Reading more but enjoying it less? The problem of promiscuous reading habits.

I find myself using books like an addict uses dope these days, looking to read myself into an altered state of consciousness, and then moving on to the next thing on the TBR pile without much reflection in between.

This morning, I realized I have about 40 books in my "to be reviewed" pile, whose plots and themes I can remember only sketchily.

Anybody do lists or have a system for your reading that promotes more mindful, thoughtful reading? Or re-reading? I downloaded Italo Calvino's Why Read the Classics recently and thought about taking a year to read/re-read the books he discusses in his essays.

Ha- I blogged about this a little while ago and I have cut down on the number of books I read concurrently since then ... https://librofulltime.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/is-it-just-actually-that-i-read-t...

Your brain must be more retentive than mine! I teach English and trying to read more than one book at a time while reading student essays and "staying current" in my field prevents me from reading books for fun concurrently.

Oh, completely: if I'm reading for my research I can have one silly book on the go but nothing I have to really concentrate on. So, no, not more retentive!

I don't think that every book deserves to be reviewed. For that matter, I don't think that many books stand up to mindful, thoughtful reading these days. In using a 5 star review system, I find that the vast, overwhelming majority of books are 3 stars (average) for me. They are pleasant enough, but not memorable, nor are they particularly thought or emotion provoking. Does this happen to everyone who does a lot of reading? Or to everyone who is a fast reader? I think maybe it does.

But I also fear the "Amazon.com BS Machine" that Ursula LeGuin rages against in her blog (http://www.ursulakleguin.com/Blog2015.html, see post #99.) Although there are more books published now than there ever were, they aren't that different from one another in style and content, and we see more trends in everything from book covers to targeted demographics. And I'm not talking about the Pattersons and Clancys and Perrys, pulp genre fiction and the legions of Mass market books that I am too snobbish to read. I'm talking about pretty good books. Like LeGuin says: "The readability of many best sellers is much like the edibility of junk food. Agribusiness and the food packagers sell us sweetened fat to live on, so we come to think that’s what food is. Amazon uses the BS Machine to sell us sweetened fat to live on, so we begin to think that’s what literature is."

That's one reason that I am here on LT and not Goodreads, and why I try to follow some rules about my reading.

Rules:
I pretty much only buy books from library sales and library carts. I will go to used book stores, but very infrequently make a purchase.
I keep a large Wish List (that I keep on amazon.com, ironically!) that I compile from friends and LT recommendations as well as 100 best books of the century type lists.
I try to only buy books on my wish list, although I do read books lent or gifted by friends.
I rotate my selections among nonfiction, fiction and SF/fantasy. I also try to rotate subcategories, like memoirs and topical within nonfiction, and classics and contemporary within fiction.
I listen to audiobooks while I have a different category of reading going on simultaneously, and I have a book of short stories I read one at a time to bridge gaps.

The rules ensure that I am not reading the same BS all the time, and that my head space is not too crowded to think about a book that is worth thinking about. But even then, I'd say that less than 10% of what I read sticks with me enough to earn 4 stars.

How do you all feel about abandoning books before you're done? I'm trying to put in practice a rule that if I'm not immersed in a book by the end of the first chapter or so, I move on. I still read a fair number of average books, but I find looking back that they were ones where I disregarded this rule for some reason (usually because I paid for them).

I've been going back and reading a lot of classics, particularly less well known ones. They endure for a reason. Classics on audio is working very well for me right now. I have more patience hearing someone read the more long-winded ones than trying to read it myself. The 2 five-star books I've read so far this year were both from the early 20th century.

I am always updating my wishlist. I try to only read books that I feel genuinely excited about reading. That may mean clearing out the backlog every now and then. Something I bought a year ago may no longer apply. I'm coming around to the idea that instead of having a big to read pile, I should read books soon after I buy them.

For new fiction, I've been having the most luck lately with genre-blurring books, what I tend to call "literary science fiction" for want of a better name. I like the willingness of some authors to experiment and play around with the tropes of genre, do new things. That's what keeps me interested.

