How To Read a Book

With half a million copies in print, How to Read a Book is the best and most successful guide to reading comprehension for the general reader, completely rewritten and updated with new material. A CNN Book of the Week: “Explains not just why we should read books, but how we should read them. It's masterfully done.” –Farheed Zakaria Originally published in 1940, this book is a rare phenomenon, a living classic that introduces and elucidates the various levels of reading and how to achieve them—from elementary reading, through systematic skimming and inspectional reading, to speed reading. Readers will learn when and how to “judge a book by its cover,” and also how to X-ray it, read critically, and extract the author’s message from the text. Also included is instruction in the different techniques that work best for reading particular genres, such as practical books, imaginative literature, plays, poetry, history, science and mathematics, philosophy and social science works. Finally, the authors offer a recommended reading list and supply reading tests you can use measure your own progress in reading skills, comprehension, and speed.

How to Read a Book, originally published in 1940, has become a rare phenomenon, a living classic. It is the best and most successful guide to reading comprehension for the general reader. And now it has been completely rewritten and updated. You are told about the various levels of reading and how to achieve them – from elementary reading, through systematic skimming and inspectional reading, to speed reading, you learn how to pigeonhole a book, X-ray it, extract the author's message, criticize. You are taught the different reading techniques for reading practical books, imaginative literature, plays, poetry, history, science and mathematics, philosophy and social science. Finally, the authors offer a recommended reading list and supply reading tests whereby you can measure your own progress in reading skills, comprehension and speed. How do you read a book? Look at the cover, probably glance at the blurb; run your eye down the table of contents, perhaps; possibly rifle through the book... then plunge right in into Chapter One. Right? Wrong! According to Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren, the authors of How to Read a Book. According to them, this is only the first level of reading, called “Elementary” reading: and this is the only level the majority of readers in this world have reached. They posit three more levels: “Inspectional”, “Analytical” and “Syntopic”, each one more advanced than the previous. The major portion of the book is devoted to analytic reading, followed by brief exposition on the syntopic. It is the aim of the authors to make each reader of this tome into an analytic reader at least, if not a syntopic one: it is my opinion that they only succeed partially, but let’s go into that after analysing each of the levels as defined by the authors. Elementary reading we have already seen. In inspectional reading, you first skim the book as a whole; give it a “once-over”, as it is. The authors, ever practical, suggest six steps to do this – most of them self-evident and what any serious reader usually does with an expository book (this book is mostly about reading expository material and of limited value in reading literature and poetry, but more about that later). The steps are: 1. Read the title and the preface 2. Study the table of contents 3. Check the index 4. Read the blurb 5. Look at the main chapters 6. Skim the book, reading it here and there Next, read the book through fast, without getting stuck at the difficult places. If the book deserves our serious attention, we can come back to those difficult places in our next reading. The advantage of this “rapid-fire” approach is that we do not waste time on a book which deserves only a superficial reading. In the authors’ own words: “Every book should be read no more slowly than it deserves, and no more quickly than you can read it with satisfaction and comprehension.” Analytical Reading The next level, analytical reading, requires the reader to be demanding: the more you demand, the more you can extract out of a book. To do this, one has to ask four questions: 1. What is the book about, as a whole? 2. What is being said in detail, and how? 3. Is the book true, in whole or part? 4. What of it? How ask these four questions is explained in detail, in the remaining part of the book. Analytical reading has three stages. The first one is mainly concerned with classifying the book, and understanding its aim and structure. To do this, the authors suggest four rules. 1. You must know what kind of book you are reading, and you should know as early in the process as possible, preferably before you begin to read. 2. State the unity of the whole book in a single sentence, or at most a few sentences (a short paragraph). 3. Set forth the major parts of the book, and show how these are organised into a whole, by being ordered to one another and to the unity of the whole. 4. Find out what the author’s problems were. The first rule classifies (“pigeonholes”) the book, by affixing it to a category, genre, etc.: the second is used to create a précis: the third expands the précis into an outline, thus revealing the underlying structure (“X-Raying” the book, as the authors name it) and the fourth defines the purpose of the book. The author presumably wrote it for a reason: he had some questions at the beginning, which he has presumably tried to answer through the book. The reader has to find out what these questions are. If the first stage of analytical reading is related to the what , the second is related to the how ; how has the author attempted to solve the problem with which he started out. For this stage also, Adler and Van Doren proposes four rules. 1. Come to terms with the author by interpreting his key words. 2. Grasp the author’s leading propositions by dealing with his most important sentences. 3. Know the author’s arguments by finding them in, or constructing them out of, sequences of sentences. 