[HN Gopher] On the Joy of Reading Slowly
___________________________________________________________________
On the Joy of Reading Slowly
Author : Archelaos
Score : 129 points
Date : 2022-12-02 10:14 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| westcort wrote:
| This is a tool to help one read slower:
| https://locserendipity.com/Scramble.html
| sohkamyung wrote:
| For those who 'fear' losing the plot thread and want to finish a
| story in one sitting, try short story anthologies or (for SFF)
| magazines. Or you could read them online while waiting in line or
| while travelling.
| tetris11 wrote:
| Gardner Dozois's sci-fi anthologies were the best. He is sorely
| missed, R.I.P.
| lifeisstillgood wrote:
| More and more I realise that the aspirational upper middle class
| goals in my / all cultures are based around having time - usually
| time bought at the proce of other people doing the donkey work
| for you.
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| So the donkey work is kinda magical?
|
| Always had been!
| lifeisstillgood wrote:
| Nah the donkey work, cooking, cleaning, raising children,
| farming etc is the donkey work - and the other stuff -
| reading writing, scientific investigation (useful) or
| religious ceremonies, cultural gatekeeping, oppression
| (useless) or war making (grey area)
| b3morales wrote:
| There is a school of thought that the donkey work is just
| as important -- or at best unavoidable. And that you should
| therefore make your peace with it.
| https://fourpillarfreedom.com/chop-wood-carry-water/
| sorokod wrote:
| I suspect that many techies come to book reading with incorrect
| expectation. Outside of a limited area books are not source of
| hard facts,they are encoding certain mental landscapes - the
| reader is challenged to decode those landscapes and enjoy a walk
| in them.
|
| The reading speed should be compatible with this process, re
| reading a book can be as pleasurable as repeating a hiking
| experience you had in the past.
| tartoran wrote:
| Depends of what type of books, fiction or non-fiction, but I
| generally agree with the sentiment of books as an experience of
| the mind.
| ggm wrote:
| I value slow reading far more than I used to. That said, one
| intense pleasure of fast reading is the slow unravelling of the
| depth of the book with each re-read. Well.. if I'm honest also
| learning how much you misread on the speed reading.
| Alt4Alt wrote:
| Obligatory ChatGpt thread?
|
| What are the advantages of reading slowly?
|
| 1. Improved comprehension: Reading slowly gives you time to
| process the information you're taking in, which translates into
| better understanding of the material.
|
| 2. Improved retention: When you're taking your time to absorb
| what you're reading, you're more likely to remember it.
|
| 3. Increased focus: Slowing down gives you the opportunity to
| really focus on the material and stay engaged in the reading
| process.
|
| 4. Reduced stress: Taking your time to read can help reduce the
| stress of trying to comprehend and remember large amounts of
| information quickly.
|
| 5. Improved enjoyment: The slower pace of reading can help you to
| appreciate the story or content more and make the reading
| experience more enjoyable.
| Slow_Hand wrote:
| This resonates so deeply with me right now.
|
| I recently began reading Krista Tippet's 'Becoming Wise' with no
| expectation of what I was getting into and it must've taken me
| two hours to read through the first 15 pages. Not because it was
| difficult, but because Krista's prose is so lovely and her
| writing is dense with stimulating ideas and perspective. I wanted
| to take my time to pore over everything.
|
| I'm the type to write in my books as I go. When the text gives me
| an idea I write it in the margins. When I don't understand
| something I write it down. When I think the author is wrong I say
| so and make a note. It's an approach of engaging with the book
| and having a conversation with an author.
|
| I've always been a big reader, but retention is an evergreen
| issue for me. There's no sense in speeding through a book if I'm
| not going to remember it. Things forgotten is often time wasted
| to me.
|
| When I speed through a convincing book I may be motivated to
| change my behaviors and retain a few rules-of-thumb about how to
| apply the book's lessons. Sometimes that's enough. But it only
| gives me a surface-level understanding of what I've just read.
