Taking video/photos of someone who is just reading is pretty creepy. They're not doing anything to you, leave them alone. If someone was actively bragging or talking about how great Infinite Jest was loudly on the metro, sure, different story. But someone engaging in a quiet private activity?

It reminds me a but of that description of Matilda's father.

"With frightening suddenness he now began ripping the pages out of the book in handfuls and throwing them in the waste-paper basket.
Matilda froze in horror. The father kept going. There seemed little doubt that the man felt some kind of jealousy. How dare she, he seemed to be saying with each rip of a page, how dare she enjoy reading books when he couldn't? How dare she?”

Anonymous wrote:I cancelled my New Yorker subscription because of garbage articles like this one. Good to know I’m not missing anything.

That's too bad, because it's still one of the best publications out there. OP completely misunderstood the article-- or didn't actually read it, which would be ironic in this context.

You didn't understand the article. Why the weird injection of class and then equating class with performance vs. authenticity?!

Performative reading is definitely a thing. See, Lebron James.

https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/13kcxfk/dude_cant_get_past_the_first_five_pages/

I cancelled my New Yorker subscription because of garbage articles like this one. Good to know I’m not missing anything.

Anonymous wrote:I just finished the New Yorker piece on performative reading. Actual performative reading signals insecurity because of its inauthenticity and is decidedly middle class as are the folks poking fun and making a spectacle of it on social media. However, foregoing social media and reading difficult literature for pleasure (and authentically) is becoming a higher status thing due to the brain rot that the proliferation of algorithmic social media and smart phones has caused in our society.

Whether it’s authentic or not, I certainly think more highly of someone reading a physical book than I do the hordes of phone addicted zombies scrolling endlessly on the metro. If nothing else, maybe this trend will improve our reading habits!

Change my mind!

Reading the New Yorker is the ultimate example of performative reading.

This post and the article that it points to are perfect examples of a new genre of rage baiting posts poking at anything virtuous and good. There is another one going around Substack right now, written by LLM, as I think this is, talking about the 20 "supposedly great books" that actually are stupid and shouldn't be read. The suggestion is that anyone who enjoys anything that isn't vapid mainstream drivel is "performative" or "bougy" or something. Books include Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Austin, etc. The great dumbing of society continues apace.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what "performative" means in this context. Reading is reading and is always a good thing, no matter the material. Getting through a "serious" book just to say you read is not wasted time or effort, but I doubt many people (if any?) do that. There has to be some curiosity and intent to learn something for yourself behind it. There isn't anything wrong with reading something fun and light either.

Read the article. Performative reading is more or less defined as conspicuously reading a physical book in a public setting. A book that is considered high brow literature (eg, Proust or David Foster Wallace) or critically accepted and in a way design to convey intellectual superiority. It screams, “Look at me you rubes. I have higher status than those who waste their time addicted to brain rot social media.” It sounds like it’s a direct reaction to those who endlessly scroll social media in public places to the point that they are often obvious to their surroundings and others. Maybe it’s just another form of snobbery in our modern age. FWIW, I’m beginning to think there is a real stigma in connection with those who endlessly consume social media, especially in public. I certainly judge them.

1. The article is a pathetic attempt at clickbait to generate relevance.

2. If I saw someone reading Proust or a recognizable classic, I would assume they didn’t read it in middle/high school or college. Put differently, I don’t think it’s a flex.

3. You said you judge people consuming social media in public, pp. Question: how do you know what I’m reading on my phone? I’m usually reading work-related emails and related attachments (sadly). If I’m killing time in line or enjoying a quick lunch alone, I might scroll dcum, daily mail, or reels. Given the excruciatingly heavy stuff I’m dealing with at work, I need a break. My mom called it “bubble gum for the mind” and said you need a break to relax your mind, body, and soul. She had a PhD from Hopkins back when women didn’t get in unless they were truly brilliant (and she had a full ride).

Your assumption is probably wrong, and only someone who is not intellectual thinks that reading a "classic" in middle school, high school or even college means that you have really understood or internalized it. The reason things are "classics" is that they address serious human questions, and these are best considered with wisdom and experience.

Anonymous wrote:Performative reading sounds fun!

Full disclosure: I’m guilty of this. I’ll buy silly books to read at the airport/on flights just to see what kind of reactions I get. Try it—it’s super fun!

I’ve also sat in the lobby of a hotel where a major conservative conference was happening and I pretended to read bios by well known Dems. I got a lot of strange looks but the people who approached me were the best! Full disclosure: my NPR tote with the RBG pin and assorted political pins drew the most comments. Again: very fun!

Next on my to do list: performative exercise. I’m planning to throw on my workout gear and head to the gym with a box of a dozen donuts. My strategy is to sit on the treadmill eating…but I can’t decide if I should be over the top joyful or sobbing. I am happy to crowdsource this and report back.

There is a better word for this: Trolling.

Anonymous wrote:I just finished the New Yorker piece

Change my mind!

Yeah tell us more about "performative reading".

Performative reading sounds fun!

Full disclosure: I’m guilty of this. I’ll buy silly books to read at the airport/on flights just to see what kind of reactions I get. Try it—it’s super fun!

I’ve also sat in the lobby of a hotel where a major conservative conference was happening and I pretended to read bios by well known Dems. I got a lot of strange looks but the people who approached me were the best! Full disclosure: my NPR tote with the RBG pin and assorted political pins drew the most comments. Again: very fun!

