Image by Olya Adamovich from Pixabay
What is close reading? Does it help you when reading science-based articles? Close reading is defined as a technique used to move a readers past the point of comprehension and onto a true interpretation of whatever text they may read. Given that definition, I would say, yes, close reading does help me when I’m reading science articles. When close reading, Vilaynur S. and Diane Rogers-Ramachandran’s “When Blindness Is in the Mind, Not the Eyes,” I made three key observations that I believe should be remembered. The way I felt when first reading this story, the tone used in the story, and lastly why—when close reading—you must read an article two to three times.
During my first read through of this story, I was passive. I wasn’t trying to make any groundbreaking observations or critical annotations; I was simply reading a story. I felt this was an important observation to make because the first read of any story should be exactly like this. Before you’re able to fully interpret a story, you must first comprehend it. Close reading taught me that there should be no pressure on the first read through of any story because the first read through is for simply getting acquainted with your story.
Another key observation I made while close reading this story was the tone being used. Given that this is a science story exploring the connections between blindness and the brain, I figured the tone would be strictly objective. I thought this would be a simple reporting of findings and nothing more, but I was wrong. As I was reading this article, I found that the authors brought much passion and emotion to their writing. “It is only when parts of these different visual areas are damaged, causing selective yet often profound disturbances in perception, that we begin to appreciate the range and subtlety of normal human vision” (Ramachandran & Ramachandran, 2008). Quotes like this one told me I wasn’t reading a highschooler’s science report, I was absorbing the harsh yet beautiful reality of those who were blind. While the article itself was primarily in the third person perspective, the stories they shared made me feel as though I was getting firsthand experience on what it was like to not only observe those who are blind but be blind myself.
For example, a story I found quite captivating was John’s. As it was described, John had visual agnosia which is a condition where the brain has trouble processing the images you are seeing. The Ramachandran twins described is as “seeing yet not knowing.” The language they used to describe this condition was truly compelling and so were their examples. Visual agnosia, according to the authors, is similar to seeing an illusion painting but never perceiving the full illusion. You are “stuck” on one thing possibly forever. It was this sort of vibrant vocabulary that made me realize that when it comes to tone, you must not only keep your audience engaged but also try to pull on their heartstrings as well.
The last observation I made was actually an answer to a question I feel like I have had for a long time. Why must I read an article multiple times when close reading? The answer is quite simple. The first read is to familiarize yourself with the content, the second read is for comprehension, and the last read is for interpretation. I read “When Blindness Is in the Mind, Not the Eyes” many times, and each time I discovered something new. On my first read, I was intrigued, but I was not fully integrated into the story until my second read when I noticed something. The authors have taken a completely human standpoint in this article.
They aren’t shoving a million different science facts about eyes down my throat. Instead they are investing the time and energy it takes to tell a blind person’s story. They are purposely using expressive colors and images to show just how much beauty some of us are missing and most of us are taking for granted. When they say things like “spot of light” or describe illusion paintings, I believe they are trying to visually stimulate the mind as much as possible to show us how much different our life would be without vision while simultaneously showing us how life would be the same as well. To read an article multiple times is to allow yourself the time and energy it takes to truly understand the intent behind someone’s writing. Once you’ve done that, you’ll never have to stop.
I knew these observations were important when I realized I could use them in the future. I know I must supply an audience with a unique and interesting story that makes them want to go back an analyze it. I know I must decide on an engaging tone to use in my story so that my audience feels like they are apart of it. I know I must provide people with something they can read multiple times and come up with a different answer each time. Without close reading, I’m not sure I would have arrived at this conclusion.
Science Writings 