Members with This Book
Most Helpful Reviews
see all reviews
Liked It “Amusing way to make important philosophical points.” see full review » see other reviews » |
Didn’t Like It1 of 1 members found this review helpful “This book needn’t ever been written, let alone read. Here’s a summary of first part (reasons not to read): 1) You’ll never read all the books in the world, so why try, or, alternatively, you’re the type who feels it is better to have never loved, for fear of disappointment, rejection or plain old...” see full review » see other reviews » |
Newest Reviews
see all reviews-
“Amusing way to make important philosophical points.”
Clinton F wrote this review Saturday, September 12 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“The title sounds intriguing, but this book is everything that is wrong with academia. The premise is interesting, that books are so infused in our cultural subconscious that it isn't necessary to read them to understand them. When we actually do read a book, we aren't reading what the author wrote, but what we want the book to be. The delivery is so pretentious and condescending that there is no point in bothering with it. Unless, of course, you frequently run into authors who expect you to have read books that you haven't bothered to pick up and need some advise on how to converse with them (Be complementary and non-specific). Other wise, don't read it and don't apologize for doing anything other than reading for the sheer joy of it.”
Holly M wrote this review Tuesday, April 7 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“I saw one review that referred to this as a "mischievous book," and that sums this book up nicely.
moik wrote this review Saturday, February 7 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
I laughed out loud at several points. The author pretends that he rarely reads a book but then quotes from them extensively and draws some amazing insights as well. Some of his theories are, I think, parodies of literary theories, and the entire process of theorizing about books. And much of it deals with paradoxes in academic life.
On the other hand some of his spiel about not reading books really rings true - especially in the context of my recent obsession regarding trying to remember what books I have read and posting them on my Shelfari page. The forgotten books section was a hoot. I am old enough now that there are several books that, for the life of me, I truly can't remember if I read them or not. Or I know I read a single book by a certain author; but can't recall which one - even if I open the books and page through them.
And, really, who hasn't skimmed sections of a book. Try reading Remembrance of Things Past without skimming. I would classify that as "Book I tried to read, skimmed, and ultimately gave up on - extremely low opinion."
This book is a mesmerizing combination of hilarious parody and smart literary theory. I loved it.
(I "read" the audiobook version and would also comment that the reading was marvelous and they picked the best possible reader for this text.)”1 of 1 members found this review helpful“This book needn’t ever been written, let alone read. Here’s a summary of first part (reasons not to read): 1) You’ll never read all the books in the world, so why try, or, alternatively, you’re the type who feels it is better to have never loved, for fear of disappointment, rejection or plain old getting hurt; 2) You’re an arrogant prick who already knows everything, so why waste time reading some ignorant slut’s work; 3) You are incapable of forming a cohesive thought of your own and must be told all of your opinions by those with half-a-wit more than you; 4) You “forget” everything you read anyway, either due to syphilis or a convenient case of (oopsie!) plagiarism, so it’s not really reading the book at all. Bayard has no respect for the individual’s act of discovery, so be prepared for several great works of literature to be ruined (endings and all…he just HAD to pick mysteries for his examples). I only made it about half-way before getting fed up. Do the author (and yourself) a solid: take his advice and don’t read his book. Instead, read what you enjoy and NEVER apologize for a) your taste, and b) for what you haven’t read. ”
wurd nurd wrote this review Tuesday, February 3 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“This erudite, tongue-in-cheek book about books you have or, more likely, haven't read (and why not reading a book shouldn't deter you from talking about it) is funny and thought provoking. To follow his various lines of reasoning requires alertness and concentration. He talks more about inner books, phantom books, and the virtual library of books than he does about actual books. This is not a book to read while drifting off to sleep.”
Jim H wrote this review Wednesday, December 10 2008. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Irony-drenched book by a French literature professor.
TheophileEscargot wrote this review Thursday, September 18 2008. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
Not much actually helpful advice on the subject, as you'd find in a Bluffer's Guide or Molesworth. Instead he wants the reader to consider books as social objects, existing in a web of associations in people's minds. Seems like a limited version of Baudrillard: even if you can't accept that reality isn't real, you might accept that books are just mental constructs.
Hard to know how serious he is about there being a cultural pressure to appear to have read Important Works of Literature. Presumably it exists amongst literature professors; not sure if he seriously thinks it exists in the rest of the world.
If only it were true that people respected reading, rather than thought of it as unbearably pretentious, effete and boring. For one thing I could give up this blog and just talk to people in real life about it, instead of huddling on the Internet with the other perverts who share the vice.
Does have some interesting metafictional anecdotes, where he describes various satirical setups relating to unread books.
Overall, seems a bit pointless. Doesn't seem to consider that anyone could have an individual response to a book, appreciating a point, event, character or theme that hasn't made it into the collective consciousness.”
“This is one of four newish books I recently read mostly so I could finally get them off my queue list, all of which were actually pretty good but are mere wisps of manuscripts, none of them over 150 pages or so in length. This one is the surprisingly thoughtful How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read, by a hip French literature professor named Pierre Bayard; because make no mistake, this is not exactly a practical how-to guide to faking your way through cocktail parties, but more a sneaky examination of what it means to "read" a book anyway, if by "read" you mean "understand, relate to, can recall details of, and can discuss with others." After all, if we read a book as a child and then completely forget its story as an adult, do we still get to count that as a "read" book? Bayard gets into all kinds of interesting questions like this, ultimately arguing that the most important thing we can do as readers is understand the entire time period that book is a result of; in the goal of accomplishing that, then, he argues that it's perfectly okay to just read the Cliff Notes of famous huge books you know you're never going to get around to actually reading, perfectly okay to discuss a book at a cocktail party you're familiar with but haven't actually sat down and scanned each and every page. This is how we learn, he argues, how we grow as both humans and patrons of the arts; every Wikipedia entry we read, every conversation we fake our way through, every BBC adaptation we check out, ultimately helps us understand the full-length books we do sit and closely read from the beginning to the end, which is why we shouldn't be ashamed of any of these activities but rather proud of them. Funny, smart, and very French; a very fun afternoon of reading.
jasonpettus wrote this review Saturday, May 3 2008. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
Out of 10: 9.2”
“Using examples from books and author's lives, Pierre Bayard presents a theory of reading that does not necessarily involve actually reading every word in a book. He discusses several ways of not reading a book including skimming, hearing of a book, and forgetting what you have read; explains how to talk about books you haven't read with different audiences; and even how to invent books. ”
JennyIL wrote this review Thursday, April 3 2008. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
