“In such circumstances, readers cannot but be subversive” (Manguel 22). The first time I read this quote, I was quite perplexed. I was unsure about the point Alberto Manguel was trying to make. Once I re-read the entire paragraph, I developed my own interpretation of this statement.
In “A History of Reading,” by Alberto Manguel, Manguel talks about the different forms of government in the world who posses apprehensions about having intellectual inhabitants living in their society. One form of government, in particular, Manguel discusses is the totalitarian government. Totalitarian governments prefer to have a non-thinking society in order to maintain their power. So they prohibit certain reading material from the public.
What I got from Manguel’s statement, previously mentioned, is that in certain societies, such as one governed by a totalitarian government, people who wish to educate themselves cannot help but revolt against authority. This is not because they are criminals with no regard to authority figures. It is because they enjoy the act of reading and learning new things. Just the mere explanation of my interpretation of this quote baffles me. Does it not sound a bit oxymoronic? The word subversive means to undermine governmental authority. To read means to consume and comprehend written material. A “subversive reader;” does such a thing even exist?
