First impressions not always correct?

[Martin]

I've been on a rereading binge this year; at least 3/4 of what I've read this year, I read for a second time. And something struck me as funny. First impressions are, at least for me, it seems, not always 100% correct.

While my first impressions of the bulk of the books I reread this year remained virtually intact, there are a few instances where I was dead wrong first time round.

Notable example - I reread David Brin's Kil'n People, a pulpy sci-fi/crime thriller, which I enjoyed the hell out of first time round. The second time, however, I couldn't help noticing what an enormous piece of crap it was. Characters didn't captivate me, the story didn't excite me, and the writing style didn't particularly make me envy Mr. Brin.

Another example is my current read, Jose Saramago's semi-apocalyptic Blindness, which was one of the best books I read in early '04. This time round, though, it just doesn't do it for me. While I still recognise the quality of the writing, and the importance of the premise and it's execution, the book itself kind of bores me. Take the long, strung together sentences, and the namelessness of the main characters; these are gimmicks I so very much enjoyed first time round, because they put you in the shoes of the characters, which simply annoy the pants off me now. I find myself skimming and skipping more and more often.

So, is this because it's a reread? Seems unlikely, because the bulk of this year's rereads went down fine. Have my tastes shifted away from these specific books? Could be; I got slightly older, and slightly more mature and experienced in the ways of life. Or are first impressions not always as correct as we think they are? That, the first time around, you are so excited about the author, or the premise of the book, that you tend to forget about the minor (and perhaps major) annoyances?

Who knows?

 

[abecedarian]

Maybe you were reading more critically the second time around. You'd already read and enjoyed the story, but the next time you were noticing how the author put the thing together, and found it wanting. And maybe your tastes have changed a bit. We all have experienced trying to read a book and not liking it on the first read, but loving it on the second. This is the same thing in reverse.

 

[Martin]

That's probably the case with the first example, Brin's Kil'n People, but most certainly not with the second.

I read Blindness very closely the first time round, because I was dealing with a nobel prize winner - I didn't want to miss any of the literary brilliance he might throw at me, and it were exactly these literary 'tricks', coupled with a great central premise and superb execution that made the book so utterly interesting. I still see those tricks, and the premise and execution haven't changed, but now they merely annoy me.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great book; it was back then and it still is today. But, I don't know, it just doesn't read as smoothly as the first time around.

 

[Peder]

Martin,
No, I don't think it is because it is a reread. I really think it has to do with the quality of the book. I have reread Lolita a number of times and enjoyed it each time, and seen different things each time that made it interesting. Lately I have read and reread Pale Fire and enjoyed it so much more the second time, in addition to getting so much more out of it. I'm looking forward to reading it the third time starting tomorrow. I don't reread so many books so my experience is limited. I can say, with respect movies however, that there are some movies that cannot be sat through a second time, even though I start out with the best of intentions. And there are movies that I have seen many times -- six times being the current maximum. So I really think it is the author's artistry that is the key and not yourself or the whim of the moment.
Peder

 

[Scottishduffy]

This is why I almost never re-read. I am too frightened of not enjoying the book as much the second time. Or perhaps spending all my time picking at inadequacies of the author. I can't recall having re-read much of anything lately, except for the Chronicles of Narnia, but lord I was 8 the first time I read that. I have an entirely different perspective now.

The only time I re-read is if it was a book I did not enjoy on my first try but believe that I may enjoy now. I have done this with The Jungle by Upton Sinclair and Wicked: the Life and Times of the Wicked witch of the West. I keep hoping that if I wait for a bit, then a book might intrigue me.

 

[abecedarian]

How much time had lapsed between readings of the second book? If it had been awhile, your reasons for reading the book may have shifted a bit, or you may be right about a shift in your maturity level. Sometimes I think environment plays a role in whether we enjoy a book or not, and that can change. eg. If I am depressed when I read something I loved the first time, my feelings may prevent me from enjoying when I try it again. Not that I'm saying you're depressed, just that your life circumstances may be different from the first time you read and enjoyed the book.

