Theorists have assigned reading a constitutive role in the formation of publics while at the same time viewing it as an activity secondary, even inferior to the gold standard of public debate, direct exchange. Locating the reason for this paradox (and possible inconsistency) in leading theories of the public sphere in the idea of the face-to-face as transparent intersubjective exchange, this chapter seeks to accomplish three things: (a) track the formative role that different theorists have assigned to the practice of reading in the creation of the public as a political actor and democratic institution, and flesh out some of the implications they may have missed; (b) challenge the idea of the transparency of the face-to-face and its status in said theories with a practice-based understanding of reading and literature; and (c) offer some thoughts on what an altered understanding of the face-to-face (and reading) might mean for our understanding of the public as a political actor.