my compulsion is that when I read something I must read the full, unedited text. I'm not the type of person who must finish every thing that they read though. Usually if a book hasn't hooked me in the first fifty pages I put it away and pick up something else. I'm currently eighty-six pages into Middlemarch and am enjoying it immensly so I'll definitely finish it, references be damned. Thanks for your reply, using a timer is quite a good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charles Darnay

Not to the same extent, I'm sure, but I can relate. I tend to get sidetracked by references, but I take note of them and come back later if/when I have the time. It's like the Arabian Nights Entertainment (sorry, this isn't helping is it?) In the Arabian Nights, Scheherazade never finished a story because she managed to introduce another story to take its place - all stories interlock and thereby prolong her execution. There is a beauty in the analogy: we all have our own eventual "executions" and feel the need to constantly fill our time with stories. But unlike Scheherazade, our time is a fair bit longer.

---

Very nicely put Charles, nicely put indeed.

To the OP: I think if you approach a novel like a text book then it can be tough going. But if you approach it more like a film its easier to go along with it. I myself usually have an encyclopedic dictionary beside me when I am doing deep reading. I like to read slow anyway. A really great text can have so many layers and shades it becomes like a thick jungle. You don't run through thick jungle unless something is chasing you. There's usually nothing chasing us and so its okay to just relax and linger a while.

The essence of many novels is the human narrative, the human themes. Historical and cultural background always helps but is not often an absolute necessity. Don't worry if you come across passages with references you know nothing about and make the choice to just hop over them and continue with the text. Also don't worry if you decide to stop and look all those references up. Both strategies work just fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darcy88

[/B]

Very nicely put Charles, nicely put indeed.

To the OP: I think if you approach a novel like a text book then it can be tough going. But if you approach it more like a film its easier to go along with it. I myself usually have an encyclopedic dictionary beside me when I am doing deep reading. I like to read slow anyway. A really great text can have so many layers and shades it becomes like a thick jungle. You don't run through thick jungle unless something is chasing you. There's usually nothing chasing us and so its okay to just relax and linger a while.

The essence of many novels is the human narrative, the human themes. Historical and cultural background always helps but is not often an absolute necessity. Don't worry if you come across passages with references you know nothing about and make the choice to just hop over them and continue with the text. Also don't worry if you decide to stop and look all those references up. Both strategies work just fine.

---

I've come to the conclusion that you are right. I don't need to obsess over the references although when I feel intrigued I will still stop to at least do a small bit of research. I'm not one to read something more than once (I have such a huge library that I can't even get through everything a single time let alone multiple reads), I think I may change this habit though. I think that with certain works my first time through I can just focus on the story and then perhaps I can read them again at a later date focusing more on the details. Thanks for your response, you've made me feel quite a bit better about not focusing so much on obsessively having to understand every reference. I also keep a dictionary close by to look up words I'm unfamiliar with and can't even figure out in context of the sentence they are in.