A reader asks
why I so often link reading and pleasure. He admits that for him reading is often
a chore, an occasional obligation that sometimes can’t be avoided. He speculates
that the origin of his distaste for books is rooted in family and education.
His parents didn’t read, books were largely absent from his childhood home, and
reading was a form of punishment in school. My history is similar but I chose
another response to indifference and occasional contempt. I’m contrary by
nature, a personality bent I accepted when very young. My parents smoke? I’ve never once put
a cigarette in my mouth. They can but don’t read? I’ll spend the rest of my
life with books.
So, why is
reading a pleasure? I’ve never in any organized fashion analyzed it. It’s an
unexpectedly complex question because the pleasures of reading are many. I like
narrative, the charms of pure story. I love language artfully deployed. There’s
no better way to meet an interesting sensibility than to read a good book, one
that lends life an interesting texture. Readers aren’t “better people” than
non-readers but they often (not always) make better company. In my experience, non-readers
tend to be dull and mulish. Their worlds are small. I know a middle-aged man
who hasn’t read a book since high school, if then. His idea of pleasure is
watching Marvel super-hero movies, and they supply the only cultural references
I’ve heard him make. The give and take of conversation is beyond him. His
company is tedious, and part of me pities him.
The passage
quoted at the top is from “The Bookish Life,” an essay Joseph Epstein published
last year in First Things. He’s not
proselytizing, thank God, for books or reading. That doesn’t work. Rather, he’s
celebrating them. He even revels in the pleasures of slow reading. Like me, he never
enrolled in the Evelyn Wood Reading Dynamics program:
“In the
risky generalization department, slow readers tend to be better readers—more
careful, more critical, more thoughtful. I myself rarely read more than
twenty-five or thirty pages of a serious book in a single sitting. Reading a
novel by Thomas Mann, a short story by Chekhov, a historical work by Theodor
Mommsen, essays by Max Beerbohm, why would I wish to rush through them?
Savoring them seems more sensible. After all, you never know when you will pass
this way again.”
Savoring, by
definition, implies a pleasure-driven activity. How good to find pleasure in an
activity that carries no risk apart from asthenopia. Epstein writes:
“[T]he next
life, which, I like to think, will surely provide a well-stocked library. If it
doesn’t, I’m not sure I want any part of it. Hell of course will have a
library, but one stocked exclusively with science fiction, six-hundred-odd page
novels by men whose first name is Jonathan, and books extolling the 1960s.”
[As an
old-fashioned man of letters, Epstein has made a career rooted in the love of
books. The theme runs through many of his essays and reviews. See “The Pleasures of
Reading,” collected in Partial Payments:
Essays on Writers and Their Lives (1989).]
1 comment:
I've always admired Joseph Epstein, but always expected that the quality of his work would deteriorate after his heart surgery a few years back (anesthesia is sometimes associated with cognitive decline). But he has remained as prolific as ever, and every essay and every review he writes still has at least one or more astonishing insights that makes me wonder that this national treasure isn't even more celebrated.
Post a Comment