When i put down a book, i fail at the endeavor of picking it up again...

[Hector Wiklund]

... and i wonder if there is someone who can teach me a simple system so i can re-entering reading?
Since my thirst for reading has suddenly returned.

I have sort of a distraction problem, some sort of ADD i guess (which i have had all my life).
Is there someone with a similar problem to mine, which is to get INTO reading, past the threshold of laziness or being unaccustomed etc., who have made up a good system for themselves when the problem rises?

I mean, whenever i get into reading i literally run through pages.

I hope you understand what i mean.

Yours faithfully,
H

[Jancarlo]

Just force yourself man, I have ADD and I used to have that problem sometimes, use willpower to pick it up again even if you don't feel like it at the time, if its something you enjoy, once you start reading it again and force yourself through 2 or 3 pages, you'll be breezing through it again in no time.

[Marbles]

Once there was this book which I wanted to finish but was too lazy to sit through. So I enacted a horrible scenario in my head. I put down a date, a week after, and convinced myself if I did not finish the book by that time the jailer would hang me.

You are the jailer.

[Pompey Bum]

Welcome to the sight, Hector. I don't have ADHD, but I have a physical condition that makes my pupils shake, significantly slowing down my reading speed. Even so, I finish every book I start without exception. I have done this for so long that I don't even think about it anymore. I like nothing so much as a 1000+ page epic, and I sometimes whine that I'm wasting money if I buy a book that isn't between 500 and 1000 pages long. Not finishing these books is never an issue.

I'm not boasting since what I'm describing isn't especially hard to do (if, of course, it's something that you really want to do). Marbles is right to suggest using a mental image, but if I may offer an alternative metaphor, instead of a scaffold, think of a swimming pool. In a pool, it doesn't matter if the water is seven feet deep or 700 feet deep--if it is higher than your nose, you are going to have to swim. It may impress others if you swim across a 700 foot pool, but in truth, it's all the same to you. If you can swim at all, you can make it easily. So the first thing you do is to forget how deep the water is.

Now let's say you are reading a 700-page book. At first, forget about the length. Instead, just "swim out" to page 111. That's a novella--nothing you can't handle. The next thing to do is to notice that you are no longer reading a 700 page book, but a 589 page one. Then "swim on" to page 222--another novella. That once-mighty book is only 478 pages long now. One more novella (up to page 333) and it is only 377 pages long, a very routine read (not to mention the fact that you are probably into the story, the characters, and the author's language by now). It's an easy swim from there.

Isn't that just replacing one illusion with another? You're damn right is, and just watch how well it works.

Another helpful illusion--a good one for even longer books--is to calculate the midway page of the book. As you read, drive yourself toward that page. I'm not sure why, but for some reason, once you get past the midpoint (at least in a long book), it's almost impossible to stop. It's as if your mind says, "I've come this far, I'm sure as hell not going to turn back now."

Another suggestion is not to read reviews of a book until after you have finished it; otherwise you will tend to notice whatever the reviewer doesn't like and perhaps over-blow its importance in your own mind. That will not only decrease your enjoyment of the book, it will demoralize you as you attempt to finish it. Read reviews once you've made it through and weigh them against your own judgment.

Jancarlo and Marbles are both talking about discipline. Ultimately they are correct, although I think my suggestions provide enough anesthesia to make it relatively painless. But the real reason I finish every book I start is because I make myself do so. Giving up is just never an option. Because of that, I tend to be careful about the books I start (especially since I avoid reviews). If it's not classic literature (which it often is), it's either high quality modern literature, or university-quality history. (I do read lurid true crime books once or twice a year, just for fun, but those are easy enough to get through).

Usually that works for me, although occasionally I end up with with a book I can't stand. I finish those, too, as a matter of principle. Maybe they will get better, or if not, maybe I will learn something about why I hated them. A Place of Greater Safety (768 pages) by the double Booker award winning Hilary Mantel was one such stinker. And the Grand Prix du roman de l'Académie française and Prix Goncourt winning The Kindly Ones (975 pages) by Jonathan Littell was even worse. But the Littell novel had a scene I liked near the end (although getting there was quite a chore); and Mantel's book at least reminded me of characters I had forgotten from my 8th Grade history class. Never put a book down till it's done. Just never do it.

I hope that helps, and again, welcome to the site.

[virtuoso]

Set a definite time at the end of day (usually best before bedtime). Set a definite portion of the book to read. This portion should be a chapter, or if the book has no chapters 15-20 pages. That is only the minimum. Some nights you will feel like reading two, three, or even four chapters. By setting a low threshold that you can easily achieve, you are making it easier to coax your lazy, apathetic mind into commencing the activity. Routines are important, but the dull routines are not stimulating or challenging. That is why people spice up their activities by adding enjoyable things that complement the activities. Adding some soft music or a favorite hot/cold beverage can help. Also, as others do, occasionally going to a book store or coffee shop for an afternoon, and being stimulated by the presence of other, motivated readers can help.You could spend an afternoon of enjoyable reading around geeks like you! It rocks!