4. Determine which of his problems the author has solved, and which he has not: and as to the latter, decide which the author knew he had failed to solve. The argument here that any author, putting forth an argument, will use certain key words and terms (for example “natural selection” and “evolution” by Darwin in The Origin of Species). It is the reader’s duty to come to terms with the author, so that he does not misinterpret the author’s intentions by misreading the terms. Then on, it is an exercise in logic by understanding the propositions and arguments. This is not as difficult as it looks: in fact, we do it all the time, even though the exact logical terms may be unfamiliar to us. A proposition is nothing but the meaning contained within a declarative sentence: and arguments what the author uses to prove the truth of the proposition. The fourth step is a little more difficult for the lay reader, and it will only come through practice. One needs to find out which of the problems presented the author had been able to solve: and if he had been unable to solve some, whether he knew he had failed or not. At this point of time, it is not important whether the reader agrees with the author. That comes later. Here, we are talking about the author’s own internal logic, and how far he has been able to present his arguments consistently in light of it, and how far he has been in successfully concluding his arguments. In the third stage of analytical reading, the reader, for the first time, starts to apply his critical senses and begins to agree or disagree with the author. Here according to the authors of the current book, the reader has to follow certain etiquette, captured in the following three rules: 1. Do not begin criticism until one has completed the outline (first stage) and interpretation (second stage). Then one can agree, disagree or suspend judgement. 2. Do not disagree disputatiously or contentiously. Or in plain words, unless one can present factual evidence acceptable at least to oneself, disagreement with an author based on emotional prejudice should be avoided (easier said than done!). 3. Demonstrate that one knows the difference between knowledge and mere personal opinion by presenting good reasons for any critical judgement one makes. The authors also provide special criteria for criticism: (1) show where the author is uninformed, (2) show where he is misinformed, (3) show where his illogical and (4) show where his analysis is incomplete. Syntopic Reading This is the fourth (and most advanced) level of reading, according to Adler and Van Doren – though I’d perhaps disagree. Here, the reader is engaged in researching books about one basic idea. For example, if you want to read up on, say evolution, you must first understand what the significant books are on the subject: then you must proceed to read them, and summarise the arguments, both pro and con, preferably remaining objective throughout. Phew! Not a very easy task. Don’t worry, the authors give step-by-step instructions for this level also. First, create a bibliography of the subject and inspect all of the books to ascertain which are the relevant ones: then, do the following: 1. Do inspectional reading of the selected book to choose the passages which are most relevant to the subject at hand; 2. Establish a neutral terminology which is applicable to all the authors, so that all of them can be brought to the same terms; 3. Establish a set of neutral propositions, by framing a set of questions which all the authors can be seen as answering; 4. Range the answers on both sides of the issue. The issue may not always explicitly exist, and may have to be constructed by interpretation of the authors’ views (for example, in the case of evolutionary theory, “Intelligent Design” is a form of creationism even though the trappings of evolutionary theory are used); 5. Analyse the discussion by ordering the issues to throw maximum light on the subject. The authors stress the need for dialectical objectivity throughout; that is, the reader is only expected to arrange and present the arguments so as to present an ordered discussion without taking sides. So the aim of syntopical reading is to “clear away the deadwood and prepare the way for an original thinker to make a breakthrough”. *** Whoever has read through this review so far would be asking (him/her)self: “But that’s applicable to expository books, where the main aim is the dissemination of information? What about fiction? What about poetry? What about drama?” Well, the authors extend their methodology to all kinds of books, but according to me, it falls flat. All said and done, the methodology works only for expository works. And that is its main problem. This book is not about literary theory or criticism: nor is it about literature appreciation. It is a self-help book on the lines of those on time management, attending interviews, etc. It outlines a methodology, the diligent following of which will guarantee results, according to its authors. It well may, for the major part of the book devoted to analytical reading gave me some insights on how to tackle books on difficult subjects like philosophy and political theory (the two stars are for that). But the book is extremely boring, and the authors’ insistence on applying their favourite methodology to all sorts of books was stretching things a bit (moreover, it takes all the fun out of reading!). And syntopic reading may make sense to an undergraduate preparing a dissertation, but is of little use to anybody else. If anyone wants to read this book, I would recommend an inspectional reading concentrating mainly on the methodology of analytical reading only. The other parts are not worth the time spent on it. I purchased a copy, but the book seems to be available free on the net (no idea about copyright issues!), so go ahead and try it if you want. Statutory warning: boredom ahead. literary-craft

