No time to read a book, poetry, or an article? But, why would anyone want to read the whole stuff anyway? You can still comment on it like an expert.
Back in my college days, I had come across some infinitely colourful characters. By ‘colourful’, I don’t mean their dress, hair, or even sunglasses. These guys and girls were a boisterous lot who liked to poke their fingers in every pie they could lay their hands on, and in some cases even if they couldn’t. Well, these colourful characters liked to discuss at length every topic they knew or pretended to know, with a certain supine attitude that was more for ‘effect’ than the natural smugness arising out of genuine knowledge of the subject.
In the beginning, I was totally in awe of the ‘extensive’ knowledge my fellow college mates seemed to have. “How is it that they have so much time to read and know about so many different and unconnected topics?” I would ask myself. In those days, I was a voracious reader and would read anything that was lying within my peripheral vision. So, over a reasonable period, I found out that these people were nothing but pretenders in the quest for knowledge. But I must admit they did have a talent for it.
Their modus operandi was simple and effective, they would master a few technical words which were related to the topic, understand which way the story moved, if at all it did, listen to what others had to say about the book, develop a slightly different opinion to what others had just for the effect, and then use this cocktail of critical inputs to confuse and confound other mortal beings. There was no way they would spend much time on a book, they would simply read the introduction, or the prologue, and then skim a few leaves to get the drift and then swiftly move on to the concluding part or the epilogue. By now they would have assimilated how the story had begun, how it had ended, and who were the main characters. What would have normally taken a person with average reading skills a day or two to complete the book; these people could achieve that in a mere 30 minutes. The thought that they only had acquired superficial knowledge infuriated me no end. These people were only echoing the thoughts or views of others without actually digging deep into the subject.
My contempt for the Machiavellian tendencies of my wily college mates and their less-than-honourable ways never diminished even with time. But, sometimes, life plays strange tricks on us and here I was face to face with a relic from my college days. This guy had done well in life, he had pursued a medical career vigorously which took him to France but was not vigorous enough to bring him back to India. We soon got into our old habit of discussing many things and arguing about them. During our exchange of information and ideas, I caught a glimpse of a book with a 'stare in the face' kind of title “How to Talk about Books You Haven’t Read? peeping out from the back pocket of his shoulder bag. True to my habit, I reached out for the book and with a few hastily murmured apologies straight away dug into the book for the remaining forty minutes or so. Suddenly, even I had mastered the art of reading a book the way my honourable college mates used to do. But, I am digressing from the point. A renowned professor of Literature from Paris has not only admitted to his follies but has even written a book about it. More importantly, he proclaims that one need not feel guilty about not reading a best seller when our contemporaries have read it.
The book is a best-seller. It is not only controversial, but it is also interesting, funny, enlightening and above all guilt-effacing.
I reproduce here some of the striking observations and confessions made by the ‘honourable’ Pierre Bayard:
“It’s possible to have a passionate conversation about a book that one has not read, including, perhaps especially, with someone else who has not read it.”
“I think the success shows that it has touched on a sensitive point.”
“To be able to talk with finesse about something one does not know is worth more than the universe of books.”
“A valid literary opinion can be formed by dipping into a work, hearing others talk about it or skimming through a review of it.”
“I often make references in lectures, meetings, reviews and conversations to works that I have not read — without being found out.”
“The discourse on books that have not been read places us at the heart of a creative process which leads us to their origin.”
“I am surprised because I hadn’t imagined how guilty non-readers feel. With this book, they can shake off their guilt without psychoanalysis, so it’s much cheaper.”
“When you meet an author of a book, speak well of it without entering into details.” Indeed, all the author needs to hear is that “one has loved what he has written.”
“Non-readers should talk about themselves, using the pretext of the book without dwelling on its contents. In this way, they are forced to tap their imagination and, in effect, invent their own book.”
“Students are told to read the book, then to fill out a form detailing everything they have read. It’s a linear approach that serves to enshrine books. People now come up to me to describe the cultural wounds they suffered at school. ‘You have to read all of Proust.’ They were traumatized.”
Talking about a book you have never read:
“Avoid precise details. Put aside rational thought. Let your subconscious express your relationship with the work.”
Reviewing a book you have never read:
“Put it in front of you, close your eyes and try to perceive what may interest you about it. Then write about yourself.”
Discussing a book with its author:
“Stick to generalities, remain ambiguous and say how much you like the work.”
There is not much to write about this book because there isn’t any plot, or a tumultuous beginning, nail-biting suspense, or even that surprisingly happy or sad ending. It has neither characters nor edge-of-the-seat action. But what the author has to offer, courtesy of his previous experiaences will touch us in many ways… some good, some bad, but none that we can ignore. While reading this book we are bound to feel that this man was dishonest in his work to a certain degree. He has based on his own confessions, taken his audience for a ride. He is guilty of amaking expert comments or recommendations without actually reading the works of other authors. But he is also brutally honest while expressing his own bloopers. How many people are honest enough to own up to their mistakes publicly, and put them in writing for posterity?
This is one review where I have been forced to reproduce the quotes, something I normally detest, for the simple reason that they are not only self-explanatory but also capture the true essence of what the author has in mind, a mind no other person could have explained better, certainly not me. However, I leave it to your better judgment to ponder and decide whether Mr. Bayard’s thinking is justified or flawed. But I dare say he has shocked the literary world, made the reader laugh… and think!
Now, I know why my motley group of college mates did so well post-college.