How to read

[yer]

In your experience, was that ability to read through difficult texts acquired or was it innate? I am sure it gets better with practice, but is there a pattern behind understanding?

I know that understanding symbolism, metaphors, and other literary techniques come through practice. But what about understanding the sentences? I find myself having trouble understanding what the author is saying in a literal sense, let alone the meaning behind it (which I know are related). Right now I am trying to read Nietzsche's Zarathustra but I cannot grasp most of it. And I do not think that he is one of the most difficult writers out there. And when I do understand what he says, I do not know if he is being serious or if he is mocking the reader. Similarly, I have not understood Homer, Dante, Foucault, and others. So instead of getting frustrated and giving up, I'm trying to understand how people have managed before me.

I've looked for answers online but found only unsatisfactory ones (read twice, summarize, highlight main points, paraphrase). Are those answers enough? In my experience, if you cannot read it or understand something different, reading it several times will not make you understand it better. Reading more books has not been given me any signs of improvement either.

Is the ability to comprehend innate? Are some people just born with it? Or is there a systematic way of learning?

Once you can understand everything Shakespeare, can you understand Friedrich Nietzsche, Henry James, and James Joyce? I know some are more difficult than others, but do they all have the same basic principle behind them or is each author unique in that sense?

Should I just start with easier books and slowly move up? (Which ones would those be?) And how does one build up on it? Buying annotated books and then trying to figure it out by myself with practice? Discussing it with friends? Help would be appreciated :)

I hope that the preamble filters answers like: "Each author is unique. You cannot simplify literature to that. You must read closely. Those books are filled with references" I am sure you know what I mean instead. Otherwise, tell me so and I will try and clarify.

So the two big questions I'm asking are:
1) How can I understand the literal surface?
2) How can I understand the meaning behind it?

Thanks people,
Yer

[kiki1982]

Well, interesting question... With me, it just clicked. I was 16, read my first book about a boy whose parents and brother were killed because of a nasty coincidence during WOII in the Netherlands and looks for answers all through his later life. It just clicked and everything made sense to me. My teacher (who I was writing I book review for was amazed adn did not believe that I wrote that review myself and asked for my source. She eventually gave me a 96% and ceased to despise me ever since.

But I did get more out of that same book when I read it again 10 years later because I noticed other things (national adjectives without capital letters f.e.). I guess practice played a big part.

I would say, do not start with the most difficult ones, i.e. do not start with things too far removed from our contemporary way of writing and understanding. Medieval literature, f.e., is very much based on metaphor and sometimes very far-fetched. I learned a lot in uni about that and it helps me, but if you don't know, it is kind of a nice story without meaning. In fact those dragons, reoccurring situations etc do mean something, only it is not so straightforward. Mostly works carry an educational message. Read a book about that type of stuff and then read some works (annotated?).
This category also includes philosophy in my opinion. Philosophy, and possibly also writings of philosophers, tend to use another type of word use than other 'normal' writers. Because philosophy is based on thinking and feeling, it cannot always be explained in plain words because thinking goes further than the mere word. So, philosphers tend to use the same words, but with more Ideas (in the Platonic way as the ultimate (divine) Truth) behind it. So the word 'real' or 'true' might carry some additional meaning to what you perceive it to be. And that also depends on the philosopher you are reading, ironically. Aristotle defined 'real' and 'true' differently to others. Hence, the philosophers that adhere to Arisotle tend to use the words 'true' and 'real' in the same way, but might also add to the meaning themselves. Philosophy though, takes just a little studying and that is fine. Most philosophers do explain what they think, fortunately, so you only maybe need to read some stuff of a specialist in that philosopher to be able to comprehend it. I believe it is given to you or not, but maybe you can learn it. I try, but I am not confident, given that I totally mucked up in uni.

Other than that, start with something pretty straightforward. There are the books which everyone has to read as a teenager, because they are easy (or at least have a pretty easy first layer that even starting readers can comprehend). Shakespeare is such one, I believe, but he has more to it. At any rae, he wrote for the great public on the parterre (hence the sword fights and loving balcony scenes), but he also wrote for the highly educated public that could pay for a seat and even for a cushion.

Just ask yoursef the question 'why'. Why does this or this character do this or that? It introduces you to thinking like that character and to understand the emotions of it. And then finally the 'why' of what happens (down to the writer). Why did the author write this story or had this or this happen? 'Why did the writer write this?' can be a useful question for highly allegorical things (things that under no circumstances can be real, that have 'an unreal' feel to it). 'Why did the author have this or that happen?' is a useful question when it comes to symbolical happenings in a book that is in itself quite probable.

I'll give a few examples to humour you:

Saramago's The Cave is so strange. It is about a pot-maker, possibly in Portugal (as Saramago is Portuguese), who delivers his pots to the nearby Centre ( a huge shopping mall). Nothing strange about this at first sight, only the city is divided in 'girdles' (Centre, 1st, 2nd an 3rd girdle, each with a special need: shopping, living, agriclture, industry) and the Centre has not only shopping in it, but also beeches, cinemas, nature walks what-not, and living quarters for the guards. The pot-maker has a daughter who is engaged or married to one of those guards. In the end something happens, but I won't tell you what. You see, the Centre is too big and unrealistic to be anything real, or even remotely possible. Or this one: The Stone Raft, about the Iberian peninsula that breaks off French and drifts away, into the Atlantic. Why did Saramago write these things? He has an issue, that comes back in his books all the time and he writes allegorical stories about it. What is that issue? This type is quite hard though

An easier way of allegory is The Pilgrim's Progress. A main character Christian has to go on a tour etc. Look it up on wikipedia and you'll see that that is an easier allegory than the first about Christian (if you see what I mean: his name says it itself). This is of the educational type, butit is also 17the century, so easier in order to apeal to the bigger public and to educate that same public.

Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray is about a man (Dorian Gray) who wants to keep his youth. At a certain time, he sees his portrait (painted recently by a friend) change for the worse, he himself, though, stays the same. Now, this changing of a portrait is not realistic, but, why did the author put that in? What is the message behind that? It also carries an allusion to Faust, but that left aside...

Floods/Fires are also something interesting. What does water/fire stand for?

Allusion is also such an important feature. There are implicit allusions and explicit. Explicit is that the title of a work is sited or that a few verses are quoted. That's easy. It says 'Gulliver's Travels was in the library' (what does Gulliver's Travels have to do with this story), 'he looked like Hamlet's Polonius' or something, or 'he felt like [another character]'. Who was this Polonius and what does the author allude to or seems to want to allude to? It is not always straightforward, but mostly it alludes to the character's way of thinking, or how we should see him (if the author is using irony). Or, in the case of Gulliver's Travels, to the theme of the novel, or at least that part of it if it is kind of clear. Implicit allusions are situations, dialogues, relationships between characters, images and such things that are not explicitly quoted to be taken from somewhere, but that are clearly inspired on another work. Recognising them needs experience. If you hanev't read the work alluded to, it is not really possible to recognise the allusion, only maybe if one comes across an essay on it or so.

F.e. The Picture of Dorian Gray as quoted above, in its painting that takes the marks of Dorian's doings carries an implicit allusion to Goethe's or anybody else's Faust without really naming the work explicitly. What does that say about Dorian Gray? Good or bad character, or sad character? At a certain time in The Mill on the Floss the two main characters Maggie and Tom Tulliver walk towards their new lot with a bankrupted father, and Eliot describes it in a way that offers reminiscences of Miton's Paradise Lost when Adam and Eve leave Paradise. What does that say about their situation? They are children now, but what does it say about their life from now on? Hardy writes a scene of darkness and fire and has Alec d'Urberville turn up to seduce Tess which offers thoughts of the same Paradise Lost. What does that say about Alec? Good or bad character? Will Tess be better off with this man or not?

I hope I helped you, but really, just read, read, read, and maybe consut essays about the work you want to understand.

[mal4mac]

Zarathustra is unreadable. Find another book, almost any other book. Don't worry about not finding some texts unreadable. There are more readable texts out there than you could ever read. Read them instead.

[Vautrin]

Yer,

You don't have to understand everything. University professors don't understand every sentence of every book they cover in their classes, and they teach other people for a living. Especially when it comes to literature, it is impossible to understand every single thing you read, or at least understand it the way the author truly intended it to be understood. As long as you comprehend most of it and pick up on the emotions and moods conveyed, then you should be fine.

Also, keep in mind that many of the literary greats abused drugs and alcohol; so sometimes even they didn't know what they meant when they wrote certain things (or at least they thought they did when they were under the influence ;). I've read some pretty impenetrable sentences by some great thinkers and writers over the years. Sometimes you either have to make an educated guess or simply forget it and move on. Life is too short.

[JBI]

Always ask the same questions - how is y constructed in x. For example, how is gender constructed in Orlando.


Or, you don't even need to go that way - how are chapters divided in Dickens.


Of course, this technique works better on the reread, on the first read, I just take notes of themes and characters, and hope to gain a basic understanding - it may also help to think of a few general themes that seem central to most texts, and work with them.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Look, you can't just expect to jump right into the deep ocean without having first learnt to swim. I'm not being patronising but some of the writers you are quoting are in no way easy to read. Do you really expect to be able to compete with a world class swimmer wearing armbands - OK, with the swimming metaphors, (or analogies) but still it is just not that easy all the time?

I mean Foucault, Joyce, Nietzsche are not going to yield much on a first read, certainly to those unacquainted with them. The fact that you are reading them though suggests that you are not an inexperienced reader??

However, to tackle your questions, I think that the very best advice is just to read a huge amount of material. It is not that simple but that is basically the answer. It certainly helps to have taught lessons of course, but you really do just need to get stuck in and that is about all there is to it. I think apart from a very few then reading complex material is not innate, but something that is acquired through the process of reading and reflecting over time. I'm sure that there are some really smart minds out there who can pick up Foucault for the first time and "get it" all in one gulp, but I think they are few and far between to be honest - and that is certainly not me!!

If you want my advice, and I'm coming from someone with 6 years undergraduate experience, I would tackle such texts in small chunks and follow them up with decent commentary texts for a while - at least compliment your reading with them. When I say decent, I mean decent, recommended texts and not garbage like sparknotes.

Certainly your approach with easier texts and building up is one decent method, but of course it depends greatly on what you want to read, so it is a little difficult to recommend on a blind basis. Other than that, following a degree course if you are not doing so would set you well on the way to getting a good grip with some of the most challenging texts out there.

There are no magic shortcuts.

[stlukesguild]

Neely pretty much says it all. Any art form involves a language and a vocabulary and a history that must be learned for a fuller understanding. It is highly unlikely that you will understand a Wagnerian opera or a Cubist painting or Dante's Comedia without first developing an understanding of the language and vocabulary through which they were expressing themselves... and this involves experience. Certainly, I salute your efforts at tackling challenging texts, but do not assume that your first perceptions are the end of the matter. Return to these same texts again after you have gained more reading under you belt. You will find that the works change as you do.

[MorpheusSandman]

+1 to the two posts directly above me. To your primary questions:

1) As far as literal surfaces it's best to have a good vocabulary (or something like an electronic dictionary handy) and a good grasp on sentence structures. I say this because in terms of surface all there is the semantics of language and how that language is ordered and how the two effect each other. Every writer will have their own style that will emerge and an astute reader should start being able to predict how a writer's paragraphs, for example, are, in general, going to flow. That's not to say that writers (especially the great ones) won't surprise you or you won't encounter a 4,400 word sentence in Joyce that makes you go "WTF?", but, in general, it should make the "surfaces" easier to grasp. There are definitely writers out there that can be especially complex and difficult and you've listed many of the MOST difficult which will likely give everyone but extremely intellectual English professors fits.