| After having sped through a book I may be able to tell someone
| WHAT I am doing differently, but I do not have the internalized,
| intuitive understanding of why I am doing it. If someone were to
| challenge me on my new behavior or outlook I would not be able to
| defend my new beliefs in a robust way. It is a weak kind of
| authority that I've gained by reading quickly.
|
| By taking time to slowly internalize and integrate my learnings I
| am on a much stronger footing to A) retain the lesson B)
| intuitively understand it and C) convey it to others in a way
| that is consistent, authoritative, and convincing.
|
| -----
|
| To return to Krista Tippet's 'Becoming Wise' I think I love this
| book. For me it is one of those rare books that resonates with me
| deeply and immediately. Like meeting someone and striking up an
| immediate friendship. I have that feeling of "You and I are going
| to get along just fine." It's a lovely feeling, but uncommon and
| it's a wonderful thing when it happens out of the blue. I am more
| than happy to take my time to get to know it.
| divbzero wrote:
| People also brag about about listening to audiobooks, podcasts,
| or video lectures at high speed. As for me, I stick to 1/4x or
| less for the highest quality stuff.
| OJFord wrote:
| People do talk at different speeds, personally I increase
| YouTube video speed sometimes, according to the creator, just
| to make it sound more normal/average.
|
| Dave Jones of EEVBlog for example has quite a slow Aussie
| drawl, seems to have sped up over the years, and I now 'only'
| have it 1.25x to sound 'right', but I played the older ones at
| 1.75x or 2x even.
|
| Also agree with sibling that if I want time to look at/think
| about something or let it sink in, I'm more inclined to pause
| than run the whole thing at a slower speed. I suppose that
| could be different for a fiction audiobook say with brilliant
| prose you want to slowly wash over you... I don't really listen
| to things that I could read (at any speed I like (and can))
| personally, but I can imagine that makes sense.
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| 1/4 audio sounds weird to me. In go 2x for introductionary
| stuff then 1x for learning stuff, but lots of pauses to make
| notes.
| TheGreatCabbage wrote:
| If I'm learning educational material, I prefer to listen at 2x
| speed and pause regularly when I need to ponder something.
|
| I can't learn well at low speed because I'm apt to zone out and
| start my own train of thought, necessitating a rewind.
| wkjagt wrote:
| I've started doing many things more slowly, not just reading.
| Cooking, for example. After the challenge of chopping an onion
| really quickly wore off, I started going slower and enjoying the
| moment. I realized chefs in kitchens go fast because they have
| to. They have many tables to serve. I have just one, so for me
| trying to look like a chef doesn't make any sense. I can go slow
| and it's ok, my family isn't "waiting for their order". I call
| them to the table when dinner is ready, which means: no rush
| needed, and I can just enjoy the moment. Same goes for almost
| anything else.
| dorchadas wrote:
| Can I ask what prompted this? I've tried to change my life to
| fit this in the past few years, since reading Carl Honore's _In
| Praise of Slow_ (released in 2005! I can only imagine what he
| thinks now), even down to shifting away from speeding on the
| highway and just going the speed limit. I 've found that one
| simple act gave me a better mindset, same with trying to do
| other things slowly as well (including just meandering the city
| I now live in).
| thenerdhead wrote:
| This article reads to me that people who read quickly are
| braggarts and those who read slowly are pompous.
|
| There's a joy to doing things slowly just so much as there is a
| joy of doing things quickly. Reminds me of the Francis Bacon?
| quote:
|
| > Some books should be tasted, some devoured, but only a few
| should be chewed and digested thoroughly.
| hgomersall wrote:
| The important thing is you've found a way to feel superior to
| both. ;)
| thenerdhead wrote:
| Haha, the human condition I suppose!
| abhaynayar wrote:
| This, plus reading great books more than once.
