Grain

Strong reading can be defined as the capability to interact with text in various ways.  This capability means finding fulfillment in reading while understanding, comprehending, and questioning the information the author displays.  A strong reader recognizes that there are many types of reading, and understands what is demanded of him or her in each setting.  As described by The Allyn and Bacon Guide to Writing, reading rhetorically is reading with an awareness of what effect the text is meant to have.  This is a particularly advantageous skill when reading academic text because the reader can view the text in a somewhat unbiased manner, understanding the persuasion that is meant to occur, thus analyzing the perspective while consciously deciding whether to engage in the argument or not.  In my opinion, rhetorical reading is beneficial in an academic sense, but there are ample other methods of reading, all of which can be classified under the broad spectrums of "with the grain" and "against the grain."

 Reading "with the grain" is a more passive form of reading.  By passive I do not imply that reading "with the grain" is an easier form of reading, but rather that the reader acts as a passive audience of the author's perspective.   "With the grain" entails accepting the author's message for what it is worth, keeping an open mind about the author's opinion, and connecting this message within a larger context, possibly a personal experience.  Personally, I read "with the grain" quite often.  In my experience, both in an academic and casual setting, reading "with the grain" has been the type of reading that has been most prudent.  These experiences include novels I read for enjoyment, apolitical articles in the news, and textbooks. I enjoy reading most text in this manner because exposure to the perspective of others is something I find satisfying, appropriate- and quite frankly- reading "against the grain" the majority of the time would become increasingly exhausting. 

Reading "against the grain" is a more active form of reading.  "Against the grain" includes questioning, doubting, and potentially refuting the author's point of view.  "Against the grain" appears to be the type of reading that The Allyn and Bacon Guide seems to be promoting, and seems to be directly associated with the development of a strong reader.  An experience I have had with reading against the grain is when I read science journals.  I do this quite frequently as I work in a laboratory.  As a scientist one has no choice but to read "against the grain."  Another scientist publishes data and may interpret it differently from you, and it is your responsibility to question their written conclusions in order to make advancement.  Having interpretations questioned is the most challenging, frustrating, and enjoyable aspect of the field.  Although this may be more considered thinking "against the grain," it can not be denied that the two are immediately intertwined if not identical. 

I find that it is sometimes advantageous to combine the two techniques.  To initially read "with the grain," allowing the knowledge and perspective to soak in, and then think "against the grain," comparing what you ingested to what you previously thought/felt/experienced, is an approach that works well, also.