2. Understanding the subtext is about understanding the work in contexts; how does the writer's historical, social, religious, etc. milieu or the writer's beliefs, opinions, psychology, etc. effect what they're observing, depicting, commenting on, etc. The important question to always be acting is "why". Of course, not everything has a definitive why to it, but when you come across something in a book that's especially provocative, unusual, especially poignant, profound, or interesting it's a good idea to ask why it's like that, what is the author saying, what is this suggesting given everything else I know about the work, etc.

[yer]

Well, I just finished today the Nietzsche's book. I greatly enjoyed reading him. What a mind!

There were, of course, a lot of things that I did not comprehend. Yet, I got a hold of many of his ideas. But when I was trying to explain them to someone else, I realized that I could not go through the same arguments as Nietzsche did. The lesson: I should take close notes whenever I come across a good idea in a book (but I guess this works mostly for philosophy-like texts)!!

I decided to go through the reading even if I was not understanding much of it. Yet, after reading the replies I found that it was easier to follow his ideas.

If I had to give advise to others, I would say that there must be a balance between reading very close with the text and just going the opposite direction and trying to get the very general idea. I also learned that the first few pages were the most difficult for me and that I was able to better understand the sentences once I got an overview of the author's style, like Stlukesguild and MorpheusSandman said (the same thing happened when I read Shakespeare for the first time). MorpheusSandman’s advice was also very good. Keeping a dictionary made the ride easier.

I definitely need to reread the book several times if I want to get a better understanding of Zarathustra.

And something else: I was reading about Harold Bloom. Just reading about how important literature is was very motivating. Being able to see literature as this grand, almost obscure phenomenon made me want to spend all of my waking hours reading (and sleep less!). I also read about how this guy would be able to tackle 2 or 3 novels per night. Having him in mind, I was able to read for long hours at a time.

Kiki1982: It was really difficult asking the why's since I was struggling so hard to understand the meaning of Nietzsche's words. It was very apparent that he was trying to tell the readers things (when he repeated words or when he would omit phrases), but the question "why?" did not give me any answers. However, I think this technique would be a wonderful ally on my second or third reading (or not so difficult books).

I did see the importance of allusions, though. Nietzsche uses several authors heavily. I am sure I would have gotten a much better understanding had I read those other authors.

I guess the "just read, read, read" part of your advice is what I need to do the most!

Vautrin: I did move on in a lot of Nietzsche’s passages. Being able to get through the book felt like a big accomplishment.

JBI: I agree with you about the rereading part. I focused on just trying to grasp the general concepts on my first reading.

Neely: I got this idea from class when others were getting the material the first time they read it. But I guess they are just very bright individuals.

I used to consult Sparknotes... I guess I won’t anymore, haha. Where can I find other sources? Are you talking on-line or go-to-the-library type?

Thank you everyone for your comments!

[kiki1982]

In most cases it is ok to get a grasp by just reading the summary of a work and an analysis of some kind so you can see what your writer meant when putting that allusion in.

If Nietzsche was talking aout other philosophers though, you might encounter problems, but general studies have been made about the influence of the one philosopher on the other. Some Wikipedia-entries are really good (if they are referenced), and mostly in their own language. Otherwise, here is a link to the Philosophy Encyclopedia wich is quite alright, I think (though philosophy geeks may possibly find some wrong things in it).

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

[mal4mac]

"Thus Spake Zarathustra is now unreadable" - Harold Bloom

[virginiawang]

When I say decent, I mean decent, recommended texts and not garbage like sparknotes.
I do noy understand in what sense you considered sparknotes as being something similar to garbage. When I had to read plays written by Shakespeare in college, I did find cliffnotes being helpful. Even now, I will go to their website and read some essays or plot analyses once in a while. I don't think it is so terrible. It is written in plain English, and perhaps in a more oral style. It makes certain ideas clear at once.
By the way, what are some of the references you referred to as decent texts ?

[Red-Headed]

Also Sprach Zarathustra is one of my favourite works by any writer. Do I understand it? Do you need to understand a text to enjoy it? I think that is an interesting question. I would certainly read as much as you can about Nietzsche & his particular philosophical views to understand his works. On the other hand, just enjoy what you can. I think greater understanding will come eventually.

[Desolation]

If you're interested in gaining a comprehensive knowledge of Nietzsche, I recomend the following books:

Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist by Walter Kaufmann, an excellent introduction to Nietzsche that provides a scope from which to read Nietzsche's works.
The Portable Nietzsche, published by Penguin/Viking, a great collection of a few of his important works.
The Basic Writings of Nietzsche, published by Modern Library(/Random House, I believe), contains the rest of his essential works.

After reading Kaufmann's scholarly work, you should have much less trouble understanding the Great Immoralist.

[Dinkleberry2010]

I agree with you, Desolation. Kaufmann's work is by far the best introduction to Nietzsche

[LitNetIsGreat]

I do noy understand in what sense you considered sparknotes as being something similar to garbage. When I had to read plays written by Shakespeare in college, I did find cliffnotes being helpful. Even now, I will go to their website and read some essays or plot analyses once in a while. I don't think it is so terrible. It is written in plain English, and perhaps in a more oral style. It makes certain ideas clear at once.
By the way, what are some of the references you referred to as decent texts ?

It depends. If they are of use to you or to whoever then fine, you grab whatever works for you and you don't listen to people like me. But I think that these sorts of guides have limited appeal because they don't go far enough even as basic guides or even to supplement what you yourself can get just from a reading of a text. This is in fact where they come in handy, they provide basic summaries so lazy students don't need to bother to read the text (or so they think) I think this is where they actually make most appeal, it is their niche appeal - and thus probably the result of my anger towards them. In short I think they are a bit of a rip off and are unlikely to give the dedicated student much support for their money. If however, like I said someone finds them useful then that's fine.


