16. Christians Get Depressed Too

Christians Get Depressed Too. David Murray. 2010. Reformation Heritage. 112 pages. [Source: Gift]

First sentence: There are many different kinds of mental and emotional suffering. The area I am particularly concerned with here is the most common--depression. As anxiety and panic attacks are also commonly associated with depression (so much so that doctors are increasingly using the term depression-anxiety when referring to depression), much of what I write will apply to these distressing conditions also. 

ETA: I have created a SPOTIFY playlist titled Christians Get Depressed Too. It is over three hours of music. You'll finish the book a LONG time before you finish the playlist. My hope is that it will prove helpful and spiritually edifying. If some of the songs seem to be stuck around this time period--before 2015--there's probably a good reason for that! These are songs that have personally built me up, encouraged me, challenged me. These songs are lived in songs. 

I first reviewed this one in October 2015. Looking back, I wouldn't say it is providential that I read it when I read it, but for anyone who actually knows me, the word 2015 is enough of a trigger!!! I've got about a million spiritual lessons I learned through my trials, tribulations, and sorrows of 2015. And I do think the book helped me process some of that. 

Original review follows--I couldn't really think of anything I'd change about describing the book itself.

Christians Get Depressed Too may just be the best book I've read on the subject of depression. Its strengths? Well, it's short, it's concise, it's well-organized. It tells you what you need to know and why you need to know it. It is also a very practical book. Because it is short and concise, it may not tell you absolutely everything there is to know on the subject. But if it did, it would be overwhelming and intimidating. There is something to be said for telling people clearly and precisely what they need to know first.

Murray's book is divided into six chapters:

• The Crisis
• The Complexity
• The Condition
• The Causes
• The Cures
• The Caregivers

In the first chapter, Murray shares eight reasons WHY believers should study the subject:

• Because the Bible speaks about it
• Because it is so common
• Because it impacts our spiritual lives
• Because it may be prevented or mitigated
• Because it will open doors of usefulness
• Because it is so misunderstood
• Because it is a talent to be invested for God
• Because we can all improve our mental and emotional health

I'll be honest. I didn't need all eight reasons to convince me to read the rest of the book. I include the whole list because I do believe--strongly believe--that all believers would benefit from reading this little book.

In the second chapter, Murray shares two guiding principles with readers. HOW should Christians prepare themselves to study depression? Both principles are important, but, one is especially important: "avoid extremes and seek balance." Most of the chapter focuses on how depression has been perceived and how depression has been treated within the Christian community. What things have we gotten right? What things have we gotten wrong? What is the best way to think about depression? He urges us not to go to either extreme and seek balance.

In the third chapter, Murray focuses on WHAT depression is--its symptoms. How does depression manifest itself in our everyday lives and in our spiritual lives? Even if the cause of a person's depression is not in any way caused by problems in our spiritual lives, the consequences of depression may effect our spiritual lives. Mainly because depression effects our thoughts and our feelings. One of the things I found most helpful in this chapter is his sharing of ten false thought patterns that "reflect, but also contribute to, the symptoms of depression." With each thought pattern, he shares an example from ordinary life, a spiritual example, and a biblical example.

In the fourth chapter, Murray focuses on some of the causes of depression, and in the fifth chapter, he goes on to focus on some of the cures for depression. He presents things in balance. Not all physical. Not all spiritual.

The final chapter focuses almost exclusively on caregivers--the family and friends of those suffering from depression. What can they do to help? How can they best help?

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

15. Trusting God in the Darkness

Trusting God in the Darkness. Christopher Ash. 2021. [April] 160 pages. [Source: Review copy]

First sentence: This book began as a sermon series on the book of Job. 

Christopher Ash has written a short little book on Job. A few years ago, Ash wrote a longer, more traditional commentary on the book of Job. But this is not a traditional commentary, it started life as a series of sermons. In some ways I find it a more practical, more readable treatment of Job. 

So how short is short? There are eleven-ish chapters. Or eleven chapters and an epilogue. It is written from the WHEEL-CHAIR perspective as opposed to the ARM-CHAIR perspective. What's the difference? Well, when you start asking hard/tough questions--mainly WHY questions--you can be approaching it from an arm-chair perspective--academic, distant, hypothetical OR from a wheel-chair perspective--you have experienced pain, loss, sorrow, grief or are currently experiencing it. You can relate to these hard questions on a personal, experiential manner. 

The author describes his own book in this way, "It is a staggeringly honest book. It is a book that knows what people actually say and think—and not just what they say publicly in church. It knows what people say behind closed doors and in whispers, and it knows what we say in our tears."

He continues, "Job is to be lived in and not just studied. Let us read the book of Job itself, read it out loud, mull it over, absorb it, wonder, be unsettled, and meditate. And let God get to work on us through this great Bible book."

One of the ways he encourages readers to do just this is by asking reflection questions for each chapter. True readers can skip out on participating. The author can't force you to read thoughtfully, reflectively, carefully. But if you do, you're missing out on benefiting from the reading experience.

I found the narrative to be compelling and thought-provoking. I have read the book of Job countless times. (Last year I read through the whole Bible ten times. This year I've already read through the Bible two times.) I thought I *knew* Job. But Ash's presentation--his perspective--got me thinking and rethinking. 

For example, this is what Ash has to say about Job's three visiting friends, "They weep, tear their clothes, and throw dirt on their heads. They sit with him in silence for seven days and seven nights. It is usual to say that this was the best thing they did. And certainly (as we shall see in Job 4), when they speak, they do no good at all. But their silence may not have been as helpful as is often assumed. The Bible hints that what they do—tearing clothes, throwing dust on the head, taking seven days—is precisely what one would do in mourning with a corpse. Recall that Joseph mourned seven days for his father Jacob (Gen. 50:10), and the city of Ramoth Gilead mourned seven days for King Saul (1 Sam. 31:13). It may be that their silence is not so much a silence of sympathy as a silence of bankruptcy: they are silent because they have nothing to say. Their friend is as good as dead."

Ash points out something about skeptics, unbelievers--anyone who would use suffering as an excuse to NOT believe in God--that I hadn't thought about before. "When unbelievers say to us they are troubled by the problem of pain and the unfairness of suffering in the world, we may say to them, “Why are you troubled? I as a believer am troubled, but why should you be? For you do not believe in a living God who is in control and who is good. So why should you expect there to be any logic or any fairness? And yet you do, don’t you? I wonder if that is because we are deeply hardwired to know there is a living God who is in control and who is just.”"

