On Rereading

by Patricia Meyer Spacks

After retiring from a lifetime of teaching literature, Patricia Meyer Spacks embarked on a year-long project of rereading dozens of novels: childhood favorites, fiction first encountered in young adulthood and never before revisited, books frequently reread, canonical works of literature she was supposed to have liked but didn't, guilty pleasures (books she oughtn't to have liked but did), and stories reread for fun vs. those read for the classroom. "On Rereading" records the sometimes surprising, always fascinating, results of her personal experiment.

Spacks addresses a number of intriguing questions raised by the purposeful act of rereading: Why do we reread novels when, in many instances, we can remember the plot? Why, for example, do some lovers of Jane Austen's fiction reread her novels every year (or oftener)? Why do young children love to hear the same story read aloud every night at bedtime? And why, as adults, do we return to childhood favorites such as "The Hobbit," "Alice in Wonderland," and the Harry Potter novels? What pleasures does rereading bring? What psychological needs does it answer? What guilt does it induce when life is short and there are so many other things to do (and so many other books to read)? Rereading, Spacks discovers, helps us to make sense of ourselves. It brings us sharply in contact with how we, like the books we reread, have both changed and remained the same.

Genres: Nonfiction, Books About Books, Literary Criticism, Essays, Criticism, Writing, Literary Fiction

280 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 2011

Reviews

[Margaret · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sometimes, a book comes along which just fits with your frame of mind. I think this is the case for me with On Rereading. I often feel as though I have an obligation to read rather than reread, that it's somehow more virtuous to read something new to me than to revisit a book I'm already acquainted with. This is partly the result of knowing exactly how many unread books I own (296 right now, thank you very much), and partly a general feeling of so many books, so little time -- how can I justify spending time rereading?

Spacks acknowledges this feeling and shares it: what Roger Angell calls the "sweet dab of guilt attached to rereading" (her quote). So she embarks on a deliberate process of rereading, as an experiment, to see if she can figure out what is the good of rereading: what can rereading supply which first readings can't? In the course of her year-long experiment, she revisits childhood favorites, books she teaches, guilty pleasures, books she ought to like, and books she loves and has reread many times. (The Austen chapter is particularly good and one I will have to return to next time I reread Emma and Pride and Prejudice.)

In the end, she suggests that the best metaphor for rereading is that of a palimpsest, originally writing material reused so that many layers are visible. Each time you reread, you add something new and obscure something old, but bits and pieces of every layer are always accessible. Rereading, she concludes, gives the reader a richer, fuller experience, allowing new interpretations along with the joy of revisiting your past self and earlier thoughts.

I had been hoping to convince myself to spend more time rereading this year, to revisit both books I've read many times and books I've only read once. I couldn't have found a better argument than Spacks provides here.

[K.M. Weiland · Rating 5 out of 5]

I may have to go really meta and re-read this book someday—it’s that good and thought-provoking. In what is really a literary memoir of sorts, Spacks reflects back on 70+ years of her reading life with thoughtfulness, whimsy, and delightful jaunts into some of my own favorite classic works. She’s inspired me to do a little rereading of my own this year.

[Jennifer Steinhoff · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ugh! I wish I could rate individual chapters! I really really enjoyed the first few, as Spacks was laying out her thesis. It was like someone was putting into words EXACTLY how I feel about rereading -- that it provides comfort because it's the same story I know and love, but also excitement because I discover something new each time. The story may be the same, but everytime I read it, I'm different, so I bring something new to the story and read it differently.

My problem with the book was when Spacks starts her rereading case studies. Her studies of books that I'd read before were fantastic and I was so interested in her analysis and comparing it to my own reading (and rereading) of that text. However, for those case studies about books I have not read, my mind wandered, I got bored and I kept asking myself "How can I appreciate what she learned rereading a book that I've never read? I can't relate at all with the author!"

Overall, I would recommend this book, but I would tell people to just read the chapters they're interested in.

