which book have you read the fastest?

[cacian]

and why?

[Dark Muse]

I would have to say The Road by Cormac McCarthy. My sister was down visiting over the weakened and she had just finished reading the book and brought it to lend to me, and it just so happened that the movie was going to be released on the next Friday, so since I had the book I wanted to have it read before seeing the movie, so I got that book read within a week.

[Desolation]

Well, I read The Bell Jar in one day not too long ago. I think I read 1984 in a day, too.

During one particularly productive period, I managed to read The Stranger and Notes from Underground on the same day.

I think the one I'm proudest of, though, is Gaddis' The Recognitions clocking in at 950 pages, which I read in exactly two weeks (Down to the hour, oddly).

[Sir Lord Oliver]

I read In Search of Lost Time in a day when I was hospitalized.

[Dark Muse]

I read In Search of Lost Time in a day when I was hospitalized.

Now that is impressive. Even if I had all day, with nothing else to do, I do not know if I would be able to pull that off.

[stlukesguild]

Really... doesn't a lot of this come down to the length of the book. There's certainly any number of shorter books that I've read in a single sitting.

[hawthorns]

Really... doesn't a lot of this come down to the length of the book. There's certainly any number of shorter books that I've read in a single sitting.

Exactly...

I'm only able to read "fast" for two reasons: it's a short work, or I can no longer stand the writing, characters, or storyline so I skim my way through just to be done with it.

Do you mean, "Which books could you not put down? Why? For how long?"

[Riesa]

Exactly...
Do you mean, "Which books could you not put down? Why? For how long?"

yes, there's a million of them, but I have to be boring and admit to the classics: Jane Eyre, To Kill A Mockingbird, and Huckleberry Finn. :) still the books I read the fastest!

[cacian]

Exactly...

I'm only able to read "fast" for two reasons: it's a short work, or I can no longer stand the writing, characters, or storyline so I skim my way through just to be done with it.

Do you mean, "Which books could you not put down? Why? For how long?"

That could be a perfectly way of addressing it yes.
I agree that reading fast can be due to boredom, but I tend to skim rather then read fast or I skim,skip to get it done and over with.

[JuniperWoolf]

Catcher in the Rye, fourteen hours. I had a date the next day with a guy, and I heard it was his favorite book through the grape vine. "No ****, that's your favorite book? Mine too!!! Didn't you just love that one part..."

[cacian]

Catcher in the Rye, fourteen hours. I had a date the next day with a guy, and I heard it was his favorite book through the grape vine. "No ****, that's your favorite book? Mine too!!! Didn't you just love that one part..."

Haha..this is great it reminded me of Sense and Sensibility, Marianne and Willoughby showing off their similar reading interest over a Shakespear's sonnet 116.

[Helga]

It does depend on the book of course, I read 'the story of the eye' in about an hour or 70 minuets but it's only100 pages and big letters so in a sense it did take me a long time. But I read 'American Gods' in a week and 'Ilium' in a week but that was because I had to read them for school and only had a week to read them.

[Sancho Panza]

I was able to polish off the entire K-Pax trilogy in an afternoon of solid reading. Each book is only about 150 or so pages long, but it certainly fulfills the unputdownable category.

Shame about the film though.

[cacian]

I was able to polish off the entire K-Pax trilogy in an afternoon of solid reading. Each book is only about 150 or so pages long, but it certainly fulfills the unputdownable category.
That is impressive I could not do it if I tried.


Shame about the film though.
why? did you not take to the film?

[Babyguile]

During one particularly productive period, I managed to read The Stranger and Notes from Underground on the same day.

How is that humanly possible?!? I guess it depends on reading habbits. I only read at night and sometimes first thing in the morning so my quickest will be no shorter than a week.

I can't read more than fifty pages in one siting before everything loses clarity and my mind (and body) get restless and wants to do other things.

[Helga]

I was able to polish off the entire K-Pax trilogy in an afternoon of solid reading. Each book is only about 150 or so pages long, but it certainly fulfills the unputdownable category.

Shame about the film though.

I liked the film... I guess I should read the books

[Silas Thorne]

I remember, when I was still in high school, I cycled into the city especially to buy Anne Rice's 'The Vampire Lestat,' and was finished it before the following morning.

[Declan]

lol Silas. That's a charming, vivid post :-)

[IntravenousJava]

I read In Search of Lost Time in a day when I was hospitalized.

Although this is my favorite novel, almost always within arms reach, I do not believe that I could manage, even under the most conducive circumstances, to read Swann's Way, let alone the other six parts, in a single day.

If, however, the original question refers to a work which so captivated my attention and interest that I could scarcely put it down or attend to anything else until it was finished, In Search of Lost Time would be my answer, with The Magic Mountain as its closest rival.

[/dev/null]

Lem's "Solaris" first reread. It felt wrong.

[mal4mac]

I read Herman Hesse's "A Journey to the East" between breakfast and morning coffee last Saturday, that may the the fastest! It's a very easy read, quite gripping, and very puzzling - couldn't stop before I knew where it was going... and then it finished before I found out. Jerome's "Three men in a boat" went down almost as quickly on Sunday - so funny... fits of laughter slowed me down a bit.