I expected the book to be about Job. Anyone would. This is a book about the BOOK OF JOB after all. But I was pleasantly surprised to see how Christ-centric the book is. For a book on Job, this book has a LOT TO SAY about Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. Perhaps this is because the book started out life as a sermon series or sermon notes? But I love how each chapter points the way to the Good News. 

I found the book to be an incredible read.

Favorite quote:

Because Job is about Jesus, it is also, derivatively, about every man and woman in Christ. Every disciple, called to take up the cross and walk in the footsteps of Christ, must expect in some measure to walk also in the footsteps of Job. And so in the end we may conclude that Job is in some measure about us. Not primarily about us, for it is above all about God. Not centrally about us, for its central human character foreshadows Christ. But for each of us as a believer walking through this world in union with Christ, Job is an unavoidable part of the pathway of faith. Our final justification will come through present suffering.

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

2. Geneva Bible 1560

Geneva Bible 1560. God. 1560. 4305 pages. [Source: Bought]

First sentence: In the beginning God created the heauen and the earth.

I first discovered this version--with archaic spelling--on the YouVersion app. I also bought an e-book copy because I was LOVING it so much. I started reading in December 2020 and I finished March 2, 2021. I read using the Bible in 90 Day plan--loosely. I think I finished the Bible in 86 or 87 days instead of 90--if you want to nitpick. 

I have read a little here and there in the 1599 Geneva Bible. That one was reprinted not that long ago. The print is SUPER TEENY TINY. But in my reading it wasn't instant love. Not even close.

With the 1560 Geneva Bible it was INSTANT LOVE. And it wasn't just infatuation--lasting for a few chapters of Genesis. Nope, from Genesis to Revelation I remained HEAD OVER HEELS in love with the 1560 Geneva Bible. 

I loved the archaic spelling. LOVED, LOVED, LOVED. I think that is in part what kept me engaged with the text.

Many of the Textus Receptus Bibles were written in Early Modern English (c.1500-c.1800). This may be daunting for some readers but it is not so hard once you get used to it. Most early modern writers saw no need to follow a strict set of rules for spelling and grammar, and little in the way of such a thing existed. Standardization came later.

It reminded me of a couple of Mark Twain quotes:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing. I have a correspondent whose letters are always a refreshment to me, there is such a breezy unfettered originality about his orthography. He always spells Kow with a large K. Now that is just as good as to spell it with a small one. It is better. It gives the imagination a broader field, a wider scope. It suggests to the mind a grand, vague, impressive new kind of a cow.
- speech at a spelling match, Hartford, Connecticut, May 12, 1875. Reported in the Hartford Courant, May 13, 1875

I never had any large respect for good spelling. That is my feeling yet. Before the spelling-book came with its arbitrary forms, men unconsciously revealed shades of their characters and also added enlightening shades of expression to what they wrote by their spelling, and so it is possible that the spelling-book has been a doubtful benevolence to us.
- Mark Twain's Autobiography

“Anyone who can only think of one way to spell a word obviously lacks imagination.” Mark Twain

The spelling of certain words just made as much sense if not MORE sense than the traditional (modern) spellings. 

For example:

• voyce instead of voice
• shalbe instead of shall be
• yeeres instead of years
• eightie instead of eighty
• gyants instead of giants
• mightie instead of mighty
• onely instead of only
• crueltie instead of cruelty
• fourtie instead of forty
• moneth instead of month
• speache instead of speech
• multiplie instead of multiply
• sayd or sayde instead of said
• assoone instead of as soon
• appoynt instead of appoint
• companie instead of company
• knowen instead of known
• syr instead of sir
• stuffe instead of stuff
• inough instead of enough
• cattell instead of cattle
• foorth instead of forth
• starre instead of star
• enemie instead of enemy
• detters instead of debtors
• glorie instead of glory
• physition instead of physician
• easie instead of easy
• delite instead of delight
• rejoyce instead of rejoice
• krush instead of crush
• afrayde instead of afraid
• libertie instead of liberty
• prayse instead of praise
• worthie instead of worthy
• haylestones instead of hailstones
• coles instead of coals
• powred instead of poured
• middes instead of midst
• shepheard instead of shepherd
• battell instead of battle
• tentation instead of temptation
• trueth instead of truth 
• wisedom instead of wisdom
• hipocrisie instead of hypocrisy
• sprinkeling instead of sprinkling
• ordeined instead of ordained

Here are some verses to give you an idea of what the text is like.

“In the beginning was that Word, and that Word was with God, and that Word was God. This same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made. In it was life, and that life was the light of men. And that light shineth in the darkenesse, and the darkenesse comprehended it not.”

John 1:1-5

“Verely, verely I say vnto thee, wee speake that we know, and testifie that we haue seene: but yee receiue not our witnesse. If when I tel you earthly things, ye beleeue not, howe should yee beleeue, if I shall tel you of heauenly things? For no man ascendeth vp to heauen, but he that hath descended from heauen, that Sonne of man which is in heauen. And as Moses lift vp the serpent in the wildernesse, so must that Sonne of man be lift vp, That whosoeuer beleeueth in him, shoulde not perish, but haue eternall life. For God so loued the worlde, that hee hath giuen his onely begotten Sonne, that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. For God sent not his Sonne into the world, that he should condemne the world, but that the world through him might be saued. Hee that beleeueth in him, is not condemned: but hee that beleeueth not, is condemned already, because he hath not beleeued in the Name of that onely begotten Sonne of God. And this is the condemnation, that that light came into the worlde, and men loued darknesse rather then that light, because their deedes were euill. For euery man that euill doeth, hateth the light, neither commeth to light, least his deedes should be reprooued. But he that doeth trueth, commeth to the light, that his deedes might bee made manifest, that they are wrought according to God.”

John 3:11-21

“Iesus then answered, and saide vnto them, Murmure not among your selues. No man can come to mee, except the Father, which hath sent mee, drawe him: and I will raise him vp at the last day. It is written in the Prophetes, And they shalbe al taught of God. Euery man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, commeth vnto me: Not that any man hath seene the Father, saue hee which is of God, hee hath seene the Father. Verely, verely I say vnto you, hee that beleeueth in me, hath euerlasting life. I am that bread of life.”

