/lit/ - Literature

>>17610318
>Dick length: 2 inches

>>17610318
Past tense, anon

>>17610334
Beat me to it

>>17610318
Physical book: 60-70/h
E-book:32-40 /g

>>17610318
I read about 25 to 30 pages an hour, but thats because I really take my time and process what I'm reading; if I'm just skimming I bet I could go a lot faster

Are you kidding? Obvs bloom took an hour to say he can read 1000 pages. Have you heard my nigga's wet lips smack? He had to drink 20 bottles of water to mumble for 50 mins and think for the next 10

>stop subvocalization
>suddenly can read 100 pages an hour
It's honestly that simple

Anywhere from 40-60 depending on the difficulty of the book

I think 1k is bullshit but I don’t doubt that after 15,000 books you can’t read fast as fuck

>>17610420
How do you stop it

>>17610318

>>17610414
kek

>>17610318
It takes me several hours to read 20-30 pages.

>>17610445
wear ear plugs

Who cares how fast you can read

>>17610513

>>17610414
Amazing

>>17610445
move your eyes faster than your brain can sound out words, widen your focus to clusters of words instead of individual ones

>>17610318
Was thinking of learning how to read faster but I realised that the lack of an inner voice makes it more difficult to develop your ear. I think u should go at a natural albeit focused pace. I'd be surprised if more than say .1% of people read more than 60 pages an hour of a reasonably challenging book

I listen to audio books at 2.5 speed. This trains the brain to quickly process information and not go back. Also train your eyes to move faster than you can process for 10 minutes a day. The eye movement is the most obvious choke point for reading faster. You also have to actively read faster or else you’ll fall back into a slow a passive pace.

>>17610318
Just tried the nonvocalising and fuark 23 pages in 20 minutes. Big leap. The action on the page proceeding at the speed of thought actually made it more vivid for me too, altho a juicy line must always be savoured

>trusting anything a jew says
Why would you ever do this

>>17611102
How did you do it?

People who claim not to subvocalize to increase their reading speed retain nothing. Do not fall for this speedreading meme.

>>17610445
You can stop it but you'll kill your soul while doing it

>>17611552
Just moved my eyes quickly and tried not to vocalise in my head. I sort of looked at each sentence in 3 fragments, taking jn about 5 words each time. It still felt like vocalising but different too, like the words were just quickly imprinting. It felt more tiring than normal reading but seemed fun and effective. Excited for the added volume.

>>17610318
I can read a few hundred an hour, but its mostly skimming at that point. Its fine if you're just pulling important aspects out of work for something like a school project. But when reading for enjoyment or trying to get deeper meaning you tend to lose out on too much of the details to make it worth doing.

>>17610445
You don't

>>17610318
It's just myth-building to justify why he has an opinion on everything ever written.

Does anyone on this board actually enjoy the act of reading and not just having read?

>>17614849
Neither. We enjoy the act of acting as if we‘ve read something.

>>17612303
This is what I'm afraid of when trying it. Using some similar ideas and techniques is natural to try to read faster, but actually "subvocalizing" seems to me for an unthinking scholar.

>>17614849
Both.

>>17610445
don't

>>17610318
Maybe at his peak, but I highly doubt he could do that these days

>>17610414
lmao

>>17610318
>I think he is larping.

No shit?

>>17610445
1. Relax.

>>17615993
I can understand it but it's not as clear.
With subvocalozation I feel like I get a lot more information.

>>17610445
Use your finger. Move your finger faster than you mouth the content of the line.
Done.
>Doesn't work on dense books
>Doesn't work on Philosophy
>Most serious thinkers read with a pen in their hands
>Bloom is fucking with people

>>17614849
When I'm reading good fiction, yes.
When I'm reading interesting, accessible, and well written non-fiction, yes.
On the other hand, reading Philosophy or any other dense book is not supposed to be fun.

>>17610318
It’s okay that someone is better than you.

>44 years married
How did he do it?

>>17610581
then how can I be sure that I'm absorbing th e material?

Bloom was taking the piss you retards

>>17615957
Anon, have you not heard?

>>17610445
you control every aspect of your brain

>>17617023
Am I wrong?