|
| The idea of reading a book a second time was repulsive when I had
| never done it before. But once I tried it, I realized that it is
| a much better use of my time and I get many more insights the
| second time around. I'd rather read an amazing book again, than
| waste my time on mediocre books just to say I read a lot of
| books.
|
| Reading a lot of books is overrated. Reading great books is
| underrated.
| RunSet wrote:
| "My definition of a great story has nothing to do with 'a
| varied and interesting background.' It is: One that can be read
| with pleasure by a cultivated reader and reread with increased
| pleasure."
|
| - Gene Wolfe, from a chain letter to George R.R. Martin and
| Greg Benford
| sorokod wrote:
| I commented elsewhere that rereading a book can be compared to
| revisiting a certain landscape. After a wery long time I am
| rereading "A Study In Scarlet", the very first Sherlock Holmes
| story. Just from the first few chapters some things I have not
| noticed or perhaps forgot:
|
| * Watson is an Afghanistan veteran
|
| * The London borough of Holborn is referred to as "the Holborn"
| (no idea why)
|
| * Watson and Holmes are flatmates, they share an apartment as
| they can't afford to live solo - some things don't change.
|
| * The word "ejaculate" did some cultural traveling over the
| years.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| >> share an apartment as they can't afford to live solo
|
| There was also at the time a general disdain for living solo.
| A person living on their own was almost seen to be hiding
| something. Their daily activity would be totally unchecked.
| The protestant ethic also saw it wasteful for one person to
| occupy an entire dwelling on their own. Think of all the
| scrooge-like literary characters who lived alone.
| sorokod wrote:
| Not an expert on late 19 century England but this is not
| the way the story goes:
|
| _... He was bemoaning himself this morning because he
| could not get someone to go halves with him in some nice
| rooms which he had found, and which were too much for his
| purse." "By Jove!" I cried, "if he really wants someone to
| share the rooms and the expense, I am the very man for him.
| I should prefer having a partner to being alone._
| [deleted]
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Note: story. "I should prefer having a partner to being
| alone." The character is reassuring the reader that he
| isn't the sort of oddball loner who might actually want
| to live alone. They may have expenses, but they both feel
| a societal need not to be that strange man living alone
| in an empty apartment.
| CodeyWhizzBang wrote:
| There's a line in War of the Worlds that was innocuous at the
| time, but is impossible to read as intended now to our modern
| eyes:
|
| "He heard footsteps running to and fro in the rooms, and up
| and down stairs behind him. His landlady came to the door,
| loosely wrapped in dressing gown and shawl; her husband
| followed ejaculating."
| [deleted]
| axiomdata316 wrote:
| This brings back memories of me reading this is middle
| school. I remember getting to this exact spot and thinking
| should I be reading this? Lol. I'm glad to know I'm not the
| only person that read that passage a different way.
| kwhitefoot wrote:
| No it isn't.
| sorokod wrote:
| Funny how we (and victorians such as Conan Doyle and Wells)
| make an effort to avoid "naughty words" and then all
| efforts come to nothing as the language moves on.
| f0e4c2f7 wrote:
| I agree - how many times have you watched your favorite movie?
| Favorite TV show? If only once you should watch it at least one
| more time.
|
| I've only read the culture novels by Iain Banks once. I'm
| really looking forward to doing a second read in a few years.
| Thinking I might do audiobooks next time.
| Veen wrote:
| Nabokov said:
|
| > Curiously enough, one cannot read a book: one can only reread
| it. A good reader, a major reader, an active and creative
| reader is a rereader.
|
| https://www.themarginalian.org/2013/01/21/nabokov-on-what-ma...
| kqr wrote:
| Indeed. I used to think my to-read list is long enough already,
| with no need to add books I've already read to it.
|
| I've come to realise that it's not a list, it's a priority
| queue. And what would be weird would be if the greatest books
| I've already read would rank the absolute lowest in priority.
