Mark Edmundson, writing for The Chronicle of Higher Education believes that the average reader reads for one purpose and one purpose only–for pleasure:

Who is the common reader now? I do not think there is any way to evade a simple answer to this question. Common readers—which is to say the great majority of people who continue to read—read for one purpose and one purpose only. They read for pleasure. They read to be entertained. They read to be diverted, assuaged, comforted, and tickled. The evidence for this phenomenon is not far to seek. Check out the best-seller lists, even in the exalted New York Times. See what Oprah’s reading. Glance at the Amazon top 100. Look around on the airplane. The common reader—by which I don’t mean the figure evoked by Dr. Johnson and Virginia Woolf, but the person toting a book on the train or loading one into his iPad or Kindle—the contemporary common reader reads for pleasure, and easy pleasure at that. Reading, where it exists at all, has largely become an unprofitable wing of the diversion industry.

As someone who reads a good bit for pleasure, I am tempted to take issue with Edmundson here, however as the article progresses it becomes clear that Edmundson is not arguing against the enjoyment of reading but rather against enjoyment as the goal of reading.  Certainly Edmundson’s statement above does not adequately describe all readers, especially savvy CAPC types.  However, despite this over-generalization, he seems to understand the pivotal value of reading.  Edmundson claims our ultimate goal in reading ought to be the desire to be influenced.  We are all works in progress and reading at its best reveals our weaknesses and challenges our thinking:

The desire to be influenced is always bound up with some measure of self-dislike, or at least with a dose of discontent. While the culture tells us to love ourselves as we are—or as we will be after we’ve acquired the proper products and services—the true common reader does not find himself adequate at all. He looks in the mirror of his own consciousness, and he is anything but pleased. That is not what he had in mind at all. That is not what she was dreaming of.

But where is this common reader—this impossible, possible man or woman who is both confident and humble, both ready to change and skeptical of all easy remedies?

I have to say–this is the kind of reader I want to be.  So how do we avoid the pitfall of narcissism when we read?  I don’t think the answer is necessarily to avoid reading the NY Times Bestseller list or Oprah’s Book Club but rather to read more thoughtfully.  There is nothing wrong with reading for pleasure but there is something wrong with assuming we have arrived at a place where we are beyond influence.

Sadly, I think Christians often are wrongly afraid of being influenced by what we read if its not explicitly Christian.  Certainly we want avoid an unhealthy love the world (1 John 2:15) but there is much to be learned from the world of books–even if and often when we disagree with them.  I have been reading more lately, some Christian authors and some not, and several of these books challenged my thinking and even made me take a closer look at myself.  How is what you are reading influencing you?  What have you learned about the world?  What have you learned about yourself?  Feel free to share an example in the comments below and perhaps I will too.  If what you are reading is not influencing or challenging you at all, perhaps you are not reading carefully enough.

Avatar for Drew Dixon

Drew Dixon

Drew Dixon is editor in chief of Game Church. He also writes about videogames for Paste Magazine, Relevant Magazine, Bit Creature, and Think Christian. He hosts the Christ and Pop Culture podcast The Digest with Tyler Burns.
Twitter

7 Comments

  1. Hey Drew,

    Love the post and the topic! However, I might slightly disagree with you as to whether the problem is not the content, but the thoughtfulness of the reader.

    Though thoughtfulness is good, one major thing that sets classic books apart from everyday fare is that they are greater in their ability to change or influence the reader simply because they are better and more insightful descriptions of Reality than normal books.

    That is why a book like Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness” is far better and more influential than most recently published books, even though it is shorter than the average romance novel.

    Reading thoughtfully is good, but it is most effective with a book that rises to the challenge and takes us to new places of thought and understanding, much the way that a student can be equally willing to learn in two different classes, but a good teacher will always make more of a difference than a poor one.

    Further, the value of reading MANY good books (especially ones that challenge or have a strong point of view) is that they will often contradict each other. Recognizing these differences, comparing them with reality, and resolving your own perspective in your mind is some of the best training in discernment a person can receive. Discernment is a necessary quality for the man or woman who wants good judgement and wisdom.

