Walker Percy's - the Loss of the Creature

Complex Reader

In Walker Percy's essay, "The Loss of the Creature", the author uses many anecdotes to get his point across. Much of what his stories describe is the "loss of sovereignty." This particular point is long, and difficult to explain, but it is there and it is something that exists in our society. He uses examples of tourists on vacations and the way in which students learn. This idea can also be applied to how people read; whether or not a person is a "complex" reader or a "common" one. Does the reader allow himself/herself to lose their sovereignty and just accept what they are reading, or do they take control and fight against the author for what they believe? This question can especially be applied when looking at how people-myself included- read Percy's essay.

When it comes to reading, there is a large difference between reading commonly and reading complexly. A common reader simply reads through the text only to understand the basic meaning behind it and accepts the text at face value. According to the introduction to Ways of Reading by Bartholomae and Petrosky, this is called "reading with the grain." In this method, the reader agrees with everything the author has written. As Percy would state it, the reader is giving up their "sovereignty."

In Percy's essay, he uses many examples of people who have lost their "sovereignty." One example used is tourists who visit places like Mexico City and the Grand Canyon. Like these people, I lost my sovereignty while reading. During my first read through of Percy's essay, I fit into the category of a "common" reader. I simply agreed with everything he wrote. I saw Percy's examples of how these tourists were not seeing what he called "it" because they were only visiting "spoiled" places- where other tourists had visited and will continue to visit, areas that we have all heard of and have expectations of. When we visit these places, we simply compare what we see to what we believed we would. When I first read this, I only thought of my past experiences, such as my visit to Washington D.C. and the White House, and through Percy's stories and my own, I did not question his validity. In this way, I became a common reader. I did not think about any other option, any other story that may even waver from what Percy was saying. And this "common" reading continued through the entire essay and greatly affected my perception of it.

A complex reader reads in a much more thoughtful way. He or she is a reader who reads "against the grain" (Ways of Reading Introduction). While reading, the audience does not simply accept everything that they are being told. They look at the text, analyze it, and decide what they would say to the author if they had the chance. One way to become a complex reader is through the use of annotations. Annotating a text allows the reader to go back and see what they noticed while reading. A person that is truly "reading against the grain" will be able to look back and see his or her comments about what they thought of the author's writing.

After reading this essay, I thought about how reading connected to Percy's ideas. Reading complexly is similar to Percy's example of when tourists visit the Grand Canyon; they have to travel on the "beaten track." In both situations, the tourist and reader keep control- they do not let previous expectations affect what they are seeing and learning. Because of this, I was able to read as a complex reader during my second time through Percy's essay. I tried to analyze what Percy was saying and decide whether or not I agreed with him.

In his essay, Percy sets forth a premise that tourists and students are not taking full advantage of what they should- they are looking at everything in front of them in the completely wrong way. Specifically, Percy argues that tourists at the Grand Canyon are not even seeing the Grand Canyon for what it is. As he himself puts it, "Why is it almost impossible to gaze directly