Neely: I got this idea from class when others were getting the material the first time they read it. But I guess they are just very bright individuals. I used to consult Sparknotes... I guess I won’t anymore, haha. Where can I find other sources? Are you talking on-line or go-to-the-library type?

I don't know you sound a clued up and dedicated individual. I'd like to guess that those individuals were quite good at talking the talk. Maybe they were bright individuals who got all of that in one read, (but not everyone can be like JBI:D) but in my experience I wouldn't put my money on it - besides with your apparent dedication and passion for it you will soon be ahead of those; either way of course it is not a race.

No, use what you want (like I said above) but don't part with your money too quickly on the likes of sparknotes, because you will very soon outgrow them.

Where can you find other sources? Certainly the best place to head to is a decent library or you can try online. The problem with going online for the stuff you are going to be looking for is that you won't find much I'm guessing of any substance, without a scholar log-in, which you get as part of a university registration. You can pay for those separately, but to be honest I get most of my critical stuff from the library or I use the lasting books I have at home.

Good stuff. :)

[Red-Headed]

Don't overlook A Nietzsche Reader selected & translated by R.J. Hollingdale (Penguin Classics).

[virginiawang]

I would tackle such texts in small chunks and follow them up with decent commentary texts for a while - at least compliment your reading with them.
Please allow me a question. What are some of those decents texts you referred to that you might supplement your reading with? Did you find them in different websites or in books? Do you find them interesting?

[LitNetIsGreat]

Please allow me a question. What are some of those decents texts you referred to that you might supplement your reading with? Did you find them in different websites or in books? Do you find them interesting?

It completely depends on what I am reading and what I am reading it for. Often I have the advantage of a recommended reading list from my university, but other than that, I head off to the library and dig around, often looking for experts in the field or university press releases or journals, or just anything that seems relevant. I rarely use the internet for sources and then usually just for essays through my uni log-in only, in databases such as JSTOR - and then I only tend to use them in order to supplement my main secondary reading to a max of around 20%. Other than that I have my own small collection but that is quite limited in secondary reading, because often they just doesn't last in relevance. I use The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, amongst other things which are relevant to my main areas of interest, but I don’t see the point of spending hundreds of pounds on secondary sources that I will possibly only use once (in some obscure essay), and besides I have no room for them. Do I find them interesting? Yes mostly, I suppose, I would hardly be in the field if I didn’t.

Why I dislike the likes of sparknotes, (if that is what you are getting at?) is for the reasons I gave here:


It depends. If they are of use to you or to whoever then fine, you grab whatever works for you and you don't listen to people like me. But I think that these sorts of guides have limited appeal because they don't go far enough even as basic guides or even to supplement what you yourself can get just from a reading of a text. This is in fact where they come in handy, they provide basic summaries so lazy students don't need to bother to read the text (or so they think) I think this is where they actually make most appeal, it is their niche appeal - and thus probably the result of my anger towards them. In short I think they are a bit of a rip off and are unlikely to give the dedicated student much support for their money. If however, like I said someone finds them useful then that's fine.

There are better basic guides around if that is what you are looking for. The "A Very Short Introduction" guides seem better value for money and seem a little more lasting for beginners. They are relatively cheap and concise, written by people who seem to have more than an A-level in their relative field, informative and, more importantly, point you ahead with a fairly OK looking bibliography.

The overall point is that there isn't going to be one magic book that is going to answer all a student's questions and set them on the right track. It is a combined effort of will and dedication over time.

Does that help?

[virginiawang]

I've also been in the field for many years, but it seems that I am as ignorant as a beginner as to what fits my purpose of getting references. I usually typed the name of a book or work into the search box in yahoo, and read whatever I could find that caught my attention. I never went to a library, though I was taught how to find books in a library in my freshman year. I think that explains why I was never good at literary criticism. I always wished that I could have come up with a theory myself, but that was nearly impossible. Sometimes it happened.
What is JSTOR? Is that a website you've got to pay to get material?
Thank you for your advice.

[JBI]

Many major public library systems have a scholar-connection to many databases. Of course, I have essentially the biggest possible at my finger tips, so I don't exactly know what the smallest one's look like, so I can't vouch for everywhere.

Generally, most major institutions, or even large public libraries (at least in Canada) will have some sort of online access - JSTOR from what I hear is relatively common for libraries to have connections to (at least here). It is probably better to check there before paying 15$ for an article or whatever crazy cost they push.

As for Spark Notes - it isn't that I hate them, it is that anything that is contained within them to me is essentially useless. I believe, personally, and I mean no offense when I say this, that they are written at a level that a general reader assigned the text should be able to pick up on their own, and at a level that sits around a c+ or lower in major universities where proper competitive programs in English exist.

To get higher, to understand more, or to know "how to read," ultimately, one will need to be at a level high enough to have written the spark notes themselves. Generally, as a rule of thumb, I will not write an essay on a text I have not read, and generally, unless I am really left without time or option (this means an all-night-er is already being accounted for) I will not write a formal essay on a text I have not read at least twice. Quite simply, you cannot write on something you haven't read and expect to understand anything, and you can't understand anything to a reasonable level to give full explanation in words without reading something twice - for poems, perhaps 10s of times.


Spark notes is useful as a kids tool, but don't use it if you expect your understanding to be that of somebody greater than a kid - a crutch is only good to have if you don't have to always lean on it to walk.


To read well, the first thing you should do, is read widely, and challenge yourself, even if you don't fully understand - eventually things will unwind if you give them time, and you are direct in the way you read. Reading scholarship on specific texts also seems to help (it helped me a lot, especially when it came to formal writing) but isn't 100% necessary, especially if you are just starting out.

Good editions of things are also worth the money - sometimes the extra money for a properly edited and annotated copy of a book, with good introduction and selected bibliography at the back is worth it.

