Scary readers

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

My memory is at least as good as yours

As Rafiki in the Lion King says: "Look harder..." *Points*

The claimed numbers have been steadily rising since we had that discussion.

Ah, I see, I missed that part of that conversation completely. I was recalling the year prior: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=166869, which took that turn around post #77.

(Edited for clarity)

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

Now, the first time we had this discussion (yes, I have a very good memory) your issue was with claims of more than 200 books per year. I do not honestly recall anyone on MR claiming to have read more than 1000. There was some mythical beast that mentioned 730, but I don't think we ever found it.

I am semi retired and I read 10-12 books a day in winter (Oct to May) and about 4 a week in summer. When I read paper books I think I actually read more. I am not a super fast reader.

Around 500 WPM when doing a reading/comprehension test, and I have done two that were supervised and graded in the last 20 years, and several online. Reading books on the ereaders it is more like 350-375 WPM maybe less and that is below college student level. In fact I am sure my reading speed hasn't increased since grade 6.

So I am reading around 300 books a year without trying at an average of 275 pages a book. And the big factor here is that I enjoy reading, it is what I do to relax and probably my main leisure activity. I even read at the gym. And of course I do more time to read than many.

As to 1000 books a year, that figure may not be as mythical as we seem to think. John F. Kennedy reportedly increased his reading speed from 300 WPM to 1200 WPM. If he had the leisure time to read that I do and chose to spend it that way, he would easily pass the 1000 books a year mark. And there a lot of people who read faster. The couple that I know I know don't talk about it as people call them liars to their faces. For some reason it seems to cause extreme hostility in some people that someone reads faster than they do. Most people don't care if you cook better, walk faster or play basketball like a pro. But reading faster seems to set off the fight or flight syndrome in the insecure

Lucky for me I am under average in the reading world.

Helen

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

The couple that I know I know don't talk about it as people call them liars to their faces. For some reason it seems to cause extreme hostility in some people that someone reads faster than they do. Most people don't care if you cook better, walk faster or play basketball like a pro. But reading faster seems to set off the fight or flight syndrome in the insecure

10 books a day, at 275 pages average makes 2.750 pages of reading per day. It's about twice the size of my hard cover Lord of the Rings, including appendices.

Ask some random dude in the street:

"Have you read Lord of the Rings?" The answer could easily be "Yes". If you then ask: "Have you read it twice?", then the answer could still be "Yes".

Then ask: "Can you read that book, including appendices, twice in one day?"

Be honest. You'd get laughed at... at the very least.

And you call yourself "below average"? Nah.

Someone telling me that it's "normal" to be able to do that, would be akin to someone at a local chess club stating: "You know, if I'd study chess a bit harder, then I could attain a 2750 ELO rating." Dude... if that's true only partly, you wouldn't be playing in this club.

You'd be a world class star, maybe even busy taking a shot at the next world championship.

Some things are just too fantastic to be believable, even if they could be true for "normal" people. Of course, both the 1000 books a year readers, and the chess world champion candidates exist, but they make up only a handful of people in the entire world.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

10 books a day, at 275 pages average makes 2.750 pages of reading per day. It's about twice the size of my hard cover Lord of the Rings, including appendices.

Ask some random dude in the street:

"Have you read Lord of the Rings?" The answer could easily be "Yes". If you then ask: "Have you read it twice?", then the answer could still be "Yes".

Then ask: "Can you read that book, including appendices, twice in one day?"

Be honest. You'd get laughed at... at the very least.

And you call yourself "below average"? Nah.

Someone telling me that it's "normal" to be able to do that, would be akin to someone at a local chess club stating: "You know, if I'd study chess a bit harder, then I could attain a 2750 ELO rating." Dude... if that's true only partly, you wouldn't be playing in this club.

You'd be a world class star, maybe even busy taking a shot at the next world championship.

Some things are just too fantastic to be believable, even if they could be true for "normal" people. It could be that this chess player is (was) a veeeery lazy prodigy or something, who decided to become a postman or something....

Well if someone said to me that they could read Lord of the Rings twice in one day including the appendices, I would be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. I can't think why anyone would want to read Lord of the Rings twice in one day or even twice at all including the appendices, unless there was a substantial reward involved. But saying you could and saying you did and or do this on a regular basis are two different things.

I do know that some people read much faster than I do. There are those that do read more than 3 books a day. I can read in the right circumstances, more than three books a day, even 400 page range and have on occasion, and my reading speed is average. I have been in the hospital and done nothing but read eat and sleep and read the 10 books I brought with me in a couple of days and had to beg for some more from the nurses.

Lots of people do lots of things much faster than I do and many do these things much better, I don't view them as abnormal or veeeery lazy any more than I view people who may be slower as abnormal. I am ok with what I have and what I can do and hope that others are the same.


Helen

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

10 books a day, at 275 pages average makes 2.750 pages of reading per day. It's about twice the size of my hard cover Lord of the Rings, including appendices.

BTW 10 books a day at 365 days a year is 3650 books a year. More than 11 times what I have ever claimed. Not that I think it couldn't be done, just that not many could do it

Helen

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

BTW 10 books a day at 365 days a year is 3650 books a year. More than 11 times what I have ever claimed. Not that I think it couldn't be done, just that not many could do it

Helen

Maybe I'm understanding this wrong, or you meant something else:

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

I am semi retired and I read 10-12 books a day in winter (Oct to May) and about 4 a week in summer. When I read paper books I think I actually read more. I am not a super fast reader.

<snip>

So I am reading around 300 books a year without trying at an average of 275 pages a book.

So if you wanted to, you'd be able to read 3650 books a year.

Or did you maybe mean 10-12 books a *week* in winter? (Which is still a lot, nonetheless.)

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Maybe I'm understanding this wrong, or you meant something else:

So if you wanted to, you'd be able to read 3650 books a year.

Or did you maybe mean 10-12 books a *week* in winter? (Which is still a lot, nonetheless.)

My apologies, I meant 10-12 books a week and had typed in 1-2 books a day as my average winter reading and edited it badly.

I doubt I could read more than 5 books a day, and that is being optimistic, without becoming more seriously deranged than I already am and even 5 would be a chore not an enjoyable pastime.

A 1000 books a year, or 3 books a day, seems daunting but I have no doubt that there are more than a few who do it regularly. Easier for me to envisage than a second reading of War and Peace, which I hear some have done or even a first reading of the appendices of Lord of the Rings. I am almost sure I could read an appendix from start to finish if the incentive was high enough, but anyone doing it voluntarily kind of flummoxes me.

Feel free to think of me as abnormal and or untruthful as you wish, because I sure as hell am an incompetent post editor

Helen

[Katsunami]

LOL. The scary LotR appendices. (I just can't say 'boring'. I refuse! )

I don't know what's more abnormal: reading 1000 books a year (which I don't / can't), or reading the LotR appendices as light reading for fun (which I do... Sometimes, when reading online discussions, I use them as references, and invariably end up reading half of them again).

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

LOL. The scary LotR appendices. (I just can't say 'boring'. I refuse! )

I don't know what's more abnormal: reading 1000 books a year (which I don't / can't), or reading the LotR appendices as light reading for fun (which I do... Sometimes, when reading online discussions, I use them as references, and invariably end up reading half of them again).

Each to his/her own. I have a friend who would rather play Bingo than anything else, which I can't fathom, especially as she rarely wins. But she is happy either way

Helen