History of Reading

I loved Manguel’s A History of Reading. It was interesting how he divided the book into short chapters which focused on one example to clarify the point. Manguel managed to transform a long, complex history into an engaging story.

I have sentences underlined everywhere in the book, so I’ll start with one which made me pause because it challenges my assumptions as a (future) librarian. Manguel notes, “Whatever classifications have been chose, every library tyrannizes the act of reading, and forces the reader–the curious reader, the alert reader–to rescue the book from the category to which it has been condemned” (199). The strong language of this statement caught me off guard. Librarians think of classification systems as one of their greatest contributions to readers. We take huge amounts of information and organize it so that readers/patrons/users can find what they need. We see classification as a service to readers. Yet Manguel indicates our classification is an act of condemnation. I understand the point being made is that the way we read a book is influenced by the category to which it is assigned–these categories or classifications shape reader’s expectations of the text. Part of me even wants to agree with Manguel; however, agreement implies that one of the fundamental services of libraries is not only obsolete, but is also more of an impediment than a service.

Another interesting chapter was “The Translator as Reader,” specifically the discussion about translations of the Bible. Before reading this chapter, I had no idea who introduced which particular, memorable phrases or words to the Bible. I grew up in a religious tradition which literally interpreted the Bible. I was always puzzled how the King James translation came to be considered the authoritative edition. This chapter helped clear up a little of that confusion for me. I have also always wondered how the Bible can be interpreted as God’s actual words if it was written by so many different people–each with their own biases and motivations–and translated so many times. I wonder how this issue is addressed in seminary for those studying to be ministers or if it is even addressed at all. I do not have any great insights into this issue. Rather, I found Manguel’s discussion interesting and worthy of further research to answer my own personal questions.

I also found the exploration of glasses and the way glasses were used to indicate intelligence to be fascinating. As an avid reader with poor eyesight, I have always wondered how people managed before the invention of glasses. I didn’t realize that difficulty reading was not such an issue because of the limited availability of books as well as limited literacy. It is pretty funny how glasses were added to paintings to make the subjects seem wiser. I find it strange that eyeglasses continue to have a double connotation of wisdom/intelligence and the idle bookworm or the nerd. In a way it is comforting to know that readers with eyeglasses have been nerds since the fifteenth century. Even with the widespread use of contacts, the association of glasses with intelligence and nerdiness is persistent.