36. Reading for the Love of God

Reading for the Love of God. Jessica Hooten Wilson. 2023. [March] 208 pages. [Source: Library]

First sentence: Imagine you are resting in a cave on an unpopulated Greek island. 

I love the premise of this one--reading as a spiritual discipline, a spiritual practice. I love the idea of embracing reading as more than a hobby, more than a distraction. I love reading. I do--obviously I do. Always have, always will. I have three book review blogs. My love of reading is not in doubt. I went into this one expecting one kind of book and I got another kind of book. It just wasn't the perfectly perfect fit I imagined.

The book is definitely more academic, more scholarly, more "elevated" for lack of a better term. I felt the author was up in the clouds with her narrative--in other words, so much going zoom, zoom, zoom right over my head. The act of reading is not complicated. (Usually). So why does reading books about reading have to be so incredibly complicated??? I wanted the book to be conversational, written for the lay person, a fellow book lover that loves, loves, loves reading. I wanted to find a kindred spirit--not be lectured and judged and judged and lectured.

I did find myself agreeing in parts--at the very least--with some of what she was saying. In particular, I think reader response theory is a bit overrated. When that is the one and only way that is "acceptable" to approach READING, and reading in all aspects of life. It's one thing to have a light reader-response philosophy when it comes to reading say, poetry, or something. Quite another when it infests--manifests in???--your reading when it comes to say the Bible, or theological books. For decades this has been the primary theory being taught. And it's problematic...because then as a believer you have to say, well, when I read x, y, and z this is the way to do it...but when I switch over to this then I have to throw everything I know about reading out the window and approach this completely differently. And you *can* do that. Hopefully most realize that you should be approaching the Bible differently from any other text. 

Just to backtrack a bit, reader response theory for those who don't know the term is something like this:

The author doesn't create the meaning. The text doesn't create the meaning. The meaning comes when I the reader read the text. I bring the meaning. It doesn't matter what the author meant when he/she wrote the text. It doesn't matter what the literal meaning of the words on the page mean literally. The text means what I *feel* it means. Without the reader there is no meaning. And since every single reader brings or potentially brings his/her own meaning to the text--there is no one "right" way to read the text. Everything is subjective. Not just I like this, I don't like that. Reactions can be--and often are--a hundred percent subjective. But meaning, well, meaning that's a different story. 

I thought the book was not as clear as it could have been, should have been. I felt the author never clearly and emphatically defined exactly, precisely what she meant by her words--special vocabulary. She used specialized words throughout. And I was left trying to puzzle out my own definitions based on context, context, context. Which is a reading skill. Some words might have been helpful to go to an actual dictionary, but others I feel are too specialized to find help. For example, one of the things this book is about--learning to spiritually read, reading spiritually, approaching all reading as a spiritual practice. I don't know that any dictionary could help me puzzle out precisely what she was talking about. In most basic building-block terms--what do you mean exactly. She talks of finding truth and beauty in ALL types of books--even those with off-putting vulgarity. She talks of the importance of not hunting for moral lessons in reading, or over-hunting, I guess. 

She also occasionally would say things that I found slightly worrisome. I don't want to assume that I know her intent as an author. I don't. And I don't want to assume that the meaning I took away from reading the text lines up with her intent. (I'm willing to admit the confusion may be more on my end than her end.) But when she said things like you have to learn to read other books so that you can read the Bible. I was stumped. I don't know if she means that at its most literal--you must learn to read Go, Dog, Go and Cat in the Hat before you can come to the Bible. Or if she has somehow elevated the Bible too much. I'll try to explain.

I believe the Bible is the Word of God. 100% I believe the Bible is accurate, authoritative, breathed-out and inspired, infallible, inerrant--all the things. But I also believe that the Bible is for everyone. The Bible is not "elitist" reserved for the highest intellects, the brilliant, genius scholars. EVERY person regardless of education level can read the Word of God and read it well. By read it well, I mean read it with spiritual eyes. It is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that enables readers to READ the Word of God in any meaningful way. Without the Holy Spirit indwelling the reader, without the new birth in which the Spirit gives spiritual eyes to see, spiritual ears to hear, spiritual heart to respond, then there is no reading of the Word. No matter how brilliant, how intellectual, how academic, how perfectly-perfect you understand grammar or language or original languages--without the Holy Spirit GIVING and graciously giving you understanding, it is all in vain. 

The Bible is not a book for some--the super-smarty-pants--and too difficult, too complex, too weighty for the rest of us. Everything that is necessary for salvation is clearly illuminated--for believers--in the Bible. 

