Reading Response Prompts
 

These prompts are meant to get you thinking about what you have read, and to help focus your thoughts for your reading responses. You can respond to any one of them, or, if you have another idea you would rather explore, you are free to write about that instead. Do not, however, attempt to answer multiple prompts for any assignment. If you choose to pursue an idea of your own or are not writing a response that day, you should still spend at least a few minutes thinking about each of the prompts in preparation for class. For more information, review the listserv assignment.


Alberto Manguel, A History of Reading 108-47, 186-235, 278-89

Think about the ways the idea of genre affects your reading. Officially in this course we are reading examples of many kinds of literature: poetry, drama, fiction, non-fiction. However, those categories are broad, and within them we are reading odes, dramatic monologues, a Shakespearean tragedy, two novels, a cultural history (according to the back of A History of Reading, though in my view Manguel’s style is more personal and essayistic than that dry term implies), a collection of lectures published as essays, and various works of literary criticism. Still too broad? Then you can say we are reading the irregular ode, two postmodern novels (one rooted in historical fantasy, the other in pastiche), and so on. On the other hand, we are not reading epic poetry, haiku, a mystery novel, a graphic novel, or a romance novel (in the contemporary, breathless, heaving-bosom sense). Why? To what extent do genres serve a purpose in our reading? To what extent does the idea of genre distort the experience of reading?

Manguel describes the way that the ability to read means power, and recounts how even as books became more common, more available, and more affordable, those who already have the means to read attempt to restrict or control it and so confine power to the hands of those who already have it. Authorities frequently attempt to control what is read, whether to quash dissent or to preserve morality. When the attempt to control who reads or what is read fails, authorities turn their attention to what interpretations are permissible. This seems to me a much more subtle form of control, though I am not sure whether it can wielded reliably. How effective do you think these attempts are? What evidence do you see in the world today that they continue?

Conversely, consider playing devil’s advocate to Manguel for a moment: does increased literacy, more available books, more common readers (meaning amateurs, not those like critics or college professors who are paid to read) promote liberty, equality, and fraternity? Perhaps some of you think you might teach someday — do you hope to improve your students’ lives, even contribute to a better world? Does reading have that power?

 
|
|
|