Source: flickr_/photos/wildrose115/24767545586
Do you like reading? Hopefully you enjoy it as much as I do. I like reading as a hobby and as something to pursue in the future both. This is why I read actively. You must have heard of active and passive reading, right? Active reading is when you read while thinking and soaking in the knowledge from the source. You have ideas and a proper understanding of the material. Passive reading is its exact opposite- mugging up the material without actually understanding what’s written inside.
What if I tell you there’s more to approaches in literary studies than just these two methods? Have you heard of Paranoid Reading and Reparative reading before or for the first time? Well, whatever is the case, I will make sure you know more about these two approaches by the time you finish reading this article. Oh, but do remember to read this one actively!
What is Paranoid Reading?
In an amazing article written in 1997, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick came up with two different approaches towards reading and understanding written media. These later got published in her book in 2003, and have been discussed quite a lot by writers ever since.
Paranoid Reading, by definition, refers to approaching a writing in such a way that you anticipate bad elements, clues, and an underlying plot. This doesn’t mean that you find faults within the writing, no. It only means that you, as the reader, feel like that the text has a hidden meaning which you have to uncover.
This method includes breaking down and analyzing the writing at several levels and then, looking for clues in these. Through this method, one can find and highlight negative issues like racism, oppression, etc. So, basically, you are feeling paranoid about the text in question and hence, try to break it down to piece clues together.
Paranoid readers face a lot of criticism because they seem to be looking for things to hate in the text. But there’s no harm in being skeptical about issues which are wrong in the first place! So, why is it criticized so much? Sedgwick feels that the reason has to do with the fact that criticism has become synonymous with this approach. She writes that “In a world where no one need be delusional to find evidence of systemic oppression, to theorize out of anything but a paranoid critical stance has come to seem naive, pious, or complaisant.”
This just means that paranoid reading is, in fact, a very powerful tool for literary studies- but it shouldn’t be mixed in with critical thought and expression.
What is Reparative Reading?
On the other end of the methodology proposed by Sedgwick, we have Reparative Reading. This approach looks for different things; a reparative reader will look for the positive stuff in the writing. Instead of finding negativity within the text, this kind of reading focuses more on reading the piece as a whole and appreciating the peace they find later on.
So, if you become a reparative reader, you would be someone who believes that it is important to engage with the text emotionally and seek understanding, joy, and emotional richness. The same critical theory deems reparative reading deems reparative reading as ‘merely aesthetic’ without appreciating the way this approach works wonders for the readers. Let’s clarify that reparative reading doesn’t deny the negative elements in the text. It has a pleasant outlook because it recognizes the fact that there is hostility.
Is one better than the other?
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/usaidkenya/6129813120
A reader might wonder which method is better? Let’s see.
All the while we talked about the two, we saw that reparative reading seemed like the right choice. It is the better option when it comes to affect and ethics. It makes one appreciate the overall richness of the text and leaves the reader feeling nice and positive when they finish. On the other hand, we have paranoid reading which has its own merits but it places immense importance upon uncovering the truth within the text rather than engaging with it emotionally.
Should we throw paranoid reading out of the window then? Sedgwick wouldn’t agree. There is more to paranoid reading and its benefits. Paranoia is a natural response when one has faced hostile treatment. Many-a-time using paranoid reading is better than reparative reading- there can be situations when a reparative reader tries to smooth out a harmful narrative.
Sedgewick suggests that both methods should be used together to achieve more. Paranoid reading can be used to make a base- a foundation of sorts- to look for underlying contexts and then, reparative reading can take over to explore the text as a whole.
Which one is better than the other? None of them. But which one will work the best for you? That’s something I will leave you to think about.
Resources
- Active vs. Passive Reading. (2019, March 14). Excelsior OWL. https://owl.excelsior.edu/orc/introduction/active-reading/
- Sedgwick, E. K. (2020). Paranoid Reading and Reparative Reading; or, You’re So Paranoid, You Probably Think This Introduction is About You. In Duke University Press eBooks (pp. 1–38). https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822382478-002
- Law, K. (n.d.). It’s All on the Surface: Paranoid vs. Reparative Reading. Scientific Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 3, 2021. http://sjohss.org/download/SJOHSS-3-7-43-47.pdf
- Love, H. (2010). TRUTH AND CONSEQUENCES: ON PARANOID READING AND REPARATIVE READING. Criticism, 52(2), 235–241. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23131405
- Ellis, D. (2021, October 14). The Danger — and Necessity — of Paranoid Reading. BOOK RIOT. https://bookriot.com/paranoid-reading/
