Against Readings

       My presentation this week was on Mark Edmundson's "Against Readings" and there were just a few points that I wanted to pull out and question. Although being very easy to read, the chapter is clearly for a very specific type of audience; namely the intellectuals who would endeavour to read critically, but Edmundson is so keen to recognise every single viewpoint that in some cases it feels like he's trying to defeat his own argument. Naturally it’s important to recognise social gaps in theories, but Edmundson does this to the point that I began to wonder whether he really believed his own argument or whether it was simply a utopian ideal.

       In relation to viewpoints, as I said above this article is clearly for literary intellectuals, but I did feel that Edmundson’s argument of literature being good because it offers a second chance to be extremely faulty. This I felt because of the nature of literature versus oral and physical culture. Undoubtedly literature can have extreme physical and social responses to it, such as in the cases of religion, but most challenging of social ideals comes through oral and physical challenges, hearing and seeing people doing things that are different to our preconceived notions.

       Carrying on from preconceived notions, certainly my biggest problem with this article was Edmundson's admonition that we should treat and present the text as the author would have wished it (Edmundson, "Against Readings" 2009 pg. 62). This idea has so many inherent problems that I don't have space to deal with them in justice, so I shall move on.

       My second greatest problem with the article was Edmundson's recommendation that if we don't like the text we should lay it aside to gather dust (Edmundson, 2009 pg. 63). This I find problematic because: often I find that I only truly love the text after I have studied it (not just read it), and because often what we don't like is good for us. For example, I hated maths in school but if I had never been forced to study maths then I wouldn't have certain skills that I have now. To simply ignore a book on the grounds that we don't like it, is to me, a dangerous dissolution of academic study. If we only read what we enjoy, or what we think we will enjoy, then we take the risk of never opening our minds to other genres and authors who, despite their difficulty, can advance our minds and theories.

       So, despite Edmundson having some very valid concerns, such as forcing one text upon another, I was left vaguely bemused by his insistence that I love and befriend the text and author, and that I take care not to offend either of them lest I kill the text. It feels slightly like I should be walking on eggshells.

------------

Edmundson, Mark "Against Readings" from Profession 2009. 56-65.