Welcome

I'm Stephen Schenkenberg, an editor, writer, and digital communicator living in St. Louis, MO.

Understandable Questions
Q. Wait, who are you? (A)
Q. What have you written? (A)
Q. What books have you edited? (A)
Q. What are you reading? (A)
Q. What wines are you drinking? (A)
Q. What kind of stuff do you like? (A)
Q. What technology do you use? (A)
Q. What websites do you like? (A)
Q. What's that William Gass site you run? (A)
Q. Do you also have a Tumblelog? (A)

Search
I'm Also Here
Nightstand
« An LV at Flickr | Main | Wilson Working Fast »
Friday
10Nov2006

Zadie on Wallace, Readers as Amateur Musicians

Zadie Smith, author of my favorite novel of 2005, just appeared on Bookworm. Early on in the conversation, Smith said that she's been thinking a lot about “what good reading involves," a subject she'll be lecturing about soon.

Smith: I think of reading as a skill and an art. And if you read badly –- I always think a good example -- I’ve been trying to write this essay on [David] Foster Wallace and when you first read Foster Wallace, or when critics read him, they give him back the thing that they think they see, which is some smart aleck with smart language, but [they have] no idea of what this --

Silverblatt: Yes, that he’s trying to determine what truth is. What can be said truly.

Smith: Exactly. An incredible ethicist and serious moral writer. But there’s a kind of superficial layer of him, which if you can’t be bothered to think any deeper, it just seems, 'Here’s some wise guy, with his wiseass stories.' And that’s not true. But the problem with readers, the idea we’ve been given of reading is that the model of a reader is the person watching a film, or watching television. So the greatest principal is, 'I should sit here and be entertained.' And the more classical model is the idea of a reader as an amateur musician. An amateur musician who sits at the piano, has a piece of music, which is the work, made by somebody they don’t know who they probably couldn’t comprehend entirely, and they have to use their skills to play this piece of music. The greater the skill, the greater the gift that you give the artist and the artist gives you. That’s an incredibly unfashionable idea of reading. And yet when you practice reading, and you work at a text, it can only give you what you put into it. It’s an old moral, but it’s completely true.

Reader Comments (3)

lazy writing makes bad reading, not vice versa.

it's the author's job to elucidate, not the reader's job to decipher code.
November 13, 2006 | Unregistered Commenterhgibson
"it's the author's job to elucidate, not the reader's job to decipher code."

Surely the author and the reader should meet somewhere in the middle, at least in the realm of serious fiction. There's nothing wrong with reading something easy, where everything is explicit and there's nothing below the surface - that's what airport novels are for. But I think you'd have to agree that there's also plenty of difficult fiction that succeeds in expressing something of real depth.
November 13, 2006 | Unregistered Commenterjohn s
re: dfwhis non-fiction clearly shows depth,but as to whether his fiction demonstrates same,i propose an experiment in whichpassages are randomly generatedand altered by computer and givento a reader unfamiliar with his work.could a reader find same satisfaction with these prepared texts?if so, dfw's contribution is superficial at best.
November 20, 2006 | Unregistered Commenterfuturist

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>