>>17610420
You can't while still reading the word. Linguistic studies have shown this -- even if you don't think you're activating a word's sounds in your head, you are. Your brain activates words that sound similarly to the words you are reading, even when "stopping" subvocalization. It's just not possible while still reading in the sense of understanding the grammar of sentences. It's possible to "read" quicker but you're not reading in the same way, you're just picking out keywords and inferring the rest -- you're relying on the fact that you only need to read 10% of a text to actually understand it -- but that doesn't mean you read the other 90%, you just found a solution that didn't require you to. Even if it's possible to pick up the words and grammar this quickly (which it's not), you'd still be limited by your brain's ability to understand the ideas being stated. Again, this isn't hard if you're reading texts there 90% of it is redundant. But in a text that isn't so heavily redundant, or relies on a subtle complicated argument that the reader hasn't seen before, it's just not possible to read anything close to 1000 pages a minute and get anything out of it.
Stop trying to read faster. Stop being a consoomer. Just read at a speed you can understand.

>>17617041
Well, no, but

>>17617055
>be deaf
>never heard, don't have any concept of sound
>start reading
>subvocalizing cause it's impossible not to
>suddenly can hear
Thank's anon.

>>17617236
for humans with the ability to hear words, it's impossible to not hear them. I don't know what your point is, anon. A deaf person not hearing the words in a disability, not an advantage -- they aren't reading and faster than you

i bet you could read something like harry potter at a few hundred pages an hour, and everything's probably harry potter to you once you've read constantly for 70+ years. maybe he's exaggerating but i believe him

Did he ever actually demonstrate it or it's just a case of a jewish mind coming up with tricks, like the IQ thing?

>>17614839
People have witnessed him reading a page a second. You think he was just performing for them?

>>17614849
I only like reading poetry. Prose is usually a slog for me with a few glorious exceptions.

>>17616014
Nigga I'm Hue and I only read English from 4chan and it was easy as fuck. Maybe you're slow in the head.

>>17610318
I suppose he was an academic so maybe there is a point to it, but it comes across as surfeit gluttony.
Observing somebody stuffing their face with fillet stake and chugging fine wine by the bottle isn't impressive, it's gross.
It's solipsism but I can never believe they're truly appreciating the work, let alone enjoying themselves.

>>17617637
I agree. chances are he rereads a lot of stuff many times as well

you probably do already when you are on 4chan and dont even realise, plus all this hack read was fiction which isnt even worth your attention, seriously shakespeare is shit and overrated, the only fiction i will read is dostoevsky and tolstoy, and then sure i can read 100 or more pages but if you are reading philosophy expect 20

>>17617055

I just speedread this post. 100% comprehension.

>>17618938
obviously, most of it was redundant, because I was trying to make a point clearly, which generally requires redundancy. There was nothing sophisticated about my point that would require the reader to understand the grammar, either. It was a very simple post meant for simple people. You should be very proud that you were able to read it quickly! However, frequent readers will find that some works are more complex than anonymous postings on anime bulletin boards

Subvocalization is a symptom not a cause. Trying to avoid it will get you limited results. How fast you can read is determined mostly by processing power and some people just have more. I didn't teach myself to subvocalize, I was just naturally able to read faster at an early age. Same reason some people can do multiplication faster. Technique can make you a bit more effecient but you can't really teach yourself to think faster.

>>17618980

> However, frequent readers will find that some works are more complex than anonymous postings on anime bulletin boards

Of course. If you can effectively speed read something it's probably not worth reading in the first place. But your point that you necessarily have to be skipping and filling in gaps is wrong if there's not much density to what's being written you can just power through it.

He learned from the master
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24KnwTepKdU

>>17619051
>skipping and filling in gaps is wrong if there's not much density
but that's exactly what it is -- there's such little density that you can just assume the default. If somehow someone slipped into that completely sparse-of-info text a sentence that, through complex grammar, indicated the exact opposite of the surrounding sentences, a speedreader would have no idea. They are filling in gaps in grammar by just seeing the keywords of the sentence and knowing how those keywords fit together because they already know the information from everything else. Nobody can speedread Kierkegaard and have any fucking clue what he's saying, unless they already are familiar with his philosophy, in which case they could just the same as anything else, because they'd already know that he's going to say.

