Monday marked the end of my “scorched-earth” policy regarding books. You see, for the past several years I had not re-read a single book. Nope, not a single one–excepting the Bible of course. Well that ended Monday when I read The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe for the second time. Why the sudden change in reading philosophy? Well, I read a biography of C.S. Lewis recently (this one, if you’re interested) and the author noted that Lewis was a great believer in the merits of re-reading books.
Though a little skeptical, I decided to experiment and see what would happen if I took Lewis’s advice and re-read a book. What better choice than one of Lewis’s own book–The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe? There were several things I noticed this time around that I missed the first time. For instance, when the professor is talking to Peter and Susan, who are concerned about Lucy’s sanity, the professor points out that either Lucy is lying, or she’s crazy, or she’s telling the truth.
This stuck out to me because it’s an oft-used argument for the divinity of Christ. People may not rationally claim that Jesus was “just a good teacher,” because what good teacher also claims to be God? Jesus certainly claimed to be God (John 8:58, Matt. 16:13-20, etc.), so people must make the same decision about Him as Peter and Susan had to make about Lucy–either Jesus was a liar, a lunatic, or…He was telling the truth. Interestingly enough, C.S. Lewis uses this very argument for the authenticity of Jesus in his apologetic work Mere Christianity.
All in all this experiment seems to be a very good success so far. I should qualify that I don’t believe that the only benefit of re-reading is the opportunity to catch stuff that one missed the first time. That would be a very studied and…callous…way to view literature–as something to be drained until there’s not a drop of insight left, and then thrown away.
On the contrary, good literature can stand on its own two feet and continue to re-delight readers with every reading–new insights or not–at least that has been true in my limited experience. Very interesting stuff, and with this success I’m now re-reading my second book in several years–Prince Caspian.
I don’t know how many times I have read the Narnia books…I always enjoy them and usually catch something I missed. Good literature is, plain and simple, a joy to read.
It’s honestly never occurred to me that some people didn’t re-read books, since I’d venture about half my reading is actually re-reading. I’m very glad you’ve “seen the light.” As you pointed out, you do catch more things the second (or third, or fourth) time around, although my main reason for re-reading is simply because I liked the book, and I want to experience it again. On a more practical note, what would be the point of buying a book if you just read it once then let it mold on a shelf?
Yup, I’ve seen the light.
It’s interesting that I’ve seen this “scorched-earth” trend developing in our family’s movie-watching practices. We hardly ever re-watch movies anymore (or buy them, for that matter; cruel, cruel Netflix). I wonder, do you think re-watching movies is any different from re-reading books?
Not too much. Thinking about it, the reasons I re-watch movies are the same as the reasons I re-read books: to notice new things, and to experience it again. But for some reason people (including me) tend to think of reading as “nobler” than watching a movie. I’d more compare it to listening to music: you don’t listen to a song just once, but continue to enjoy it over and over again.
Good point…I like the song analogy. You’re right–reading books does seem “nobler” than watching movies for whatever reason….perhaps because it makes us feel intelligently old-fashioned, not young and naive like all those idiotic movie-watchers.
Duty calls though: I must get backing to watching Howl’s Moving Castle 😉
Wait – How is Netflix cruel for increasing the cost for your buying carbon copies movies? You could apply this logic to the library very easily.
By this argument you could also say that amazon is cruel for increasing the cost for buying carbon copies of books by selling digital copies of books.
Horatio, I was just joking! I’m just saying that Netflix has changed the economics of our movie-watching I think.
Supply and demand.
Netflix increases the supply of movies for us to imbibe, thus lowering the individual value of the movies we watch (maybe I should check with your dad to make sure this idea is sound economically 😉 ).
Hey, it was your idea. I was only mocking it. You ascribed the quality of cruelness to a company. I only brought it to its logical conclusion.
Like I said before, it was a joke…I don’t get what the big deal is.
Winston Churchill said that a joke is a very serious thing – so serious that you did not perceive my joking.
Another good reason to read books again (especially after several years) is you are no longer the same person who first reads it. People are constantly evolving (and hopefully maturing) which makes different themes/ideas/connections stand out.
Movies can work the same way. Watching Dumbo being snatched from his mother has much more impact when I watch it now than it did ten years ago.
I’m not sure the medium itself (book, song, movie, television show, picture, or even video game) makes a difference. It’s what the creator does within it.
Forgot to add: good movie choice. How often does a cranky old lady get to be the heroine? :^)
Exactly! Just finished rewatching it this afternoon.
And I agree about the whole age thingy–there are several books I read when I was 10 or 11–take the Lord of the Rings, for example–that I would view in a whole new light if I read them again today. There’s probably a million things I missed or glossed over that would stick out to me now that I’m older.
That’s scary though–in many ways my thoughts about the Lord of the Rings books are still the thoughts of a 10 or 11 year old! I’m going to have to re-read it one of these days…