Every day we encounter bodies of text. Whether it's newspaper articles or updated blogs from our favorite person on the Internet, we are surrounded by words and phrases. With each body of text we grow and expand our thinking capacity. Things are written with a purpose and when we read them we get the perspective of what bothered the author. But the question is: how can we take what we read and use it to come out as a more informed and educated person? It is not enough to simply read what is presented to us and accept it as fact, as this is too passive and requires no participation from the reader. Nor can we simply refute every argument that the author has a say, because that is a quality of an arrogant fool. So what do we do? Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayIn Francis Bacon's "Of Studies," Bacon addresses the very topic of how a scholar becomes a scholar through the way he or she reads. He explores the paradox of approaching a piece of text and eloquently states “read not to contradict and disprove, nor to believe and assume, […] but to weigh and consider” (Bacon 9). He believes that truly growing from a piece of literature means taking it apart and projecting our own perspectives onto it. Getting the most out of writing studies requires an active role on the part of the reader. We ourselves must not only question ourselves and qualify pieces of the text we read, but also reflect. The way to maximize the potential we can derive from a piece of writing is not only through an assertive reading, which questions every character, nor a passive reading, which welcomes everything without prejudice, but an active and conscious reading which requires not only readers input of opinions nor output of the authors' explorations but a conversation between the two. Only in this way can we avoid the common follies according to which "dedicating too much time to studies is sloth; to use them too much for ornament is affectation; to judge entirely by their rules is the humor of a scholar” (9). Bacon here shows what happens to people who do not heed his advice on how to read and work (with studies). Those who fail to reflect on what they are reading and transmit it, cast a sieve into their conscience and sift through valuable insights will not only fail to become scholars, but will become something even more superficial: a lazy person, an affected person, the end of a joke. However, following Bacon's teachings is a statement much easier said than done. It's easy to warn someone not to fall into a trap, but actually avoiding the trap itself is a much more complicated task; the reason it is a trap is due to the deceptive ease with which one can fall. So how can one traverse the trap-laden fields of literary information and evade the things Bacon warns against? How can we find the balance between reader-intensive reading and author-dominated reading, and start a productive conversation between the two? And how can we avoid falling on both sides of this issue? In “The Corrections” by Adam Gopnik, Gopnik reviews abbreviations of various novels. The novels reviewed by Gopnik are critically acclaimed literary pieces that are believed to be unanimously approved classics. These texts transcend the field of literature and are thought of more as a paradigm of artistic perfection. Despite this, Gopnik almost criticizes the writers of these universal stories, criticizing them for sometimes being "not merely digressive but 'sentimental'" insome passages from the story (Gopnik 563). He complains about writers of major novels like “Moby Dick” for having parts of the story where the author goes on “philosophical wanderings” with moments of “metaphysical huffing and puffing” (561). Gopnik does not simply accept the greatness that others have proclaimed and does not share the depths that the authors of these novels seek to explore at the margins of their stories, but rather questions its relevance to the story. Even as he distances himself from the danger of “[believing] and [taking] for granted” that Bacon presages, he seems to fall prey to naivety? to “[read] to contradict and refute” as many of his criticisms may seem arrogant (Bacon 9). His support for reductions that tell the plot and avoid "too many digressions and extraneous learnings" that he finds unfavorable may show a temperament that refuses to acknowledge the other side but attacks the problems he seems to find. His predisposition to contradict and refute the texts he reads may put him in a position where he is not learning from what he is reading but simply stating what he already believes to be true. However, Gopnik eventually switches sides with the author and tries to realize the reasons behind the author's “little quips and warm quips” (Gopnik 563). He realizes that these things are what make these pieces of literature unique. The personality of the text reflects that of the author and he sees the positive side in what he initially saw as a detractor of the novel. He views what he saw as the “waving on [the] shoulders” of an author and the constant “commenting on [the] behaviors” of characters as perhaps a humanizing trait. He thinks about it for a moment and reflects that perhaps this complaint he initially had with the text is actually a parallel to “the way we deal with real people who are obsessed with us” (563). He takes something that he initially thought hurt the story and tried to see it from another perspective where the author's words were an intentional commentary on the way we live our lives and successfully managed to gain a new understanding. His mature reflection on what the author has to say despite his previous personal bias shows his struggle to sift through truth and objectivity. Through this he was able to grow and learn that “masterpieces are inherently a little crazy” and that is their beauty. He is able to come to the conclusion that narrative is not everything and a text that is often "too in line with the message" diminishes the creativity and strength of the story; it is not the “transparency of action” but the “self-awareness of purpose” with which we learn. The narrator's experiences rather than the character's trials are what truly resonate with our philosophies and for us to gain new perspectives (567). By reading these “hysterical and semi-crazy masterpieces” we are able to peer into the bizarre minds of the authors of these great works and learn something new ourselves (562). Although Gopnik is a person who believes in the conciseness of a text, as shown by his penchant for an abbreviated text that fits the plot and is free from the author's indulgences, he can also take a moment to appreciate the other side and see value and consequently see its greater value, leading to a reevaluation of what the reading is about. Taking the time to be open-minded and see where the other side is coming from is the way to start the conversation between writer and reader. But it's also important to be aware of what we enjoy from reading to ensure we don't fall for the writer's whims. Acknowledging the arguments of those who disagree with us and at the same time countering them with our own complaints is how we can 9-10.