Should I take notes while reading books?

One thing I've found myself wondering about lately and now try to express in writing is what type of approach I should take in reading books. Specifically, I wonder if I should be taking notes, or notating pages or making more of an effort in marking or identifying passages that catch my interest somehow, or if I should continue just to read the pages and not leave marks all over them.

Currently, I simply read the book and occasionally remark or think to myself "wow, that's a good point."  I do also rarely dog-ear certain pages, but even if I do that I'll sometimes go back to that section and question which page I was marking - the one that the corner is folded down on, or the one it's folded away from. It's also sometimes a challenge to find which passage I wanted to note or remember.

With this in mind, especially since I sometimes do book reviews for this blog and have found myself enjoying that challenge, I ask myself if I should do more than a rare fold in the corner of a page. Should I keep a pen handy to underline certain lines or to put notes in the margins? Will that benefit me at all? Will it cause harm to the book, perhaps in resale value (though I have no intentions at all of ever selling any of my collection, so why do I wonder about this)? Will it help or hurt if I re-read a book (though, again, I have not gone back and re-read any of the books I have, so why would this be a consideration)?

I have taken that approach in one book, a paperback copy of Look Away by William C. Davis, While reading it (long before I started this blog or did any formal book review) I found a lot of fascinating comments and observations, often about "states' rights" or something similar. 

The issue, though, is that I have never gone back to that book to review those notes or markings, so what good did it do me? Perhaps I have a slightly better memory of the topics in that book, but is that much of a benefit?

Part of the issue is related to a blog entry I made last year in which I wondered how to label myself in regards to my enjoyment and learning of the Civil War. Buff? Historian? Enthusiast? Student?  I'm not sure I know the answer to that yet, or how much it really matters, but it seems like if I'm going to try to be a serious student, or even a historian of some sort, I need to take a serious approach to my reading, and is making these kind of notes part of that approach? Would such notes make my book reviews better or more credible or would it help my understanding of the subjects or of the war itself?

Since I do now express my thoughts publicly on this blog, and sometimes use this as a forum to critique the work various authors do, I believe I do owe it to my readers and myself to make a serious attempt at expressing my thoughts and not just type out words just to kill time or fill bandwidth. 

I really do enjoy reading about the Civil War, especially when the book is really good, like the last couple I read General Lee's Army and Forged in Battle, both by Joseph Glatthaar, but would making notes and comments on the pages of these volumes enhance my experience? Would it increase my understanding of the book, or improve how well I remember it as time passes?

On the side of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," I make no pretense about being a professional historian or scholar, and am not sure I want to be at that level, so why would I need to take such a scholarly approach while reading books? Cannot I enjoy them and learn from them without covering the pages in ink-drawn lines and notes? I think I can, but something inside of me, deep in my conscience, seems to be telling me I need to do more. This is a nagging feeling that I can't quite shake.

Please forgive me if  this entry seems a bit too self-serving, but among my goals for this blog is to explore myself and how/why I enjoy the Civil War so much. How I read and understand the books I read may help me find out more about this obsession and the enjoyment it brings me.

I just wonder how others approach books they read and if I am a bit out of the norm among those who really enjoy the Civil War.

Public Speaking

Before July of 2008, I had never given a public talk. After last night's talk before the Northern Kentucky Civil War Roundtable, I have now done three - 2 for that group and one earlier this month for a local historical society.

Granted that still leaves me quite the novice in this area, but I did notice I felt much more relaxed and comfortable last night than in the past. Perhaps it is true that "practice makes perfect."

I had never imagined myself doing even one such talk, but, then again, I didn't expect to be posting blogs on the web either. Hopefully my entries and my talks have brought at least some enjoyment and maybe even some learning to anyone who has read or heard me.

I just wonder what the future holds. I certainly intend to continue this blog, but will other speaking opportunities arise? Will I find new subjects worth discussing? Only time can tell.

My interest in the Civl War makes me....

So, just what am I in terms of my interest in the Civil War?

Plenty of terms are available – historian, buff, scholar, student, enthusiast, author, re-enactor, and perhaps a few more, but I’ll work with these for now.

Let’s start with author and re-enactor, as both of those are easily defined and neither apply to me.

The next one to investigate is “historian.” I admit I would like to be able to claim this title, but I think that would require an ego bigger than mine to think that as being true. I have given one talk about some local soldiers, done research on local stories and soldiers from the War, and made a few blog entries and message board posts about various topics, but none of this seems to me to be enough to be an “historian.” I like history and it was my major in college, but I think to be an historian requires more original scholarship and published work (or other forms of teaching/communicating such scholarship) than what I have done.

The same argument applies to similar terms such as “amateur historian” “scholar” or even “independent scholar.” All are very nice terms and I would like to apply them to myself and my interest in the war, but I have not earned them yet, at least from what I believe and can tell.

That leads us to “buff” a term that might be appropriate, but, for some reason, irritates me. Perhaps it’s because the term “civil war buff” has become a cliché that people apply to anyone and everyone who has interest in the war. It strikes me as being quite generic and almost even patronizing, due to its overuse so I prefer not to call myself a “buff.” I’m wondering if I’m being a bit pretentious in trying to avoid this label. I hope not, as pretentiousness is one trait I never wish to possess, but maybe I do.

“Student” is the next verbiage to look into and of the choices I’ve thought of, this may be the closest to matching what I feel like. It’s true I’m taking no classes or undergoing any formal educational programs, so I’m not a traditional student in any sense, but I’m constantly reading books and learning from them and as I get more involved with the Civil War on the web, I find myself learning more from various blogs and discussion boards. I’m moving out the isolation of my own little world and starting to see how many other opinions are out there and how many other people have such incredible knowledge. In other words, I’m starting to learn what I didn’t know before and “learning” is the essence of what a student does.

I guess “enthusiast” is another good description that would be fairly accurate in terms of how much I enjoy the war, but I’d like to think I do more than idly “enjoy” the war. “Enthusiast” seems to imply (to me anyway) someone who sits back and appreciates something but does not go beyond that – perhaps someone who has a passion for watching movies and perhaps buys them to watch over and over, but is not actively involved in any form of the movie industry. Of course, I’m not actively involved in the Civil War, but I’d like to think my attempts at learning more and even sharing what I learn with others means I do more than simply enjoy what I read or hear.

I’ve also thought of the word “fan” like in the fan of a sports team, but I think that sells myself short too, much like “enthusiast” does.

Perhaps “fanatic” is a good word. It does not have the full in-depth meaning that I would like, but does provide a better view of the the depth of my interest and how seriously I take it.

For now, I guess I won’t claim any definitive label, though I’m sure I’ll keep wondering about this whenever I meet someone new and I’m introduced as a “Civil War buff.” Hopefully one day I’ll have done enough to earn a title like “scholar” or “historian” though that may be a bit too ambitious.

“A rose by any other name is still a rose” and no matter which label may be given me, I may claim or that may seem wrong, my obsession for this timeframe in United States history lives on and hopefully will do so well into the future.