What I am most disliking is when I pick up a book that looks interesting and it turns out to be a romance in disguise. This seems to happen with me more with historical fiction than anything else. I like immersing myself in different worlds, so historical fiction is constantly attractive, but there has to be more to the plot than yet another love triangle. Those are often quick reads, though, and I'm usually done with them before I know it, but they are certainly not memorable.

>5 vwinsloe:: No, not every books deserves reflection, but I'm finding that the faster/more compulsively I read the less I'm making distinctions between my 4 and 5 star books and the throw-aways.

I like your buying idea, but I have a chronic respiratory ailment and have donated most of my paper books because of dust issues. And I quit buying out of the bargain bin because the dust and mold spoors that lurk in there are usually a ticket to Inhalerville for me.

So I am grateful for the Evil Amazon's Kindle.

>6 sturlington:: I rarely abandon a book, though I did ditch Sarah Waters, Hilary Mantel, and a lot of Sarah Dunant. Not high on historical fiction, I guess. Also think Gary Shteyngart is obnoxious and don't get the hype around his work.

But I've thought, too, about picking a genre and just reading in that for awhile.

About a year ago, I read all of Trollope's Barchester books, and as a chaser read his mother's book about customs of the Americans ca 1830s/40s. Great style, witty, though she had some cringe-making ideas about race. (I also listened to most of the Pallisers and a couple of Henry James).

>7 nohrt4me2: I have dumped not one, but two books by Gary Shteyngart before finishing.

>8 sturlington: Which Steyngarts did you ditch? I don't remember the end of Super Sad True Love Story, so I might have ditched it before the end. A colleague suggested Little Failure and I almost barfed at the title (though I feigned interest because I'm a wuss about hammering on other people's literary tastes).

As a Teen librarian, I read a lot of YA that grabs my attention while I'm at work. Some of it is pretty good, some of it disappoints, some of it I know isn't up my alley so I don't pick it up in the first place.

I'm of the opinion that if you don't feel like reading it, don't. Maybe it was a recommendation from a friend, or a gift, or something you just aren't in the mood for. Reading should be fun, so if it's not grabbing you, grab something else. (I do at least start all the books I'm given as gifts, if just to be polite, and I don't generally heap recommendations on other people unless they ask me to or we have very similar taste. I don't want to force them away from the TBR list they made from themselves!)

If I notice that I've been reading stuff that doesn't satisfy me, I'll go to the TBR list I keep on Goodreads (don't hurt me!), organize it by best star rating, and choose something from the top ten.

I read somewhat compulsively as well. But I know I'm not getting any less out of the books because I'm reading more frequently, and I'm not reading books that I don't like. I have no problem with getting rid of a book if it doesn't hook me within the first few chapters. That said, I borrow exclusively because I can't afford to buy books, so I don't mind returning the book if I didn't like it.

I only review books that really stand out for me one way or another, or books that I win through LTER. The way I see it is, I don't re-read books (just don't care to), and I don't need to have the contents memorized, and the really profound things (maybe not specifics, but themes or big plot devices, etc.) are going to stay in my memory one way or another. So why not read a ton?

(Side note, I wouldn't be reading as much if I weren't currently unemployed. It really helps to pass the time when I don't have any volunteer activities or other commitments.)

>9 nohrt4me2: SSTLS was one, and Absurdistan was the other. No one can say I didn't give him a fair shot, but his style is definitely not for me.

Before joining LT, I read anywhere from 20-40 books a year, mainly classics, and always one at a time. About a year after joining LibraryThing, I started reading multiple books at the same time and now read about 80 books a year. Usually I have one nonfiction, one contemporary fiction - I tend towards award winners written by women, one classic or book from the 1001 books to read before you die list, and possibly an audiobook for my commute. I have a terrible memory for plot in the books I read. Even as soon as a month after reading a book I often can't remember the end and a year or two later I remember almost nothing about plot or character names. However, books that I connect with (or really hate) I usually remember something like an overarching theme, particularly fascinating setting, some outlying historical details, or a memorable character. I see these details as adding to my overall knowledge and am happy to take away those ideas even if I can't remember book specifics.