John 6:43-48

When Iesus therefore saw her weepe, and the Iewes also weepe which came with her, hee groned in the spirit, and was troubled in himselfe, And saide, Where haue ye layde him? They said vnto him, Lord, come and see. And Iesus wept. Then saide the Iewes, Beholde, how he loued him. And some of them saide, Coulde not he, which opened the eyes of the blinde, haue made also, that this man should not haue died? Iesus therefore againe groned in himselfe, and came to the graue. And it was a caue, and a stone was layde vpon it. Iesus saide, Take ye away the stone. Martha the sister of him that was dead, said vnto him, Lord, he stinketh alreadie: for he hath bene dead foure dayes. Iesus saide vnto her, Saide I not vnto thee, that if thou diddest beleeue, thou shouldest see the glorie of God? Then they tooke away the stone from the place where the dead was layde. And Iesus lift vp his eyes, and saide, Father, I thanke thee, because thou hast heard me. I knowe that thou hearest me alwayes, but because of the people that stand by, I said it, that they may beleeue, that thou hast sent me. As hee had spoken these things, hee cried with a loude voyce, Lazarus, come foorth. Then he that was dead, came forth, bound hande and foote with bandes, and his face was bound with a napkin. Iesus said vnto them, Loose him, and let him goe. Then many of the Iewes, which came to Mary, and had seene the thinges, which Iesus did, beleeued in him.”


John 11:8-15, 21-28, 33-45


“Let not your heart be troubled: ye beleeue in God, beleeue also in me. In my Fathers house are many dwelling places: if it were not so, I would haue tolde you: I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go to prepare a place for you, I wil come againe, and receiue you vnto my selfe, that where I am, there may ye be also. And whither I go, ye know, and the way ye knowe. Thomas sayd vnto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest: how can we then know ye way? Iesus sayd vnto him, I am that Way, and that Trueth, and that Life. No man commeth vnto the Father, but by me. If ye had knowen mee, ye should haue knowen my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and haue seene him.”

John 14:1-7

“These things spake Iesus, and lift vp his eyes to heauen, and saide, Father, that houre is come: glorifie thy Sonne, that thy Sonne also may glorifie thee, As thou hast giuen him power ouer all flesh, that he shoulde giue eternall life to all them that thou hast giuen him. And this is life eternall, that they knowe thee to be the onely very God, and whom thou hast sent, Iesus Christ. I haue glorified thee on the earth: I haue finished the worke which thou gauest me to doe. And nowe glorifie me, thou Father, with thine owne selfe, with the glorie which I had with thee before the world was. I haue declared thy Name vnto the men which thou gauest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gauest them me, and they haue kept thy worde. Nowe they knowe that all things whatsoeuer thou hast giuen me, are of thee. For I haue giuen vnto them the wordes which thou gauest me, and they haue receiued them, and haue knowen surely that I came out from thee, and haue beleeued that thou hast sent me. I pray for them: I pray not for the worlde, but for them which thou hast giuen me: for they are thine. And al mine are thine, and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them. And nowe am I no more in the world, but these are in the worlde, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keepe them in thy Name, euen them whome thou hast giuen mee, that they may bee one, as we are. While I was with them in the worlde, I kept them in thy Name: those that thou gauest me, haue I kept, and none of them is lost, but the childe of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. And now come I to thee, and these things speake I in the worlde, that they might haue my ioy fulfilled in themselues. I haue giuen them thy word, and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou keepe them from euill. They are not of the worlde, as I am not of the world. Sanctifie them with thy trueth: thy word is trueth. As thou diddest send me into the world, so haue I sent them into the world. And for their sakes sanctifie I my selfe, that they also may bee sanctified through the trueth. I praie not for these alone, but for them also which shall beleeue in mee, through their woorde, That they all may bee one, as thou, O Father, art in me, and I in thee: euen that they may be also one in vs, that the worlde may beleeue that thou hast sent me. And the glory that thou gauest me, I haue giuen them, that they may be one, as we are one, I in them, and thou in mee, that they may be made perfect in one, and that the worlde may knowe that thou hast sent mee, and hast loued them, as thou hast loued me. Father, I will that they which thou hast giuen me, be with me euen where I am, that they may beholde that my glorie, which thou hast giuen mee: for thou louedst me before the foundation of the world. O righteous Father, the worlde also hath not knowen thee, but I haue knowen thee, and these haue knowen, that thou hast sent me. And I haue declared vnto the thy Name, and will declare it, that the loue wherewith thou hast loued me, may be in them, and I in them.”


John 17:1-26

The heauens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth ye worke of his hands. Day vnto day vttereth the same, and night vnto night teacheth knowledge. There is no speach nor language, where their voyce is not heard. Their line is gone forth through all the earth, and their words into the endes of the world: in them hath he set a tabernacle for the sunne. Which commeth forth as a bridegrome out of his chamber, and reioyceth like a mightie man to runne his race. His going out is from the ende of the heauen, and his compasse is vnto the endes of ye same, and none is hid from the heate thereof. The Lawe of the Lord is perfite, conuerting the soule: the testimonie of the Lord is sure, and giueth wisedome vnto the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right and reioyce the heart: the commandement of the Lord is pure, and giueth light vnto the eyes. The feare of the Lord is cleane, and indureth for euer: the iudgements of the Lord are trueth: they are righteous altogether, And more to be desired then golde, yea, then much fine golde: sweeter also then honie and the honie combe. Moreouer by them is thy seruant made circumspect, and in keeping of them there is great reward. Who can vnderstand his faultes? clense me from secret fautes. Keepe thy seruant also from presumptuous sinnes: let them not reigne ouer me: so shall I be vpright, and made cleane from much wickednes. Let the wordes of my mouth, and the meditation of mine heart be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength, and my redeemer.”


Psalms 19:1-14

The Lord is my shepheard, I shall not want. He maketh me to rest in greene pasture, and leadeth me by the still waters. He restoreth my soule, and leadeth me in the paths of righteousnesse for his Names sake. Yea, though I should walke through the valley of the shadowe of death, I will feare no euill: for thou art with me: thy rod and thy staffe, they comfort me. Thou doest prepare a table before me in the sight of mine aduersaries: thou doest anoynt mine head with oyle, and my cuppe runneth ouer. Doubtlesse kindnesse and mercie shall follow me all the dayes of my life, and I shall remaine a long season in the house of the Lord.”