Next on my to do list: performative exercise. I’m planning to throw on my workout gear and head to the gym with a box of a dozen donuts. My strategy is to sit on the treadmill eating…but I can’t decide if I should be over the top joyful or sobbing. I am happy to crowdsource this and report back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what "performative" means in this context. Reading is reading and is always a good thing, no matter the material. Getting through a "serious" book just to say you read is not wasted time or effort, but I doubt many people (if any?) do that. There has to be some curiosity and intent to learn something for yourself behind it. There isn't anything wrong with reading something fun and light either.

Read the article. Performative reading is more or less defined as conspicuously reading a physical book in a public setting. A book that is considered high brow literature (eg, Proust or David Foster Wallace) or critically accepted and in a way design to convey intellectual superiority. It screams, “Look at me you rubes. I have higher status than those who waste their time addicted to brain rot social media.” It sounds like it’s a direct reaction to those who endlessly scroll social media in public places to the point that they are often obvious to their surroundings and others. Maybe it’s just another form of snobbery in our modern age. FWIW, I’m beginning to think there is a real stigma in connection with those who endlessly consume social media, especially in public. I certainly judge them.

Wait, someone literally made up "performative reading," which is so not a thing, just to pitch an article to their editors?

And they couldn't even get a person who is talking about it to post the article for clicks

The article seems to suggest it’s a trend on social media where folks are recording examples of people doing it and making fun of them for doing so.

A stranger recording someone reading is 1) dumb, 2) weird, 3) they have no idea if it's "performative" or not.

So the author saw one TikTok before they pitched the article to the editor?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what "performative" means in this context. Reading is reading and is always a good thing, no matter the material. Getting through a "serious" book just to say you read is not wasted time or effort, but I doubt many people (if any?) do that. There has to be some curiosity and intent to learn something for yourself behind it. There isn't anything wrong with reading something fun and light either.

Read the article. Performative reading is more or less defined as conspicuously reading a physical book in a public setting. A book that is considered high brow literature (eg, Proust or David Foster Wallace) or critically accepted and in a way design to convey intellectual superiority. It screams, “Look at me you rubes. I have higher status than those who waste their time addicted to brain rot social media.” It sounds like it’s a direct reaction to those who endlessly scroll social media in public places to the point that they are often obvious to their surroundings and others. Maybe it’s just another form of snobbery in our modern age. FWIW, I’m beginning to think there is a real stigma in connection with those who endlessly consume social media, especially in public. I certainly judge them.

Wait, someone literally made up "performative reading," which is so not a thing, just to pitch an article to their editors?

And they couldn't even get a person who is talking about it to post the article for clicks

The article seems to suggest it’s a trend on social media where folks are recording examples of people doing it and making fun of them for doing so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what "performative" means in this context. Reading is reading and is always a good thing, no matter the material. Getting through a "serious" book just to say you read is not wasted time or effort, but I doubt many people (if any?) do that. There has to be some curiosity and intent to learn something for yourself behind it. There isn't anything wrong with reading something fun and light either.

Read the article. Performative reading is more or less defined as conspicuously reading a physical book in a public setting. A book that is considered high brow literature (eg, Proust or David Foster Wallace) or critically accepted and in a way design to convey intellectual superiority. It screams, “Look at me you rubes. I have higher status than those who waste their time addicted to brain rot social media.” It sounds like it’s a direct reaction to those who endlessly scroll social media in public places to the point that they are often obvious to their surroundings and others. Maybe it’s just another form of snobbery in our modern age. FWIW, I’m beginning to think there is a real stigma in connection with those who endlessly consume social media, especially in public. I certainly judge them.

Wait, someone literally made up "performative reading," which is so not a thing, just to pitch an article to their editors?

And they couldn't even get a person who is talking about it to post the article for clicks

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what "performative" means in this context. Reading is reading and is always a good thing, no matter the material. Getting through a "serious" book just to say you read is not wasted time or effort, but I doubt many people (if any?) do that. There has to be some curiosity and intent to learn something for yourself behind it. There isn't anything wrong with reading something fun and light either.

Read the article. Performative reading is more or less defined as conspicuously reading a physical book in a public setting. A book that is considered high brow literature (eg, Proust or David Foster Wallace) or critically accepted and in a way design to convey intellectual superiority. It screams, “Look at me you rubes. I have higher status than those who waste their time addicted to brain rot social media.” It sounds like it’s a direct reaction to those who endlessly scroll social media in public places to the point that they are often obvious to their surroundings and others. Maybe it’s just another form of snobbery in our modern age. FWIW, I’m beginning to think there is a real stigma in connection with those who endlessly consume social media, especially in public. I certainly judge them.

1. The article is a pathetic attempt at clickbait to generate relevance.

2. If I saw someone reading Proust or a recognizable classic, I would assume they didn’t read it in middle/high school or college. Put differently, I don’t think it’s a flex.

3. You said you judge people consuming social media in public, pp. Question: how do you know what I’m reading on my phone? I’m usually reading work-related emails and related attachments (sadly). If I’m killing time in line or enjoying a quick lunch alone, I might scroll dcum, daily mail, or reels. Given the excruciatingly heavy stuff I’m dealing with at work, I need a break. My mom called it “bubble gum for the mind” and said you need a break to relax your mind, body, and soul. She had a PhD from Hopkins back when women didn’t get in unless they were truly brilliant (and she had a full ride).