Numerous published works of American educator and philosopher Mortimer Jerome Adler include How to Read a Book (1940) and The Conditions of Philosophy (1965). This popular author worked with thought of Aristotle and Saint Thomas Aquinas. He lived for the longest stretches in cities of New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and San Mateo. He worked for Columbia University, the University of Chicago, Encyclopædia Britannica, and own institute for philosophical research. Born to Jewish immigrants, he dropped out school at 14 years of age in 1917 to a copy boy for the New York Sun with the ultimate aspiration to a journalist. Adler quickly returned to school to take writing classes at night and discovered the works of Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and other men, whom he came to call heroes. He went to study at Columbia University and contributed to the student literary magazine, The Morningside, (a poem "Choice" in 1922 when Charles A. Wagner was editor-in-chief and Whittaker Chambers an associate editor). Though he failed to pass the required swimming test for a bachelor's degree (a matter that was rectified when Columbia gave him an honorary degree in 1983), he stayed at the university and eventually received an instructorship and finally a doctorate in psychology. While at Columbia University, Adler wrote his first book: Dialectic, published in 1927. In 1930 Robert Hutchins, the newly appointed president of the University of Chicago, whom Adler had befriended some years earlier, arranged for Chicago’s law school to hire him as a professor of the philosophy of law; the philosophers at Chicago (who included James H. Tufts, E.A. Burtt, and George H. Mead) had "entertained grave doubts as to Mr. Adler's competence in the field [of philosophy]" and resisted Adler's appointment to the University's Department of Philosophy. Adler was the first "non-lawyer" to join the law school faculty. Adler also taught philosophy to business executives at the Aspen Institute. Adler and Hutchins went on to found the Great Books of the Western World program and the Great Books Foundation. Adler founded and served as director of the Institute for Philosophical Research in 1952. He also served on the Board of Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica since its inception in 1949, and succeeded Hutchins as its chairman from 1974. As the director of editorial planning for the fifteenth edition of Britannica from 1965, he was instrumental in the major reorganization of knowledge embodied in that edition. He introduced the Paideia Proposal which resulted in his founding the Paideia Program, a grade-school curriculum centered around guided reading and discussion of difficult works (as judged for each grade). With Max Weismann, he founded The Center for the Study of The Great Ideas. Adler long strove to bring philosophy to the masses, and some of his works (such as How to Read a Book) became popular bestsellers. He was also an advocate of economic democracy and wrote an influential preface to Louis Kelso's The Capitalist Manifesto. Adler was often aided in his thinking and writing by Arthur Rubin, an old friend from his Columbia undergraduate days. In his own words: Unlike many of my contemporaries, I never write books for my fellow professors to read. I have no interest in the academic audience at all. I'm interested in Joe Doakes. A general audience can read any book I write—and they do. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortimer...

"A mind not agitated by good questions cannot appreciate the significance of even the best answers." Probably like the majority, I picked up this book because of the sheer curiosity the title sparkled in me when I first noticed it. I wasn't quite sure whether this was a book of academic nature, or solely aimed at professionals in education, but still couldn't keep myself away from giving a little try. A short glance at the first chapter put my mind at ease, convincing me that most of the content is aimed at the average reader, not the specialist educator. That being said, the book is mainly concerned about reading expository work, or 'Reading for understanding' rather than 'Reading for information.' However, there's several chapters on reading non-expository as well, though not diving in too much detail. The content is well structured, and takes the reader through four levels of reading (with each having many sub-levels). The latter two levels are somewhat complicated and a little too technical, but it is possible to select the parts which pique your interest. A good, an important read if you have the time and patience for it. Following is an extract from a chapter on Reading Fiction . I know it's long, but couldn't resist sharing. "The great majority of books that are read are stories of one kind or another. People who cannot read listen to stories. We even make them up for ourselves. Fiction seems to be a necessity for human beings. Why is this? One reason why fiction is a human necessity is that it satisfies many unconscious as well as conscious needs. It would be important if it only touched the conscious mind, as expository writing does. But fiction is important, too, because it also touches the unconscious. On the simplest level-and a discussion of this subject could be very complex-we like or dislike certain kinds of people more than others, without always being sure why. If, in a novel, such people are rewarded or punished, we may have stronger feelings, either pro or con, about the book than it merits artistically. For example, we are often pleased when a character in a novel inherits money, or otherwise comes into good fortune. However, this tends to be true only if the character is "sympathetic"-meaning that we can identify with him or her. We do not admit to ourselves that we would like to inherit money, we merely say that we like the book. Perhaps we would like all to love more richly than we do. Many novels are about love - most are, perhaps - and it gives us pleasure to identify with the loving characters. They are free, and we are not. But we may not want to admit this; for to do so might make us feel, consciously, that our own loves are inadequate. Again, almost everyone has some unconscious sadism and