It bothers me that I don't remember more detail, but I don't think that the change in the amount of books I read has affected that. It seems the same to me as before when I used to read less, so I'm happy to read in bulk. The only way I've found to remember details of a book is to reread. It usually takes three readings over the course of many years or intense study for a book to really stick. In keeping with that personal discovery, I have a mental list of books that I want to reread in that manner. It will probably only amount to a dozen or so books over my lifetime that I will reread every 5-10 years. Other than those books, I'm happy to read for entertainment and enjoy the act of reading, even if I don't remember the actual plot a few years down the road.

>13 japaul22: Certainly not here to bash anyone's motivation for reading.

However, I think there's something life-altering, and mind-expanding (sorry) about reading. To paraphrase from a recent piece I read (see, I can't remember where ...), reading is one of the few actions that allows you access into the inner workings of someone else's mind.

Lately I feel like I'm just sort of tromping through other people's heads willy nilly without giving them the reflection they deserve.

Slowing down is one thing I need to do, taking time for reflection, certainly. But I think it's also important (for me) to connect the dots between books that might be wildly different, yet equally engaging. And to see what a lifetime of reading adds to my understanding of the human condition.

>7 nohrt4me2:. But perhaps you can find a way to randomize your reading selections? That's really what my rules do. Intuitively, I know that if I can read any book that I want, any time that I want, then I may end up reading a lot of books that I should like, but aren't really worth my time. It may be a combination of high expectations and ease of access. One way that my randomized selection process helps is that it keeps me from reading much that is too new. I haven't gotten to the bottom of the reasons why, but most new books that come to my attention are published to rave reviews, but if you look back on them in a few years, the good reviews taper off. The Testament of Jessie Lamb which you commented on recently, is a case in point. It was on my wish list for a long time, I never came across a copy, and now it is off.

Rotating among categories, genres and mediums also helps me to keep a fresher perspective on what I read.

But still, but still, there is just not that much GREAT reading out there. I mean great reading for ME, not just in general. Not everyone is captivated by the same books, even when they are truly great books. When I do come across one, it stands out, and I will go on thinking about it, and discussing it, long after I turn the last page.

>6 sturlington:. The only books that I abandon are audio books from the library. When the book is not working for me, sometimes just because of a poor reader, my mind wanders and I can't follow it. When it is time to renew the book, or if I am aware that there are others waiting for it, then I don't regret bringing it back. I find that my friends who borrow print library books are much more likely to return them partially read for the same reason.

If I had abandoned all of the books that irritated me for the first hundred pages (or in one notable case, 200 pages) I would have missed some of my favorite reads.

Have you thought about keeping notes during reading, either in a reading journal or margin notes in the book itself if you aren't averse to writing in books? I also love my kindle for highlighting passages and adding notes. I often do this with classics or more literary current fiction. I also always review a book I finish within a day or two of finishing. With books that I'm still thinking about days or months later, I'll go back and add to my initial review.

I think writing is an excellent memory aid and also helps to bring thoughts into cohesion. Going back to read my reviews or notes often helps me remember more of the book than simply what I wrote about.

>15 vwinsloe: I think everyone has to come up with a rule that works for them when it comes to abandonment. My rule of thumb is whether I'm immersed, whether I believe in the world the author has created and want to inhabit it. It's not really the same thing as irritation. For instance, I'm reading Mansfield Park right now and virtually every character is irritating me greatly, but I'm still immersed in Austen's world and want to keep reading. If immersion is not happening, I get distracted, I don't engage with the book, and it's not going to have that great an impact on me.

>16 japaul22: I totally agree. When I started keeping a book journal, my retention really improved. The Kindle has really helped with note taking. I don't really write full-fledged reviews in my journal, more of the impressions I had and connections I made while reading the book, what worked for me and what didn't.

Switching around genres frequently doesn't really do it for me. It tends to make me hyper and I lose focus. (I'm sure it does work for others, so not judging here, just saying that's one of the reasons my reading feels restless).

I do appreciate others' thoughts here.

I take copious notes on my Kindle ... and then forget about them in my haste to get on to the next thing.