Instead of making the Bible sound accessible and relatable and WONDERFUL it made it sound like you'd have to do a lot of groundwork to get to a place where maybe one day you could begin to grasp it. As if there is a final "it" to be grasped. The Bible is a book that GROWS with you--you never outgrow it, you never exhaust it, you never move beyond needing it. But it's a book for beginners too. From day one to the very end--the Bible is just what we need it to be. 

Am I blowing up a few paragraphs and making a very minor thing major???? Probably. As I said, I don't know her intent. I don't. I wouldn't pretend to know what she meant. 

I will leave on a very positive note. I love, love, love this quote:

The words of God should be like the song that you cannot get out of your head, the one that you find yourself humming without meaning to, the song that you thoughtlessly tap your feet to, and that echoes from your heart through your whole body.

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

14. Recovering the Lost Art of Reading

Recovering the Lost Art of Reading: a Quest for the True, the Good, and the Beautiful. Leland Ryken and Glenda Faye Mathes. 2021. [March] 304 pages. [Source: Review copy]

First sentence from the introduction: Perhaps you’re wondering about this book’s title. Does reading need to be recovered? What makes it an art? And is it really lost? After all, here you are—reading a book.

First sentence from chapter one, part one: “Read any good books lately?” This question once functioned as a common conversation-starter, but now we’re more likely to hear, “What are your plans for the weekend?” or “Did you catch the game last night?”

The premise of this one is simple: reading--well, reading artfully, thoughtfully, carefully, appreciatively--is a lost art form that needs to be recovered. The authors seem to be saying that there is a right way and a wrong way to read books, or, that not all reading is created equal. One could read hundreds--thousands--of books but if they aren't "quality" enough to suit the authors, well, it's discounted as lesser than--at best. 

The authors describe their book as a "a guidebook by two seasoned and enthusiastic reading travelers, who show all readers—from those who rarely pick up a book to English majors and everyone between—how to discover more delight in the reading journey."

They mention several reasons why it is vital for individuals to recover this lost art of reading. Most significantly they point out that if one can't read well, read artfully (etc.,) then one can't read the Bible well either. By letting go of reading deeply (artfully, thoughtfully, carefully, etc.) , one is sacrificing one's spiritual growth. 

(They also argue that losing reading means the loss of meaningful leisure; losing reading means we lose out on opportunities to foster our sense of beauty; losing reading means we lose contact with 'essential human experience.' They write, "The literary enterprise shapes and forms us. The very nature of reading is contemplation of the human experience and the world in which it exists.")

This book has three parts: "Reading is a Lost Art," "Reading Literature," and "Recovering the Art of Reading." In the first part, they make their case for considering reading an art form and a LOST art form at that. They are supposing that most people don't read, and those that do read rarely read well. Therefore both need some stirring up or encouragement to read better. 

In the second part, the focus shifts to LITERATURE. What is literature? How is it defined? How is it separate or different from other books? What are its distinguishing characteristics? What makes one book literature and another not? How should one read various types of literature? It's all about categories and groups. They talk about characters, narratives, settings, structure and forms. 

In the third part, the authors give practical-ish tips on how to recover the art of reading. 

All three parts are written with a Christian reader in mind, the focus being on how to benefit spiritually from reading literature.

The book is complex and substantive. 

I have a B.A. and M.A. in English literature and an M.L.S. (My focus was children's literature.) I have strong opinions. I don't always agree, and, in fact sometimes strongly disagree with the authors of this book. That being said, I do support some of their argument.

There are two extremes when it comes to defining and/or describing literature. One extreme is that EVERYTHING (all text, every text) is literature. The other extreme is that (actual) literature is a rare unicorn. 

This scene from Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice comes to mind: 

"It is amazing to me," said Bingley, "how young ladies can have patience to be so very accomplished, as they all are."

"All young ladies accomplished! My dear Charles, what do you mean?"

"Yes, all of them, I think. They all paint tables, cover skreens and net purses. I scarcely know any one who cannot do all this, and I am sure I never heard a young lady spoken of for the first time, without being informed that she was very accomplished."

"Your list of the common extent of accomplishments," said Darcy, "has too much truth. The word is applied to many a woman who deserves it no otherwise than by netting a purse, or covering a screen. But I am very far from agreeing with you in your estimation of ladies in general. I cannot boast of knowing more than half a dozen, in the whole range of my acquaintance, that are really accomplished."

"Nor I, I am sure," said Miss Bingley.

"Then," observed Elizabeth, "you must comprehend a great deal in your idea of an accomplished woman."

"Yes; I do comprehend a great deal in it."

"Oh! certainly," cried his faithful assistant, "no one can be really esteemed accomplished, who does not greatly surpass what is usually met with. A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing, and the modern languages, to deserve the word; and besides all this, she must possess a certain something in her air and manner of walking, the tone of her voice, her address and expressions, or the word will be but half deserved."

