[Be Szpilman]

Originally Posted by BookishDreamer

There are so many exceptions in my reading patterns that calling it a methodology would be laughable.

Well, from the posts following yours I can say your methodology is the norm rather than the exception

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

when i discover a new author i like, i usually devour everything i can find by them whether or not the books are part of a series or not, until i run out of them. often i will fall into a "theme" and read a lot of books having something in common (even if superficially) ; for instance a few years ago i discovered the portugese writer Saramago ; then i discovered another portugese author by chance (the name escapes me now) and for several months i read only portugese litterature.

it's interesting to look at people's reading habits. you seem to have a well-thought out system.

You as well as BookishDreamer have reminded me of themes. I'm also usually following a general theme in my reads, and it carries over from fiction to non-fiction and vice-versa. Take now, I'm into eastern religions, or religion in general (especially considering I'm an atheist), so I'm reading biographies such as Dalai's, Buddha's, and lately Greg Mortenson's, as well as meditation manuals and holybooks, and then all SciFi/Fantasy I can find that has religion as a theme. And they're interlaced in my reading list and tackled in groups of two or as much as three.
Habits really are fascinating, it's the scoop I was into when posting this!

By the way, your reminder of Saramago might have me into him from the theme of religion (portuguese as a theme is rather weird when it's your mother tongue!). But then maybe I should have it sit untill I get into atheism along with Dawkins and Darwin. It could be a good follow-up theme alright!

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm not at all sure why you (the original poster) considers reading fiction to be a "trap". That makes it sound as though it's something to be ashamed of! Nothing at all wrong with only reading fiction if that's what you enjoy.

Nothing's wrong indeed! My meaning of trap is when you care to read non-fiction but find yourself overly enticed by the attractive fiction as to barely get by your non-fictions. It's my own trap to dodge!

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

I just have a problem with the choice of reading being restricted in any way. You can read anyway you want, but if you limit yourself to such discipline that you only read in certain orders, aren't you foregoing something you want to read in order to read something you don't, and therefore lowering your pleasure in reading, which is the purpose of reading? I don't know how else to put it.

Having a method doesn't mean I force myself to read something when I don't feel like it. It restricts my choices, yes, in that I stick to the handful I have picked untill they are finished, not beginning others untill the job's done. But the fact that I have 2 or 3 overly different, if not opposite (or "triangularly opposite"! Is there even such an expression, not to say notion ?) books to choose from sees me mostly always having a choice according to my mood. As said above, though, I won't change themes all of a sudden or start a new book impulsively because of a given state of mind. If I don't feel like reading any of my options, then I probably just don't feel like reading at all. That's what I think and feel about myself, it doesn't have to apply even to my left big toe, had the poor thing any freedom of thought.

Originally Posted by Elsi

On my computer, I keep a list of the books I've completed and the pertinent statistics. At the end of each quarter, I post this list on my LiveJournal blog at http://gee-elsi.livejournal.com/

Now you don't even need a methodology, at a book every three days, you just crush'em before they even get in line!! You probably read in half a year more than most people read their entire lives. Do you have the help of any speed reading skills or just a solid-grounded habit (more than enough for anything we do) ?

Very nice tracking you keep and paste to your blog. I do some statistical record keeping myself, only private I suggest you look into gauging by words instead of pages, it's far more reliable and really easy to get accustomed to (50k makes the average novel, below ~5k is a short story, over 100k a monster: the Hugo award has good definitions).

Originally Posted by Jadon

I've never understood this thinking. Maybe if one read only in a very restricted genre (Victorian vampire detectives, say), the details of one story might bleed into another, but in general, stories are sufficiently different that that's not the case. I'm currently reading a fantasy set in ancient Atlantis, a 1940s mystery set in a casino town, a time-travel anthology, an adventure set on a terraformed Mars, and a nonfiction work about the history of money. These are not characters and settings that I'll tend to get confused.

I tend to agree with you that it's hard to completely lose yourself even amidst half a dozen books, but the reason I try not to mix up types of reading is to avoid taking too long to complete a book, because it can get to a point where the whole background is shady in your head, and I hate having to reread or being clueless otherwise.

The 'interfere' I was referring to is more akin to 'competing', in that I might start a scifi that has me so hooked, whenever I feel like reading scifi I choose it over the other one I was halfway through.

Originally Posted by Over

I'm a faithful guy. I read a book at a time. The mood dictates the chosen one. But the mood can change and I can see myself trapped with a book that doesn't match my mood anymore. But I just can't pass it and start another book. That would be like cheating, so or I just endure or I make a pause of 2 or more days from reading.

Maybe I should use some method, for a healthier reading experience.

See, that's part of the reason I have a couple books on the going. I make a point to endure the pair, finish them before any other takes their place, but I have an option still


Finally, it's not a conveyor belt I get me'self into. I'm 'allowed' to wander about in all respects It's just I see myself having a more varied reading experience following those outlines.

I like to vary, even if my heart occasionally says, in the sweetest of internal voices, that I shall be hanged should I ever stray away from Asimov.