Basically, I don't think speed reading is a useful skill for the average critical reader. I think it probably is useful in specific employment contexts where you need to work through a ridiculous amount of information to find the important bits. But almost none of us have to do that, because we can just read secondary sources that compile thousands of pages of information into a chapter or so. Consoomption is a sin.

>>17614629
what did you read? could one enjoy reading poetry this way?

>>17610318
Note to all anons, these threads are all LARP. Just like how /fit/ LARPS about benching 2pl8, or /biz/ LARPS about making 6-7 figures in a single month, its the same thing here. Don't be dissuaded by retards claiming to read 50 pages an hour. For difficult works, 10-20 pages an hour is a great and sustainable pace. Make sure you digest each page thorughly, reread it if you have to. Never rush. Consistency is the key.

>t. has read more than 90% of /lit/

>>17620315
The illiad. Not too difficult and large lettered pages

>>17610318
What a load of waffle

>>17621115
does rhythm and visualisation work well while speedreading?

>>17610318
He’s claiming that he could read 16-17 pages a minute, which is a page in less than 4 seconds, it’s so obviously bullshit.

>>17610318
I used to read a novel a day in highschool. Stop vocalizing and your g2g.

Failed English my senior year. Highest SAT score for English in the school.

>>17617055
Apparently linguistic studies have definitely missed the long right tail because I can read paragraph long subtitles pressing skip on most games and can definitely bang out 100 pages an hour and can probably skim more like 150 the way you imply.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfmHGmIbfvs

>>17610318
Maybe if he spent less time practicing speed reading he'd have done better than 2/44

>>17621695
you are still hearing the words that you see, you're just skipping over most of the words
>I know more about how my brain works than people who spend their entire lives studying how brains process language
literal boomer tier arrogance m8

>>17610318
I am illiterate

>>17621820
No I literally am not the way most people do. I have 0 ability to visualize. You tell me to imagine an apple and that shit is black formless void. My visualization of the apple is a distillation of the concept of the apple, same as if I see one IRL. When I read the same thing happens. I process the language the same way when I read and I guess in that way you are correct. In most cases the majority of words are linguistic convention and do nothing to convey meaning, especially in English with it's hard on for subject specification

>>17610424
>>17610381
How can you guys read 60 pages an hour?

I can only read around 25 pages an hour. If I really make an effort, I can read 35.
1000 pages an hour is crazy, and Bloom was clearly a savant. However, I believe that with some effort I can read 60 pages an hour too.

>>17621867
I never said visualize. It activates the sound in the part of your brain associated with hearing. You can't think about a word without also bringing the sound to mind because the two are so tightly tied in your brain. You don't even know what you're arguing against.

>>17621878
Become a high IQ socially ill adpated emotionally stunted INTP middle schooler who's parents are self-absorbed and emotionally and physically checked out then sink into a ever deepening morass of escapism and knowledge to recompense.

Worked for me

>>17617424
His point was that it is possible to read without subvocalizing

>>17621925
I guess not. I'm just saying I read and comprehend fast. Faster than I could process it via listening that's for sure. Perhaps I skip the and if she he it etc... but the words definitely "arrive" at thier destination understandably and completely.

What about the congenitally deaf?

Anyone who thinks they can read 60 pages per hour of something like Critique of Pure Reason is outright lying, or just skimming through without thinking.

Isn't "pages" a retarded unit of measurement anyways? Not all books have the same amount of words per page. I'm reading two books atm. Each page in one of them is like reading 3 on the other.

>>17621989
Or of course, they've previously read the book one or more times and are familiar with the sections they're reading.

>>17610318
Depends on page size and text size and margins and spacing.

>>17621989
For other lightweight stuff double that is totally doable. Depends if it engages actual problem solving parts of your brain or is pure visual cortex imagery porn. Back of the envelope math isn't even required for most of whats read but sure diff eq level material abounds too.

posting my all time favorite relevant greentext

>>17610947
Ah yes, the alvin and the chipmunks narrarion

>>17621954
yes, but it's not
>>17621962
yes, I don't doubt that
>congenitally deaf
I'd assume not, since they would have nothing they hear. the problem isn't that reading is impossible without sound, it's just that for people who speak, the two are too tied to /not/ "activate" the sound in your brain.

