DB/MAY/JUNE ‘67
Reading for pleasure ìs an extraordinary activity.
These black squiggles on a white page are still as the grave, colorless as the moonlit desert;
but they give the skilled reader a pleasure as acute as the touch of a loved body! RA’s book,
‘The Pleasures òf Reading in an Ideological Age’ is quite a vigorous description (and defense)
of the European practice of reading literature for pleasure. DB also hastens to add that this “PLEASURE” does not mean a hedonistic experience, but rather one of affective identification with the characters,
an experience understood in our culture to be gratifying, but none the less edifying & improving of the reader. RA identifies several of the distinctive features of this practice:
“VERY FEW PEOPLE WILL TAKE THE TROUBLE TO READ A NOVEL OR STORY UNLESS THEY CAN SOMEHOW ‘identify’ WITH THE CHARACTERS, LIVE WITH THEM INWARDLY AS THOUGH THEY WERE REAL AT LEAST FOR THE DURATION OF THE READING”.
If we pay close attention to this statement, we will see that it conjures
up several features of our reading practice.
It assumes that reading is
a voluntary act; people can choose to dó ìt òr nòt?! Accordingly,
it must cause some kind of pleasure to the reader or (s)he wìll abandon the activity!?
Second, this pleasure is produced by an affective identification between
the reader & the characters in the story, a sympathy between the real reader and
imaginary people & their imaginary adventures.
Third, at least ideally,
the pleasure of this identification is produced when
the reader is in private & càn “FORGET” reality in the illusion
of the reality of the characters & their story.
”READING” as spoken of & described in the Bible had [has?] none of these features?
The Torah names the function of its reading as a speech act.
It declares of itself that its intention is,
”IT SHALL BE WITH US, & WE SHALL READ IT EVERY DAY OF OUR LIFE
IN ORDER THAT WE WILL LEARN TO FEAR THE LORD OUR G D,
‘to keep the words of this Torah & to perform the commandments’ [Deut. 17:19]?
reading was [is] not a voluntary act, nor one that is [was] supposed to produce ‘pleasure’!?
Mor/Asih prefers the supposition that Yehoshua proposes us, people, to combine
‘duty’ & ‘joy’, ‘plight’ & ‘right’, ‘law’ & ‘leasure’, or, if you want ‘devil’ & ‘angel’?
“Dìng & G d...!” Vormgeving & Inhoud...
In die zin was “G d” ‘het woord’ ÈN
ÌS DE “Mensch” zowel ‘uitvinder, àls géver,
ontvanger, verspreider’ & DÉLER van ‘zin’, bedoeling, richting, kunstenaar & bewerker,
ontdekker èn gebruiker... En myDiary zo nu
ook ‘n bijna ideaal ‘vervoermiddel’,
‘ruimte- & tijdvaartuig’, ‘zeil~ &
onderzeeboot’, innerlijk +
uiterlijk...?!?