I didn't realize it after plodding through Joseph Conrad's Lord Jim."" I didn't understand it while pushing through D.H. Lawrence's ""The Rainbow."" It didn't even stick after getting through Mary Gaitskill's ""Veronica."" Then, after a painful reading of Steinbeck's ""East of Eden,"" it finally hit me: I don't have to read books I don't enjoy.
This may seem obvious to some, but for others it may come as a revelation, like it did for me.
As college students, we're constantly told to read to expand our intellectual horizons. As we read, we're supposed to analyze, look for themes and ponder life's great questions. We're given checklists of must-read books and told to read the classics to build our ""book repertoire.""
There's nothing wrong with reading a book because it's intellectually stimulating or a classic. In fact, this is a great reason to read a book. There are some wonderful books I never would have read if they hadn't appeared on one of those ""greatest novels of all time"" lists. However, sometimes those lists led me down dark and dangerous paths. For instance, one list, titled ""Books to read before college,"" brought me to ""Lord Jim."" Reading it was like sitting in a lecture hall for hours on end while an incomprehensible professor droned on and on. I kept telling myself to just push through it because it was a classic, and the payoff was sure to come. Unfortunately, it never did, and looking back, it seems like a waste of time. Instead of reading ""Lord Jim,"" I could have been discovering a book I actually enjoyed.
In the past, I always felt guilty for re-reading a favorite novel or reading a book just for pleasure, like ""Memoirs of a Geisha."" I couldn't help feeling I should be reading something lofty and new, like ""War and Peace."" Finally, after years of forcing myself to plow through tedious books in and out of class, I came to a conclusion: Reading should primarily be for pleasure. There are just too many wonderful books in this world, and life is just too short to spend it reading painfully dull books.
To help follow through with my new philosophy, I've decided it's okay to not finish a book - an idea I would have rarely considered before. If I'm just not feeling a book, I'll put it back on the shelf instead of forcing myself to read it. For instance, I recently picked up ""Gravity's Rainbow"" and, despite my best efforts, I couldn't get into it. It felt surprisingly liberating to put it away.
I've also taken a private vow not to read certain books, though no English major like myself should leave college without reading them. ""Moby Dick"" tops this list. The thought of reading about ships and whale harpooning as an allegory for good and evil repels me. Instead, I'll use the hours and hours I would have spent reading it to indulge in a true pleasure: reading ""Pride and Prejudice"" for the fifth time. Life is just too short for anything else.
Made it to the end of Anna's column? That's good, as long as you share her novel philosophy. E-mail her to praise or amend her idea at akwilliams1@wisc.edu.