[Marbles]

I'm not boasting since what I'm describing isn't especially hard to do (if, of course, it's something that you really want to do). Marbles is right to suggest using a mental image, but if I may offer an alternative metaphor, instead of a scaffold, think of a swimming pool. In a pool, it doesn't matter if the water is seven feet deep or 700 feet deep--if it is higher than your nose, you are going to have to swim. It may impress others if you swim across a 700 foot pool, but in truth, it's all the same to you. If you can swim at all, you can make it easily. So the first thing you do is to forget how deep the water is.

Now let's say you are reading a 700-page book. At first, forget about the length. Instead, just read the first 111 pages. That's a novella--nothing you can't handle. The next thing to do is to notice that you are no longer reading a 700 page book, but a 589 page one. Then read the next "novella," which goes up to page 222. That once-mighty book is only 478 pages long now. One more "novella" (up to page 333) and it is only 377 pages long, a very routine read (not to mention the fact that you are probably into the story, the characters, and the author's language by now). It's an easy swim from there.

Isn't that just replacing one illusion with another? You're damn right is, and just watch how well it works.

Another helpful illusion--a good one for even longer books--is to calculate (after reading the first "novella" or two) the midway page of the book. As you read, drive yourself toward that page I'm not sure why, but for some reason, once you get past the midpoint (at least in a long book), it's almost impossible to stop. It's as if your mind says, "I've come this far, I'm sure as hell not going to turn back now."

Cool. I like the image of the swimmer. Don't worry about the depth but the act of swimming. This particularly helps in reading long books. We usually hear people not having the heart to start a book over 500 pages because they fear lack of commitment to finish it, which, in combination with other factors, has caused a gradual but definite reduction in average word count of a novel. I think your idea of setting benchmarks or small targets will surely help. This may be coupled with a strategy of setting a fixed time for reading every day/night.

I tend to divide pages into batches of 50 (and 100 for longer books) and look to achieve that target in a set time (the hangman image) if the book I'm reading is challenging me either for its difficulty or lack of interest. what I do is stop reading it for a day or two after achieving the last small target and pick up a book of short stories or a collection of poetry - anything that's not long and not continuous - to give myself a 'break' so I can get back to the main book(s) I want to finish. Not only this method has helped me finish longer books but I have been able to read a lot of short fiction and poetry which otherwise would remain sitting idly in my library, going further down on my reading list as new books get added. Talking of which, I don't like reading a collection short stories or that of poems in one go; I personally think such collections are best read over time, slowly, two or three at a time, (double for poems) so as to appreciate them better. So these forms can be great fillers, as well as worthy readings for their own sake, to help you read a long and difficult book. I'm thinking of War and Peace and the impossibility of remembering all its characters and situations if you attempt to read it like you read J.K. Rowling. I'm also thinking of In Search of Lost Time.

I might also add that some people lose interest in a book if it slows down their natural reading speed. By which I mean if you're reading a challenging text, or if you are not particularly excited by the style and form of the book, to say nothing of content, then it is natural for your average reading speed to slow. Take it as an opportunity to learn new ways of writing.

[Eiseabhal]

Maybe you are trying to make yourself read the wrong books . Maybe you need to read shorter texts. What about an anthology or three of short stories.

[Clopin]

A lot of people seem to have hang ups about long books, I mean it's no different than reading several smaller books so I dunno.

Marbles I do what you do, especially if I'm tackling something difficult or a non fiction I'm not very interested in I'll have some rereads or lighter reading on the side. It's not too hard to read 50 or so pages of something a bit plodding in a day and then just read some short stories you like, etc.

[ennison]

I quite often ditch books. There is nothing in The Rules to say you cannot. Do you prefer fiction to non-fiction? Are you trying to read heavy duty classics out of a sense of duty to improve your mind? Are you tackling the likes of Joyce at the wrong end of his oeuvre? This thirst is it like a man's in the desert or like a lonely man's longing for lurrv? I think we should know. Sotto Voce ... T C Boyle. Try him. - there I've said it.

[YALASH]

How about e-books?

[mande2013]

For relatively short novels that are 200-300 pages long, I say just discipline yourself to read them. Something like The Sheltering Sky for instance shouldn't be the most challenging read in the world. As for a tome like War and Peace, Ulysses, or The Brothers Karamazov, perhaps it would help if you don't approach it as a self-contained work but rather as an "anthology". The reading will eventually accumulate itself over time. Just worry about reading and not about being "well read". That may be part of people's problem, being hung up on the status of "having read" a certain work. Granted, I know for many on here the "having read" is just as vital as the reading. I don't understand why we need to lord these works over people's heads as if they the works themselves were 'vegetables'.

[Clopin]

Well aren't you something special.

[Pompey Bum]

For relatively short novels that are 200-300 pages long, I say just discipline yourself to read them. Something like The Sheltering Sky for instance shouldn't be the most challenging read in the world. As for a tome like War and Peace, Ulysses, or The Brothers Karamazov, perhaps it would help if you don't approach it as a self-contained work but rather as an "anthology". The reading will eventually accumulate itself over time.