"All this she must possess," added Darcy, "and to all this she must yet add something more substantial, in the improvement of her mind by extensive reading."

"I am no longer surprised at your knowing only six accomplished women. I rather wonder now at your knowing any."

"Are you so severe upon your own sex, as to doubt the possibility of all this?"

"I never saw such a woman. I never saw such capacity, and taste, and application, and elegance, as you describe, united."

That extreme sets the standard of "what is literature" so impossibly high that it's difficult not to get a snobbish vibe from it. 

So how do the authors define it? Literature is: experiential, concrete, universal, interpretive, and artistic. or  It can be briefly defined as a concrete, interpretive presentation of human experience in an artistic form.

My favorite description of literature comes from Ray Bradbury: "Do you know why books such as this are so important?  Because they have quality. And what does the word quality mean? To me it means texture. This book has pores. It has features. This book can go under the microscope. You'd find life under the glass, streaming past in infinite profusion. The more pores, the more truthfully recorded details of life per square inch you can get on a sheet of paper, the more 'literary' you are. That's my definition, anyway. Telling detail. Fresh detail. The good writers touch life often. the mediocre ones run a quick hand over her. The bad ones rape her and leave her for the flies. So now do you see why books are hated and feared? They show the pores in the face of life."

If I've understood the authors correctly in what is quality--what is good, what is true, what is beautiful, what is literature--I am in between the two extremes. I don't view "literature" so narrowly and exclusively. (For example, the authors unashamedly diss children's literature (with a few rare exceptions) and Christian fiction.) 

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

Book review: Reading Between the Lines

Reading Between the Lines. Gene Edward Veith Jr. 1990. Crossway. 254 pages. [Source: Gift]

First sentence: Will reading become obsolete? Some people think that with the explosion of video technology, the age of the book is almost over. Television monitors, fed by cable networks and video recorders, dominate our culture today.

In the preface, Veith writes: "The capacity to read is a precious gift of God, and this book is designed to encourage people to use this gift to its fullest.

The first two chapters are perhaps the most important. Chapter one is "The Word and the Image: The Importance of Reading." Chapter two is "Vicarious Experience and Vicarious Sin: The Importance of Criticism." I think these two chapters would prove relevant and beneficial to anyone regardless of your background.

Veith then addresses "the forms" of literature. Chapter three is "Nonfiction: The Art of Truth-telling." Chapter four is "Fiction: The Art of Story-Telling." Chapter five is "Poetry: The Art of Singing."

He next turns to the "modes" of literature: tragedy and comedy (chapter six), realism (chapter seven), and fantasy (chapter eight).

The next three chapters tackle the "traditions" of literature. While earlier chapters are more general and broad--giving you tools to help you read--the focus narrows quite a bit in these last chapters. Veith examines various ages of literature: the Middle Ages, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, Romanticism, Modernism, Postmodernism.

The last chapter is probably the most outdated chapter in the entire book. It is "The Makers of Literature: Writers, Publishers, and Readers." In it he addresses many newfangled notions: Christian publishers publishing Christian books by Christian authors; the establishing of Christian bookstores selling Christian books; Christian publications tracking Christian bestsellers, reviewing Christian books, etc; and literary awards being given specifically for Christian books. Veith seems to have his doubts and questions about all of these new notions.

While Crossway published a new edition of this book with a NEW cover. None of the text has been updated. Veith does not address the internet, streaming entertainment like Netflix and Hulu, video games, online bookstores like Amazon and Barnes & Noble, self-publishing, or E-BOOKS. I don't think Veith could have imagined all the happenings in the world from 1990 to 2017.

I think Veith loses a couple of points because he recommends Madeleine L'Engle as a great Christian author people should read. Her nonfiction is TERRIFYING. BAD theology cover to cover.

That being said, some of his statements are just as true as ever.

• Reading the Bible tends to lead to reading other books, and thus to some important habits of mind. (17) Gene Edward Veith Jr.
• Universal literacy, taken for granted today, was a direct result of the Reformation's reemphasis upon the centrality of Bible reading, not only for theologians but for the spiritual life of every Christian. (19) Veith
• Great works of literature may not always articulate an explicitly Christian worldview, but they will still usually be worth reading for their intrinsic merit and will often give unwitting testimony to God's sovereignty over all of life. (28) Veith
• Those of us who know God are freed to enjoy literature on its own terms, without requiring it to be either overly serious or overly trivial. (29) Veith
• Reading provides mental training for empathizing with real people. (31) Veith
• Writing makes thoughts permanent. (149) Veith
• Literature ushers us into the minds of its authors and into the heartbeat of their age. (149) Veith
• Literature can function as a time machine whereby we leave our own day to enter other ages. (149) Veith

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible