TOW #24: IRB (How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read)

Goal: Stay on task in explaining the devices.

From chance encounters with famous authors to (rare) incidents of forgetting to read for a class, we all experience potentially awkward situations when we must discuss books we haven’t fully read. Luckily, French author Pierre Bayard is here to save the day with his book, How to Talk About Books You Haven’t Read.

Bayard’s straightforward style of writing makes it easy to understand his ideas and suggestions. In addition to the numerous examples he uses (which I mentioned in my first IRB post), the author gives his tips in the form of simple commands. In the section about talking to authors, he writes, “There is only one sensible piece of advice to give to those who find themselves having to talk to an author about one of his books without having read it: praise it without going into detail.” Admittedly, the sentence preceding the command is a bit lengthy, but Bayard simplifies his writing where it counts. Almost everybody likes cut-and-dry rules and those are what he provides.

Bayard often philosophizes about the nature of books and reading, which may seem boring to the casual reader but fascinating to the truly interested. For example, Bayard muses, “What we preserve of the books we read—whether we take notes or not, and even if we sincerely believe we remember them faithfully—is in truth no more than a few fragments afloat, like so many islands, on an ocean of oblivion…” Bayard uses logic like this to justify the idea that actually reading books isn’t much more valiant than skimming or researching, and in many cases is a waste of time (that could be spent reading worthwhile material). This especially appeals to the portion of the audience that is typically loyal to books and might feel guilty or wrong in forgoing the actual reading experience.

For the organization and discussion ideas, How to Talk is already a worthwhile guide, but the occasional stream of consciousness writing about books as a concept gives it an extra entertaining edge that makes it worthwhile as a book (and not just a how-to guide).


*I repeat from IRB post 1: Page citations are difficult, as this is being read on Kindle Cloud.

TOW #23: Article (Why Disaster Warning and Development Go Hand in Hand)

In order to make early action disaster plans more effective, we need to change cultural values in order to make locals more accepting of the plan, according to Andrew Collins's article titled "Why Disaster Warning and Development Go Hand in Hand" and published on SciDev.net, an internet science forum. Regardless of whether or not the article was actually well-written, Andrew Collins certainly has the authority to write it; he's the director of the Disaster and Development Centre at the British Northumbria University. After reading so many articles that didn't give the author's credentials (or, in worse cases, name) it's nice to see a publication that cares about the credibility of its work.

Author Andrew Collins mostly relies on his credibility as a disaster expert in order to make his points. The appeal to ethos is sudden but present; even at the beginning of the article, he is introduced as "disaster policy expert Andrew Collins." He goes on to make a series of broad claims and statements of fact; if the author wasn't so qualified to write on the subject, I would expect to see sources and backing, but because Collins is credible I trust that the information is accurate.

I don't think the article achieved its purpose because I'm not really sure that it had a purpose. Perhaps an outline would've helped, because the piece starts shaky and goes nowhere. With a plea so abstract as "improve disaster warning systems," one must ground their argument in specific examples of how they want this to be done, and Mr. Collins does not do this. I've learned that personal circumstances and cultural values play a part in disaster readiness, but have not learned the author's plan for how to use them to improve. Although the article seemed promising in theory, there isn't much to take away.


http://www.scidev.net/global/disasters/opinion/why-disaster-warning-and-development-go-hand-in-hand-1.html

TOW #22: Visual Text (Bill of Fare Cartoon)

The above political cartoon, drawn in 1898 by an unidentified cartoonist, satirizes the casualty of American imperialism. At the time, McKinley was President, and although he wasn't strongly in support of imperialism, he often found himself pressured by the rest of the nation (mainly by businessmen and journalists) to take action that would lead to the acquisition of foreign nations and peoples.

The policy of massive takeover in the context of a quaint cafe highlights the nonchalance with which America invaded nations like Cuba and the Philippines. Rather than think about it carefully with a board of advisers, the image of "Uncle Sam" decides how to use his naval power with all the seriousness of deciding what to order off of a restaurant menu. The author's message is that America didn't consider the gravity of the order to send troops to a nation and dominate it. It was a spontaneous decision that didn't take into account the morality or even necessity of the U.S.'s actions.

