I am a functioning illiterate. I am reminded of this every time I
visit a friend's idyllic island holiday home in Kerala. The
bookshelves seem like accusatory question marks, reminding me of
several authors I've resolved to read but never get around to:
Naguib Mahfouz's Cairo Trilogy stares accusingly back at me, as do
several of Mario Vargas Llosa's novels.
If I rate poorly as a wanna- be multiculturalist, I do just as
badly on such stalwarts of English literature as Trollope and the
Brontës.
The problem is not that I don't read, but that I re-read the same
books over and over again. The list of books I've read three times
or more includes Gabriel Garca Márquez's Love in the Time of
Cholera , Virginia Woolf's A Room of One's Own and a
collection of her letters, Congenial Spirits, a heap of books
by Salman Rushdie, Michael Ondaatje and V.S. Naipaul, Jan Morris's
Destinations, and Joan Didion's White Album. No wonder
when I log on to Amazon, I get a message saying that the website has
no recommendations for me; in effect there is no order to my reading
disorder.
Why I remain a mostly unrepentant serial re-reader is a little
easier to answer. When I was young and impressionable, I read a
quote of Vladimir Nabokov's that you can never read a novel, you can
only re-read it. I understood that to mean that we can only fully
appreciate a good book by reading it twice. The first time, we are
swept along so fast by the undertow of narrative that it leaves us
unable to savour the beauty of the writing. Márquez's Love in the
Time of Cholera still exerts a hypnotic hold on me: one recent
morning, I was 25 pages into it and ended up late for work.
Yet my addiction to P.G. Wodehouse seems mild in comparison with
New Yorker film critic Anthony Lane, who recently confessed to
having re-read a short story by Wodehouse about 200 times.
Re-reading is also a way of reassessing. Like so much of Virginia
Woolf, I found To the Lighthouse hard going on first reading.
On a subse- quent re-reading of the sections that revolve around Mrs
Ramsay, a character based on Woolf's mother, I found the book moving
and the dinner party scene one of the best in literature. And I may
have taken the underlying message of A Room of One's Own a
little more literally than Woolf intended: 10 years ago I bought an
inexpensive flat in Delhi, largely because I thought access to the
city's libraries and its lower cost of living might make it easier
to write a book there than in New York, where I was living at the
time. I never wrote the book, though.
I return to certain books depending on the mood I am in.
Wodehouse's wordplay and inspired silliness have kept me company
through the long flights home occasioned by a parent's illness. Joan
Didion's essays, especially Goodbye to All That, her partly
elegiac, partly caustic farewell to New York when she moved to
California a couple of decades ago, help me make sense of the
occasional dislocation that moving - and moving on - prompts.
Nevertheless, re-reading books often seems an unseemly
indulgence. At lunch last weekend, I found one friend who took the
view that with so much to read and so little time, she could not
justify reading a book again. Her husband felt just the opposite. We
listen to CDs over and over again when we like them, he responded.
Why not books?
He has a point, although his bias is in part because he is
writing a novel. Rushdie described readers who want to become
writers as people searching for that door that leads them to the
other side of the page. To me this quest has often felt more like
one of those scenes in a film when inmates of a jail keep
alternately tapping and scratching at a wall, looking for the
shortest way out. I know that I re-read certain writers - V.S.
Naipaul, Jan Morris, Tom Wolfe's non- fiction - because I want to
learn from their example. Yet it can have a paralytic effect:
worship too devoutly at the altar of literary deities, and nothing
you write seems good enough.
In this age of banal internet chat and unreal doses of reality
TV, the task of producing a book that people will read, let alone
re-read, is harder than ever. I am reminded of the American author
Jonathan Franzen's essay on the fate of the American novel in the
late 1990s. He receives a letter from the author Don DeLillo who
throws out this lifeline: "If the social novel lives, but only
barely, surviving in the cracks and ruts of culture, maybe it will
be taken more seriously as an endangered spectacle. A reduced
context, but a more intense one."
Re-reading books, or engaging more seriously with our favourite
writers, is one way of insulating our- selves from the heavy drone
of pop culture around us.
rahul.jacob@ft.com
Harry Eyres' column returns next week |