Psalms 23:1-6

I will alway giue thankes vnto the Lord: his praise shalbe in my mouth continually. My soule shall glory in the Lord: the humble shall heare it, and be glad. Praise ye the Lord with me, and let vs magnifie his Name together. I sought the Lord, and he heard me: yea, he deliuered me out of all my feare. They shall looke vnto him, and runne to him: and their faces shall not be ashamed, saying, This poore man cryed, and the Lord heard him, and saued him out of all his troubles. Taste ye and see, howe gratious the Lord is: blessed is the man that trusteth in him. Feare the Lord, ye his Saintes: for nothing wanteth to them that feare him. The lyons doe lacke and suffer hunger, but they, which seeke the Lord, shall want nothing that is good. Come children, hearken vnto me: I will teache you the feare of the Lord. Keepe thy tongue from euill, and thy lips, that they speake no guile. Eschewe euill and doe good: seeke peace and follow after it. The eyes of the Lord are vpon the righteous, and his eares are open vnto their crie. But the face of the Lord is against them that doe euill, to cut off their remembrance from the earth. The righteous crie, and the Lord heareth them, and deliuereth them out of all their troubles. The Lord is neere vnto them that are of a contrite heart, and will saue such as be afflicted in Spirite. Great are the troubles of the righteous: but the Lord deliuereth him out of them all. He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken. But malice shall slay the wicked: and they that hate the righteous, shall perish. The Lord redeemeth the soules of his seruants: and none, that trust in him, shall perish.” 

Psalms 34:1-6, 8-11, 13-22

“And I sawe a newe heauen, and a newe earth: for the first heauen, and the first earth were passed away, and there was no more sea. And I Iohn sawe the holie citie newe Hierusalem come downe from God out of heauen, prepared as a bride trimmed for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heauen, saying, Behold, the Tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them: and they shalbe his people, and God himselfe shalbe their God with them. And God shall wipe away all teares from their eyes: and there shalbe no more death, neither sorow, neither crying, neither shall there be any more paine: for the first things are passed. And he that sate vpon the throne, sayd, Behold, I make all things newe: and he sayde vnto me, Write: for these wordes are faithfull and true. And he said vnto me, It is done, I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ende. I wil giue to him that is a thirst, of the well of the water of life freely. He that ouercommeth, shall inherit all things, and I will be his God, and he shall be my sonne. But the fearful and vnbeleeuing, and the abominable and murtherers, and whoremogers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars shall haue their part in the lake, which burneth with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. And there came vnto mee one of the seuen Angels, which had the seuen vials full of the seuen last plagues, and talked with mee, saying, Come: I will shewe thee the bride, the Lambes wife. And he caried me away in the spirit to a great: and an hie mountaine, and he shewed me that great citie, that holie Hierusalem, descending out of heauen from God, Hauing the glorie of God: and her shining was like vnto a stone most precious, as a Iasper stone cleare as crystall, And had a great wall and hie, and had twelue gates, and at the gates twelue Angels, and the names written, which are the twelue tribes of the children of Israel. On the East part there were three gates, and on the Northside three gates, on the Southside three gates, and on the Westside three gates. And the wall of the citie had twelue foundations, and in them the Names of the Lambes twelue Apostles. And hee that talked with mee, had a golden reede, to measure the citie withall, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof. And the citie laie foure square, and the length is as large as the bredth of it, and he measured the citie with the reede, twelue thousande furlongs: and the length, and the bredth, and the height of it are equall. And hee measured the wall thereof, an hundreth fourtie and foure cubites, by the measure of man, that is, of the Angell. And ye building of the wall of it was of Iasper: and the citie was pure golde, like vnto cleare glasse. And the foundations of the wall of ye city were garnished with all maner of precious stones: the first foundation was Iasper: the second of Saphire: the third of a Chalcedonie: the fourth of an Emeraude: The fift of a Sardonix: the sixt of a Sardius: the seueth of a Chrysolite: the eight of a Beryl: the ninth of a Topaze: the tenth of a Chrysoprasus: the eleuenth of a Iacynth: the twelfth an Amethyst. And the twelue gates were twelue pearles, and euery gate is of one pearle, and the streete of the citie is pure golde, as shining glasse. And I sawe no Temple therein: for the Lord God almightie and the Lambe are the Temple of it. And this citie hath no neede of the sunne, neither of the moone to shine in it: for the glorie of God did light it: and the Lambe is the light of it. And the people which are saued, shall walke in the light of it: and the Kings of the earth shall bring their glorie and honour vnto it. And the gates of it shall not be shut by day: for there shalbe no night there. And the glorie, and honour of the Gentiles shall be brought vnto it. And there shall enter into it none vncleane thing, neither whatsoeuer woorketh abomination or lies: but they which are written in ye Lambes booke of life.” 

Revelation 21:1-27

For those curious on the background of the 1560 Geneva Bible, there's this article on the Bible Research site. 

© Becky Laney of Operation Actually Read Bible

Journaling 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]

I mentioned in my earlier review--my PROPER(ish) review--that I didn't love, love, love this one. That there were times I was in complete agreement with the two authors and time I STRONGLY disagreed with them. I knew writing the review that it would be impossible to unpack all my thoughts on the book. 

Before chapter one, they'd already made me mad! "Kitten videos may be endearing, but not enduring." SERIOUSLY, HOW DARE YOU!!!!! KITTEN VIDEOS ARE THE BEST THING EVER. 

Moving on to chapter one, 

Reading on screens differs from reading physical books. 

Reading on a device (like a Kindle) does NOT differ from reading physical books. It just DOESN'T. Reading is reading is reading. 

Many people are reading a great deal of material, especially online. But they are not necessarily reading quality material or reading well.

It sure is convenient to use general words like "many" and "most." It makes it impossible to prove or disprove. I don't necessarily disagree--since I don't know MANY or MOST and their reading habits. I can say that it seems a little judgmental to go into whether the people who are reading are reading QUALITY and reading WELL. 

We want you, whether you read a little or a lot, to experience more joy in reading (and therefore in life). We want to dispel the notion of reading as duty and instill the concept of reading as delight.

AGREED. Mostly. Who could argue with the whole READING IS DELIGHTFUL concept?!

A recent statistic from the Royal Society of Literature sounds similar to the Pew report’s finding. The 2017 RSL report showed that one out of five people could not name an author—any author.

*If* this is true, how sad! But I'm always curious WHO the subjects are and where they are rounding them up. 

The amount of time Americans spend reading each day increases with age, with retirees reading the most. But even those in the seventyfive and above age bracket read only 50 minutes per day. Not a single age group averages as much as an hour of daily reading.

Not even an hour a day? Could this be true? (Probably. But I think it's a matter of averages and maths. I'm sure there are plenty of people who read more than that and then plenty of people who don't read anything so that the averages are pulled down for everyone.)

We want everyone to discover the delight of reading literature in any genre or format.

You say that, but then with some of what you write later you've got me questioning in you really mean it!

Reading a book immerses oneself into an extensive work. When this is done receptively and thoughtfully, it becomes artful reading. Some people call it “deep reading” and believe it is in deep trouble.