On another site, someone was discussing mid-20th century women writers. That sounded like a great summer project, and I think I'll pick it up. There's some Shirley Jackson I haven't read, ditto duMaurier, and I have yet to read Highsmith's Strangers on a Train. Another person suggested Dorothy Baker.

>18 nohrt4me2: That sounds like a great reading project.

I've changed my reading habits this year, and I'm enjoying reading more as a result. My first problem was that I used to feel that if I started a book I had to finish it. I'm giving myself a break and tossing any book that I don't enjoy. I was afraid that I might end up tossing a lot of books, but it turned out to be just a few. I'm a good picker, and as a result of my new attitude toward completing books, I'm willing to experiment more. I guess I had a slight case of OCD when it came to books, and I'm over it now.

I'm also giving myself a break when it comes to reviews. I don't have to review every book I read. If I feel like I have to share my opinion or bust, I'll writer the review. Otherwise, I'll write a sentence or two about my general impressions, or skip it altogether and just leave stars to remind myself that I've read it. Actually, I think I've been forgetting to leave stars about half the time, but in the true spirit of my new nonchalant reading style, I'm not really worried about it.

Well, I went to the library today and every book I looked at from my reading list just did not appeal. I came home with nothing. I blame this thread (ha ha). At least I have plenty of books at home to read.

>7 nohrt4me2:. I keep seeing articles about the e-reading experience not being as immersive as paper book reading. I know that you cannot read paper books anymore, but maybe that is part of the problem?

http://www.wired.com/2014/05/reading-on-screen-versus-paper/

I wonder whether there is a solution?

>22 vwinsloe: I can read paper books, I just can't keep them, but what a great article! Thanks for posting it. There was something similar in an NPR report not long ago, and I want to share these idea with my Mass Comm class this fall.

This struck a chord:

"What I’ve read on screen seems slippery, though. When I later recall it, the text is slightly translucent in my mind’s eye. It’s as if my brain better absorbs what’s presented on paper. Pixels just don’t seem to stick."

When I read on paper and need to go back to re-look at a passage, I can always remember where that passage was on the page: right or left, top, bottom, or middle. I can also usually remember if there was a crease or stain or some other notable thing about the page. I've also sometimes paused in my reading to notice that words or letters happen to line up in such a way as to make a pattern of some sort on the page.

e-pages are completely devoid of most of these kinds of idiosyncracies. So the little signposts you get when you're reading that help you more intimately know the soul of the text through its bodily form are missing. There's a uniformity (which perhaps fails to engage part of the brain, as the article suggests). And it discourages the reader from flipping back to an earlier passage to confirm understanding or to make connections.

>23 nohrt4me2:. I haven't ever used an e-reader, so I can't make the comparison. But the bit about remembering where a passage is on the paper page; that is my experience as well.

Very interesting article. I've also had the experience of remembering the physical characteristics of a page, and where certain phrases were on the page.

Because of vision problems, I've turned to ebooks and audio books. I can still read large print books, but I don't really have the storage space. I've noticed that I don't retain as much from audio books. I follow the narrator easily, but sometimes I can't for the life of me remember what I "read" the day before. Once I hear it again it all comes back, but that sort of thing never happens with print. It's a whole different way of experiencing a book that is nothing like reading. Even so, it lets me continue enjoying books when I can't read. I often start out reading and switch to audio when my eyes give out.

>25 JackieCarroll: What you say about audiobooks is really interesting. I sometimes give my students those little quizzes to determine whether they prefer audio, visual, or tactile learning channels, and when I take the quizzes myself, I always come down on the audio/tactile side.

So an audiobook is actually my preferred way of "reading" a book, even if it's the robo-voice on the Kindle I have, which no one else can stand. Voices and sound make the book seem more "real."

The fact that I'm also tactile might explain why holding a paper book is more satisfying for me than just reading. There's nothing really too sensual in clicking the e-reader's pages (though I do highlight and annotate).

However, aside from the fact that my e-books don't create dust and clutter, I can adjust the text size (I also have problems with small text), and that's a help.