[Iva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rereading is a topic of great interest to me and I was delighted to sink into a whole book on the topic. Spacks is the perfect person to examine rereading as she has been a professor of literature and a passionate reader all her life. (When she was a child her father limited her to one book a day because he was afraid she'd ruin her eyes.) Chapters include children's books--which ones held up and which were disappointing decades later. Alice in Wonderland and Wizard of Oz hold up--Narnia series didn't. She examines why so many people reread Pride and Prejudice and she is unashamed of her love of Wodehouse's Jeeves stories. She has never been in a book club, but has fond memories of when the whole English dept at Wellesley along with the students read the same book and seemed to be discussing it all over the campus. The book is full of rich insights on why rereading classics and guilty pleasures are important. Enjoyable and provacative.

[MasterSal]

Jan 2024:

I've had this book for more than a decade. I think it's time to admit that I will not read this before I am 500. Will pass this onto to my free library. Maybe someone else will enjoy this - the book is physically lovely.

[Ngaire · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don't do a lot of rereading, but there are a few books that I read over and over, always with a bit of guilt because there are so many other books out there that I haven't read yet. Patricia Spacks discusses this is On Rereading - the "delicious guilt" of picking up something read before. She makes the case for rereading by emphasizing that there is always something new to discover and that we are never the same person we were when we read the book first. Books we loved the first time around may have lost their shine, while others that didn't click with us at all may prove interesting and thought-provoking on second reading.

On Rereading works particularly well in the opening few chapters when Spacks is discussing works such as Alice in Wonderland, The Wizard of Oz, and the Narnia Chronicles that she loved as a child. The chapter on rereading Jane Austen was also effective, I thought, particularly for someone like me who has recently started rereading Austen. It was interesting to see how The Catcher in the Rye and Lord Jim have lost their luster for her - where she once saw anger and rebelliousness, she now sees self-absorption and indulgence. I think she mentions that anger without action is particularly frustrating to read about, and I agree.

Now that I think about it, my favorite chapter may have been one near the end of the book, which is about reading with other people, where Spacks discusses three instances where she read a book or story with her mother, or with college friends, or with colleagues at Wellesley. I loved her descriptions of summers in Florida in the forties, and how she and her mum would set up fans by the windows and lie on their beds and read to try to beat the heat. I actually could have done with a lot more of those little details - they really made this book for me. It was lovely hearing about how her mother interpreted Islandia, and what Spacks thought of it years later. It was interesting to see how much the texts were mediated by whoever she read them with and what she found when she read them again.

Some of the other chapters I found a bit hard going, because the books were somewhat obscure to me and didn't sound like things I'd want to read, either - The Golden Notebook, for example, sounds kind of awful (which, in fairness, Spacks thought too when she read it for the second time).

[Suzanne · Rating 3 out of 5]

I will not reread this book, though I may look at my highlights and I will read some of the classics she discussed. In the first chapters, I was interested. When the discussion went into lots of detail about totally unfamiliar texts, for chapters, I stopped paying attention.
I taught English for thirty years. Each time I taught A Streetcar Named Desire or King Lear it was a new experience. Of course I changed, my views changed and my students changed. Yet each reading was exciting because the texts were great; the characters were great: evil, interesting, etc. The words were poetry; the settings were raw and gritty. You get the picture. In On Rereading, the text sounded like a very detailed term paper. I assigned and read many term papers. I can't ever remember wanting to reread one. Sorry.

[Karen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I heard someone talk about this book on booktube, and since I have been doing a lot of rereading in the last few years, I had to pick it up. Spacks is a retired literature professor. In order to write this book, she reread many books to gauge her response, did they live up to her original enjoyment, etc. I liked that she reread books that she didn't like originally to see if her older self liked them more. I had to laugh that couldn't get passed the first paragraph in the The Da Vinci Code.

[Evelyn · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book, especially the parts about re-reading Jane Austen. I just so happen to also be re-reading Emma - and could relate to what Meyer Spacks said about re-reading, how you sometimes remember liking a book very much but don't remember why. I could remember being particularly struck by "Emma", but had not remembered what a piece of work she is - geez! I'm thoroughly enjoying my re-read by the way - Jane Austen is Jane Austen and will always be Jane Austen, the appeal of reading Jane Austen does not fade with time.

