Critical reading is in crisis, it is said. It has run out of steam (Latour 2004), become formulaic (Hayles 2012), and it “singularly fails to surprise” (Felski 2009). This diagnosis can and should be questioned. What is really at stake in the current struggle over the reading practices of literary studies? In our presentation we will highlight some results from the research project The Dialectic of Immersion. Academic and ordinary reading practices in the new media landscape. We want to problematize the common assumption that reading within literary studies is characterized by critical distance whereas everyday reading practices are naïve and immersive. Our hypothesis is that the relationship between critique and immersion is far more complex and multifaceted than this dichotomy suggests, and that critique neither is “owned” by the academy, nor that immersion is absent from it. One way to bring this complexity into the light is to focus on the performative dimensions of reading, which, in its turn, forces us to work not just theoretically but also empirically. Based on ethnographic methodology, our project explores the way reading literature actually is carried out within literary studies (during a group of students’ first year), and within a number of arenas outside academia, e.g. private reading groups, live book clubs, and literary festivals. Theoretically, we draw on actor-network-theory, reception studies, and the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu and Ann Swidler. Central research questions are: Which different concrete reading practices can be discerned within literary studies on the one hand and in a number of arenas for reading outside academia on the other? Which are the most significant differences and similarities, and how can these be explained?