rereading, an operation contrary to the commercial and ideological habits of our society, which would have us ‘throw away’ the story once it has been consumed…so that we can then move on to another story, buy another book…, re-reading is here suggested at the outset, for it alone saves the text from repetition (those who fail to reread are obliged to read the same story everywhere).
roland barthes, s/z
This should probably, speaking of contemporary society, be extended to all types of texts (movies, images, music etc.). I feel a bit naïve saying this, but I’ve always felt a bit odd for liking to reread and rewatch (especially rewatch) things, a practice I think is utterly underrated. When “new” is always deemed “good”, you tend to put less attention on the “re-actions” of things. Why spend 2 hours on a movie you already seen? On a book you already read?
I love rereading. I just hadn’t put it into words till now. On the other hand, I might’ve got it all wrong, Foucault is probably as close to semiotics as I’ll ever get, and Barthes only make sense to me when he gets personal with his photographs.
(via imageobjecttext)
In several of his critical essays, Roberto Bolaño concludes by emphatically urging that “we must reread Borges” or “we must reread Swift”. It’s a moral argument for him: great literature is inexhaustible, and so when we reread it, we engrave its lessons on our hearts. Since we are fallible creatures, prone to distortion and forgetting, rereading helps us remember. Moreover, rereading is not repetitious because each time we reread, we are changed (or changed again). And this vigilance that he recommends, to always be learning and changing, is precisely what prevents our actual lives from becoming repetitious. As Barthes says, “those who fail to reread are obliged to read the same story everywhere”.
(via towerofsleep)