I was a bit disheartened to read Meyer Spacks opinion of "Gone With the Wind" - that is one of my all time favorite books, although I have not read it for years! Now I'm afraid to re-read it, what if I don't like it anymore? Hey, I'll always love Scarlett, Rhett giving her all kinds of crap cause she's not as "good" as Melanie - but who took care of everyone after all - Scarlett took care of Melanie and her baby during the seige of Atlanta, on finally reaching Tara she found her father had lost his mind and the house was practically destroyed and everyone was starving - who got out there digging in the dirt farming and kept them all from starvation? Who swallowed her pride, a most difficult thing for Scarlett, and went to ask Rhett for help (albeit wearing the green curtains and playing the Southern Belle!) She stole Mr. Kennedy from Suellen but that was to keep herself and her family afloat as well, and took care of Ashley & Melanie by having Ashley work at the lumber yard! And Rhett is disgusted with her :( You know what, Frankly Rhett, if I was Scarlett, I would not give a damn about you!

I have read some, but not many of the books that the author re-reads and discusses. The discussion of 1970's books interested me, in that my recollection of 70's novels that I read at the time includes "I Never Promised You a Rose Garden", "Sunshine", "The Woman's Room" by Marilyn French, "Go Ask Alice", and several books for young people such as "First Person Singular", which all involved young, sort of bohemian woman facing mental illness, death, addiction, sex, and sadness. My memories of the experience of reading these books blends in with the feelings I experienced when listening to music at the time; Janice Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Joni Mitchell and Donovan, These feelings fed my yearning to escape my parent's home, wear some flowers in my hair and follow the road to Shambala!

I would guess that if I were to re-read any of these books now - I would find them to be self-conciously "hip", and though I loved the 1970's, there are some parts that tend to make one cringe - (think of the cliche of the avocado appliances for example). Interestingly though, the appeal of the music I mentioned above has not lessened or changed for me through time - except maybe for some of Donovan's - ie "For Susan on the West Coast Waiting". I think the author felt that way upon reading some of her 1970's favorites, but like she says, at the time the met a need within herself, which is what the books above did for me as well.

[Elizabeth · Rating 2 out of 5]

A lot of the book is detailed analysis of the books Spacks reread. Not what I expected - I thought it would be more generally about why one rereads or should reread or what books bear rereading and what to expect from rereading - there is some of that - probably only enough material for a magazine article. If I'd read the other Goodreads reviews before reading this book, I would have known how the books is organized and its content. I agree with other reviewers: if I had read the book Spacks is analyzing, it is interesting; if not, it is not.

"Reading a book for the first time can rarely if ever offer the kind of relaxed pleasure that comes with previous knowledge of how everything is going to turn out. It is equally true that reading a book for the first time rarely stimulates the kind of subtle discriminations that become possible when much in the text feels familiar. Children's books as well as grown-up ones provoke such discrimination." p. 34

True, but I still feel the tension of, e.g., Catherine Morland being tricked by John Thorpe into missing her walk with the Tilney's (Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey), even though I know in the end Catherine and Henry Tilney will marry. Maybe this is an example of Jane Austen's genius.

This also reminds me of Lynne Sharon Schwartz's Disturbances in the field (I think that's where I read it) where she writes about increased pleasure when one has "anticipation of foreknowledge." My favorite example of this is the third act of Swan Lake where Odile, the black swan, does 32 consecutive fouettés. It's exciting the first time one sees it, but knowing it is coming up makes it even more exciting to me.

"The reader engages in constant judgment and interpretation, involved in a sequence of challenge and response. The rereader customarily feels less pressure. She can allow herself a state of suspended attention comparable to Keats's 'negative capability,' a condition of receptivity devoid, as the poet says, of irritable reaching after fact and reason - of irritable reaching after anything at all." p. 70

I liked that Spacks writes "Like many other passionate readers, I always carry a book. What if there's a traffic jam? What if the dentist is running late?" Joseph Epstein said something similar in "Waiter, there's a paragraph in my soup!" an essay in A line out for a walk: familiar essays.

One should always have one's book wherever one goes.

[Sherwood Smith]

Spacks has long been one of my favorite writers on literature. With this book, her tone takes a turn away from the scrupulously academic, as she apparently wrote this after retiring from decades of university teaching.

Now she writes about the pleasure of reading, and the result is like a conversation with a smart person over tea: informal, occasionally funny, but interesting and thought-provoking.

