/lit/ - Literature

>>22370900
Who is doing that? Besides nerdy billionaires with infinite leisure time?

>>22370916
Me, a NEET.

Depends on how much time you spend reading, how efficient you are at reading, how dense the work is, and how much practice you have. Also depends on whether the material is interesting. Sometimes I can read 200+ pages a day with goof retention, other days I only do 100, some days if I don't have the time or the material is spatially dense I might only manage 50 pages. I don't even bother keeping track of the total number of books.

>>22370921
*good retention, sorry for the typo.

Many people are just passive readers and they don't take notes.

>>22370939
That's what I suspected. I guess it's fine for literature but doing it for non-fiction is almost pointless.

>>22370900
Yeah only young people worry about this. Im a pretty slow reader, great comprehension though. Ive read a ton of great literature and im 29. Could I have read more? Sure, but who couldnt have?

>>22370900
this book is pure kino

>>22370900
They read young adult and middle school books. Probably poetry books and screenplays too. You can knock out five of those in a day.

>>22370900
>napoleon
>people still write a book a week about you and you died 200 years ago
he made it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWge4lR3ds8

>>22370900
Yeah dunno even reading piss easy light novels I can never hit more than 50 books a year

>>22370900
Yes information is retained. Your brain has more then enough storage to remember literally thousands of books. Should anything be forgotten you can probably remember it by just flipping trough a few pages of the book.

>>22370916
Women aka big children provided for by dad or husband with infinite leisure time.

I usually read a book a week. They are usually on the short side between 150-300 pages. I hardly ever read fiction. This isn't intentional it just seems that the books I'm drawn too are shorter in length.

>>22371557
Yeah because they read books by Colleen Hoover, tiktok mindrot thrillers with 250 pages in

>>22371557
A notable amount of girls I know have "Books read this year" in their bio with a high as shit number attached to it. It's always something like 87 even if it's barely june.

>>22370900
>look up writer’s personal life and beliefs on Wikipedia
>mark as read and give their books 1 star if I disagree, 5 if I agree
>buy book I think I’ll like
>mark book as read, 5 star
>read plot on Wikipedia
>mark as read, amount of stars depends
>books read this year: 837

when i was in grade school i could read a diary of a whimpy kid volume in 2 days, i guess you just have to really enjoy reading

>>22370900
When I was a neet, I would get through two a week from my local library. The books would be genre books: sci-fi, horror and fantasy. If you are reading solely for entertainment it can be done. With books of greater substance, more time is required.

>>22370954
You get more efficient at everything the more you do it. When I would read history books a few years ago I had to take notes that were almost the size of the original text and then after I finished it I would just forget everything anyway. Now I know how to summarize things, how to retain information in my head, how to "use" what I read so it sticks, I learned how to memorize all the names and dates and places, I can focus for much longer, and so on.

I can do 100 a year. I usually manage one novel and one poetry collection or a play in a week. Eg last week was pic related and All One Breath by John Burnside. Total 300 pages or so. Read the Burnside twice over.
OP book is 900 pages, so three weeks, but I'd probably read three poetry collections in that time so 4 books in the three weeks.

>>22370925
yeah you better be sorry, punk
one more spelling mistake like that and you're off to the ink mines

Audiobooks and e-readers

>>22371800
Are you me? I have cut down on the note taking but still struggle with retaining dates and info. Started summarizing seemingly important paragraphs in the margins. My goal is to ultimately be able to recite the entire overview of the book by memory even years after I have read it.

Any tips on retaining names and dates?

>>22372116
NTA but names and dates are probably the least important things to remember desu. In general, I only remember stuff you can look up with a quick Google search (what, who, when, where) when knowing it is crucial to understanding the thesis of the book (how and why). Even there, I would say that knowing the answers relatively (this happened BEFORE or AFTER that) is better than knowing them absolutely (just a date without any reference to other events).
The point of reading books isnt to impress normalfags with trivia but to actually extract important lessons for your current situation.

>>22370900
Op, don't read that terrible book. He unironically claims that Napoleon constructed gas chambers from wooden ships to kill Haitian slaves. Read this instead.

>>22372159
>extract important lessons for your current situation.
I'm glad I'm not alone.

>>22372735
>Napoleon constructed gas chambers from wooden ships to kill Haitian slaves
He did and it was a good thing

>>22372116
Outside research (anything from critical essays to wiki articles) helps my info retention immensely. I also find that reading in "blocks" -- tackling more than one book at a time on a single subject or from a specific era/literary movement/country forces me to think about the same information for longer. I'm not sure if this helps, but it's what works for me.

>>22371800
i wish to one day reach your level of reading

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

>>22372116
>My goal is to ultimately be able to recite the entire overview of the book by memory even years after I have read it.
For what purpose?

>>22375235
That's my subjective measurement of memory retention. When I pickup a book that I've read and I can only remember like 1-2 major points of the book I feel like I just wasted hours of my life. Or more embarrassingly, if someone asks "what did you like about that book?" and -- even though I know I enjoyed the book -- can't give a succinct response.

My memory is terrible so that's my feeble attempt to force an improvement.

>>22372116
You have to look up mnemonic techniques, get used to them, and just figure out through trial-and-error which ones to apply according to the information you're dealing. For names the most banal associative mnemonics will do, for dates you might need to first learn a number system, then you need to learn to encode all of that within a place or narrative to retain it over the years. It's all very simple, to the point that it even feels silly when you start doing it, but it works really well.

I don't necessarily disagree with >>22372159 btw, but I guess that depends on how you intend to apply what you read. For me, it's the fact that I'm always writing or talking about what I learn, and I hate blanking or getting fuzzy on details, having to look things up, etc. I also like fully assimilating quantitative information that helps me conceptualize things, for example I assume that if you read a book like the OP without a previous frame of reference for logistics, rate of march, military expenses and resource consumption a lot of the campaign descriptions will feel abstract and weightless to you, and knowing how to commit all those number you encounter to memory and retain them from book to book helps you build a deeper understanding of what you read.

The good news is that if you like remembering all that stuff for the sake of it, the more you know the easier it gets. Memory is associative, and most mnemonic devices revolve around that, so the more information you have to easier it is to find a connection.

>>22370900
>Is information even retained at this rate?
You don't need to retain anything. Thinking about how "useful" each act you do is a lower class mindset.

>>22371615
Unfathomably based