masochism in his makeup. These are often satisfied in novels, where we can identify with either the conqueror or victim, or even with both. In each case, we are prone to say simply that we like "that kind of book" - without specifying or really knowing why. Finally, we suspect that life as we know it is unjust. Why do good people suffer, and bad ones prosper? We do not know, we cannot know, but the fact causes great anxiety in everyone. In stories, this chaotic and unpleasant situation is adjusted, and that is extremely satisfying to us. In stories - in novels and narrative poems and plays - justice usually does exist. People get what they deserve; the author, who is like a god to his characters, sees to it that they are rewarded or punished according to their true merit. In a good story, in a satisfying one, this is usually so, at least. One of the most irritating things about a bad story is that the people in it seem to be punished or rewarded with no rhyme or reason. The great storyteller makes no mistakes. He is able to convince us that justice - poetic justice, we call it - has been done. This is true even of high tragedy. There, terrible things happen to good men, but we see that the hero, even if he does nt wholly deserve his fat, at least comes to understand it. And we have a profound desire to share his understanding. If we only knew - then we could withstand whatever the world has in store for us. "I Want to Know Why" is the title of a story by Sherwood Anderson. It could be the title of many stories. The tragic hero does learn why, though often, of course, only after the ruin of his life. We can share his insight without sharing his suffering. Thus, in criticizing fiction we must be careful to distinguish those books that satisfy our own particular unconscious needs - the ones that make us say, "I like this book, although I don't really know why" - from those that satisfy the deep unconscious needs of almost everybody. The latter are undoubtedly the great stories, the ones that live on and on for generations and centuries. As long as man is man, they will go on satisfying him, giving him something that he needs to have - a belief in justice and understanding and the allaying of anxiety. We do not know, we cannot be sure, that the real world is good. But the world of a great story is somehow good. We want to live there as often and as long as we can."

Who This Book is (not) For It focuses mainly on reading expositional, rather than imaginative material. It was written in 1940, and revised in 1972, though it looks and feels more like a 40s book. I read it in the hope of becoming a more analytical reader who could go on to write more coherent, concise, and original reviews. It didn’t help. A much more relevant book is How to Read Literature Like a Professor, which I've reviewed HERE. This may once have been a good book. Had I read it as an undergraduate, I may even have found bits of it slightly useful. As a middle-aged fiction reader in the 21st century, I found it infuriating, boring, and mostly irrelevant. Types of Reading There are four levels of reading: 1. Elementary (learning to decode the symbols). 2. Inspectional (time-limited skimming). 3. Analytical. 4. Syntopical (comparing and drawing conclusions). I used Inspectional for most of the book - because my patience and interest were severely, and increasingly, limited. It focuses mainly on analytical reading of non-fiction: knowing what sort of book it is, having an idea of the content and structure etc. Its own structure is very poor. For example, four rules of analytical reading are spread across two chapters, and only listed together at the end of the second. Then, in the next chapter, you discover rule five, and six… It turns out there are 15 (yes, 15!) rules of analytical reading. Enough to put me off reading altogether. There are a couple of chapters devoted to fiction, but I didn’t find them helpful or insightful. Example of Annoyances “Most plays are not worth reading… because they are incomplete.” Sweeping generalisation followed by a non-sequitur. I rarely read plays precisely because they were written for performance, and I can’t do that effectively in my head. It does not mean that most plays are not worth reading, though. “An author uses most words as men ordinarily do in conversation.” I nearly threw the book across the room, though that was probably an overreaction, born of my mounting dislike. Yes, I know it was written when it was more common to use male pronouns as generic ones, and to use “man” to mean “mankind/humankind”. But it was revised in 1972, and “men” grates far more than “man”: surely “people” would be more natural, even back then? The Literary Canon (only one?!) I don’t think the authors really know who their audience is - a fatal flaw in any writer/reader relationship. There are constant assumptions that the reader is familiar with the classical Western canon, from ancient civilisations, through to the start of the twentieth century: Homer’s Ulysses, though to Joyce’s Ulysses. If you’d read them in school (as the authors expect), you’d either have understood them and so have little need of this book, or not understood them, and have no intention of reading this book. This is reflected in the impressive and somewhat daunting reading list. It explicitly includes only Western works because: 1. The authors admit they know very little about Indian, Chinese, Japanese and other literary traditions. (They could have consulted someone else.) 2. Apparently, there is not a single tradition in Eastern literature, as there is in Western. (I’m not sure I understand the truth or untruth of that.) 3. It’s better to really know your own culture’s canon before branching out to others. (I don’t agree, but it is a valid and somewhat interesting opinion.) Exercises An appendix has a lot of comprehension exercises (I’m not sure what term is used outside the UK). I didn’t do any of them. I’d rather read a good book. If you want to read a book, I suggest you read a book. But probably not this one. If you want exercises, make it a large, heavy one!