I wouldn't recommend that approach for either War and Peace or The Brothers K (I can't address Ulysses), because the plots are both complicated and important to the reader's experience of the book. In fact, it seems to me that your approach is likely to create a situation similar to the one you mention ("There, I've read the book. Who cares what it was about, At least I got through it.") Your approach might work for really long books, like A Journey West and or Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which have episodic plots and were probably meant to be read over years. I suppose you could get away with it, too, with Don Quixote. But I wouldn't recommend trying it with Dickens or Fielding. You've got to gulp Dickens' wordy concoctions down whole or you miss the effect. And why read Fielding if not to luxuriate in his voice and wit? Why would anyone want to put him down?

Out of curiosity (and I'm not being contentious), how do you think we can talk about these books if we don't own up to having read them?

[mande2013]

I wouldn't recommend that approach for either War and Peace or The Brothers K (I can't address Ulysses), because the plots are both complicated and important to the reader's experience of the book. In fact, it seems to me that your approach is likely to create a situation similar to the one you mention ("There, I've read the book. Who cares what it was about, At least I got through it.") Your approach might work for really long books, like A Journey West and or Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which have episodic plots and were probably meant to be read over years. I suppose you could get away with it, too, with Don Quixote. But I wouldn't recommend trying it with Dickens or Fielding. You've got to gulp Dickens' wordy concoctions down whole or you miss the effect. And why read Fielding if not to luxuriate in his voice and wit? Why would anyone want to put him down?

Out of curiosity (and I'm not being contentious), how do you think we can talk about these books if we don't own up to having read them?

I never said people shouldn't read them. I'm in the middle of reading The Brothers K myself, and I encourage others to do the same, but my issue is with the way "having read" something is construed as a status symbol in and of itself. With audiophiles, someone might say, "oh, you should listen to A Love Supreme or Kid A, they're great albums". And the response is well okay, I'll check them out, but literary works are treated as 'vegetables', which I think turns many people off from reading. They're presented as being "good for you", so people feel anxious and inferior for not having read them, regardless of whether or not the genuine interest to read them at some point is present.

Besides, there shouldn't be a need to own up to having read them. Just talk about them, plain and simple. Give posters the benefit of the doubt.

You may be right about the approach one takes to The Brothers K, since yes, the plot is obviously intricate and quite complex, although it's worth mentioning the novel was initially serialized and Dostoevsky didn't entirely preconceive his novels before writing them. He was more of an 'improviser' who sort of made things up as he went along. All I mean to say is his novels were far from entirely pre-conceptualized.

Now surely, something such as In Search of Lost Time is meant to be read over years, especially if you're reading it in French, and it's not your native language.

[livi]

I never said people shouldn't read them. I'm in the middle of reading The Brothers K myself, and I encourage others to do the same, but my issue is with the way "having read" something is construed as a status symbol in and of itself.

Sometimes I think that people who make having read certain texts a status symbol give readers a bad name.... intellectual snobs who then make people brand any reader the same way

[mande2013]

But I'm also a firm believer in the fact that things sink in over time provided the reading gets done. A lot of people I think psych themselves out, because they try too hard. Don't strain to understand. Just read. It'll sink in, as long as you dedicate yourself to it. Like with many things in like, you need to work smart instead of hard I think.

[NikolaiI]

I just thought I would point out that there is an entirely distinct and separate book called "The Brothers K," published in 1992, so using the phrase as a shortened form of Karamazov may cause confusion.

[Pompey Bum]

I never said people shouldn't read them.

No indeed. But be fair--I never said that you did. My question was:


how do you think we can talk about these books if we don't own up to having read them?

You may not realize it, but it can sometimes be hard to talk about reading books like War and Peace or The Brothers Karamazov (much less Catullus or Thucydides) without being accused of trying to show off. I appreciate your perspective (some people really do try to the books they've read as status symbols), but try to put yourself in the shoes of the many of us who just want to discuss the books we love.

As for talking about books rather than just saying what you've read, I can appreciate that, too. There are in-depth discussions threads here about these books (and more current literature), but only a handful of us do most of the talking. On the other hand, everyone weighs in on lists of their 10 favorite books, their 20 favorite books, their 25 favorite books, and so on. (Somebody, I think Papayahed, made the hilarious suggestion that we list our favorite lists). Of course that is partly because that kind of thread is easier to write and takes less time. But it's also true those lists have also provided great suggestions for future reads by people whose opinions I mostly respect.

So my suggestion to you, if you want more discussion and less listing, is to be the change you wish to see. I hope you are enjoying The Brothers Karamazov, for example, and would love to discuss it with you when you finish it, or even now. It's an amazing and very moving book, and one that made a deep impression on me. So let's talk.

I wonder what happened to Hector (OP), by the way. Do you suppose he was too lazy to read our heartfelt suggestions? :)

[Pompey Bum]

Sometimes I think that people who make having read certain texts a status symbol give readers a bad name.... intellectual snobs who then make people brand any reader the same way

I agree, Livi. And treating all readers like that is a kind of prejudice when you think of it.

[livi]

I agree, Livi. And treating all readers like that is a kind of prejudice when you think of it.

Well I would read constantly given half a chance, but am far from an intellectual snob. The more I read, the the more I learn about the world, the less I realise I actually know!