Thanks a lot, Pierre Bayard. Whatever happened to honor among thieves? However will I keep my professional cocktail-party credibility, that certain
je ne sais quoi about the epically well-read English professor that is my only cultural compensation in crowds of better-paid citizens, now that you've explained to the layman
Comment Parler des Livres que l’on n’a pas Lus (How to Talk about Books that You Haven’t Read)?
Yes, folks, the scholarly world of letters is all abuzz about Professor Bayard's latest book, which gives the lie to the hallowed belief that well-read people got that way by actually reading books. Adam Sage
reports in the Times Online:
A distinguished professor of literature at Paris University has become a bestselling author with a work explaining how he comments authoritatively on books that he failed to finish, has forgotten or has never read.
Pierre Bayard, 52, who specialises in the link between literature and psychoanalysis, stunned specialists with the admission that he is anything but an assiduous reader.
He says that he often makes references in lectures, meetings, reviews and conversations to works that he has not read — without being found out.
However, Bayard — who has never finished Ulysses by James Joyce and forgotten what Steppenwolf, Hermann Hesse’s classic novel, is about — claims that this in no way devalues his opinion.
“It’s possible to have a passionate conversation about a book that one has not read, including, perhaps especially, with someone else who has not read it."
Well,
duh, Pierre. If this turns out to be literary criticism's break-out, sell-out, million-dollar crossover idea (the book's publisher Minuit, according to the Times, "now wants to get it on supermarket and airport bookshelves"), I am going to be so pissed. Not because of the betrayal, the exposure, the way it inadvertently confirms to the world that we are all the frauds they always suspected we were, but just because Mr. Big-Shot Tenured Frenchy Pants published it before I did. I'm sitting here slaving away on a manuscript on 18th-century British literature and I could have ended up on the bestseller list by revealing that
it's possible to talk about a book one hasn't read, including, perhaps especially, with someone else who has not read it? What's the next big idea in literary scholarship going to be? It's possible to talk shit about a movie one hasn't seen, including, perhaps especially, to someone else who has not seen it? It's possible to wax nostalgic about an experience one hasn't had, including, perhaps especially, to someone else who has not experienced it? It's possible to laugh at a joke one doesn't get, including, perhaps especially, with someone else who doesn't get it? Did Bayard just get high for the first time? Is that what's going on?
Personally, I'm with Sarah Vine, whose
commentary also appears in the Times:
The book that I’d part company with hard cash to get is this: How to Avoid Talking About Books You Shouldn’t Have Read — But Have. Such as Captain Corelli’s Mandolin, or anything by Jackie Collins, or Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus — or the ultimate literary embarrassment, The Da Vinci Code. I don’t know anyone with an ounce of intellectual pride who will confess to having read it, and yet statistically some of them must be lying. Maybe I should start a Da Vinci Anonymous association. All welcome, even French professors.
Now, you may recall that, as I am entirely devoid of intellectual pride, I have actually
admitted to reading The Da Vinci Code. Nevertheless, I think I'm a pretty good candidate for some kind of book-disavowal therapy, as are most academics I know. Our problem is clearly not that we haven't read enough books, but that we have consumed all manner of disgraceful cultural dross, and that it occasionally surfaces at inopportune moments. Did I mention that I extemporaneously invoked an early interview with Britney Spears in order to explain Ian Watt's reading of
Robinson Crusoe in my 18th-century novel class the other day? Well, I did. Such are the perils of knowing too much.
And now I must excuse myself; it's Sunday and I have to go not read something.