[cacian]

Lem's "Solaris" first reread. It felt wrong.

do you mean you read it again because it felt wrong?
and if so what was wrong with it?

[/dev/null]

do you mean you read it again because it felt wrong?
and if so what was wrong with it?

No, it's a great book and a personal favourite. I ment that it was disturbing to read it in a single session. It's a highly emotional and philosophically charged novel.

[Snowqueen]

It was Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen and I read it in 3 or 4 days. Maybe I had thing else to do then.

[Kafka's Crow]

To me reading less than 100 pages a day is not reading at all. Last week I finished The Prince of Tides in 4 days and it had almost 700 pages. I finished Jane Eyre in 3 days three weeks ago so I am going through a very productive period. Previous week I read Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous Fourteenth Century and it was a large book as well. Before that I read Tuchman's The Guns of August. So 4 large books in this month alone. On the side, I read 2 smaller books on Black Death (382 and 278 pages each) and 1 on Organizational Learning (work-related). I am reading Cialdini's Influence on the side as well, very slowly. Very fruitful month indeed. Now I am reading Catch 22 as my main reading and to me it feels like a vile book. Call it satire, humor, absurd or whatever, a war novel which is not dead serious is not worth anything. I despise barrack comedy. Hopefully I will finish this monstrosity before the end of this month.

[tonywalt]

I read Catcher in the Rye in one go.

[Damze36]

A back in grade school I read one of the harry potter books in a day. I don't remember why I was able to read it that fast though.

[aliengirl]

I've read many books very fast but they are just too many to name. Last month I read The Color Purple in just five hours.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I read In Search of Lost Time in a day when I was hospitalized.

The whole thing, at least one version on Amazon, is about 4200 pages. That's about 3 pages a minute if reading for 24 hours straight, absolutely no breaks. So, if you actually did, you're a speed reader and completely missed the point of reading such a work.

Personally, I read pretty much everything at the same pace. I'm sure I've read books in one sitting, but I don't remember. I just read Night in two days--could have done it in one if I wanted to. I read 52 books last year, so that's a little under a book a week.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I read In Search of Lost Time in a day when I was hospitalized.

The whole thing, at least one version on Amazon, is about 4200 pages. That's about 3 pages a minute if reading for 24 hours straight, absolutely no breaks. So, if you actually did, you're a speed reader and completely missed the point of reading such a work.

Personally, I read pretty much everything at the same pace. I'm sure I've read books in one sitting, but I don't remember. I just read Night in two days--could have done it in one if I wanted to. I read 52 books last year, so that's a little under a book a week.


Very fruitful month indeed. Now I am reading Catch 22 as my main reading and to me it feels like a vile book. Call it satire, humor, absurd or whatever, a war novel which is not dead serious is not worth anything. I despise barrack comedy. Hopefully I will finish this monstrosity before the end of this month.
Catch 22 is brilliant. I first read it because it was a war veteran's, who's a buddy of mine, favorite book. It's not humor like the Three Stooges or something. It's pointing out the insanity and illogic that is war.

[PoeticPassions]

Catcher in the Rye, fourteen hours. I had a date the next day with a guy, and I heard it was his favorite book through the grape vine. "No ****, that's your favorite book? Mine too!!! Didn't you just love that one part..."

Hahaha that's great :) I read Catcher in the Rye in one day as well...


I also read An American Tragedy in about 10 days, but I was also really young, so I thought then that that was relatively fast, considering I had other obligations like school and homework and such :)

But there have been other books I have read in a day or two that were shorter... such as A Clockwork Orange or Death in Venice.. but both those are considered novellas.

[cacian]

Hahaha that's great :) I read Catcher in the Rye in one day as well...


I also read An American Tragedy in about 10 days, but I was also really young, so I thought then that that was relatively fast, considering I had other obligations like school and homework and such :)

But there have been other books I have read in a day or two that were shorter... such as A Clockwork Orange or Death in Venice.. but both those are considered novellas.

Hi PoeticPassions how do you interpret the difference between a novel and a novella?

[Sir Lord Oliver]

The whole thing, at least one version on Amazon, is about 4200 pages. That's about 3 pages a minute if reading for 24 hours straight, absolutely no breaks. So, if you actually did, you're a speed reader and completely missed the point of reading such a work.

Personally, I read pretty much everything at the same pace. I'm sure I've read books in one sitting, but I don't remember. I just read Night in two days--could have done it in one if I wanted to. I read 52 books last year, so that's a little under a book a week.

I guess I should clarify. I read the French version, which is a bit shorter. And at the time I was on certain drugs which would not let me sleep at all, so I was actually wide-awake for something like 36 hours (of course I later fell asleep for no less than 14 hours). And I did notice the drugs may have enhanced my reading perception.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Well, that is quite a feat, Oliver. It must have been quite an experience.

[kev67]

I read About a Boy by Nick Hornby on holiday once. I started reading it after going to bed and didn't stop until I'd finished it the next morning.