
Ten years ago, I started reading Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow. I was enjoying the book. (I especially like the bit about the dodos.) But something happened when I got to page 120. I got distracted. (Brain cramp?) One day though, I'll get back to reading the remaining 640 pages.
So have I read Gravity's Rainbow? I'd say that I haven't read it. But I have read 15% of it. Does that count for anything?
Another thought occurred to me as I read Davis' Scholarly Kitchen piece: what does your typical academic consider to be reading? In order to read a paper, do you just need to read all the words in the article and examine the figures? What if there are mathematical formulae? Is it sufficient to glance at the formulae, or should you try to work from equation 1 to equation N along with the author? Have you read an article if you've read the abstract, introduction, and conclusions only? If we take a liberal view and say that an article has been read if one gathers as much as one needs from the text, then I've already read half-a-dozen articles today and will likely "read" a half-dozen more before my "academic work day" ends. But if I need to have read all the words in these articles, then I've read precisely zero articles.
What is the quanta of reading?
No comments:
Post a Comment