They talk a LOT about artful reading of course. I think it is a matter of engaging the text and staying engaged with the text--during but also perhaps afterwards as well. Great characters STICK with you long after you finish the book. 

Who should care more about reading timeless truths than children of the Book?...We’ve lost the ability to read the Bible consistently and attentively...What then happens to our relationship with God? 

STRONGLY AGREE. I have wondered if there is a connection between loving to read and loving to read the Bible...and if some of the disconnect with people who don't read the Bible has to do with the act of reading itself.

C. S. Lewis writes, Those of us who have been true readers all our life seldom fully realize the enormous extension of our being which we owe to authors. We realize it best when we talk with an unliterary friend. He may be full of goodness and good sense but he inhabits a tiny world.

TRUTH. I talk with my mom about this and we started naming examples. Two or three that come to mind are Milne's Pooh books but also many of Seuss's books and ALICE IN WONDERLAND. The books that you read and reread and reread and share with your family become PART OF YOU and remain a part of you deep down. I call this reading DNA.

Reading is by its very nature a leisure time activity. Although some people speak of reading as a compulsion and something they cannot live without, reading is usually something we do after we’ve handled life’s routine physical and social demands.

Definitely in the first group! 

Literature refreshes at deeper levels than many other leisure activities. 

Possibly true, but I wouldn't discount good-to-great films that I would argue could be viewed "artfully" or good-to-great music OR other activities and hobbies like SEWING OR QUILTING OR KNITTING or whatever. Reading isn't the only worthwhile hobby.

Our failures to read and read well have deprived us of an essential way to transcend our confining world of private preoccupations and worries.

Again I think there are other ways of escaping "private preoccupations and worries." MANY ways--not all healthy, not all wise, not all beneficial, not all free. 

We need to be clear here that it is not the “pastness” of literature that makes it worthy. It is the presence of the true, the good, and the beautiful. Additionally, acquaintance with the past liberates us from bondage to the contemporary. C. S. Lewis has written on this with his usual good sense. In an essay titled “Learning in War-time,” Lewis asserts that “we need intimate knowledge of the past,” not because “the past has any magic about it, but because we . . . need something to set against the present.” Then he shares the following analogy: “A man who has lived in many places is not likely to be deceived by the local errors of his native village; the [person who knows the past] has lived in many times and is therefore in some degree immune from the great cataract of nonsense that pours from the press and the microphone of his own age.”

#TRUTH

As literature projects human experience, we see our own lives more clearly and accurately. In this way, 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. Literature is a confession of the human race. We have a stake in it.

YES. It's so easy to agree with this before he starts narrowing down what literature is. I think to some extent or degree ALL books are capable of this. Some more than others. 

Literature categories edify in different ways, but most reading experiences can be edifying if we read self-consciously as Christians. Not reading prevents these new avenues of edification from developing in our lives.

I don't like the phrase self-consciously as Christians. Wouldn't a reader's worldview be so deeply rooted and  his or her beliefs be so grounded in the Word of God that he/she doesn't have to intentionally think about it or purposefully be conscious of it? Again maybe, maybe not??? I might be assuming too much? I think it is almost more important to examine AFTER you've finished a book and consider/reflect/ponder the book's spiritual strengths and weaknesses. Again I don't think this is limited to just reading. You can watch a movie or television show and walk away edified.

We need to consider not only the quantity of experiences in literature, but also their quality.

But do all books have to be equally amazing?  

When writers write they do so from the perspective of their own world view. What they presuppose about themselves, God, the good life and the validity of human knowledge governs both what they say and how they say it. That is why reading with world views in mind (your own and that of the author) will help you understand not only what is written in the lines but what is written between the lines—that is, what is presumed before a pen ever reaches the page.

I think this is true enough. I think sometimes this takes a reread OR a book discussion. You need more than one set of eyes to sometimes grasp all the angles of world view peeking through. 

Authors often express worldviews in subtle ways. Thoughtful readers recognize nuances or assumptions that either resonate with their own beliefs or fail to do so. This doesn’t mean Christians should read only literature falling in-line with their faith. It does mean, however, that their faith informs their reading.

TRUE. I don't think (adult) readers should limit their reading to "only" Christian books that line up with their specific leanings or denomination. I think this will come up again later, but I do think adults can/should self-censor what they read at times.

We’re using the adjective biblical rather than Christian because, sadly, much of what is called “Christian art” today is not artistic. This is particularly true when it comes to books. The popular genre of Christian fiction contains too few literary gems. When we write about a biblical aesthetic, we mean a perspective on the arts that is steeped in scriptural knowledge and informed by artistic awareness. We’re not advocating separate categories of Christian art as opposed to secular art. Because all artists are made in God’s image and live in a world that reveals him (whether they realize it or not), both Christians and unbelievers are capable of producing artistic works.

I think Christian fiction unnecessarily has a bad reputation. It is SO easy to pronounce judgment on it and condemn it even if you've never read it or given it a chance. EVERYONE loves to hate on Christian fiction. But it can be GREAT. Maybe not great in a snooty "literary" way. Christian fiction is never going to be as "literary" as say SHAKESPEARE or MILTON, etc. But why does it have to be? 

Contrary to trends in college literature departments, it is not impossible to define literature, and the best thinking on the subject for twenty centuries will guide our journey to this definition. While we wish to encourage all types of good reading, our passion and expertise focus on imaginative literature. This is also the sphere in which we can most decisively speak of having lost the art of reading. We will begin by looking at a literary specimen and drawing some preliminary conclusions about the nature of literature. Literature is: experiential, concrete, universal, interpretive, and artistic. To say that literature is experiential means first that its subject is human experience. Authors do not seek to convey information about human experience but to recreate experiences that readers vicariously live in their imaginations and emotions. Literary works specialize in truthfulness to life. Literature embodies experiences familiar to all people in all places at all times. Literature is a window to our world. A work of literature is bifocal: we look at the details of a story or poem but also through it to life. Comprehending this aspect of literature as life helps us grasp the relevance of what we read. 

I don't disagree so far...not really. 

As noted, poets and storytellers present human experience as concretely as possible. They appeal to imagination over intellect. But they do more than present human experience; they also interpret it. All great artists have a theme, an idea of life profoundly felt and founded in some personal and compelling experience. . . . All writers have, and must have, to compose any kind of story, some picture of the world, and of what is right and wrong in that world. So far, our discussion has centered on literature’s content. But an additional, equally important, dimension to literature is its form—the “how” of a literary work rather than the “what.” Because authors work hard to craft beauty into their compositions, readers should pay attention to their intentional artistry. What is literature? It can be briefly defined as a concrete, interpretive presentation of human experience in an artistic form. 