>>17621962
>>17622046
once you learn an automatic process like than, it's not possible to turn it off. It's sort of like, if you become fluent in French, you can't turn off your ability to understand someone speaking French around you. It becomes involuntary

>>17622046
So many questions about perception that could be answered if we could only switch bodies for even a minute and "walk a mile in his moccasins" as it were. Maybe I see what you call blue as red. Would love to know about the deaf reading or the blind dreaming or even if frosted mini wheats taste the same to everyone.

>>17610318
>Books he estimates to be in his home
This fucker can't speedcount?

>>17622069
>frosted mini wheats taste
they're awesome. yum. gonna go eat some now, thanks for the reminder anon

60-80 depending on how into it I am.
If I start getting bored I sometimes have to reread a few lines.

Self-help schlock: 200/hr
Fantasy: 50/hr
Literature: 25/hr
Hegel: 2/hr

>>17622117
>OMGG HEGEL IS LIKE SOOOO HARD YOULL NEVER UNDERSRAND HIM HES SO HARD YOU NEED TO READ 1 PAGE AN HOUR BRO YOU CAN JUST SPEEDREAD HEGELERINO HES THE HARDEST PHILOSOPHER EVER I KNOW IT BECAUSE I SAW IT ON BUZZFEEDS TOP 10 HARDEST PHILOSOPHER EVER OMG OMG I USED TO THINK PHILOSOPHY WAS EASY THEN I TOOK A HEGEL TO THE KNEE XD EDIT: WOAH THANKS FOR THE GOLD STRANGER!!! YOU SIR, HAVE WON THE INTERNET. NOW EXCUSE MEWHILE I GO FAP TO BBC PORN HEGEL IS TOO HARD I NEED A BREAK LOL ALSO HES TOO WHITE SO I GOTTA DECOLONIZE MY MIND EDIT: WOAH MORE GOLD AND KARMA!!!! THANKS FELLOW REDDITORS!!!

>>17622153
Hegel is his own worst enemy. Guy was a great philosopher and a pretty middling writer. People have done a better job writing Hegel than Hegel ever did.

>>17622197
That's the most calm and serious reply to a basedjak bait I've ever seen

>muh subvocalizing
>Just stop thinking about the words you read so you can read faster
Anyone who "reads" this way has no legitimate love of reading or language and will not meaningfully comprehend anything above YA schlock.

>>17622585
this

>>17614849
Depends on the book. Something like Nabokov or Flaubert or Proust I do enjoy reading. However if I'm trying to slog through Plato or Rousseau I won't lie and pretend to like them. It's hard going but I still think it's important to do.

>>17610318
I can read 60-80 in an hour. It depends on the density of the text + the actual number of words on the page. I read between 300 and 400 words per minute.

>>17622585
This is cope.

>>17624972
He's right though. I don't know how you can enjoy Shakespeare or Woolf without hearing the words in your head. And poetry. Are there people who read poetry without listening to how it sounds in their head? Isn't this like food without taste?

>>17610318
I don't care much how much time I spend reading a page anymore. I used to be obsessed about it, now I just take my time with the book sometimes taking longer to admire a beautiful passage, allowing myself and the book to breathe, I`ve been enjoying reading a lot more this way.

>>17619204
I would say your second paragraph is spot-on. I only speedread when looking through academic papers. I rarely read the whole thing: If I do, it's because it's genuinely interesting. If I'm reading for my own pleasure, though, I avoid speedreading. There is no gain for me in missing info that I'm choosing to read.

>>17610318

“I took a speed-reading course and read War and Peace in twenty minutes. It involves Russia.”

>>17610318
>he is larping
*was, unfortunately.
I wish Bloom was still around. He had some shit takes but he was one of the few notable people trying to defend the humanities from the creeping threat of postmodernism.

>>17621878
Escapism like the other guy said + working that "muscle."
I started reading from a young age and reading has been my default escape from reality my whole life.

speed reading is such an incredible meme. if you don't have a journal and pen out when you're reading philosophy you're basically a retard