Scholarly descendants of Rudolph Otto investigate the experiential basis for religious symbols. But Griffiths did not write Religious Reading in order to demonstrate a thesis for the benefit of scholars of religion. Quite the contrary, Religious Reading is written against scholars of religion, against the gaze of objectivity. In short, Griffiths seeks to defend religious reading not as a thesis about how religion functions, but as a living practice. Here, the polemical side of Religious Reading emerges.
Consumerist reading evokes disposable diapers, brand names, chain stores.
It is an approach to reading that treats literary works as means to some other end, as purveyors of information that can be discarded once the exams are taken, the problems solved. Consumerist reading seeks entertainment and titillation, and should a literary work fail to command immediate attention, the consumerist reader moves on and picks up another book, switches to another channel. Scholars treat books as resources for citations, as occasions to display theoretical virtuosity, as raw material for the production of their own books. Because the passion of Religious Reading rests in the antithesis Griffiths draws between consumerist reading and religious reading, he needs to do more than denounce. He needs to employ something like the care he displays in analyzing religious reading when he describes the pedagogy and habits of reading that dominate academic study.