I enjoyed it all, even if our tastes don't mesh. She talks about books that reward rereading, and books that were great at one period of your life, but lost their pizazz.

The best essay, though, is the one on Jane Austen. I think it's best read by those who've been through Austen's novels so many times you know instantly what incident she's referring to. There is so much insight packed into that essay that it feels like a book unto itself.

I ended up leaving this book in my nighstand collection, which contains books I can grab if I'm awake in the middle of the night, and want to open and read a few pages before falling back to sleep.

[Odoublegood · Rating 3 out of 5]

somewhat dry and academic in tone and approach, but worth reading; it's always fun to learn what others think of a book or books; the only books author read that I haven't are Islandia and Herzog; physically, this book is a pleasure to hold and read; on page 156, in a discussion of Middlemarch, the author interpolates her definition of the word "guimp" and gets it all wrong, defining it as "an underblouse intended for wear with a low-cut dress." It's a form of trim (used on clothing, draperies, upholstery, etc.; another example would be soutache).

[Library Angel · Rating 3 out of 5]

I disagreed with some things the author said, but it was still interesting.

[Sheelie Kittee · Rating 4 out of 5]

I didn't know this would be so elucidating and eye-opening, truly. at times I would either falsely believe or be influenced by the disdain of others to re-read anything ( life is short! too many books to read, new ones, why waste the time re-reading! ) this book covers such topics of angst related to revisiting any text, along with other misconceptions and myths. but most importantly it made me celebrate the very art of re-reading and how i do find this to be of immense value, for myself personally. moreover i do not know if there can even be such a thing as 'rereading' in the way this word is generally perceived. every time one reads a book, it is not ever the same epxerience. a text can still change with time given interpretation, and a reader can bring a new perspective to the text if they've had changes in life experience. so, is it really re-reading then? it makes one think!

friends, readers, what is one text you recall re-reading or having done so, or want to re-read, and why? did you feel it was different or imagine it will be, upon revisiting it?

[Dianne Oliver · Rating 4 out of 5]

" Rereading can enlighten us about what we are looking for now and what we have sought in the past. "

I have been considering rereading some books that I read quite a bit, ahem, in the past. My concern is that the books I hold dear in memory might be lacking now. I don't want them ruined. But I know the ones that hold up will bring a greater depth and joy now. I will possibly enjoy books I cast aside, as well. I may find ways that I have grown as a reader, and a person.
I fear I will regret the time spent not be on the endless tbr list. But, how nice it would be to visit the old familiar, comforting friends. She quotes Larry McMurtry " If I once read for adventure, I now read for security. How nice to be able to return to what won't change. When I sit down to dinner with a given book, I want to know what I am going to find. "
Am I ready for that?
She aknowledges all of these concerns. Which leaves me at square one.

[Emily Harris · Rating 3 out of 5]

I loved the thesis of this book, and I do love a professional saying rereading is good for you! I also really enjoyed the authors personal stories about encountering books for either the first time or her following rereads. What I think lowered my enjoyment/intererst was that I hadn't read many of the books referenced throughout. Since the author spends significant time doing literary analysis of the books she's reading, those sections felt tedious to me since she talked mostly about books I've never read, or sometimes never heard of.

[Allyson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys serious reading, whether a rereader or not. I want to reread this book in fact.
She writes really well with thought provoking insights and an intimate, personal style that feels like a friend. So many phrases or thoughts are worthy of remembering but that is never my strong suit. I felt a common experience with her reads despite reading none except Pride and Prejudice and how they affected her. Really it was just beautiful, a true treasure and one I want to own. I love the cover and small size of it, something to be kept at hand. It was not perfect as toward the middle, it lagged a little but somehow that even felt appropriate. And in addition to that fault which is not truly a fault, I felt no need to read any of her mentioned books although unfamiliar with all.
i really enjoyed the reading of this gem and only hope on my reread to enjoy it equally or more.