It’s such a dinosaur. Cranky, snooty, stuffy, pedantic, often condescending. It’s a manual. For intelligent reading. Very textbook-y, very fundamental. Very practical. Like some invisible ruler cracked against my keyboard-clobbering knuckles, like a pesky voice in your head. It’s like having tea with your cane-thumping retiree-professor of a great-grandfather. Him demanding why you aren’t wearing hose, and will you please stand up straight? You bide your time, you promised you’d keep him company. And then, hours later, you realize you’re growing fond of the old coot, you can’t help but enjoy the starchiness. And there are rewards, there are gems your heart could ping with, the occasional moments of, egad, tenderness. Just imagine Gramps lecturing you on all the misreading you’ve committed, giving you precise directions on how to analyze a given book’s title, teaching you how to skim the right way. And then him suddenly going quiet, when you’ve mustered the courage to ask about fiction—him quiet and then, and then: “We do not know, we cannot be sure, that the real world is good. But the world of a great story is somehow good. We want to live there as often and as long as we can.” And you both reach for your cups of tea. 2011

I'm reading this awesome book again. I'll be writing my notes for each chapter below (It will be like a "running account" of my summary of and thoughts about every chapter). So, be warned, this is going to be a very, very, very long review. I hope I'll be able to write a shorter version after I'm done with the book. Overview Basically, How to Read a Book is a practical book. It aims to help people become intelligent readers. To read intelligently means to read actively. To read actively means to read skillfully. This means that reading is actually a skill (in the same way that writing is a skill). It is an activity. Therefore, it is never passive. And, to read skillfully means to read not for information and amusement but for understanding. The authors propose that, in order to achieve this aim (intelligent, active, skillful reading), readers must observe certain rules. These rules are discussed in detail throughout the book. The book has 4 parts and 21 chapters. Part 1 (The Dimensions of Reading) talks about the nature and levels of reading. Part 2 (The Third Level of Reading: Analytical Reading) talks about what analytical reading is, how to go about reading a book analytically, and the general questions you must ask or the general rules you must observe when reading a book analytically. Part 3 (Approaches to Different Kinds of Reading Matter) talks about, well, the different approaches to different kinds of literature: expository books, imaginative literature, etc. Part 4 (The Ultimate Goals of Reading) talks about the fourth and highest level of reading -- syntopical reading. Part One: The Dimensions of Reading Chapter One: The Activity and Art of Reading Adler and Van Doren says that reading is an activity. Therefore, reading is active, not passive. He gives an analogy -- baseball. Reading is like "catching" the ball in baseball. It is an active thing. And because it is active, it requires skill. This book aims to help readers develop that very skill. Adler says that there are different goals of reading -- information, amusement/ entertainment, and understanding. This book is mainly concerned with the latter goal. So, the goal of this book is to help readers learn how to read for increased understanding. That means to read in order to move from understanding less to understanding more. That also means reading in order to become wise or enlightened. The authors also differentiate between reading for information and amusement, and reading for increased understanding and enlightenment. On the one hand, you are reading for information when, after reading the book, you are only able to state the facts in the book. On the other hand, you are reading for increased understanding and enlightenment when, after finishing the book, you can state the things in the book and at the same time explain what they mean. Adler and Van Doren says that books are like absent teachers. Books can teach us something (they can help us increase our understanding about the world) although their authors may no longer be physically present. That's great news, because that means that we have access to the greatest minds in the history of civilization! Adler and Van Doren says that the goal of this book is to help readers learn the skills they need in order to become well-read, as opposed to being merely widely-read. Thoughts: I love Adler's baseball analogy of reading: Pitcher/ hitter = Writer/ author Catcher = Reader Ball = The ideas or information contained in the book I also like to be reminded that reading (at least, reading for increased understanding, which is the main goal of this book) is never passive. Reading is active -- it is an activity. That is, it involves the performance of certain mental acts. And you shouldn't take it for granted. When you read a book, you must allow it to influence or affect you. However, I'm not sure if I agree with the authors when they say that our goal, if we wish to become intelligent and skillful readers, is to read difficult books so that our understanding about things will increase. I mean, can we not read books that are entertaining (and therefore easy to read) but can also increase our understanding about life and the world? I love the idea about books being "absent teachers"! That's an awesome thought, isn't it? That means that, as readers, we still have access to the greatest minds in human history! We can still "approach" them and allow them to teach us, even if they are no