[JBI]

I've also been in the field for many years, but it seems that I am as ignorant as a beginner as to what fits my purpose of getting references. I usually typed the name of a book or work into the search box in yahoo, and read whatever I could find that caught my attention. I never went to a library, though I was taught how to find books in a library in my freshman year. I think that explains why I was never good at literary criticism. I always wished that I could have come up with a theory myself, but that was nearly impossibl. Sometimes it happened.
What is JSTOR? Is that a website you've got to pay to get material?
Thank you for your advice.

Rule of thumb, if it is on Google or yahoo, don't use it. I never, personally, like to footnote anything that wasn't published at one point in print (and usually I will try to dig up the printed version of it if I can) and I would never footnote or even consult anything that wasn't backed by credentials. Simply put, in order to be backed by credentials, most likely the text must be academic, or copyrighted at least, and therefore not on Google.




To be honest with you, and I mean no offense, but I find it baffling how people don't realize what is out there in terms of scholarship in the field - I mean, as soon as I got to university and started learning things, if anything I got the feeling of finally earning the opportunity to be plugged in - there is so much great stuff made available by connection to the institution. Proper research though aught never to be neglected.

For instance, it is OK to post questions on public forums such as this, but it is rude, stupid, and illegal to be like somebody on this forum who is sending me private messages begging me to give him my answer to his teacher's essay question, of which he would a) claim authorship, and b) not tell me that he plans to plagiarize word for word (which actually does happen, as I have, to be honest, seen stuff discussed on boards brought up in class, to the point where I am sure people lifted it.

Generally, if you are consulting with people, do so to reaffirm your own opinion if you are doubting yourself, rather than to lift theirs. It may be tempting to steal, but if I catch you lifting my stuff, I will get you nailed to a cross for plagiarism.

[sixsmith]

Rule of thumb, if it is on Google or yahoo, don't use it. I never, personally, like to footnote anything that wasn't published at one point in print (and usually I will try to dig up the printed version of it if I can) and I would never footnote or even consult anything that wasn't backed by credentials. Simply put, in order to be backed by credentials, most likely the text must be academic, or copyrighted at least, and therefore not on Google.


To be honest with you, and I mean no offense, but I find it baffling how people don't realize what is out there in terms of scholarship in the field - I mean, as soon as I got to university and started learning things, if anything I got the feeling of finally earning the opportunity to be plugged in - there is so much great stuff made available by connection to the institution. Proper research though aught never to be neglected.

For instance, it is OK to post questions on public forums such as this, but it is rude, stupid, and illegal to be like somebody on this forum who is sending me private messages begging me to give him my answer to his teacher's essay question, of which he would a) claim authorship, and b) not tell me that he plans to plagiarize word for word (which actually does happen, as I have, to be honest, seen stuff discussed on boards brought up in class, to the point where I am sure people lifted it.

Generally, if you are consulting with people, do so to reaffirm your own opinion if you are doubting yourself, rather than to lift theirs. It may be tempting to steal, but if I catch you lifting my stuff, I will get you nailed to a cross for plagiarism.

What I find both disheartening and infuriating is that, in my experience, plagiarism is not infrequent in academic, peer reviewed journals. I can't speak for English lit because I could never muster enough interest to consult anything but the first fusty and likely redundant piece of scholarship that I encountered in the library. But certainly in History and in Law (Law being particularly bad), the scholarship can get pretty darn sloppy. And it's a little grating to have Professors ramming the 'intellectual theft' line down your throat when Joe Bloggs from Harvard hasn't footnoted the sentence which you read 5 minutes ago in another paper. I'm not necessarily talking wholesale replication, but as any student knows, you can get find yourself in serious grief even for unintentional plagiarism.

[virginiawang]

JBI, perhaps you're right in a sense, but I just cannot help wanting to present some of my views, and questions as well, to oppose your views on this subject under discussion.
I do not understand what you said about a library being big enough for you, because I don't think anyone can finish reading all the books lying on the shelves of a library, even if it be a library of the smallest scale. Does a library being big say anything about its contents or the quality of them, I wonder? By the way, I believe in what Emerson wrote in the opening paragraph of a small phamphlet, called Nature, that people have no need to grope among the dry bones of the past. He encouraged his readers to envision the world with his own eyes and soul. In my opinion, one has the opportunity to come up with his own theories and interpretations after he reads a literary work, and one theory that comes about in this way, imparted with sincere feelings, is as good as another, if only it is expressed clearly. I don't think an acedemic will have a bigger heart that feels more than a literary student does.
Feelings are all noble, if they are sincere, so I can't figure out why people rated feelings by ways of different levels like A, B, or C+. Therefore I really don't understand you.
Did you give some of those their low rating because they did not have many ideas included, or because they had poor wording? What do you mean by to get higher? If my heart refuses to feel anything after I read a text, I don't think it helps much if I try to read more comments written by, say the most prominent experts in the field.
Before I close the post, I must point out a reality most people would not like to hear. Plagiarism is necessary. I must learn how to use a brush before I can paint. Concerning literary criticism, one must read as least some of those to pick up the vocabularies only. It is just not easy and likely to write in a tone similar to that of some well-written essays, if one never learns from them.

[kelby_lake]

I do noy understand in what sense you considered sparknotes as being something similar to garbage. When I had to read plays written by Shakespeare in college, I did find cliffnotes being helpful. Even now, I will go to their website and read some essays or plot analyses once in a while. I don't think it is so terrible. It is written in plain English, and perhaps in a more oral style. It makes certain ideas clear at once.
By the way, what are some of the references you referred to as decent texts ?

There's lots of Shakespeare criticism- AC Bradley's book on Shakespearean Tragedy is qite simple to read.
I use Spark Notes only to back up the ideas I've already formed.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Plagarism is necessary. I must learn how to use a brush before I can paint. Concerning literary criticism, one must read as least some of those to pick up the vocabularies only. It is just not easy and likely to write in a tone similar to those well-written essays, if one never learns from them.
You are not talking about plagiarism here, but simply reading. There is a point when your reading becomes 'knowledge' to the point that you couldn't say where you have got something from, but this is perfectly natural, and a completely different thing from consciously stealing someone else's words without giving them credit. This is plagiarism, the conscious stealing of someone else's work. A student who intentionally plagiarises is the lowest form of individual in academia.

