How to read a text

Lecture Summary

Speaker: Dr. Krishna Swamy Dara
Session: Monsoon Edition, Reading Pillar

Date: 10th August, 2025

1. Introduction & Context

The Kashf Reading Pillar is about learning how to read — not in the basic sense of literacy, but in the deeper sense of engaging critically, truthfully, and meaningfully with texts. The goal is to cultivate skills that are often missing in formal education: reading that questions, challenges, and interacts with the author.

This first chapter focuses on Gandhi and Ambedkar, with Hind Swaraj and Annihilation of Caste as core readings, though the methods discussed can be applied to any “classical” political text.

2. The Problem of “Classical Texts”

Interrogating the very label “classical text.”

What makes a text classical? It’s not an inherent property — rather, it’s a product of historical processes, repeated academic citation, and political consensus.
Example: Gandhi wrote over 60 volumes, yet Hind Swaraj and My Experiments with Truth are canonised, while others are ignored.
Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste is prioritised over States and Minorities or other works.
The Western canon similarly elevates certain works (The Republic, Two Treatises) without questioning who decides their value.
Even in art: Why is the Mona Lisa considered a masterpiece? Who tells us that Da Vinci is “great”?

Key Insight:
Canon formation is shaped by power. Texts gain classical status through repetition in curricula, conferences, and academic discourse, often reflecting the politics of the time.

3. What Counts as a “Political Text”?

The term “political” is itself contested.

Feminist theory popularised the phrase “the personal is political”, showing how everyday experiences are linked to structures of power.
Gandhi, Ambedkar, Pandita Ramabai, and Phule expand the meaning of “political” beyond state institutions to include social relations and identities.
A political text can be a book, speech, painting, film, TV broadcast — anything that invites interpretation and addresses power or collective life.
In this sense, the world itself can be read as a “text.”

4. Reading vs. Engaging

Simply reading a text is not enough. Engaging with a text means:

Multiple readings — A single reading rarely suffices. Meaning changes with age and life experience (e.g., The Old Man and the Sea read at 20 vs. at 50).
Going in with questions — Ask why the author is saying what they do, what assumptions they make, and what they might be leaving out.
Recognising your own position — Your background, experiences, and biases shape your reading. Without self-awareness, you risk “reading to reject” if you dislike an author.
Avoiding projection — Humans are meaning-seeking creatures and tend to see patterns even where none exist (like shapes in clouds). Be wary of imposing meaning on a text.
Viewing reading as dialogue — The text shapes you, and you shape its meaning in return.

5. The Reader’s Self in the Reading Process

Neither the text nor the reader is “simple.” Both are shaped by complex histories.
We may not even be aware of why we are drawn to certain questions — they often emerge from our own life experiences and societal background.
Misunderstandings often arise not because of the text, but because of our own unexamined assumptions (like misreading a friend because of our preconceived ideas about friendship).
Self-deception is a major barrier: humans are skilled at deceiving themselves, which can lead to selective or defensive readings.

6. The Author’s Purpose

Every text has a stated purpose, often found in the introduction or preface.
But there may be deeper, unstated motives — shaped by the author’s historical and political context.
Critical reading involves comparing the stated purpose with possible hidden purposes.

7. Interpretive Approaches

There coud be several lenses and approaches for reading a text. Each brings certain aspects into focus while downplaying others.

Historical Approach
- Situates the text in its original context.
- Example: Reading Hind Swaraj against the backdrop of anti-colonial politics in early 20th-century India.
Contextualism
- Warns against anachronistic reading, i.e., attributing contemporary meanings to historically specific terms or debates.
- Inspired by Quentin Skinner and conceptual historians like Reinhart Koselleck, it stresses that terms change over time (e.g., “virtue” → virtù; “freedom” then vs. now).
- Example: Gandhi’s critique of “modern civilization” in Hind Swaraj must be read in its early 20th-century context, not through postmodern anti-modernity debates.
- Problem: How much context is enough? Historical depth enriches understanding, but endless digging risks losing the text’s present relevance
Hermeneutic Approach – Treats reading as a dialogue between text and reader, shaped by both parties’ contexts.
- Influenced by Gadamer and Ricoeur.
- Polysemy: Words can hold multiple meanings at the same time, even in the same period.
- Hermeneutics of Trust (Hans Gadamer): Dialogue between reader and text can produce a fusion of horizons — the merging of the author’s and reader’s perspectives. The hermeneutic circle emphasises moving between part and whole to understand meaning.
- Hermeneutics of Suspicion (Paul Ricoeur): Examines underlying power relations and ideology; unmasks hidden motives and biases in the text.
- Recognises the politics of language and epistemic injustice, especially for marginalised authors writing in dominant vocabularies.
Critical Theory / Marxist Approach
- Examines whose interests the text serves; foregrounds power and class.
Feminist Approach
- Brings gender into focus; for example, it asks what the text says or omits about women’s experiences.
Postmodern Approach
- Rejects the idea of a single, unified meaning; explores contradictions, silences, and multiple interpretations.
Deconstructive Approach
- Inspired by Derrida; exposes tensions and contradictions within the texts

Key Point: These are not mutually exclusive — skilled readers often combine approaches consciously.

8. Why All This Matters

The way we read shapes our understanding of politics, history, and society.
Critical engagement prevents passive absorption of authority and challenges the structures that decide what is worth reading.
The goal is to move from being told what to think toward thinking with and against the text.

Takeaway Exercise for Students:

Choose a short excerpt from Hind Swaraj or Annihilation of Caste and:

Read it once without commentary.
Read it again using one interpretive approach (e.g., historical or feminist).
Write a brief reflection on how your interpretation changed between readings.