longer with us physically. We can "go to" Plato, Aristotle or Aquinas and "sit at their feet" while they "lecture" us about their philosophy. Lastly, I love Adler's distinction between being well-read and being widely-read. I agree with him that our goal should be to become well read and not merely widely-read. Chapter two: The Levels of Reading Adler and Van Doren talks about the different levels of reading: 1. Elementary reading 2. Inspectional reading 3. Analytical reading 4. Syntopical reading Elementary reading asks the question, "What is the sentence saying, and what do the words mean?" Inspectional reading asks, "What is the book about as a whole? What is its structure? What are its parts?" Analytical reading asks, "What is the author saying? What does he mean? What are his arguments? Are they true? So what?" And syntopical reading asks, "Given all these books/ literature about this particular topic or issue, what analysis or conclusion can I make?" These levels are cumulative, so a reader cannot master the highest level of reading (syntopical reading) without first mastering elementary, inspectional, and analytical reading. Thoughts: I like how the authors break down the skill of reading into levels. It's very helpful. Our ultimate goal should be syntopical reading. Chapter three: The First Level of Reading: Elementary Reading Basically, Adler and Van Doren says that elementary reading has four stages: reading readiness, word mastery or the ability to understand basic words, rapid growth of vocabulary, and the further refinement of these skills. A child has to go through each of the above stages in order to master this reading level. This does not happen quickly. In fact, it takes years of practice. It starts during nursery or thereabouts, when the child becomes ready physically and intellectually to read. Then the child goes through his elementary years and learns to read basic books. During these years, the child's vocabulary grows and he begins to develop his understanding of context. Then, during his high school years, he further develops and refines his reading skills. Ideally, by the time the child reaches high school, he should be able to read books analytically. Thoughts: I can honestly say that I haven't yet really mastered this basic reading level. My vocabulary is really not that wide or deep, and sometimes I find it hard to understand the context of a given sentence, especially if the book I'm reading is advanced or tertiary-level. Chapter four: The Second Level of Reading: Inspectional Reading Adler and Van Doren talks about the second level of reading -- inspectional reading. Inspectional reading involves two steps: systematic skimming or pre-reading and superficial reading. Systematic skimming involves several steps: -- Look at the book's title and subtitle (if any); -- Read the preface; -- Look at the table of contents; -- Look at the index; take note of the topics and authors discussed in the book; -- Read the summary at the end of the book or at the end of each chapter; -- Read the first few lines of each opening paragraph of every chapter; -- Read the publisher's blurb. Superficial reading involves browsing the pages of the book slowly but superficially -- scanning every page casually. Adler and Van Doren says that inspectional reading achieves two things: It helps you know whether the book is, for you personally, worthy of being read analytically or not; and, it gives you a general idea of the book which is useful for your future reference. The authors say that there is really no such thing as a standard reading speed. Ideally, you should simply adjust your speed according to the book's difficulty. They also talk about reading fixations and regressions -- people's tendency to not read the book straight through without interruptions. They say these two things harm our reading because they prevent us from understanding the gist of the book. They suggest that we should use "markers" or "pointers" when we read -- this can be a pen or our finger. This increases our reading speed and comprehension significantly. Also, they say that we don't have to understand everything about the book right away. What's important is that we continue reading (without fixations and regressions) and make an effort to understand the essence of the book even if we don't understand what the author is saying 100%. Thoughts: I love this reading level! Basically, the idea here is that not all books that are available out there deserve to be read analytically. Majority of them are worth an inspectional reading only. And inspectional reading is very, very useful. If you follow its steps, you will have a general idea of what the book is about -- you'll know what kind of a book it is (whether it's a work of fiction or non-fiction, etc.), what its subject matter is, what its structure/outline is, and what its main arguments are. Also, when you read a book inspectionally, you will be in a better position to decide whether the book is really that interesting or relevant for you and whether it is really worthy of your time and effort to read analytically, or whether you should just set it aside for future reference. Adler and Van Doren's suggestion to use the finger as a "pointer" while reading is also very helpful. Chapter five: How to Be a Demanding Reader I think this chapter is a preparation for analytical reading, which is discussed in part 2. Adler and Van Doren says that in order to become an intelligent or skilled reader, you must be demanding in your reading. That is to say, you should make the effort to read and understand what you're reading. You must be motivated by the desire to enlighten yourself, to increase your understanding about matters. Furthermore, to become a demanding or active reader, you must ask questions while you read. What sorts of questions? These four, generally: 1. What is the book about as a whole? 