I guess the issue I have with this wonderful, grandiose sounding definition of literature is that it seems to be saying ALL literature will have ALL of these elements ALL the time. If it's missing even one of these, it isn't really literature and is just junk. 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."

Literature acquaints us with the great ideas by which the human race has ordered life. These ideas are important, but not every view is true. Christian readers should compare what is conveyed in works of literature to biblical truth.

Sometimes. I don't really get that every single book that is to be considered "literature" has to be philosophical in nature. But I do agree that everything is always to be held up to the Bible to see if it's true or just sounds true.

The writer’s task is to present human experience as concretely as possible, to interpret the presented experiences, and to create artistic beauty. 

It's this artistic beauty that is getting to me. I just don't get it. 

We know God wants us to have literature in our lives because he has revealed himself to the human race in a book that is primarily literary in nature. If we apply the criteria for literature explored in the preceding chapter, at least 80 percent of the Bible meets the definition of being literature, and with a generous application of the criteria, the percentage is even higher. It is therefore accurate and helpful to think of the overall genre of the Bible as a literary anthology—a collection of predominantly literary works composed by numerous authors over a span of many years.

I hadn't thought of it like that, but I like it.

When we consider the entire body of literature the world has produced, viewpoints obviously contradict. We cannot assert that literature as a whole embodies right ideas about God, people, and nature. A more realistic assessment is that literature embodies the great ideas by which the human race has ordered its affairs. On one level, this is simply interesting to know. But there is a practical usefulness as well. The ideas conveyed in literature serve as a stimulus to our own thinking. Encountering these ideas forces us to codify what we, as readers, believe to be the truth. This process sometimes expands our understanding and more often leads us to repudiate error and confirm our commitment to truth. The Bible calls us to understand, embrace, and walk in the truth.

AMEN, AMEN, AMEN. Sometimes it's encountering those ideas that differ from ours that we can see our own more clearly. GOOD BOOKS GET OUR BRAINS SPINNING in a good, productive way.

Reading a work of literature begins with a magical moment of transport. This transport includes both a leave-taking from our ordinary world and an arrival in an imaginary one, but we’ll focus first on the departure. As soon as we become engaged in a story or poem or drama, our everyday concerns and physical surroundings recede from our consciousness. This initial wonder is therapeutic to the human spirit. There are many joys in reading literature, but transport alone makes it worthwhile for even the most reluctant reader. 

TRUE. 

Do other types of reading also transport us in this way? Screen reading rarely does. When we read on a digital device or computer monitor, we do not leave concerns behind but remain very much connected to them.

NOT TRUE. I don't think it's entirely fair to screens to blame them for distracting thoughts and interruptions. Not if the real weakness is in attention spans OR undisciplined minds/bodies. This might be true if you were never, ever, ever, ever, ever distracted, losing concentration, losing interest, having to go back and reread because you lost your train of thought, etc. while reading a print book. Interruptions happen with print books too--especially if you live with others. 

Self-forgetfulness is one benefit accompanying transport. People need regular times when we move beyond preoccupation with ourselves and our concerns. The very act of reading admits us to a particular state, which in itself is pleasurable and beneficial, quite apart from the content of what we are reading. As we leave our physical and mental surroundings, we simultaneously arrive in an alternate world that is merely imagined. We cannot touch it with our hands or see it with our eyes. Its specific qualities depend on the genre and literary work we are reading. The broad genre most obviously creating this world is narrative or story, which includes sub-genres such as fiction and creative nonfiction. But other genres conjure imaginative worlds as well. Literature offers a concentrated version of a chosen subject. It defamiliarizes a subject in a way that helps us see it more clearly than we do in real life.

I think this describes MOST IF NOT ALL reading. Not just "literary" or proper "literature."

What does literature offer when we make the return journey? If we have been reading something good and satisfying, we experience a feeling of disappointment as we close the book. Such disappointment is revealing. It tells us that the leave-taking and temporary residence in an imaginary world have been meaningful and desirable, in itself a tribute to the value of reading. At the very least, a work of literature asks—and prompts us to ask—the right questions about life experiences.

True enough.

Without biblically-grounded criteria, a novel becomes whatever the reader wants it to be. When authors and readers do not believe in objective truth, literature loses transcendent meaning....While not all readers are familiar with modern literary theory, most are heavily influenced by cultural perspectives and pursuits. Without even realizing it, they absorb unbiblical perspectives that have become part of society’s fabric. They focus on personal advancement and mindless entertainment. They read novels much like they watch TV, passively absorbing images and action with little thought to the quality of the content or the values it promotes....Even Christians disagree about how to view literature and other fine arts. Os Guinness writes that “most Christians lack a Christian aesthetic, an agreed Christ-centered philosophy of the arts. Christians therefore tend to swing between two extremes—puritanically dismissing the arts as irreligious or seeking to exploit them as a means of promoting faith and morals.” This is too often the case when it comes to novels. Some Christian readers consider fiction a secular invention to be avoided. Novelists who are Christians frequently wield their pens with evangelistic or moralistic fervor. Both extremes stem from a failure to appreciate literary quality.

Is this true? I may not be the best judge since I write about everything I read and give at least a little thought to its worth, value, quality, etc. 

The aesthetic lack is especially apparent in today’s Christian fiction market. Too many of these novels are bland romances with flat characters and pat endings. Although exceptions exist, Christian fiction written according to modern formulas tends to lack character complexity, imaginative language, and creative execution. No wonder some believers view reading novels as a waste of time!

Again hating on Christian fiction! Why?!?! 

Definitions of literary fiction can be somewhat diverse, but it’s used here to describe well-written novels with timeless qualities that transcend popular trends. What separates popular fiction from literary fiction? Writer Bret Lott explains the differences this way to his college students: I tell them that literary fiction is fiction that examines the character of the people involved in the story, and that popular fiction is driven by plot. Whereas popular fiction, I tell them, is meant primarily as a means of escape, one way or another, from this present life, a kind of book equivalent of comfort food, literary fiction confronts us with who we are and makes us look deeply at the human condition. Literary fiction goes beyond page-turning action and predictable plots to a skillfully-constructed narrative about complex characters. It engages the mind and emotions with excellent craftsmanship. The best literary fiction reflects God’s beauty and creativity in an imaginative and biblically-realistic way.

I do often talk about character-driven and plot-driven in my reviews (especially at Becky's Book Reviews). But I'm not sure it's as simple as that in dividing literary from popular. 

What is true about this novel? • How are the characters authentic? • In what ways do they change? • How is the central conflict resolved? • In what ways has the novel increased my understanding of others?

