We all know, or think we know, what close reading is, or at least what it used to be: a form of vaguely elitist, slightly old-fashioned way of dealing with much beloved texts, the opposite of distant reading and, more generally, theoretically based and scholarly informed ways of addressing literary texts, in short a kind of reading that is close to self-justifying as well as endless rereading, sometimes just for the beauty of the gesture, and thus a good example of art as defined by Immanuel Kant: a purposiveness without purpose. This exciting and eye-opening collection on new and old forms of close reading shows that there is much more in it than just a mix of passion and art. Indeed, the mission of the editors of this book is to demonstrate the value, stakes and even necessity of close reading and to open new ways to implement a well-structured way of implementing it in the modern classroom. The target audience of the book is very large, ranging from freshmen to PhD students and instructors as well as senior professors, and for once this objective of reaching an almost universal readership, a worn-out cliché used by all academics submitting a manuscript to their publisher, is not a marketing slogan.

In order to realize their ambition, the editors embrace a triple strategy. First of all, Sinykin and Winant offer a robust yet open methodological as well as theoretical framework, close reading being one of the rare cases were it is difficult to tell the method from the theory and vice versa: the theoretical input is an important step in the application of  the methodological tool, but its specific content or orientation is never preceding the practical reading trajectory. After a brief but illuminating historical discussion of the use of close reading since its “invention” around 1930, both in English practical criticism and American New Criticism, and its permanent reinvention by successive waves of scholars (deconstruction, new historicism, postcolonial studies, queer theory), the editors discuss a five-steps methodology that they serves as the ideal platform for virtually any type of close reading. These five steps are the following ones: 1) scene setting: identifying what a reader thinks that really matters in the text, setting the stage for the rest of the close reading, 2) noticing: focusing on a detail that deserves closer attention, in other words a detail that surprises but is in need of clarification, 3) local claiming: explaining about how the detail in question can or should be understood and how it functions in its immediate context; 4) regional argumentation: discussing the importance of the detail for a better understanding of the whole text; 5) global theorizing: connecting the results of step 1 to 4 to more general questions, not only literary or cultural but also social, political, and very personal (for many readers, texts become life lessons). Sinykin and Winant obviously insist on the fact that these five steps are not and  cannot be a pure linear process: any form of close reading is confronted with the question of the hermeneutical circle, going back and forth between the part and the whole, for one can only start reading when one has already read, while the discovery of new details and aspects eventually affects the general ideas one had at the beginning of the reading. At the end of the book, readers will also find a set of useful exercises to “read”, “write”, and “use” close readings.

The central part of the book (this is the second and major strategic stance of the two editors) deepens and broadens the five-steps method with the help of twenty-one contemporary discussions of historically important examples of close readings made by great critics, such as Erich Auerbach, Robert Penn Warren or Judith Butler, and touching upon the work of great authors such as Jane Austen, Virginia Woolf or Toni Morrison. Sinykin and Winant have wonderfully succeeded in commissioning essays that demonstrate that historical close readers were already following, each in their own way of course, the reading techniques defended in the book. At the same time, all essays highlight what can be learnt from these historical examples and showcase the possibility of using their own contemporary rereading to enhance our general understanding of literature. The design of each of these twenty-one chapters is sharply designed. Nevertheless, their homogenous internal structure never harms the personal voice and input of the authors. The results of this editorial program are impressive: on the one hand, the strong editorial hand of Sinykin and Winant dramatically increases the use-value of the book; on the other hand, the enthusiasm and refreshing insights of the new readings highlight the historical, theoretical, and methodological importance of the major representatives of the close reading spirit. The rediscovery of the past and the disclosure of new perspectives opened by the current generation of close readers are convincing and frankly contagious. It is always unfair to practice cherry-picking in the case of collections that are so well edited and whose quality is throughout outstanding, but my personal favorites are the essays by Summer Kim Lee on Barbara Johnson writing on Jane Campion, Brian Glavey on Lauren Berlant writing on John Ashbery and Stephanie Insley Hershinow on D.A. Miller writing on Jane Austen. But, in fact, I learned a lot from all the 21 essays.

Third, but certainly not last, all contributors have the courage to address the many challenges and obstacles of close reading. If this approach is capable of revealing astonishing and never seen aspects and meanings of literary texts, it is not a way of reading that can be mechanically applied. Since one cannot rely here upon a previously chosen theory, no authentic close reader can escape fundamental doubts. One is never sure whether the chosen detail really matches the initial “setting”. One cannot know with absolute certainty whether the detail in question helps foreground a relevant reinterpretation of the whole text. One is never sure when to “stop” the back and forth movement between detail and text. One may have the impression to have given too much credit to already existing theoretical knowledge, and so on and so forth. The editors certainly had Kant and his “sapere aude” in mind when repeatedly encouraging their intended audience to go for it, to believe in what one beliefs is relevant and worth reading, in short to take the risk to close read against all odds. The examples chosen and commented upon in this book show that all great readers were already facing the same doubts and problems. The great honesty and authenticity of both editors and contributors should help put close reading where it belongs: in the center of the humanities.