Edmundson - Against Readings

For me Edmundson provided one of the most enjoyable and readable articles in this unit, and still presented an engaging and interesting argument. I think it is clear that he took his own advice and wrote this out of love and not need, something that he suggests is not done often enough by literary professors who instead write to "show off, the prowess of the author."

The main suggestion of his article is that members of the literary profession should "kick [their] addiction to readings" such as Marxian or Freudian and instead focus on what the authors themselves have told us. Now that someone else has mentioned it, it seems obvious that this is the best way to read a text, as otherwise we will imbue it with values and statements that are clearly not evident in and of the text itself. Imposing different readings upon a text can be beneficial when trying to see it in a new light or develop a new interpretation of the texts, but the first interpretation should always come from within the text itself. Everything that the author wanted to say is contained within the text and this is where we should look for an understanding of it, otherwise we must "submit one text to the terms of another." To me it seems comparable to the use of sources in historical studies; while secondary sources (i.e. readings) can be useful and can complement an understanding of history, the best information comes from the primary sources (i.e. The text itself) and these are always the most reliable.

The ability to read opens up a whole new world of knowledge and gives one the opportunity to see the world from a new perspective, thus the idea that a literary education provides a second chance at socialisation makes a lot of sense. People who are constantly reading are always changing and updating their values and their world view. By reading widely you can learn much about the values and beliefs that others hold and this can often lead to personal growth, and potentially to Edmundson's "golden moment" of recognition. According to Edmundson the best way to do this is by making sure that we "befriend" the texts that we read. This seems like a romantic idea to me, it connotes the idea that texts are confiding in us and belong to us alone, even if they are a world bestseller like The Secret History. Now that we have befriended our text instead of being skeptical we should try to represent the author in our interpretation and "analyse the text sympathetically." This does not mean that we accept its message without question or criticism, merely that we listen in full to what it has to say and we don't judge it before its completion. Edmundson quotes Emerson in saying that "the best purpose of all art is to inspire" and by leaving suspicion and readings behind we are giving texts the best chance to do this, the best chance to fully engage us and light the candle of understanding.


Edmundson, M., "Against Readings" from Profession 2009, pp.56-85.