| Of course they fit into the to-read priority queue, some quite
| high, even!
| davnicwil wrote:
| yeah I agree with this and I think there's some broader truth
| here that also applies to other art forms where the real value
| is not in the unveiling of a storyline or whatever, but in the
| detail in the journey along the way.
|
| Actually this might be one definition of a great book / film /
| series etc - that it can't truly have 'spoilers' because the
| key facts of the plot is not the point.
| Barrin92 wrote:
| yes the modern anxiety over spoiler alerts I think is very
| closely tied to the "watch once and forget" culture.
|
| It also always reminds me of that Hitchcock anecdote where he
| talks about the difference between surprise, which is not
| knowing that the bomb is under the table, to suspense, the
| viewer seeing the bomb but it not going off. The former is
| five seconds of surprise, the latter is 15 minutes of
| tension.
|
| Point being that keeping the viewer in the dark is in many
| ways the lowest form of creating excitement. And it seems way
| to common nowadays both in how we watch and how stories
| themselves are constructed around this.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| I loved this idea (and it rang very true in context) in the
| Hadestown musical, which is a retelling of the story of
| Orpheus and Eurydice - and it begins with lyrics like "It's a
| sad song, it's a sad tale, it's a tragedy - but we sing it
| anyway".
|
| Knowing how the story ends can sometimes even make it better,
| when it's a really great story.
| Tomte wrote:
| Romeo and Juliet gives their eventual deaths away in the
| first few sentences, as well.
| scarecrowbob wrote:
| There are several reasons why I agree, but I want to elaborate
| on one specifically.
|
| I believe almost all "meaning" comes from context. The process
| of reading a book is part of the process of developing a
| context for a story. When we come back to the book's beginning
| again, we are experiencing that same work in a new context.
| Often that new context provides elements in the text I may have
| missed on the first read-through
|
| And, further, when I return to books with new life experiences
| their context has changed again, sometimes radically: reading
| King's "The Shining" as a preteen was very different than
| reading through it as a twice-divorced alcoholic with two grown
| children.
|
| In my understanding, some texts allow for that return better
| than others.
|
| Some texts are complex, in that they can speak deeply to us in
| many ways based on the varied contexts in which we approach
| them, and that's much of how I value the books I value.
| ddalex wrote:
| One reason why I think reading great books multiple times is
| important is that it allows us to gain new insights and
| perspectives on the text each time we read it. Our
| understanding of a book can change as we grow and experience
| new things in life, and rereading a book can help us see it
| in a new light. For example, a book that might have seemed
| simplistic or shallow on our first read-through might reveal
| itself to be a deeply complex and thought-provoking work on a
| second or third read. Additionally, rereading a book can help
| us better understand and appreciate the author's intentions
| and the themes and ideas they were exploring.
| dandy23 wrote:
| Sounds like GPT-3.
| kqr wrote:
| This was something I discovered in the period my wife and I
| (before children...) read books aloud to each other. Somehow the
| scenes described became more vivid as I stayed longer with each
| word and tried to predict vocal variations to match the mood and
| action unfolding.
| PhasmaFelis wrote:
| I'm not capable of reading a good, compelling book slowly. My eye
| falls on a sentence for an instant, and my brain has already read
| it. I feel like this might not be normal? I dunno. It's not
| really a useful or even desirable skill, but there it is. (I can
| go back over a difficult passage to make sure I really understood
| it before going on, but that doesn't slow my overall rate much.)
|
| But I'm confused, because the author alternates between two
| different things they call "reading slowly": actually reading
| slowly, and reading many books in parallel so you cover a lot of
| pages but take a long time to finish anything.
|
| Which sounds like pointless self-flagellation to me. My reading
| is driven forward because I want to know what _happens._ Putting
| down a good book after 10 pages so I can read a different good
| book for 10 pages would feel like...I 'm struggling to come up
| with a comparison that isn't some kind of self-denial sex fetish
| thing.