These are suggested questions to ask of books.

How can we promote healthy reading alternatives to today’s junkfood, literary fare for children? We can recognize the unique nature of children’s literature and become aware of current concerns. Then we can choose good books and integrate reading into family life through strategies like reading aloud and controlling technology.

The authors are approaching the chapter on children's books with NEGATIVITY from the get-go. They are assuming that MOST if not ALL of children's books being published are JUNKY JUNKFOOD. The Christian's only hope is to go back decades to the tried and true classics like C.S. LEWIS' Chronicles of Narnia. 

Why did all the other chapters approach the topic at hand with positivity? Why is children's literature singled out?

Children lack the emotional and intellectual maturity to temper the reading experience with an adult’s reserve or analysis. This is why the most crucial aspect of children’s literature is its incredible capacity to shape impressionable young minds. This is also why it’s so important for loving and godly adults to guide children in going beyond merely learning to read to reading with discernment and delight. Concerns about children’s literature fall into two broad categories: quality and content. Although both lamentable quality and questionable content permeate many of today’s books for young readers, poor literary quality has long been a concern.

So the argument appears to be CHILDREN'S BOOKS EXIST ONLY TO BRAINWASH CHILDREN and children are too stupid to realize they are being brainwashed. I HATE, HATE, HATE, HATE this attack on quality that "has long been a concern." 

This charge of poor quality is often leveled at large series characterized by formulaic and predictable plots. Writing excellence is sacrificed on the altar of commercialism in a host of books linked to movies, video games, or superheroes. Such books, particularly beginning readers, suffer from unimaginative language and incoherent plots. Simple language is necessary for younger readers, but we needn’t abandon good writing.

Apparently they've never taken a course on children's literature OR a class on READING. Series books with their formulas and predictability are A GOOD THING and ESSENTIAL in developing a reader. Not that one is to stay STUCK forever and ever and ever in the early chapter book series and not move beyond that. But it's a STAGE, not a destination. And not all early readers OR early chapter books are "poorly written" and "unimaginative." I DARE ANYONE NOT TO FALL IN LOVE WITH MO WILLEM'S ELEPHANT AND PIGGIE. AND DON'T GET ME STARTED ON MERCY WATSON by Kate DiCamillo. 

I seriously doubt that either author has read widely in the field of children's literature. I don't think either author knows what is what. 

Content concerns are also far-ranging. A simple picture book, featuring lovely language and beautiful illustrations, may promote an unbiblical concept. Even nonfiction is often laced with manipulative indoctrination. A first grade student may bring home a flyer advertising revisionist history as well as stories about vampires or aliens. Objectionable content increases in books aimed at older readers, especially those geared toward teens. The Young Adult genre includes hopeless dystopian and occult horror, but it is overwhelmingly weighted with “real life” fiction. In most of these books, teens struggle with problems ranging from trivial ones about appearance to weighty trauma like sexual abuse. No matter how minor the problem, self-centered protagonists see themselves as victims with a difficult life. No one understands these protagonists (especially parents) and they need to handle struggles on their own. God is absent or Christians are portrayed negatively. Scenes are graphic, but answers are few and hope elusive.

There is *some* truth in this. Picture books like ALL BOOKS have world views. Some picture books do promote world views that are at odds and opposed to the biblical world view. (Picture books aren't automatically safe. But is any book automatically safe? It doesn't matter how long--or how short--how new or how old--no book should be considered safe when it comes to being in sync or in alignment with Christian values and beliefs. That is why parents *should* read any book before sharing it with their child.   It isn't *every* picture book that is packed with *dangerous* ideas. But parents shouldn't be blind to the possibility either.)

As for objectionable content--every single family will have to decide for themselves what they object to and what is deemed "allowable" and "forbidden" subjects. I don't have issues with individual families deciding for themselves what is "safe" "good" "right" and "appropriate." Just don't assume that ALL families will perfectly perfectly agree. 

I think there is again some truth when it comes to YA--and even Middle Grade--these days. Not every single book. Not every single author. Not every single genre. And sometimes the focus on content forgets context, context, context. Sometimes the HOW and WHY matter significantly in judging a book's worth. The novel SPEAK comes to mind. OR even FAHRENHEIT 451. 

I think reading WITH your children and DISCUSSING what you're reading is sometimes worth the exposure. 

When you condemn 99% of the books available for children, tweens, teens, and new adults...you're really saying SORRY YOU DON'T GET TO READ ANYTHING BUT THESE TEN BOOKS WE'VE DEEMED QUALITY ENOUGH FOR YOU TO HANDLE, AND SINCE YOUR BRAINS ARE SO SMALL AND WEAK, YOU WON'T MIND. 

I think DISCERNMENT can be modeled, demonstrated, taught. I think parents can start teaching/demonstrating HOW to read a book wisely and well with children especially as they enter middle school and high school. Better they learn HOW TO READ A BOOK AS A CHRISTIAN from you than to be in for a shock once they go to college, get a job, live on their own. 

I think sometimes the focus is so much on EVERYTHING YOU MUST AVOID AT ALL COSTS that one forgets that it is just as important to being GROWING DEEP ROOTS and BUILDING A STRONG FOUNDATION on the Word of God. If the roots are DEEP and the foundations are STRONG, if genuine faith is there then exposure to a book that disagrees with the biblical world view won't really upset things. 

After all, we've spent the whole book arguing how adults are smart enough and wise enough to read secular books artfully and gain the benefits of reading even books that aren't biblical in nature. 

That being said, I do believe in age appropriateness. 

Few books combine an engaging story with an authentic (but not moralistic) portrayal of godly parents and growing faith. This is especially true for boys. 

I don't think this exists for girls either. 

Considering quality and content helps us choose good books. Most people simply want to get children reading. The prevailing philosophy is that is doesn’t matter what kids read as long as they are reading. But just as decent parents wouldn’t feed children a steady diet of junk food, we shouldn’t allow children to constantly consume books of poor quality and questionable value. Literary quality is good writing. Sentences flow smoothly, and the occasional phrase sings. Figurative language is fresh and apt, appropriate to both content and reader. Interesting and authentic characters make progress. They do and say things to propel the plot gradually toward a satisfying resolution. Worthwhile content promotes biblical values without preaching. Problems can be portrayed, but goodness and hope ought to illuminate any darkness. This is especially important in books for children, who must be guided to develop intellectual and spiritual maturity. Children’s books should shine with hopeful content and sing with excellent writing.

I'm not sure I agree with the first part. I still sense a lot of snobbery coming from the authors. I do like the second part.

