Monday 2 April 2018

A DEFENSE OF REREADING BOOKS, by Sean M. Brooks


The theme of this essay is the puzzling and saddening fact that even most people who are readers are simply not interested in rereading even the most excellent stories and novels.  For the purposes of this article I'm largely focusing on science fiction and the works of Poul Anderson.

I was inspired to write this article by discussions I had with a good friend I'll call "J.B."  She noticed how I was rereading Poul Anderson's AGENT OF THE TERRAN EMPIRE.  I told J.B . it was the third or fourth time I was reading that collection (or even more than four times).  She was surprised and puzzled over why I would read any book more than once.  And expressed the same bafflement at an earlier time when I told her I was reading S.M. Stirling's THE PESHAWAR LANCERS a third time.

J.B. thought that once a book has been read there was no reason to reread it because you would know what the book was about, or remember the basic plot of the story. There would be no surprise or mystery left in the book.  I disagreed and tried to explain to her the various reasons why good books, such as the works of Poul Anderson, richly deserve to be reread many times.

I told J.B. that a skillful author can write so strikingly and beautifully that the pleasure to be gained from rereading such a book more than makes up for any lack of mystery.  I argued (at greater length here, in writing) that a good writer can develop plots, strikingly portray characters we love, hate, admire, or have only contempt for, etc.  A good writer makes us CARE about the characters he created.  I believe that alone explains why some stories deserve to be reread over and over.

There are other reasons why excellent novels and stories are rightly reread.  A good writer not only creates interesting characters, he paints in fascinating backgrounds and scenarios.  He gives us color and drama and small fascinating details.  I  argue that a good, well written story can be compared, in some ways, to masterful paintings.

What I wrote above naturally leads to a point I have seen other readers making.  I have seen complaints that authors such as J.R.R. Tolkien and Poul Anderson gives us too much background and detail in their stories. That these writers slowed down the ACTION in their stories when they allegedly "digress"  into poetry (a particular complaint made against Tolkien).  I disagree and declare that it's precisely such things which helps to make these stories permanently worth rereading.

I have nothing against action and adventure in stories and novels.  When done well they make such stories exciting and pleasurable to read.  One example of that being the Barsoom novels of Edgar Rice Burroughs. But it is my belief that stories which also have ideas and reflections about mankind, history, society, philosophy, etc., gives them the solidity and depth needed to justify reading them over and over through generations and centuries.  The greatest of such masterpieces passes into the general use of mankind by being translated into many languages (as has happened to many of the works of Poul Anderson).

Getting back to an earlier point I made, an author can write so well that the ideas, symbols, metaphors, allusions, etc., that he uses evokes or brings up in our minds images which makes us wish to read on.  And this is true both of books read for the first time and for stories reread many times.

One way an author like Poul Anderson tries to attract the attention of new readers is by the skillful writing of opening paragraphs to his stories.  These texts use images, ideas, and symbols so deftly and colorfully that at least some readers will want to continue reading, to find out what happened in the story.  In addition, such texts are simply a pleasure to read multiple times.

Here I will quote from one of Anderson's stories an example of a skillfully written and suggestively evocative opening paragraph.  The first paragraph of Chapter I of  "Hunters of the Sky Cave" (AGENT OF THE TERRAN EMPIRE, Gregg Press, 1979. AT page 95).   At my request J.B. read this text as part of my effort to convince her that some books are deserving of being read more than once.
    'It pleased Ruethen of the Long Hand to give a feast and ball at the Crystal Moon for his enemies. He knew they must come.  Pride of race had slipped from Terra, while the need to appear well-bred and sophisticated had waxed correspondingly.  The fact that spaceships prowled and fought fifty light years beyond Antares made it all the more impossible a gaucherie to refuse an invitation from the Merseian representative.  Besides, one could feel delightfully wicked and ever so delicately in danger.'
The text quoted above is only one of the many, many passages in the works of Poul Anderson which has stayed in my mind because of their beauty, elegance, allusiveness, etc.  From time to time I like to browse through some of his stories to reread such texts because I wanted to enjoy their beauty.  It does not matter how many times I have read them.

The text quoted from Chapter I of HUNTERS OF THE SKY CAVE is an excellent example of a "teaser" paragraph designed to entice readers to ask questions about what they had read and become curious enough to read further.  Questions like this: who was Ruethen and why was he subtly mocking his enemies by hosting a feast and ball for them?  Why were spaceships prowling and fighting fifty light years beyond Antares, etc.?

I urge people who believe that a book only needs to be read only once to consider the proposition that multiple readings of excellent stories can bring out implications and shades of meaning easily missed in a first reading. A second and third reading often brings out ideas and details overlooked the first time a book is read.  And some readers are so passionately devoted to certain authors and their works that these stories will be read many times throughout their lives.


10 comments:

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

This blog celebrates rereading.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul and Ketlan!

Paul, absolutely! And because of you alone I have reread many of Poul Anderson's works in the past five years.

I also hope other readers will comment about my article, and I would not object to them disagreeing with me! I enjoy getting feedback.

Ketlan, many thanks for the trouble you have taken with my articles!

Sean

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

I'm currently rereading "The Game of Glory" in the Gregg Press edition of FLANDRY OF TERRA (1979), and I'm trying to pay more attention to those "small fascinating details." One I noticed was in Section I, as the Marine named Thomas Umbolu was dying of his wound, "The wide lips SHINNED back from shining teeth" (my emphasis). I was puzzled and at first thought this was a typo for "SKINNED back," which seemed more natural. But when I looked up the same passage in my copy of the 1965 Chilton Books edition of FLANDRY OF TERRA, "shinned" was used there as well. Was this a neologism coined by Poul Anderson? In any case, it's a good example of the "small fascinating details" to be found in his works.

I daresay this kind of detailed pondering of details is an example of fan boys being "dreadfully serious and constructive." Hint to readers, who first said that? (Smiles)

Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Sean,
In any case, I find that, having read a Technic History or Time Patrol story a while ago, I have forgotten most of the plot details. They wait to be rediscovered.
Paul.

Ketlan said...

'Ketlan, many thanks for the trouble you have taken with my articles!'

No problem, Sean.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul and Ketlan!

Paul: I agree! I too tend to forget many details in a story. Or to overlook them.

"The Game of Glory" was copyrighted in 1957, but is still remarkably "undated" in many ways (aside from such things as the lack of cell phones). I greatly appreciated this lack of "datedness," in particular.

Ketlan: again, thanks!

Sean

S.M. Stirling said...

Absolute agreement -- stories like Poul's can, and should be read on many levels. You always discover something new, or a new slant on something old, every time you reread them.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Dear Mr. Stirling,

I'm naturally glad you agreed with my argument! And I agree with you saying about the many levels and discoveries to be found in Anderson's works. And I include many of your books as well. This article has been my attempt to push back against the demoralizing idea that books only need to be read only once. Statements which had left me feeling nonplussed in the past.

Sean

Nicholas D. Rosen said...

Kaor, Sean!

Well said, and since your piece is already well commented upon, I really have nothing of importance to add.

Best Regards,
Nicholas

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Nicholas!

And I still appreciated your comment! Thanks!

Truthfully, I think this article could have used some further editing. But, since this is now a finished text, better to leave it as written.

Sean