 

[Martin]

So I really think it is the author's artistry that is the key and not yourself or the whim of the moment.

I don't want to exclusively make this about the example I used, I was really inquiring about the phenomenon, but I must react to this - this is Jose Saramago we're talking about, and not Dan Brown or the likes. The author's artistry (or lack thereof, as you are perhaps implying) doesn't seem to be relevant here. I could be wrong, though.

Sometimes I think environment plays a role in whether we enjoy a book or not

Environment and state of mind could be an explanation, yes. It's been about 16 months since I first read it, so that's not all that long, but perhaps it's enough for me and my environment to slightly shift.

Again, let me stress that this is not meant to be a literary deconstruction of Blindness; I wanted to discuss the phenomenon - have you experienced this, and if so, what did you think about it?

 

[Peder]

....but I must react to this - this is Jose Saramago we're talking about, and not Dan Brown or the likes. The author's artistry (or lack thereof, as you are perhaps implying) doesn't seem to be relevant here. I could be wrong, though.

No Martin,
I did not intend a put down of Saramago. Just a too casual response on my part. But please allow me to ask why you mention Dan Brown in your response to me? Certainly not as rough comparison to Nabokov I would assume. Just a general thought about my own reading habits? Or just your irritation? Or your estimate that I equate Saramago and Dan Brown? As long as you "must react to this" I guess I must ask about that
Peder

 

[MonkeyCatcher]

Another example is my current read, Jose Saramago's semi-apocalyptic Blindness, which was one of the best books I read in early '04. This time round, though, it just doesn't do it for me.

Thank you, Lord, there is another! I thought I was the only one to find Blindness even a /tad/ boring. And don't get me started on those long and confusing sentences void of proper punctuation

Back to topic, I don't think that this has ever happened to me - I have actually experience the opposite a few times. I will have started a book, found it boring and stopped reading part way through, picked it up again later and absolutely loved it(like LOTR and The Hobbit)

 

[mehastings]

I rarely re-read. I don't often find books I enjoy enough that I am willing to take my reading time away from something fresh and new. However, there are those rare books that I am willing ro re-read. I find that I need to give enough time in between readings though. Otherwise, the story is so familiar that I just can't find it interesting enough to give it the twice over. I start to get annoyed with the fact that I already know every detail and I am more likely to find unique and quirky writing to be annoying and tiring. Long story short, I'm going with the "wait longer before re-reading" theory.

 

[Mari]

A couple of possibilities occur to me. First, I know that I embellish books in my memory. I improve them in my mind. Or, to be more precise, I turn a phrase here and there so that the book matches more closely the way I like to read. Therefore, when I reread, the books are not as good as I seem to remember them.

The other possibility is that your appreciation for good writing has grown in the interim. Simply through the passage of time filled with reading, you have become a more experienced and critical reader. Your standards have become higher than when you first read these books.

Just tossing out possibilities.

 

[Jemima Aslana]

Mari may be on to something.

Also consider that trying out something new can be exciting - in this case also because it was Nobel winner, you may unconsciously have added some value to it in your 'digestion' of the book. Now it's no longer a novelty.

Hmm what to compare to.... bungee jumping perhaps. It'll be great fun to try it,not because it's bungee jumping but because it's something you hadn't done before. So what you remember as 'being fun/good' is actually trying something new out and not the bungee jumping itself. This could be what's happened to Blindness for you, you enjoyed it because it was something new and exciting you needed to try, but now that you're not reading it just for the sake of reading it, but rather for the sake of enjoying it - it won't fly.

Did that make any sense at all?