Madeleine L’Engle wrote, “The only standard to be used in judging a children’s book is: Is it a good book? Is it good enough for me? Because if a children’s book is not good enough for all of us, it is not good enough for children.”

Tolkien wrote, “Books written entirely for children are poor even as children’s books.”

Lewis said, “I am almost inclined to set it up as a canon that a children’s story which is enjoyed only by children is a bad children’s story.”

I somewhat agree with each of these. Somewhat. But what appeals to children and what appeals to adults often differ. And that's not a bad thing. I do believe with all my heart that EVERY SINGLE book has the POTENTIAL to be someone's favorite book, the book that turns them onto reading, the book that awakens the magic that is READING.

Whenever parents or children pick up the Narnia series, we recommend beginning with The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and reading them in publication order. Editions released in recent years often package sets with The Magician’s Nephew as the first book because it tells how Narnia was created. But attempting to maintain chronological order is pointless because the events in The Horse and His Boy occur during the same time frame as The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

1000% YES.

Artful reading takes more time than scanning. But rather than stressing about not having time to read, we can think in terms of having freedom to read. Instead of wasting precious minutes on meaningless activities, we can remind ourselves of our ability to make conscious choices.

I suppose I can agree. We can certainly all be better stewards of our time.

We long to read good books again, and they can be enjoyed repeatedly with increasing delight. C. S. Lewis called the desire to reread “a good test for every reader of every kind of book.” But the desire to reread shouldn’t guide all our book choices. We should expand our horizons into new genres and authors. 

Agreed.

Some readers stick to books they view as safe. Books that won’t surprise or upset them. The kind found in church libraries or Christian bookstores turned coffee shops. While an increasing number of works within the Christian market show spiritual subtleties and literary skill, many others are overtly evangelistic and aesthetically poor. But readers in general shouldn’t limit themselves to banal books that never cause uncomfortable feelings or expand the spirit. These novels fail to acknowledge either life’s pain or its beauty. 

Again hating on Christian fiction. Assuming that Christian fiction falls into the "banal" and "poor" camp. The way they describe it is almost foreign to me. 

An artful reader may read dark fiction depicting the biblical reality of broken people living in a fallen world. Genuinely realistic fiction, however, should be pierced by glimmers of redemption’s light. Fiction can be realistic without being vulgar, evangelistic without being didactic, and beautiful without being esoteric.

So unlike what he said about Young Adult literature. Apparently if it's a dark adult book it's of value and if it's written for teens it's junk.

For Christians, the best form of censorship is self-imposed. It begins with awareness of how our literary experiences influence our thinking and behavior. If a work of literature is prompting us to immoral thoughts or actions, we either need to stop reading the book or exercise stronger control over its influence. Literary works are moral and immoral.

True about self-imposed censorship.

God gives us exactly 1,440 minutes each day, which we can neither extend nor reduce. We can’t prolong a relaxing day at the beach or shorten a painful day at the hospital. Each of us has a single finite life on this earth. How will you choose to spend each minute of what poet Mary Oliver calls “your one wild and precious life?”

Worth a thought.

The “true reader” receives literature by initially suspending personal thought processes and being open to the work’s art.

Don't disagree.

Receptive readers are alert to the work’s artistry. They notice beautiful language and experience the emotions of the characters. Just as tourists who rush through the National Gallery of Art receive little enjoyment from its many masterpieces, fast readers sacrifice pleasure. For most people, reading attentively requires slowing down. Slow reading at our leisure leads to fulfillment. Susan Hill describes slow reading as “deeply satisfying” and then contrasts reading speeds: Fast reading of a great novel will get us the plot. It will get us names, a shadowy idea of characters, a sketch of settings. It will not get us subtleties, small differentiations, depth of emotion and observation, multilayered human experience, the appreciation of simile and metaphor, any sense of context, any comparison with other novels, other writers. Fast reading will not get us cadence and complexities of style and language. It will not get us anything that enters not just the conscious mind but the unconscious. It will not allow the book to burrow down into our memory and become part of ourselves, the accumulation of knowledge and wisdom and vicarious experience which helps to form us as complete human beings. It will not develop our awareness or add to the sum of our knowledge and intelligence. Read parts of a newspaper quickly or an encyclopaedia entry, or a fast-food thriller, but do not insult yourself or a book which has been created with its author's painstakingly acquired skill and effort, by seeing how fast you can dispose of it.

I feel attacked. What I don't think some people comprehend is that it's a matter of NATURAL PACE. Some people naturally--organically--read at a faster pace. This doesn't mean they are "cheating" or "skimming" or "skipping"  or "scanning." DON'T ASSUME THAT A FAST READER is sacrificing meaning, comprehension, or pleasure by reading at their natural pace. 

I just can't understand why there's all this JUDGEMENT involved when it comes to reading fast. Seriously. Read for MEANING. But don't get caught up in TIMING it. Why can't people just get to read at their own pace. 

Not that I'm bitter. Okay. Maybe I'm flashing back to elementary school when you're reading in groups and are supposed to be following along while someone reads out loud and waiting for your turn. 

Even if a book isn’t immediately engaging, it’s a good idea to give it a chance to prove itself. Some people recommend setting aside an hour or ninety minutes for an initial reading. This allows the reader to become grounded in the story and acquainted with the characters. Also many people advocate a “50-page rule”: Read at least fifty pages to see if it captures your interest.

That would be awfully long for a chance!!! If I dedicate ninety minutes to a book it's almost a sure thing that I'll finish it or it would be a WASTE OF MY TIME. 

C. S. Lewis defines a prime example of a bad book according to the way it can (or perhaps better, cannot) be read: “The ideally bad book is the one of which a good reading is impossible. The words in which it exists will not bear close attention, and what they communicate offers you nothing unless you are prepared either for mere thrills or for flattering daydreams.” A bad book not only defies good reading, but it also offers little genuine pleasure. C. S. Lewis defines a good book as one that “permits and invites” good reading. He adds: “It is not enough that attentive and obedient reading should be barely possible if we try hard enough. The author must not leave us to do all the work. He must show, and pretty quickly, that his writing deserves, because it rewards, alert and disciplined reading.” Lewis believes the entire work should generate enjoyment. He writes, “Every episode, explanation, description, dialogue—ideally every sentence—must be pleasurable and interesting for its own sake.” Lewis wrote, “Unless you are really trying to look through the lens you cannot discover whether it is good or bad. We can never know that a piece of writing is bad unless we have begun by trying to read it as if it was very good and ended by discovering that we were paying the author an undeserved compliment.”

I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this. 

© 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