| californiadreem wrote:
| Not to be too snarky, but I think this should be titled "On the
| Joy of Advertising Thirty Books" rather than reading slowly.
|
| I started playing a game a few years ago--given a headline, guess
| whether the buried lede is an advertisement for a book. Is it
| about someone dead or a banal new factoid about someone dead?
| Almost certainly yes. At some point, it stopped being a game and
| started being They Live.
|
| This, though, puts it to shame. It's like seeing a move in Go or
| Chess where you wouldn't think to make it yourself, but can see
| the implications of why it was done and sigh appreciatively in
| regards to the craft itself.
|
| How do you motivate consumers to buy more books when attention is
| fixed, taxed, and waning? And there's a cultural trend amongst
| the literate towards slower, more intentional living? Convince
| them that rapidly multiplexing and timeslicing between ten books
| is actually slower than the intentionally slower consumption of
| one. Slyly suggest that you'll also rack up a higher book count
| as well.
|
| How do you receive more product placement revenue while shying
| away from being perceived as a vehicle for product placement?
| Cloak thirty advertisements in a morass of trendy deep workism
| and throw in The Road as a red herring.
|
| It's beautiful to watch in the sheer chutzpah of it all. It's a
| little _too_ clever and it makes my tool-assisted sense tingle.
|
| Susie Mesure's only other article (for the Guardian--she's
| freelance and a real person) was published the day before this
| one and is literally a deep advertisement by and for Microsoft,
| so who knows? Maybe we're already in the event horizon of
| Adverturing and its consequences.
| whydoyoucare wrote:
| Exactly my thoughts. The first four paras are the only useful
| part of the article, everything else is advertising tons of
| books.
|
| On the other hand, the comments here are worth reading as
| always. :-)
| dav_Oz wrote:
| Different kind of books tolerate different speeds. "Easy" books
| (e.g. fairy tales/children books) are more forgiving at varying
| speeds. For more "difficult" books (e.g. older
| books/philosophical treatises) you have to kind of work your way
| up and then back and so forth, they demand to be read at a
| certain speed. Here the famous quote of Pascal applies more
| strongly: _When we read too fast or too slowly, we understand
| nothing._
|
| "Poems" are a great way to methodically slow down your (forced)
| reading speed and be aware of it. Like it is much harder to play
| eighth notes spot on at 40 bpm than at 220 bpm.
|
| Maybe it is beside the point but I would also recommend
| modulating your reading speed by choosing different kind of
| books, at least for me this is more effective and easier than
| trying to read say LOTR "slower".
| nicbou wrote:
| I really enjoy the slow, methodical questioning of the hustle
| culture. People are realising that chasing metrics won't make
| them better or happier.
|
| Read books that feel right at a speed that feels right. Give up
| on those you don't like even when everyone says they're great.
| It's a hobby. It's meant to be enjoyable.
| [deleted]
| Emma_Goldman wrote:
| In my experience, the time taken to read a book increases super-
| linearly with its difficulty. A brilliant work of philosophy can
| take weeks of dedicated study to understand, and in the most
| extreme cases, entire careers. Mastering a truly difficult book
| can be very intellectually satisfying, and that is often part of
| the 'value' you get from the process. The problem is when an
| increase in difficulty is not matched by a commensurate increase
| in value, when a text is both difficult and unrewarding, and
| rather than being satisfied by the labour of understanding, you
| are repelled by the fact that it came to nil.
|
| I don't really understand what the point of reading a novel
| slowly is. Some poetry is difficult and rewarding, though I can't
| say I've ever found any great virtue in purposefully enigmatic
| prose. In fact, I tend to like novels most when they are
| graceful, and my eyes can slide across the page with ease.
| Tolstoy comes to mind.
|
| I am not a fast reader though, so maybe all of my reading is
| unavoidably 'slow'.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-04 23:02 UTC)