PDA

View Full Version : General Reading Advice



John Lark
09-28-2009, 04:55 PM
Hello,

If you're anything like me, then you probably read books quite regularly, and you probably read more than one at a time; you're pretty tall, you're called John, and you enjoy early morning walks across brightly lit, dew embellished meadows, around late July, especially when there are flagrant and ornate flowers to pick.

Well John, the following assorted fragments from random places (I think most were actually discovered in windmills), you may just find to be quite intriguing, or, if tempestuous waters permit, even of some use.


It is never sensible to read more than one novel at a time, particularly if these novels happen to be rather large, as these tend to be quite uncomfortable to hold, and furthermore laborious on the eyes; it is even less sensible if these novels are also fairly long, somewhat engaging, and are, respectively, filled with a tumult of events -- The mind can only concentrate on so many things, and when it concentrates on certain things, it often forgets about other things, especially when these other things are similar to those initial things. (See Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding)

The longest consecutive interval one should spend reading a single book should be no more than five hours. Beyond this point, or around this point, the content of the book begins to submerge into the subconscious, and one will quickly find oneself repeating character’s names, distinguished locutions, and sorts, in one’s mind, without any volition of one’s own.

Don’t be afraid to take pauses for thoughts and recollections in the middle of sentences; a pause for thought can hardly be called a pause at all (-- in other words, it is well worthwhile).

Reading too much is bad for you
Too much is precisely that quantity which is excessive
What is in excess is a contingent truth; and thus, is subjective
Know what is in excess for you

Reading a book is like climbing a mountain; it is done best with great care, precision, and ardour, but even more importantly, with regular breaks. (It helps if the mountain is rather small, has a well constructed route, and exhibits a memorable view at its peak)

Certain skills are compatible with multitudinous and multifarious disciplines; reading, as such, is one of them; and even in the limited confines of literature, there is the novel, the play, the poem, the essay, the short story, &c. in which it is able to freely indulge itself – Variety is a beautiful thing, because choice is a beautiful thing, because freedom is a beautiful thing.

The beauty of poems, amongst other things, lies in their nature of often being quite short, and though ‘short’ is often followed by ‘sweet’, in this instance, short is sweet. Now, with the pace of modern life being what it is—the busyness of work, the numerous and mindless leisure activities, the increased speed of transport—most people just haven’t got the time for longer mediums of text; which is reason enough for poetical adherence. But moreover, even for the more studious reader, they offer the perfect break from and between larger and more prosaic works; be they novels, philosophical tracts, text books, or anything else.
Don’t like poetry? There’s no need to worry, the innate magnoliophyta seed will indubitably grow in time; all it takes is some well nourished soil and a modest degree of exposure.


That's all I could gather for now; criticisms of the above and further such advice are welcome, though, in your cases, there is license to be as particular and as specific as you like.

LitNetIsGreat
09-28-2009, 05:14 PM
If you're anything like me, then you probably read books quite regularly
Yes.

and you probably read more than one at a time
Yes.


you're pretty tall
Er, yes.


you're called John
Er, actually yes:eek2:.


and you enjoy early morning walks across brightly lit, dew embellished meadows
Yes, that sounds cool, I'm freaking out.

around late July, especially when there are flagrant and ornate flowers to pick.

Yes, I'm off work then.
:eek2::eek2::eek2:

Are you Derren Brown???


Well John, the following assorted fragments from random places (I think most were actually discovered in windmills), you may just find to be quite intriguing, or, if tempestuous waters permit, even of some use.
OK, I'm certainly listening, you have my attention...


It is never sensible to read more than one novel at a time, particularly if these novels happen to be rather large, as these tend to be quite uncomfortable to hold, and furthermore laborious on the eyes; it is even less sensible if these novels are also fairly long, somewhat engaging, and are, respectively, filled with a tumult of events -- The mind can only concentrate on so many things, and when it concentrates on certain things, it often forgets about other things, especially when these other things are similar to those initial things. (See Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding)

That sounds like a good idea.


The longest consecutive interval one should spend reading a single book should be no more than five hours. Beyond this point, or around this point, the content of the book begins to submerge into the subconscious, and one will quickly find oneself repeating character’s names, distinguished locutions, and sorts, in one’s mind, without any volition of one’s own.

Oh, I don't spend that much in a single sitting, but I will bear that in mind if I ever did.


Don’t be afraid to take pauses for thoughts and recollections in the middle of sentences; a pause for thought can hardly be called a pause at all (-- in other words, it is well worthwhile).
That's a good idea actually, I never pause in the middle of sentences, but why the hell not?


Reading too much is bad for you
Too much is precisely that quantity which is excessive
What is in excess is a contingent truth; and thus, is subjective
Know what is in excess for you
:rage:


Reading a book is like climbing a mountain; it is done best with great care, precision, and ardour, but even more importantly, with regular breaks. (It helps if the mountain is rather small, has a well constructed route, and exhibits a memorable view at its peak)
Yes, that makes sense.


Certain skills are compatible with multitudinous and multifarious disciplines; reading, as such, is one of them; and even in the limited confines of literature, there is the novel, the play, the poem, the essay, the short story, &c. in which it is able to freely indulge itself – Variety is a beautiful thing, because choice is a beautiful thing, because freedom is a beautiful thing.
True, I always read different mediums together, one novel, one play, essays, shorts and poems, sound advice.


The beauty of poems, amongst other things, lies in their nature of often being quite short, and though ‘short’ is often followed by ‘sweet’, in this instance, short is sweet. Now, with the pace of modern life being what it is—the busyness of work, the numerous and mindless leisure activities, the increased speed of transport—most people just haven’t got the time for longer mediums of text; which is reason enough for poetical adherence. But moreover, even for the more studious reader, they offer the perfect break from and between larger and more prosaic works; be they novels, philosophical tracts, text books, or anything else.
Absolutely.


Don’t like poetry? There’s no need to worry, the innate magnoliophyta seed will indubitably grow in time; all it takes is some well nourished soil and a modest degree of exposure.
Yes it will, I'm trying to convert my brother. I will win.


That's all I could gather for now; criticisms of the above and further such advice are welcome, though, in your cases, there is license to be as particular and as specific as you like.

I'm not going to criticise you, for you are the zen master and can read my mind. :eek:

John Lark
09-29-2009, 07:02 PM
Mr Neely; John Neely (or so it seems),

Am I to gather from your reply that you agree with everything originally documented, and also follow on to presume that that same everything was concocted solely from the bowls of my imaginings?

I shall have a suitable response dependent on whatever the answer.

(Excuse the formalities; 'tis just, I find it rather humorous)

Scheherazade
09-29-2009, 07:06 PM
Are you gonna give us the winning lottery numbers next?

Or only to Neely?

LitNetIsGreat
09-30-2009, 03:28 AM
Mr Neely; John Neely (or so it seems),

Am I to gather from your reply that you agree with everything originally documented, and also follow on to presume that that same everything was concocted solely from the bowls of my imaginings?

I shall have a suitable response dependent on whatever the answer.

(Excuse the formalities; 'tis just, I find it rather humorous)

Pretty much agree with the statements given, yes, though I did realise that they were quotations, but even so you was the medium through which they were expressed.


Are you gonna give us the winning lottery numbers next?

Or only to Neely?

Just to me please.