Quote:
Originally Posted by sun surfer
Understood, but now I'll give mine. 
I think your mindset is perhaps the mindset of most, especially around here with so many heavy readers, because you read *fast enough*. No set speed really, just still fast enough for your own enjoyment even if it has changed and become harder.
There are those of us who read slowly. It is still enjoyable but the disparity between my reading speed and others is noticeable, especially after years socialising with heavy readers on this site. |
You assume a bit wrongly.
I'm a terribly slow reader in general (and getting slower all the time on average). Decent-sized works of fiction typically take me a month or more to complete. I take long breaks between short bursts of reading. Sometimes I burn through a book very quickly, but not very often any more.
I don't find it discouraging at all, though. Because I'm still enjoying every minute I'm reading (as long as the book interests me).
Perhaps the difference is that I have a very, very good memory? Long breaks between reading sessions, and even years between reading the previous installment of a series don't cause me to forget any details (and I'm a stickler for details).
But if reading more in a shorter amount of time makes someone happier, who am I to judge? It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me is all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sun surfer
Think of it this way. Imagine a 300 page book you enjoy reading. Now imagine it being 300 pages for most people to read, but 900 pages for you. Or, if it's a 900 page book then it's 900 pages for others and 2700 pages for you. Alternately, imagine what most others get through in one hour of reading it taking you three hours.
|
I've got nothing. Sorry. The length of the book and the time it takes me to read it (and certainly not the time it takes
someone else to read it) has literally no bearing whatsoever on whether or not I will have "liked" the book. That might make me the weirdo, though. And I'm OK with that.