As for your earlier question JBI covered what you need to know, though I would add that from my point of view it is not worth paying for database access because, as I say I only ever seem to use them in a minor role.

JBI, what databases do you use? Is it a collection specific to Canada or your university?

[Hank Stamper]

If you haven't got access to a good library then buying the norton critical editions are always a good place to start for secondary reading.. they all have comprehensive notes, historical contexts and various thematic essays etc

[blazeofglory]

This is really a very wonderful topic and this reflects the many experiences I myself have gone through in life. I came from a different background than most writing for this forum. I came from a nonnative English background and the village I came from had no speakers of English at all. Initially I learned English with no intention of writing in it; I learned it since I have no access to translated works of world class writers like Tolstoy, Thoreau, Dostoevsky, Dickens, Victor Hugo, Emerson and the like. I read some of the world classics understanding of course very little of what I read in point of fact. But my passion for English could not be deterred no matter what difficulties faced me initially.

I read them not innately but with a keen interest in new language. After of course a decade and half I can comprehend Dickens, Hemingway, Henri James. But I want to be honest that I cannot understand Joyce. I made several endeavors to read his Ulysses I failed to understand it. That said it does not mean I cannot understand his other works.

I can understand Shakespeare, even Dante, Milton, but reading some of Nietzsche's works is hard for me.

Reading to me is a mechanic endeavor and through repetitions we are more likely to comprehend incomprehensible texts. Now I do read and write in two languages at the same time. I write poems and some writings of complex thoughts in Nepali and meantime I do write essays in English with the intention to go across larger audiences.

Of course now I feel at home with some of the best works in English and take pride in the fact that not only can I comprehend complex books but can communicate complex thoughts across people throughout the world.

What I gleaned from my experiences with books is books come to our understanding if we keep on read them unstoppably and I hope in a few years my level of the English language will grow double.

I suggest the only one path to enhancing your efficiency in reading is reading.

[JBI]

You are not talking about plagiarism here, but simply reading. There is a point when your reading becomes 'knowledge' to the point that you couldn't say where you have got something from, but this is perfectly natural, and a completely different thing from consciously stealing someone else's words without giving them credit. This is plagiarism, the conscious stealing of someone else's work. A student who intentionally plagiarises is the lowest form of individual in academia.

As for your earlier question JBI covered what you need to know, though I would add that from my point of view it is not worth paying for database access because, as I say I only ever seem to use them in a minor role.

JBI, what databases do you use? Is it a collection specific to Canada or your university?


The University of Toronto has essentially linking to virtually all electronic resources available - Robarts is the third largest library in North America, but the electronic resources of the library are linked with a sharing agreement to the top universities in the US, Harvard, Yale, etc, to create a super database. The only hard things to find really are periodicals in very removed instances - so for instance, if I wanted specific research on China from a Chinese perspective written in Chinese, I probably would need to go to China, or if I wanted to do archival or manuscript work, I would need to go there - everything else is on line. Essentially every journal in every discipline, in most languages. Texts are harder to get - many, of them can be retrieved, but the vast bulk are on shelves, so I physically need to go to the library, which has essentially everything useful, and dig it up. The only trouble is on specific collections that one normally wouldn't frequent, but I doubt that would ever come up outside of very specialized scholarship, and certainly not at the undergraduate level.


In addition to that, Toronto also has the second largest public library system in the world, which has links to major databases (nothing like the university, but they have a few interesting ones, if you can get passed the tedious design of the library website). That's where I go for most of my casual reading, as the lone policy is quite slack, though the vast bulk of scholarly stuff is reference only, and better accessed online.

[hootrooster]

To add to the good advice above: Also consider the condition your brain needs to be in for difficult reading. For me that means reading first thing in the morning. Even a 30 minute walk seems to reduce my peak ability.
So find out when your brain is at its sharpest and do your toughest mental work then.

[Sancho]

I'm exactly the opposite. I can't get my brain in gear until after a good hard run, might have something to do with circulation.

My only advice: read slowly.

[MorpheusSandman]

My only advice: read slowly.I would recommend the opposite; learn to speed read. Comprehension tends to go up as reading time decreases and it makes re-reads much easier which is usually when you begin picking up on subtext.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Originally Posted by Sancho:
My only advice: read slowly.


I would recommend the opposite; learn to speed read. Comprehension tends to go up as reading time decreases and it makes re-reads much easier which is usually when you begin picking up on subtext.

Ha, ha, quite interesting really both these comments. Actually I think you are both right. Evidence does suggest that speed reading can increase comprehension, but also I think there are times when you really need to sit down with a text and read the bloody thing very slowly, line by line, smash a cup of coffee and then go back over it again. Imagine trying to speed read Foucault for instance?

This is it with reading though, there is often very few set rules or magic ways in. You have just got to read and read and find what works for you.

[stlukesguild]

Imagine trying to speed read Foucault for instance?

I can't imagine wanting to read Foucault for any reason whatsoever... so if such were required, reading him as fast as possible would surely be my goal.

[sixsmith]

Imagine trying to speed read Foucault for instance?

I can't imagine wanting to read Foucault for any reason whatsoever... so if such were required, reading him as fast as possible would surely be my goal.

:nod::smash::lol:

Hear, hear.

[JBI]

Imagine trying to speed read Foucault for instance?

I can't imagine wanting to read Foucault for any reason whatsoever... so if such were required, reading him as fast as possible would surely be my goal.

Have you read him? How then can you pass judgment... He isn't even that difficult relative to some of his contemporaries.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Imagine trying to speed read Foucault for instance?

I can't imagine wanting to read Foucault for any reason whatsoever... so if such were required, reading him as fast as possible would surely be my goal.

Really Stlukesguild how Virgilesque!

