Moby Dickhead
In social situations, my boyfriend will often pretend to have read books I know he hasn't. He doesn't just fake it with some casual "Yeah, I read that." He will try to say something deep and philosophical but can end up not making much sense. He's too smart to need to do this. Is there something I can say to persuade him to stop?
--Embarrassed
Your boyfriend's just lucky nobody's suspected he's lying about what he's read and tried to trip him up -- maybe with "It's like Heathcliff wandering the moors searching for Cathy after she was abducted by aliens!" or "What a relief when Romeo rushed Juliet to the hospital and they pumped her stomach!"
Obviously, if you're at the English department's afternoon tea and you don't know your Homer from your Homer Simpson, there's a problem. But, the truth is, not every intelligent person is well-read. People show their intelligence in how they solve the problems life throws them. And actually, as psychologist Carol Dweck observes in "Why Smart People Can Be So Stupid," the people most likely to squander the intelligence they have are those who measure their self-worth through their intellectual performance -- "(caring) so much about looking smart that they act dumb."
Dweck finds in her research that this thinking comes out of a "fixed mindset" -- the self-improvement-stunting belief that intelligence and ability are set and not changeable, rather than what seems to be the case: that you can work to improve yourself (the "growth mindset"). With the growth mindset, you're motivated to learn and grow, and failure is just a sign that you need to keep trying. For fixed-mindset people, success is about proving they're already smart and talented, and the need to work to accomplish things is a sign of being dumb. Fixed-mindsetters actually have a dislike for hard work, which Dweck says makes sense, because if you think effort is for idiots, what else is there to do but avoid it?
Sure, your boyfriend could simply be lazy -- wanting to look smart but thinking he'd take a shortcut getting there. But chances are, there's more to it than that. Build him up -- tell him you respect his mind, and then tell him you can't bear to see him faking it. Explain Dweck's thinking, and lay out her advice (from her most recent book, "Mindset") for escaping the fixed mindset: First, listen for the fixed-mindset voice, and talk back to it with the growth mindset voice: "Hey, Self...you succeed by working to learn, not pretending you've got the Library of Alexandria in your baseball hat!" Next, take growth-mindset action: Risk admitting that you haven't read something, and note how people shrug or maybe respect your honesty; they don't get up on furniture and pelt you with old fruit. Finally, get reading -- perhaps with a 15- to 20-page nightly quota -- and enjoy the reward: having something meaningful to say instead of having to get by on a guess that "The Catcher in the Rye" is the coming-of-age story of a food inspector at a bread factory.
I used to be a bit like that; in elementary school I was always the kid that had his hand up on every question the teacher asked. In the early elementary grades I was moved from a private to a public school (due to, let's say, a changing family situation), and the material being taught by the public school was over a year behind the private school. Then, in high school, I went back into a private school and they were waaaay ahead of where the public school that I'd left was, and there was no help for me to catch up. I did not handle that well; I was not disciplined enough to go find the material that I needed to catch up on and study it. Instead, I tried to fake my way through it, like the BF in the letter, but I was usually seen through by the instructors and other students, who were all a lot wiser than at the public school that I had left. Needless to say, that did not result in sparkling grades, and my parents were most unhappy. It wasn't until my senior year that I caught up and felt like I was competent on the material I was being taught.
The lesson of all of that was: When I know all of the answers, or think I do, that means the situation I'm in is not challenging enough. A lot of the best things that have happened in my life, both professionally and personally, have happened when I threw myself in a situation where I was totally over my head at the outset. What I learned from my unhappy school experience is that, in that situation, I need to shut up and listen. The secret: People who are good at something are often happy to teach you. Let them do it. You have to get over your embarassment at not being an expert on something, because no one else knows or cares that you're embarassed -- as long as you don't insist on making a fool of yourself They're doing their thing. Learn from it. You don't have to be the life of the party every night.
Cousin Dave at December 17, 2014 5:17 AM
This is just one case of the insecurity that leads people to tell you things with absolute conviction that simply are not true. So, do you let it go, like I usually do, or contradict them, as I will when it matters?
Maybe it's me, but I'd much rather admit not having read a book than be exposed for lying about it. Maybe it comes from working with computers. They don't care how much conviction you have if you get something wrong.
MarkD at December 17, 2014 5:22 AM
My biggest worry about behavior like this, is that is not just insecurity, but part of a sociopathic pattern.
I have been closely associated with about six people in my life, who would lie about anything, even when the truth would have served them better, in both the long and the short run.
It makes people not trust you.
LW's boyfriend, may be a harmless Pinocchio dufus, but he also might be lying to her about all sorts of important things, that she hasn't uncovered yet.
My son has a friend like that. He has gotten caught lying about important stuff at work, and lost every good job he has ever had because of it. He is now practically unemployable because he has no references.
My advice to the LW is from Ronnie Reagan. Trust, but verify.
Isab at December 17, 2014 6:18 AM
Am I the only person who thought "Catcher in the Rye" sucked?
Patrick at December 17, 2014 6:26 AM
I never read it.
