Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
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. |
Ah, then we're actually quite similar in our reading speeds and memory. As your speed has become worse, so has my reading memory, but generally I've had a very good recall of books too to the point where in the past it was hard for me to
ever fathom re-reads of anything because I remembered not only the general story but also many details too well. Sometimes (though much more rarely now) I can even recall a page itself with where the words were on the page when I read them and how they looked (font/size/etc.). Why bother re-reading when it takes me three times as long as others to re-read anything and gives me far fewer 'new' surprises/insights?
But anyway, we're discussing speed which is my big reading 'weakness'. What you don't mention in this reply is how long you spend reading per day and how many hours you put into a book. I also have ups and downs with time spent reading per day/week/month and for me it can depend greatly on work and other things in life. You did give me an idea which made me smile, though. When people mention how many books they read per year, around here it can often be 100+ which I'm not sure I'll ever make in a year even with audiobooks included, so I often see those numbers and think, 'wow, if only I could as well'. However, if we could all easily track
time spent reading per year, I wonder if I might not finally be in the upper echelon for reading numbers.
Reading slowly doesn't discourage me, either. If anything it just makes me more determined, here and there when it comes to mind, to work on reading faster, so long as it's still enjoyable. I don't see anything wrong with that and in fact see a lot of good in it. I don't mean learning to speed read (as if, lol) so that someone could skim over books and say they 'read' them, rather just trying any tips that come along that may help me easily and enjoyably read at a faster pace.
Quote:
|
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.
|
I never said it determined whether I liked a book. I was trying to give an example that those who read fast might be able to imagine more easily and meant that when you know most others can read say three times as fast as you, it may make you wonder just why that is.
If it's something inherent that can't be changed, then okay, you will then need to just accept the fact. But if there are things that can be done to help you, then it's up to you whether you take advantage of those things. Some like you may rather not concern yourself with trying those things and instead simply enjoy the reading regardless. Others like me may rather try those things to see if they help. I don't find either approach hard to understand.