Many theory roads lead to Foucault, whether we like him or not...

[sixsmith]

Many theory roads lead to Foucault, whether we like him or not...

A fact that could militate against one choosing to read him. I'm not a Foucault hater in the classic sense. I enjoyed parts of 'Discipline and Punish' and 'Madness and Civilisation.' But I don't think he is necessary reading. Then again, I'm no longer in an academic environment where theory is unavoidable

[virginiawang]

The University of Toronto has essentially linking to virtually all electronic resources available - Robarts is the third largest library in North America, but the electronic resources of the library are linked with a sharing agreement to the top universities in the US, Harvard, Yale, etc, to create a super database.
I came to the conclusion that you must have a head similar to a computer in structure which gives you such wonderful desire to suck information from around the globe, of all fields, and I was forced to confess the limitation of my head in its volume and the listlessness it displayed when it confronted information.
I do not want to train my head in a way people build up computer files, because I don't think it is necessary to accumulate knowledge once I gave up my dream of oral interpretation. Even an oral interpreter is not required to know so many points of view provided by different experts, and Encyclopedia Britannica is more than enough for him/her to handle a case. Why do people want to know what other people think so eagerly after reading a text, I wonder? I don't think it necessary for the purpose of appreciating art works to know how other people had felt for them in the past. David Henry Thoreau who once led a simple life of an artist in a forest, wrote in his small book, Walden that he did not even care to read newspapers. To be knowledgeable does not indicate to any higher achievement in art, and at the same time it blurrs the vision of one's own.
In college, I plagiarized in exams when I was required to offer a great deal of comments which I had not. To be able to plagiarize is not always easy, and I had to memorize word for word many paragraphs before I took the exam. However I would almost always offer my genuine opinions when I encountered some reading that shook my soul, whether I was writing a term paper or an exam. I think it's honest to say nothing when I do not feel anything, so that will be the time for me to improve my English by memorizing lines from essays. It's interesting to pick up lines from different essays which I think will fit into the questions in a test. I've got to predict what my test will look like the day before to be able to choose the right quotes. However I must say that I never plagiarized in my term papers beacuse they were opportunities to practice writing. I could write anything unrelated in my paper because I could always digress to a far distance beyond the subject. In fact I should say everything is related in one way or another, and last but not least I want to impart an experience to all of you here. The importance of group discussion is what I was referring to. To discuss with a group generates fresh ideas, which improve the understanding of a work tremendously.

[LitNetIsGreat]

A fact that could militate against one choosing to read him.

:lol:


I'm not a Foucault hater in the classic sense. I enjoyed parts of 'Discipline and Punish' and 'Madness and Civilisation.' But I don't think he is necessary reading.

I don't mean that is necessarily necessary in his own right, but he and his thoughts seem to pop up in a lot of places. So even if you have only got a general understanding of Foucault it often helps, rather than having to go back in reference all the time. In a similar way I often feel a little blind that my knowledge of the Bible is rather limited. I think it would have been useful to start literary studies with the Bible because it underpins so much in literature. I'm not saying that Foucault has that much influence in comparison to modern theory, but he does seem to be a bit of a root figure and someone I would recommend to try to get a grip of if you are approaching (modern?) theory.

[Sancho]

I would recommend the opposite; learn to speed read. Comprehension tends to go up as reading time decreases and it makes re-reads much easier which is usually when you begin picking up on subtext.

Sorry about taking so long to respond but I had to go to work. Baby needs new shoes.

You have a good point and now that I think about it, there’s some stuff I like to read fast too - stuff like the back of tooth-paste tubes, instruction manuals, product safety warnings, and business contracts. Artsy-fartsy literature, on the other hand, I like to read slowly. I like to throttle-back and enjoy the ride, stop to ponder what I’ve just read, try to circle around and come at it from a different angle, spend some time enjoying a particularly well-crafted sentence.

So here’s where I make a crude simile:
Reading is like sex. Fast is good, but slow is better.

And here’s where I recall a crude, anthropomorphic joke:
An old bull and a young bull are standing on a hill, watching the herd. The young bull, sniffing and fetching and full of anxiety, says to the old bull, “Hey man, I’ve got a great idea. Let’s run down this hill and f*** one of those cows.” The old bull says the young bull, “Naw man, let’s walk down this hill and f*** ‘em all.”

[MorpheusSandman]

When you speed read there's no rule that says you can't slow down for particularly good passages or even go back and read them and soak up the phonetic/aesthetic detail. But reading takes time; a lot of time compared to most of the other arts. Most people read at a rate that makes reading frustrating to them. When you read one word at a time like you speak then you're reading at about 250 words per minute. That means for an even average size book of around 400 pages it would take about 10 hours to read. Imagine being able to cut that time in half (which is easy with speed reading), then you'd be able to read the book twice in the same time. Imagine being able to read that same book in a day; think of how much MORE you could get read! There is so much great literature out there; so much that's worth reading. And outside of literature there are so many films, so much music, and so much of the rest of life to experience. If you can save many hours reading and experience more in less time I just don't think this is ever a bad thing. We may never be able to breeze through books like Harold Bloom, but it would be nice to get close.

Yes, I realize that things like poetry or extremely complex prose are either impossible to speed read or that speed reading ruins the effect, but this only accounts for a small-ish amount of literature out there.

[Sancho]

Ah-hah! So I’ve learned that speed-reading is not the same thing as fast-reading and I’m willing to concede that it may be an effective technique for some readers, but I’m not willing to say it’s for everybody. I’ll admit my prejudice here and make the excuse that those old Evelyn Wood TV commercials, with a reader zigzagging his finger across the page at lightning speed, seemed like a hoax to me – something in the same category as baldness cures or this-will-get-you-into-that-bikini-in-two-weeks-guaranteed programs.

Anyway, it may have more to do with the temperament of the reader than with the method. That is to say, I don’t think you can rank order these things like college football teams.