AHW at December 17, 2014 7:50 AM
The problem I see is that insecurity is trumping integrity. I've put decades into reading history, philosophy, and religion -- but what that has taught me is just how much I *don't know* about a great many things. You could spend a life-time on one narrow genre or theme of literature and writing and never get to the rest. There is no sin in not having read a particular book, no matter how greatly it may in the anemic sensibilities of the litterateurs. The problem with airs is that they betray a lack of substance. There is something terribly liberating in saying "I don't know" or "haven't read it" or "Moby Dick is dry as dirt and I quit 200 pages in because the Maltese Falcon promised to be infinitely more engrossing." People who drone on about Moby Dick are usually people you don't really want to have a beer with in the first place.
David at December 17, 2014 8:53 AM
"What a relief when Juliet rushed Romeo to the hospital and they pumped his stomach!"
FTFY. Juliet knifed herself. Pumping her stomach is contraindicated.
Picky, picky, picky... Can't help it.
mino at December 17, 2014 9:07 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2014/12/moby-dickhead.html#comment-5662214">comment from minoThanks, mino -- I know this. I have Romeo and Juliet (two copies) right next to my desk. I thought it was funnier to do it this way. It wasn't supposed to be right; it was just supposed to be funny.
Amy Alkon at December 17, 2014 10:15 AM
Patrick, no, you're not the only one. I also thought it sucked. Admittedly it's been a long time since I read it, and I don't even remember it that well (and who knows, I may feel differently about it now, since I've grown/changed since I read it), but I do remember feeling like the main character was a mopey whiner and not very likable in my mind.
Angie at December 17, 2014 11:13 AM
I had this problem -- my first grade teacher suggested to my mother that I was so used to people saying "Isn't she bright! Isn't she cute!" that I was afraid to try anything that didn't come easily -- pretty forward-thinking for 1964. I eventually flunked out of college my freshman year.
Turns out that I have ADD. I have long since discovered audio books, which let me "read" while driving or doing chores. I have listened to everything from popular novels to a 26 lecture university course in linguistics. Perhaps the LW's boyfriend could start listening to audio books in the car. Pretty quickly he'll be saying "I've been reading this fascinating book on..."
Dana at December 17, 2014 3:24 PM
Thank you, Angie.
Patrick at December 18, 2014 5:48 AM
@Angie: exactly my feelings. I even was upset for loss time reading it.
nicoc@cdg at December 18, 2014 1:12 PM
I HATED "Catcher in the Rye," but I now have a MAJOR CYBER CRUSH on CousinDave.
Lori at December 18, 2014 3:43 PM
Aw, shucks! 'Twern't nothin', ma'am!
Cousin Dave at December 18, 2014 6:49 PM
And I thought I was the only one who was left cold by Catcher in the Rye! I read it on my own (none of my classes required it, strangely) so I can't blame some boring teacher for sucking the joy out of it.
I felt kinda the same way about The Great Gatsby when I had to read it in college. But then I re-read it when Baz Luhrman's movie was coming out. Then I went absolutely ape-s××t over the book and couldn't wait for the movie...or watching every other film adaptation I could get my hands on.
Maybe if I read CitR now, I'd enjoy it more.
Wallawallawanda at December 19, 2014 3:58 AM
LW's boyfriend has yet to discover the fun of telling snobby people you've never read a book/heard of a band/ate a certain kind of food.
First they give you The Look. Then they say, "I can't BELIEVE you haven't read/heard/tried it. It will change your life."
At that point, you're supposed to act impressed or ask follow-up questions. But you don't; you shrug and say, "Well, I've survived this long." And then change the subject.
The look on their face when they see you don't care about their superior experiences/tastes is really fun.
sofar at December 19, 2014 11:59 AM
Awwww...and I thought I was the only who had a cyber-crush on Cousin Dave. I just hate competition.
Patrick at December 20, 2014 2:31 PM
I think being intellectually dishonest is worse than being ignorant. Unfortunately, I have been both at times. It's more embarrassing to be caught out putting on airs. It reveals that you are not only ignorant but lying about it.
BTW, "Catcher in the Rye" sucks big ones. I have actually read it, but I don't remember enough of it to talk about it. Except I remember thinking, "Why is this supposed to be so cool?"
ken at December 21, 2014 4:01 PM
"Am I the only person who thought "Catcher in the Rye" sucked?"
Never read it, but feel the same about many of the books forced to read in HS. Especially Charles Dickens.
On a side note, Anyone watch any 'Thug notes' book reviews. I find them hilarious and insightful.
Joe j at December 23, 2014 10:03 AM
I freely admit that I started to read Dickens' "A Tale of Two Cities," but stopped after the first two paragraphs because he couldn't make up his mind as to whether it was the best of times or the worst.
Pinkie at December 25, 2014 2:27 AM
Sometimes ppl just like to hear themself talk. How did we get on the subject of books and snobs? The first step in understanding why someone is doing something is by asking. Why are you predending to know about a book when you do not. What was your goal in pretending. And since when did the opinions of others matter so much. Since when did just being yourself not rate?
Tracy at January 24, 2015 2:39 PM
Leave a comment