#1 How can we think about Reading - reflection on Tim Ingold?

Reading is fundamental to how we construct our worldviews, yet it is often an action we take for granted. We have been trained to see it as a mechanical, "cognitive operation" where attention is supposed to “cut through" the surface of the page to "retrieve meanings reflected from behind". This approach treats printed text like "algebra"—a problem of "restoration of broken parts"—where the letters themselves are meant to "vanish from visual consciousness".

However, the way we read is highly cultural, shaped by history and script. This dominant Western cognitive style, which tends to "withdraw words from script", stands in stark contrast to other ways of knowing. For instance, while some scripts (like traditional Chinese or Korean) are built upon the visual forms of objects or the sounds of words, even within the Latin tradition, reading handwritten cursive script demands a vision that is "more performative than cognitive". It requires the eye to follow the scribal line and retrace the continuous movement of formation. This echoes medieval practices where readers poring over manuscripts reported listening to "the voices of the pages" (voces paginarum), demonstrating a historical unity between reading and listening that is now often opposed in print culture.

In our current era of cross-cultural engagement and rapidly developing technology, we are inundated with images/visuals. This has intensified the perceived antimony between seeing and reading and challenges the perceived authority of written text. Given that much literature on "reading" originates from Western academic perspectives, I started this reflection out of curiosity— to re-examine this fundamental relationship.

By reflecting on the work of scholars like, in this case, the articles from Tim Ingold, we can move beyond the current trend of tendency toward "ocularcentrism and scriptism". We need to challenge the premise that meaning is only achieved by "cutting through" and instead consider the observational modality of "going along"—an attention that "submits to movement". This perspective allows us, as readers and writers, to re-think reading as a lively, performative act, rather than a silent cognitive deficit.

Reference:

Ingold, T. (2022). Cutting through and going along: A comment on knowing by singing. American Anthropologist, 124(4), 885-890. https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.13786

Ingold, Tim, 1948-. (2011). “Drawing Making Writing”. Being alive : essays on movement, knowledge and description, p.177-p.180. London ; New York :Routledge, 2011