    So, I would say that the distinction between those who read for pleasure (or who only read simple and/or pleasurable books) and those who read to be influenced is more stark than you might expect. The one uses books as an escape and a way to fill time, the other uses them as a classroom for deepening character and maturity.

    Reply

  2. Ben,

    I don’t have any qualm with what you have stated here, in fact I agree with you. If anything, you may have overstated my argument here. I absolutely think that we should strive to read better books–though I would say older does not equal better. I think there are probably a some great books being published today, they are just harder to find because the market is so saturated with books.

    I would say that I agree with you that the average reader who reads merely for pleasure is typically not reading to be influenced. I just wanted to say that the problem isn’t only what they are reading but also how they are reading.

    My advice is read better books and if you read today’s standard fare try to learn from it. Even if what you are reading is trite–there is a lesson to learn from that even if the lesson is “that was really awful and overly sappy.”

    I read for pleasure, but I am trying to be more thoughtful in how I do that, additionally I want to challenge myself to read better books too–books that will stretch me and influence me and force me to come to heads with important ideas.

    I hope that makes sense. I wasn’t at all trying to say that what we read doesn’t matter and if I did say that, then I would want to amend this article because I don’t believe that.

    Reply

  3. Hey Drew,

    Hope I wasn’t harsh in my comment… I think your article is a really good one and right on target. And I agree… older isn’t necessarily better. When I think of a “classic” book, I mean one whose popularity has been sustained over time because time has weeded away many of the weaker and less insightful books. It’s more of a math problem than anything else… the probability of getting a helpful book is better when choosing from among classics of the last century or two rather than choosing from among this year’s best sellers.

    You’re certainly right about the importance of HOW you read… I’m just a fanatic about books and wanted to throw in my two cents that WHAT you read is equally important.

    And you’re the one with the seminary degree and I am not, so I imagine you do just fine as far as reading the right way, whether for pleasure or learning!

    Thanks for the helpful points.

    Reply

  4. Ben,

    No I didn’t feel you were too harsh at all, I just wanted to make sure I wasn’t coming across as saying that what you read doesn’t really matter that much because I do not believe that.

    I agree with you about the classics, there is certainly a higher probability that you are going to be reading something of value when you read a classic.

    I suppose part of what I was trying to articulate is my desire to read even the more “pleasurable” reads more carefully. I don’t know how I am doing in the reading department, lately I have been trying to expand my gaze and read things out of my comfort zone. I am not sure how much my seminary degree is helping me. At the very least trudging through difficult theological arguments in New Testament theologies has made me a resilient reader to some degree!

    Anyway–I think we are on the same page, thanks for throwing in your two cents because I think you helped me clarify something that people might misconstrue in this little article.

    Reply

  5. Good thoughts gents.

    @Ben – I was a little nervous about your emphasis on classics until you clarified that you meant Those Books Which Have Stood the Test of Time. Which is, of course, what we should mean by “classics,” though some people simply just assume that old = classic. (The whole boast “I only read dead authors” smacks of this unfortunate trend.) I think that when choosing a classic you’re pretty safe (though not entirely*) in choosing something worth your time. I think this can be an especially valuable tip for those who haven’t read broadly and don’t take a lot of time for their reading. Better not to take the risk that something you read might not be worthwhile.

    My own reading is composed about 97% of books written after 1980, most of which have yet to stand the test of time. And yet, I work hard to seek out books that merit my attention. And that work generally pays off. Almost everything I’ve chosen to read over the last five years (with the exception of trifles like The Hunger Games) have been at least as thought-provoking as any classic I’ve yet encountered.** Especially reading contemporary literature from non-English sources has provided a bounty of wonderful experiences.

    While there is indisputable value in enjoying the lauded literature from the past, there is something in contemporary literature that classics can’t quite apprehend, something by nature of era rather than talent. All books are written into a particular context and so approach things from a vantage unique to their particular moment in history. Sometimes a book written five years ago will find things to say that are more valuable to the contemporary audience than a book written eighty years ago simply by virtue of the facts that a) cultures and their needs shift and b) the novel written five years ago may be building upon the foundation the eighty-year-old novel laid down.