2. What is being said in detail and how? 3. Is it true? 4. What of it? These are also the four questions you ask when you are reading a book analytically. They are applicable to any type of book (fiction or non-fiction), but when it comes to works of imaginative literature, like novels, poems, or plays, these four questions are altered a bit. Of course, you shouldn't simply ask these questions, you must also do your best to answer them. The first question helps you know the book's type and subject matter. The second question helps you know the book's structure, outline, and its main parts and arguments. The third question helps you know whether the author is right or not, or whether his arguments are true or not. And the fourth question helps you know what the book's significance and implication is to your life. Adler and Van Doren also says that we must make the book "our own". When we buy a book, it doesn't automatically become ours. That is just the first step. The second step is to read the book and "interact" with the author's ideas by writing on the book or making marks on its significant sentences or paragraphs. The authors also say that, basically, in order to develop the skill of intelligent reading, you must ask questions and obey those four general rules. Rules are necessarily because they give us structure and help us discipline our reading. At first, remembering and observing these rules may be very challenging, but that is just normal. Any skill is difficult to learn at first, but with habit it becomes easier. Thoughts: I loved this chapter! Basically, the above four questions lie at the very heart of analytical reading. That is, when we read a book analytically, we always ask those four questions and do our best to answer them. I love the idea of "making a book our own". That's very true. We shouldn't fear marking our book. We must "converse" with the author's ideas. The more we do this, the more the knowledge and insights will stick to us, so that, after answering all those questions at the end of the book, a part of us is already in the book, and a great part of the book is now in us (or, in our minds, at least). I just find the four questions very helpful. They guide me and provide structure to my reading. Also, they remind me that books are very, very important. Essential, even. So we shouldn't take them for granted. We shouldn't read them casually, especially if we're reading for understanding. We should allow them to influence and affect us. For example, after reading an apologetic book like Reasonable Faith by the Christian philosopher William Lane Craig, we shouldn't just set it aside and act as if nothing happened and nothing changed. We should instead ask ourselves, "Is what William Lane Craig saying true? Are his arguments really good? Does God really exist? If so, what are its implications to my life? What is its significance? What part of my mindset, mentality, philosophy, or worldview should I change, as a result of agreeing or disagreeing with Dr. Craig?"

I heard about this book in a casual conversation and my interest was piqued. When I heard that the book instructs on analytical reading I knew I had to read it. I have decided that I am not going to summarize the rules enunciated in this book. Instead I would keep my review short. In the first chapter the authors have mentioned that “…… this book is about the art of reading for the sake of increased understanding.” The authors have clearly stated that the book intends to help people understand expository works. In simple terms the book is meant for people who read serious non-fiction. However, the authors have included sections on how to read fiction, plays and poetry as well. The book discusses the following four levels of reading with major stress on the third type- • Elementary • Inspectional • Analytical • Syntopical The last and most advanced level – syntopical reading was an added bonus. In syntopical reading the reader goes through various books on the same subject and is able to "construct an analysis of the subject which may not be in any of the books." The book is good and no doubt helpful if you want to improve your reading skills. There are many tips and rules which guide you to better reading. There are separate sections on how to read practical books, imaginative literature, stories & plays & poetry, history, sciences & mathematics, philosophy and social science. Instead of memorizing them as rule 1, rule 2 – I felt it was better to understand the gist of their advice. One problem with the book is that the authors were too verbose. Parts of the book were repetitive and some portions could have been pruned without affecting the quality of the book. I do appreciate the efforts of the authors and understand that composing such a book is not an easy task. They have done a praiseworthy job but I feel some editing would have made the book much more compact. The authors have included a reading list and said that these books would facilitate the growth of the mind. The list includes books on the sciences, literature, politics and statecraft, poetry, theology etc. Authors included range from ancient Greek masters to great minds of the modern world. The authors have admitted that they include books from the Asian tradition because they themselves were not “particularly knowledgeable outside of the Western literary tradition” You might want to check out the reading comprehension exercises given at the end of the book. It is fun.