The depiction of McKinley as a waiter exaggerates his passivity in office. The President is supposed to serve our country, but McKinley is portrayed as literally serving our country, thus implying that he doesn't exercise his right to rule and instead bends to the will of the American people. Had McKinley not had, as Teddy Roosevelt stated, "the backbone of a chocolate eclair," he might have had a chance to resist the desire (fueled by yellow journalism and economic wishes) of America to begin a system of quasi-Euro imperialism.

It is important to remember that the illustrator of this cartoon was alive during the time when places like Guam and Hawaii were being tacked onto the United States just to forge a path to China. Whatever ideas we have of the past must be forgotten, even if they agree with the authors', since our minds were changed by history.

TOW #21: Article (Give the PAT the Boot)

In football, a team that scores a touchdown can attempt to score and extra point by kicking a field goal. I knew this. What I did not know (and had to look up) was that they're called PATs, for "points after touchdown." I don't typically read sports news, but this week I read an article by Peter King in Sports Illustrated (I'm sure there are better sports magazines but I obviously don't know them) arguing mostly through numbers that the extra point in football is no longer valuable, despite being a beloved practice in football tradition.

King's argument was mostly driven by statistics, which impressed me because I didn't know there were statistics for this kind of thing. He first argues that football is a waste of valuable playing time. It takes about 45 seconds to go through with a PAT, and they happen five times per NFL game. They're not even exciting anymore, he argues. King cites the statistic that in the last three years, 3,709 extra points have been attempted and only eighteen were missed, giving the action a 99.5% success rate. He uses the statistic to point out that PATs have become such automatic actions for kickers that they're not exciting anymore. Employing statistics really enhances his argument because any sports fan can argue that something is good or bad for the sport, but numbers are real proof to support an argument and increase credibility.

Just a page away, King's coworker Robert Klemko wrote an article countering King's viewpoint and saying that change shouldn't be rushed. Although King didn't write it, this is in a way like addressing the counterargument because the two articles are meant to be read together. Each adds credibility to the other in that they were written with the counterargument already in mind. I have not yet read Klemko's take on the issue, but as it stands now, King's was persuasive and informative enough to sway me to his side of the argument.


http://mmqb.si.com/2014/01/23/nfl-extra-point-elimination/

TOW #20: IRB (How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read)

*Citations are difficult; this is being read on Kindle Cloud, which doesn't even technically give page numbers.


Even the most avid readers occasionally find themselves attempting to discuss books they haven't thoroughly read. Fear not, readers, for Frenchmen Pierre Bayard is here to destigmatize skimming, forgetting, and lying in his book, How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read. The book is broken into three parts: types of "not reading," types of social situations, and types of behavior. Though writing on an unconventional and slightly ironic topic, Bayard uses plenty of examples to provide a guide to discussing a book you're not completely familiar with.

From Oscar Wilde to the movie Groundhog Day, Bayard draws examples from a variety of sources to convey his message that you can, in fact, talk about books you haven't read. He labels them based on his own scale of familiarity: SB for a book he's skimmed, HB for a book he's heard of, and FB for a book he's forgotten. He then rates and critiques them, since, as he points out, "there is, after all, no reason for me to refrain from passing judgment on whatever works I come across, even if I have never heard of them before." Bayard's practical use of his own principles gives the reader a clearer understanding of the book's message and demonstrates how his tactics appear to other people when used properly. The variety in Bayard's sources allows him to prove the universality of his claims.

Bayard also gives examples of real-life situations in which this information may become useful. As a literature professor, he often finds himself needing to talk about a book he hasn't read. He then employs his own book-talking strategy because, as he says, "There is a risk that at any moment my class will be disrupted and I will be humiliated." Showing the reader how he uses the book in his own life grounds the information in reality and gives it more credibility. He also uses non-personal examples, such as a hypothetical man going to a large convention and meeting the author of books he has yet to read. The more examples Bayard gives, the more useful the book.

Through several types of examples from several different media, Bayard demonstrates his theory that understanding the "essence" of a book is more important than knowing the content, and is therefore enough to get by in a conversation.