    Granted, nearly 100% of everything produced is not worth our time, so as I said, classics are the safe route. But if you can find a reliable method of seeking out worthwhile contemporary lit, the recent stuff can be at least as rewarding an experience. And I liked Heart of Darkness.

    @Drew – I read for pleasure. Every single book. However, for me, a book that causes me to think and puzzle things out is a pleasure. A book that causes me to reconsider my place in our historical context is a pleasure. A book that offers me the life of someone I am not and allows me to experience greater empathy for another is a pleasure. A book that contains awesome writing is a pleasure.

    I don’t believe then that there is anything wrong with reading for pleasure. We just need to get away from the idea that pleasure is just that light, buoyant, insubstantial feeling we get when we play Super Mario Bros.

    To your post’s original question though: I have learned a lot and pushed myself in new ways through my reading. Reading Johnny Mad Dog (which I’d only mildly recommend) gave me an appreciation for the struggle of the civilian in the DRC. Reading the works of Haruki Murakami and Roberto Bolaño challenged me to expand my abilities of interpretation (sometimes deeply and exhaustingly) and gave me reason to investigate the histories of Japan, Mexico, and Chile more thoroughly. Reading Yu Hua gave me a greater appreciation for the development of China over the course of the 20th century. Rereading Life of Pi helped me to see why even the mistaken find beauty in religion. Reading the works of Kazuo Ishiguro (and much of the international lit on my plate) helped liberate me from some of the typical expectations of story that I may have held from an earlier literary formation.

    And all of my reading (even and especially the comics) have caused me to consider ideas (both narrative and otherwise) in fresh ways and under fresh light. High five to reading.

    __________________________________
    *note: Dickens!!! *shakes fist*

    **note: granted, I’ve been holding off on most of the more famous Russian lit.

    Reply

  6. Good points, Dane.

    I think you draw a helpful sort of sub-distinction, which is to say that there can be quality reading for different types of purposes; some reading is done to consider more universal human problems, and for this purpose classics (as we have defined them) have a terrific track record. Some reading can focus more on contemporary contexts and problems.

    Contemporary reading does have some advantage in that it is able to address both, though it also posesses the disadvantage that it is harder to thresh out the chaff.

    However, I would also say that sometimes the contemporary viewpoint has the disadvantage of being infused with all the assumptions of the current age. Authors often do not recognize how many of the smaller choices they make about characters and sensibilities and a larger sense of morality infuse their writings.

    One great value of the older stuff, then, is that the dissonance between their sensibilities and that of today forces a closer look and better offers an opportunity to compare, contrast, and choose which you would rather commit yourself to.

    That said, I do imagine, Dane, that you get some of that because your contemporary reading is also cross-cultural, whereas most “classic” literature available to us (aside from, say, our Russian friends) tends to be Western.

    Whatever the case, it seems clear to me that the exercise of reading thoughtfully is highly important, but so is the discipline of finding excellent material. A person is much better able to come to healthy and settled conclusions in their own mind on a topic such as, say, the arrogance of man when they have thoughtully ingested ideas on that topic from 17th century Brits, 19th century Russians, early 20th century Americans, mid 20th century jews, late 20th century Japanese, etc etc etc.

    This meeting place of ideas from across time periods, cultures, and moral standpoints within a single mind can have a profound effect on healthy maturation, and in teaching an individual to settle and then trust their own insticts.

    Reply

  7. A person is much better able to come to healthy and settled conclusions in their own mind on a topic such as, say, the arrogance of man when they have thoughtully ingested ideas on that topic from 17th century Brits, 19th century Russians, early 20th century Americans, mid 20th century jews, late 20th century Japanese, etc etc etc.

    Great point. And this is exactly why its important, I think, that readers get together and talk about what they’re reading and what important themes and ideas and narrative structures they’ve run across. One person on their own can’t possibly be expected to read everything of value (unless they’re retired—then it’s a requirement). My wife and I very often discuss our reading with each other, especially when the one is reading a book that the other won’t get to for a while or won’t get to at all. It’s fruitful.

    Reply

Comments are now closed for this article.