I read this book because I live by the mantra, "Life is Short---Read Fast" and I hoped it would teach me how to read faster. Instead it teaches you to read slower, analytically. It also teaches you how to "date" a book---to decide if you really want to spend the time to read the whole thing before commiting yourself to it. This book has a rather pedantic tone, which makes it a little dry to plow through. But I kept at it because there were philosophical gems interspersed throughout the pages. One of my favorite of which follows: “But if the book belongs to the highest class—the very small number of inexhaustible books—you discover on returning that the book seems to have grown with you. You see new things in it—whole sets of new things—that you did not see before. Your previous understanding of the book in not invalidated; it is just as true as it ever was, and in the same ways that it was true before. But now it is true in still other ways, too. . . . Since it is a really good book—a great book, as we might say— it is accessible at different levels. Your impression of increased understanding on your previous reading was not false. The book truly lifted you then. But now, even though you have become wiser and more knowledgeable, it can lift you again. And it will go on doing this until you die.” (p. 343)

This is a tremendous personal victory for me for two reasons, the first of which has to do with the book itself and the second of which has to do with a concerted reallocation of time. Ever since I first learned of the book's existence I understood that it was a book that I really SHOULD read. And I had an intention to read it. A desire to read it. And yet, I never read it. I did lots of other things that could have gone without doing. So, it really wasn't a matter of time. Celebrities got fat and thin and pregnant and married and arrested and fired and would have done all of those things even if I had not been so fastidious about tracking it. Inspired by a listening to a Susan Wise Bauer lecture on self education, I set aside time before my morning workout to read a book. I didn't have to get up any earlier than was my habit. I just had to swap online time for book time. I set a goal of reading 4 mornings a week for a minimum of 30 minutes. I decided to start with this book because my ultimate goal was to tackle some selections from the Great Books compendium in preparation for guiding my homeschooled eldest daughter through a Great Books education. After the first morning, I was so invigorated by the reading that I decided not to take the next day off but to continue the reading. And I never did take a morning off after that. It has become one of the highlights of my day. I would feel deprived if I could not start my day this way. The book. What a revelation. I am the reader being spoken of in the places where he refers to readers that have read wide but not deep. Prolific readers who couldn't tell you what they had just read if their lives depended upon it. For shame! I took all of Adler's advice on how to REALLY read a book to heart. The trend today is for authors to begin each book that deals with how to embark upon a new venture or how to approach an old venture in a new way by saying, "This seems hard but it is really QUITE EASY!" Not Adler. Adler tells you upfront: Reading a book well is hard. It requires a great deal of effort. It will become frustrating sometimes. It will still be worth it. I outlined the book as I read which meant it took even longer to read but for perhaps the first time I closed a book with a sense that I truly understood it. I had not skimmed over vast sections of it with an arrogant sense of already knowing the gist of it. And now that I think about it, I've spent most of my life "gist" reading most books. I felt an enormous sense of relief when Adler explained that the reason why we give up on books that seem over our heads is because they ARE over our heads and it is incumbent upon us to raise ourselves to that level. I had always assumed that I should understand it and the fact that I did not meant I was too stupid to ever understand it. I would give up and read something "light" and excuse it as a "palate cleanser" (looking at you, Bridget Jones right next to the dusty and never-read Tom Jones on my shelf). I won't get into the mechanics of the book but to say that it is impeccably organized. The vocabulary might be challenging but don't worry. You can do this. You should do this. And there should be a class in every school that teaches this book and the approach to reading that it prescribes. Adler would not approve of my classification of his book but here it is: Game Changer. Cannot over-recommend.