Reading a book in its due time

[Melmoth]

I humbly believe that each book/reading has its moment/age. And I think that is primarily caused by the readers' maturity, intellectual development, background knowledge among other -more shallow- aspects.

As a consequence, for me:

Hamlet should be read as a teenager. (Age)
Lawrence's Sons and Lovers should be read once some maturity is reached
John Fowles The Magus should not be read before reading Shakespeare's The Tempest (Background Knowledge), well you could do it but you'd certainly be missing some referneces...
T.S. Elliot's The Wasteland and Joyce's Ulysses should be read.... with a lot of patience... he he ;) ...


Now, seriouly... What do you make of it all?

I understand the obvious argument against my stateent is the possibility of sympathising with , i.e., different characters in a novel depending on those aspects I mentioned above...

[Chester]

I don't know that I would disagree with this in theory. But unfortunately (like a lot of theories) it just doesn't always work out so nice and neat. Different books come along at different times of our lives and I don't think you can really organize them so precisely so as to read them "at the right age" for each respective one. One just kind of leads to the next. All you can hope is that the books put themselves in the right order for you. And every now and again a book comes along at the precise moment when it means the most to you.

[kelby_lake]

Yeah, I think there is a moment where it is best to read a book at. Your viewpoints on the book are likely to change with age

[J.D.]

I agree and I don't. Now that I'm going to be a father, for instance, there are scenes in books that do different things to me. But there are children's books that I read and whose messages mean more to me as I reflect on being young than they did when I was the age of their target audience.

You could say Hamlet should be read as a teen, but like Telemachus his trouble is in being man enough to be kingly and step into his place in the world. That resonates for me more now as I approach thirty than it did when I was seventeen.

I'm also a firm believer that for certain people, the books we read and the order in which we read them have a concrete effect on who we are--our idiosyncrasies in thought. If everyone read the same books at the same points in life, some of this would be lost, I fear.

[Chester]

...the books we read and the order in which we read them have a concrete effect on who we are--our idiosyncrasies in thought. If everyone read the same books at the same points in life, some of this would be lost, I fear.
This is excellent.

[Dark Muse]

Yes I agree with Chester, that is an excellent statement. And though there may be some truth, that if one were to read certain books when they were older, they may get more enjoyment of them than if read when younger, I think in someways, it is up to the individual what is the right time for them to read what books, though of course they cannot plan it out.

I think when I read Siddhartha, which was my Senior year in Highschool, that was the perfect moment for me to read that book, though I am sure I always would have enjoyed it whenever I read it. I do not think it would have spoke to me or had such a personal connection with me, if I had read it at any other time, but naturally I did not plan this out. It was an assianged reading for school.

[J.D.]

Oh, I absolutely agree with the "perfect moment" idea. I'm just not sure it is really the same for everybody--as in, "Young people should read this, old people should read that." I read the Confessions of St. Augustine at the perfect time--a time of spiritual crisis, when I thought the very idea of believing in God was a sham. I had a bad habit of ridiculing very religious people--my way of rebelling against my fundamentalist upbringing. It reminded me of the power of religion and made me realize that it wasn't the idea of God that I disliked, it was the way it was presented to me--a problem Augustine encountered throughout the book.

If I had read that book at any other time, I would have dismissed it. Instead it has become extremely important to me.

[Kafka's Crow]

I don't think I agree with this theory. When you are young, you have time, leisure and peace of mind to read and at that time you must read whatever you can. Seize the moment, read like there is no tomorrow. I finished reading Stephen Fry's autobiography Moab is My Wash Pot yesterday. At the end of it he savagely attacks those who dismiss poetry as boyish, specially John Keats's poetry. Read everything at all ages. I labored through Finnegans Wake in my early 20s. I don't think I can do this now as I approach my 40th year. There is a time when you are passionate about reading, make the best of that time because life and responsibilities make it difficult to read later on. There are some books that should be read at any age and should be re-read repeatedly. I must have read Ulysses six times and would not mind reading it again as soon as I find a chance to.

[Dinglingzi]

Ulysses ..........i m about to read it~but your words 've threaten my feeling~~...

[Dinglingzi]

I don't know that I would disagree with this in theory. But unfortunately (like a lot of theories) it just doesn't always work out so nice and neat. Different books come along at different times of our lives and I don't think you can really organize them so precisely so as to read them "at the right age" for each respective one. One just kind of leads to the next. All you can hope is that the books put themselves in the right order for you. And every now and again a book comes along at the precise moment when it means the most to you.

Bravo!!!;)

[Melmoth]

All you can hope is that the books put themselves in the right order for you. And every now and again a book comes along at the precise moment when it means the most to you.


Of course, Chester, it is impossible to plan one's life, even when 'just' dealing with which books should be read and when...

I suppose you choose some books, and when to read them, and some other books just choose you when the time comes.

I was just referring to the magical moment when one is lucky enough to pick up a certain book at its right time, though, of course, most of the times that's only a sensation, impossible to confirm.

[JBI]

Whose to say. The problem is, one must be very quick when reading, in order to take it all in. There is simply too much to read. As a result, I build my list as soon as I discover something I like, and branch off from there. There is no real time to say, "I'll save this for after I turn 40".

[Melmoth]

I'm also a firm believer that for certain people, the books we read and the order in which we read them have a concrete effect on who we are--our idiosyncrasies in thought.

Definitely, yes!!!!

Now, a general comment.... has any of you ever thought somethng like:


'I should have read that before...'
or quite the opposite...
'I was not prepared to read that...'

[aeroport]

I suppose it depends on why one is reading. I think there is something to what JBI said about reading something more or less at once. If one is sufficiently open-minded and is willing to commit to a piece of writing, I think one can make any time the 'right' time for it.

[Kent Edwins]

Part of what makes great literature great- and literature- is its timelessness and its ability to cater to a wide spectrum of human experience. There are, without a doubt, books that cater more towards people of certain ages. But, ultimately, I think the best literature draws its greatness from striking us at the most general range of all- our common humanity.

[kelby_lake]

I think the best literature draws its greatness from striking us at the most general range of all- our common humanity.

Hear, hear! :D