[Lorien · Rating 1 out of 5]

To be honest, this book was soooo boring, I didn't read every single page. In fact, I may have finished 4 chapters before I started skimming the pages, just to get to the end. I thought I would be inspired to read new books from the books the author discussed in this book, but nope. It was like reading a very boring book report on old books that I a) have never read and b) never intend to read. I learned i'm not much of a rereader and that I read for escapism, not to critique an authors prose and how complex their characters are. I imagine this book would be for someone who is a writer or loves studying literature. Years of schooling made me a pleasure reader, gone are the days that wish to discuss what I read and think about the writing. I just want a great plot and fun characters.

[Pamela · Rating 4 out of 5]

I must be an incredible geek to read a whole book called "On Rereading." Spacks has some interesting things to say about why we reread (favorite books, childhood books, books we keep thinking we'll like if we "just try it again") and what can happen when we do. There are pleasant case studies here, as Spacks makes her way through rereadings of The Golden Notebook (I could relate to her experience of finding it much less wowsa the second time through), The Wizard of Oz, Lucky Jim (Spacks is simply wrong, it is ever-fabulous!), and so on. Though Spacks writes very accessibly, there is a bit more of an academic vibe to this book than an essayistic one, which is too bad, but understandable--Spacks was a longtime professor of English and On Rereading is published by Harvard University Press.

[CleverBaggins · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is the last of the literary theory type books I'm trying for now and its just as disappointing ( but at least not as insulting) as the last few. The writing is dry and boring and honestly it seems like she doesn't have anything new to say at all. She's somewhat dismissive of younger readers (like her students) and had no clue about some major titles.

Now, I don't believe that everyone has to have read or heard of anything but if you love books and want to write about books (and god forbid are teaching books) I expect you to be at least a little up to date on books.

So no, this book wasn't for me at all.

[Amelia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Heard Patricia Meyer Spacks at the recent Phi Beta Kappa conference, offering her remarks as response to receiving one of the Council's awards. She was engaging and insightful, beginning with observations about kids who memorize the books that they demand to have read to them over and over ad nauseam, through to the habits and pleasures of (us older) folks who get an entirely different effect by returning to books of decades past. I'm just getting started on the book itself, but it promises great pleasure.

[Gramarye · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not quite a five-star review, but definitely 4.5 for a book with a lot of thoughtful, interesting things to say about the experience of rereading, and what readers can learn about themselves by revisiting not just well-loved favourites, but also books that might not have had a particular appeal the first time around. Well worth a look for anyone with a shelf or two full of battered old literary treats from years gone by.

[June · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read with pleasure the philosophy of rereading, and agree that each time you read a book, you are a slightly different person, and so gain a slightly different experience. The book slowed down for me as is got more specific. I would value the book more for its first couple of chapters than for the subsequent material.

[JoyfulK]

I didn't actually finish this book, but I don't plan to revisit it any time soon. Turns out I'm much more interested in re-reading things than in reading about re-reading things. During the month I had this from the library, I consistently avoided it while re-reading about 10 books by various favorite authors (and some new stuff, too!).

[Jo]

Very interesting! Why do we reread?

I notably reread Spindle's End, the Lord of the Rings trilogy, CS Lewis, some Charles de Lint, some of my favorite poetry like Sappho and William Carlos Williams... I've also reread some books and been ever so disappointed in what I'd remembered was wonderful. Rereading is a window looking into our changing selves.

[Michele Bolay · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is nothing really wrong with this book, but my hopes were for a lighter, more personal experience, and this was much more academic in tone than I expected. Again, nothing wrong with that, just wasn't what I was looking for this time around. I am a big re-reader, and it seems like Spacks and I have some of the same reading tastes, yet I was dissatisfied.

[Shallowreader VaVeros · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was a DNF for me. There were some interesting parts that I dipped in and out of throughout the book butnin general it did not sustain my interest. It would probably appeal to people who like examining the minutae of other people'sl reading experience.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book isn't bad, but I found it more of a personal meditation that I could not always relate to. Sometimes books like these are journeys, personal journeys, but it's not always clear whether company is needed. On the issue of rereading, I preferred Jonathan Yardley's Second Readings.

[Marla · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating so far. I can tell I'm going to like this very much. This is a very entertaining book about books.

[Saket Suryesh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Am reading, wonderfully written book, every paragraph, word, pause and silence speaks of the painstaking artistery and effort author has put into it.