read what you love to read

ieva — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:43:57 +0000

Lately, I have been so busy at work, that I barely have the time to breathe, let alone blog.
However, there is something I can’t forego sharing.
A couple of days ago, I suggested my co-worker would love to read “The City & The City” (a book I’m switch-reading simultaneously with “Fool’s Errand” by Robin Hobb). He said that he’d love to but he has so many books in his to-read list that he simply can’t squeeze it in.
On an impulse, I said: “Oh, come on. Just read the interesting books.”
Don’t get me wrong, he is a natural born reader, and I am sure his taste in literature is way better than mine. I mean he is only reading good books, and books that are worth reading, if not for their quality then for their value as Educational Materials in Latvian Modern Literature. I think he’d be embarrassed to admit that he’d ever read light literature, you know, mystery or thrillers or, God forbid, romance. Even if he does, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he didn’t.
Me, I’m reading things that are an easy read. I read books with an engaging plot, and books that are the top picks in fantasy. I read “Soulless”, which, for all of its qualities, is not exactly a thought-provoking Literary Read. I read “Monsters” by J.M.Greer, and all my skeptic friends (including my husband) would cock an eyebrow on that. I read–well, basically I read everything that I can gobble up fast, and I don’t care if it’s something profound (like Crichton’s “Sphere”) or something merely curious. And I read a lot I don’t have a “to-read” list. I have a “books-to-buy-when-I-have-almost-finished-what-I’m-reading” list.
Well, all right. I have books that are in my “to-read” list, books that I realistically won’t touch any time soon. There are such books in every reader’s list: the ones that you “have” or “need to” read but never really get around to reading them. It’s good. Sometimes, after all, you do open that sort of books.
But what I think is paramount to constant reading is: don’t just read what you have to read. Read worthless books as well, read books that probably won’t give much to you but that will keep you entertained. It’s way better than not reading at all because you can’t make yourself to open another hard-cover, hard-content book.
Allow yourself the pleasure of reading. Just like you sometimes cook even if you’re not creating a culinary masterpiece, or hang out with a friend even if it’s not your best, or most valued friend.
Literature is not just about improving yourself. It’s about improving your everyday as well, it’s about bringing a new highlight, even if it’s just a tiny sunbeam, in your life.
If you read out of obligation only, you won’t be reading much, nor enjoying the process overly.
If you read for fun, well, some of your friends will smirk at you for reading, say, “Twilight”, but it doesn’t matter. What matters is that you had your fun; and you had new insights, even if the insights weren’t particularly profound.
Read what you love. And then, at some point, you will learn to love what you need to read–provided you really do need it.

writing vs reading

ieva — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:21:43 +0000

Yesterday, I allowed my husband to read the beginning of my NaNo novel (he’s been trained not to mention the glitches in grammar and style) and he said it drew him in (yay!).
Then, I realized why I like writing more than I like reading.
While reading, I always know that the author has somehow solved all the problems and dealt with the plot, better or worse.
While writing, I know that nobody, even the author, knows how this will end and what surprises await.

That’s the excitement and the scare of it.

ieva melgalve » reading

read what you love to read

writing vs reading