Okay, so I’m trying to think of an allegory. Hmmm, something less crass than two bulls on a hill but probably not as well thought out as the Allegory of the Cave. Here goes: This how-to-read dilemma may be analogous to choosing an adult language program. You can go with an audio program like Pimsleur’s, or a mostly visual program like Rosetta Stone, or you can take night classes at the local community college, or you can hook-up with a [your desired language here] girlfriend. There are people who will swear that one or another of these methods is the best or even the only way to learn a language. I think it really just comes down to the person.

Well, enough of all that. What do you guys think of boozing when you read? I find that a couple of high-balls works pretty good when I’m reading someone like Hemingway or Hunter S. Thompson, but not so much when I’m reading someone like Henry James.

[kiki1982]

I think alcohol of the heavier kind like wine or schnapps or Belgian beer, ruins the concentration. It depends, like you said, on what you are reading, but Shakespeare with a glass of wine... I'd be surprised that by the end of the glass I was still concentrated and was just reading the words and not taking them in ... :lol:

[MorpheusSandman]

I’ll admit my prejudice here and make the excuse that those old Evelyn Wood TV commercials, with a reader zigzagging his finger across the page at lightning speed, seemed like a hoax to me – something in the same category as baldness cures or this-will-get-you-into-that-bikini-in-two-weeks-guaranteed programs.It's not a hoax in the least bit. The problem has to do that people are taught to read one word at a time and yet our brain is a powerful enough processor that we can read MUCH more than one word at a time. For instance, look at (don't read), this phrase:

How many words can you see just by looking at it?

Were you able to look at it without reading it? Probably not, because we read by SIGHT and recognize the word long before we say the word sub-vocally. If you can cut out that sub-vocalizing or minimize it you can read as many words as you can see. How many words could you see at a time in that line? It's undoubtedly more than one. In fact, it's impossible just to see one word. So imagine if you can read 4-5 words during each eye fixation? All of a sudden you've just doubled (at least) your reading time.

I honestly do think speed reading is for everyone. I've only just gotten into it and it's already made a major difference in how fast I can get through books and even online message boards.

[blazeofglory]

In fact all I do is I kind of choose a particular book depending upon my moods. If I feel buoyant and cheery I read serious books like Dostoevsky and if I am not in a proper mood or feeling bored I choose to read lighter kinds and at times I read Arabian nights and they are really interesting stories and that take me to a different world wherein different values, traditions, systems exist and in fact they are light stories but they are not light philosophically. In fact reading is like living to me and now I am drunk with books and living without books is almost unthinkable to me and in essence books rejuvenate me.

In fact books are the reservoirs thru which I kind of inundate myself with and everyday books renew me and energize me wholly. Reading style and methods are not learned but they go naturally

[Bar22do]

In fact all I do is I kind of choose a particular book depending upon my moods. If I feel buoyant and cheery I read serious books like Dostoevsky and if I am not in a proper mood or feeling bored I choose to read lighter kinds and at times I read Arabian nights and they are really interesting stories and that take me to a different world wherein different values, traditions, systems exist and in fact they are light stories but they are not light philosophically. In fact reading is like living to me and now I am drunk with books and living without books is almost unthinkable to me and in essence books rejuvenate me.

In fact books are the reservoirs thru which I kind of inundate myself with and everyday books renew me and energize me wholly. Reading style and methods are not learned but they go naturally

I fell upon your post here a bit by chance - while I am myself re-reading Proust's short text "On Reading" where he describes how reading is his absolute need and his life breath... a little as you say; it is for him a sort of communication with his own solitude, or rather - within his solitude, spicing his mind with the beginings of new perspectives where the author's are ending... This gem of a text is a praise of reading, preparing much to how to read (but this is perhaps my personal feeling only) his A la Recherche du Temps Perdu... I thought that might be interesting for you, so here it is, shared. And thanks for your sharing as well. Bar

[Sancho]

It depends, like you said, on what you are reading, but Shakespeare with a glass of wine... I'd be surprised that by the end of the glass I was still concentrated and was just reading the words and not taking them in ... :lol:

I know exactly what you mean. I had a similar experience last summer while reading an account of 16th century Spanish Exploradors in the Americas. I was sitting on my back porch, enjoying a tall-cool one, and burning one of Uncle Fidel’s Torpedos, when I got to the bottom of a page and realized I had no clue what I’d just read. So I read it again. No luck. So I snubbed out the cigar, went inside, poured another tall one, and flipped on the TV.

Hey, last night I found a good book on reading after chatting with MorpheusSandman about speed-reading: Reading Like a Writer, a guide for people who love books and for those who want to write them, by Francine Prose; Harper Perennial, 2007. I’ve been reading her short subjects in magazines like Harpers for years. To me she is one of the most readable writers still writing. Here’s an excerpt from page three:


As I wrote, I discovered that writing, like reading, was done one word at a time, one punctuation mark at a time. It required what a friend calls “putting every word on trial for its life”: changing an adjective, cutting a phrase, removing a comma, and putting the comma back in.

I read closely, word by word, sentence by sentence, pondering each deceptively minor decision the writer had made.

[IceM]

I found thinking "What purpose does this (insert literary mechanism here) serve?" as useful. One teacher always harped that, "Authors don't do things on accident; they do them on purpose." While taking that adage as a way to analyze literature may be limited, it's helpful nonetheless.

[HalPier]

"I will, myself, admit that appreciation of my work is improved by drink."
- William Shakespeare to his friend Richard Burbage in a letter, now in the Stratford Corp. archives

[Shifter]

In my experience everthing in reading comes through practice. Back in the day when I actually read it were the previous readings that made the one author's became more legible. I woudn't understand some books of philosophy if I hadn't already read, though and discussed some other pontual ideas and problems, even in the internet. Simple stuff that made my comprehension of a topic raise little by little. That is about the ideas. About gramatical complexity, it were the struggle to understand progressively more difficult authors that gave me the capacity to understand others.