The first thing I noticed when I picked this book up to read it was that Charles Van Doren is one of the authors. He was involved in the game show scandals of the 1950's---what the Redford directed movie Quiz Show was based on. Other than that event, I knew he had a reputation as an "intellectual". As such I would expect him to be well read and able to offer a good opinion on the topic.
I was not disappointed. This book offers a structured and directed approach for reading. The author's split reading into four classifications: elementary, inspectional, analytical and syntopical and offers rules for doing each type. The rules start with four questions: what is the book about; what is being said and how; is the book true in whole or part; and what of it? Ther are detailed instructions for determining these answers, which I will leave as an excercise to the reader. Suffice it to say, I generally agree with what is said.
The authors encourage marking up books. I used to do this often, but had gotten away from it in college---probably because reselling books was much in my mind. I am going to start doing that again, as I do find (testing with this particular book) that the act of holding a pen in my hand ready to underline, makes me a more attentive reader.
The authors say that as a reader, one must read actively, asking the questions above for all books, modifying slightly for fiction and other genres and in intensity based on what is to be accomplished by reading the book. Just this is an interesting discussion, as one must know what and why one is reading something before starting. Will I need my pen to mark up pages? Should I retain this for later reference?
One thing they don't discuss is the social aspects of reading. Plenty of time is spent coaching you to come to your own opinion about books---a very important point: an opinion about anything is no good if you didn't arrive at it following considerable thought on your own---but I do not remember any notes about using these opinions to further discussion.
I suspect that many of the directions for discussing books would be the same as "talking" to authors: don't criticize some one until you can say "I understand", don't be contentious , and recognize and observe the difference between knowledge adn personal opinion. Really, be civil in discussions.
This is a book I will reference often as I read.
9/10
Excellent sharing, solid comprehension, and amusing discovery: re. marking up books - it is a good idea (personal opinion).
ReplyDeleteO the "rules" of conversation: there is one thing that is missed that keep these otherwise sound rules imperfect. That some folks (I think that is most of us) actually discover during vigorous conversation things they had not thought of before, coming form 'the other side,' that would not have been noted had the discussion not challenged. Personal opinion has a foothold deep in this process, for opinion is often based on solid study - but study of 'at the time' half-informed materials, study that has not HAD to be brought up to date until the moment of conversation, study that perhaps could NOT have been brought up to date before that moment (owing to a lack of vital need to do so that is matched by the multi-various distractons that beset folks as they age: there really is more to be known than poor Horatios can imagine possible. Conversation does include discussion/debate that may decnedtly be at odds. Contentiousness is a determined refusal.
Thanks for the good read: the Adler book has long been on my shelf, as you might imagine.