Considering the (relative) deluge of comments yesterday, it might be appropriate to respond to some of our readers’ thoughts. (Before yesterday, I wasn’t sure I could refer to our readers as plural.)

First, from ockopatrick:
However, Jason, the fact that you expertly know how to lie about books is very telling, and makes me question how you justify blogging about the topic.

I thought the topic would be funny. Granted, the subsequent comments were better than my post. This is also the first time I have been accused of expertly doing anything.

Ockopatrick continues:
First an attack on Dickens and now this? Are you next going to tell me that John Grisham is one of the nation’s great writers?

I have been playing the iconoclast lately. How about this? Next post, I actually write about something I like. (No, it won’t be Grisham.)

From Diplomat440V8:
Don’t disgrace your reputation by lying about what you read, Lea.

You mean my reputation as an overcompensating, libelous bourgeoisie?

Kyle writes:
He has a reputation to disgrace?????

This should be my tag line.

Harold asks:
What about reading makes us feel guilty for not having done it?

This is an excellent question that cuts all quips to the quick. Mildly amusing blogs aside, some people obviously do lie about what they read. I would posit that people are more likely to lie about what they read than what movies they see, songs they listen to or paintings they know.

Perhaps, this does go back to hubris. Or, as Diplomat so subtly put it, maybe they are overcompensating because they don’t want people to think they are stupid. Either way, it’s too bad that people book-bluff, because most of my favorite books were loaned to me after I told someone else that I had not read it.

--Jason Lea, JLea@News-Herald.com

P.S. My review of "A Journal for Jordan" will be in the Sunday newspaper. Yes, I actually read it.