 

[Martin]

No Martin,
I did not intend a put down of Saramago. Just a too casual response on my part. But please allow me to ask why you mention Dan Brown in your response to me? Certainly not as rough comparison to Nabokov I would assume. Just a general thought about my own reading habits? Or just your irritation? Or your estimate that I equate Saramago and Dan Brown? As long as you "must react to this" I guess I must ask about that
Peder

No no no no, no sneak attack or anything - I just wanted to point out that the quality of the writing is probably not the cause, because that's quite good. I mentioned Dan Brown (who I have read and liked) because that was the first name to pop into my head when I wanted to name someone from who you'd perhaps expect this phenomenon (i.e. a reread showing cracks and flaws).

 

[Martin]

And Jemima and Mari,

Mari's point about embelleshing a book in your mind may be a very good one - I do find myself sometimes doing that with films, so why not with books also? I think you may be onto something here.

Jemima, I've bungee jumped 4 times now, and each and every time I loved the hell out of it. So, not the best analogy for me personally, but I do get your point, and perhaps it's somewhat related to Mari's point, which I reiterated above.

Maybe I embellish it because of the excitement of novelty.

 

[Peder]

I wanted to name someone from who you'd perhaps expect this phenomenon (i.e. a reread showing cracks and flaws).

Martin,
Many thanks for your response. I have to admit that I can't think of examples that fit your bill, or explanations. The great rise in my apreciation for Nabokov after rereading was of course the opposite of what you were asking about and I simply missed your point.
Peder

 

[Jemima Aslana]

Jemima, I've bungee jumped 4 times now, and each and every time I loved the hell out of it. So, not the best analogy for me personally, but I do get your point, and perhaps it's somewhat related to Mari's point, which I reiterated above.

Maybe I embellish it because of the excitement of novelty.

LOL You may, at your leisure, replace bungee jumping with whatever you tried once for the novelty of it and tried twice to find out whether you actually liked it or not. My intended point remains that sometimes the novelty of something makes you forget to notice whether you actually like it or not.

 

[direstraits]

I think it *is* because it's a re-read Martin. I've read Blindness and I loved the story. The language was not common, and while it didn't *really* plod on, it was a unique idiocyncracy of the book that was good the first time around, and would be boring if it went on too long. I know I'd probably not enjoy Blindness the second time around. At the first read, the language added something to the story's atmosphere. Since we already know what's gonna happen, the way it's presented will seem like a hindrance to the point. My opinion.

Saramago writes well, and part of the reason is also because he knows when to stop.

I seldom re-read, and when I do it's usually a book I know I'm going to enjoy no matter how many times I've done it.

ds

 

[WoundedThorns]

Maybe you were reading more critically the second time around. You'd already read and enjoyed the story, but the next time you were noticing how the author put the thing together, and found it wanting. And maybe your tastes have changed a bit. We all have experienced trying to read a book and not liking it on the first read, but loving it on the second. This is the same thing in reverse.

i agree with this. i've read more critically the second time around before.

 

[WoundedThorns]

hmm.. perhaps it is because its a re-read. its why i'm scared of rereading my favorite book.. i dont want it to bore me. this summer i was re-reading the HP series (well i never finished 4th... hah) and i guess it bored me since i already knew what was going to happen. the first time around you only have theories, and therefore the suspense is exciting.

also, actual taste in books just changes. i probably wouldnt be able to stand half the stuff i loved five or so years ago.

 

[Prairie_Girl]

This is why I almost never re-read. I am too frightened of not enjoying the book as much the second time. Or perhaps spending all my time picking at inadequacies of the author. I can't recall having re-read much of anything lately, except for the Chronicles of Narnia, but lord I was 8 the first time I read that. I have an entirely different perspective now.

The only time I re-read is if it was a book I did not enjoy on my first try but believe that I may enjoy now. I have done this with The Jungle by Upton Sinclair and Wicked: the Life and Times of the Wicked witch of the West. I keep hoping that if I wait for a bit, then a book might intrigue me.

Duffy, have you seen the musical/heard the sountrack? I found I actually enjoyed it more the second time around after having seen the musical.