/lit/ - Literature

I really want some advice 'cause I don't want to ruin one book by splitting my attention between many books and getting them mixed up.

if you're doing Dostoyevsky and want to take a break, pick something totally different, preferably without a story. i usually have a novel and a philosophy book going simultaneously

>>2772388
Excellent, I wanted to read Marcuse's An Essay On Liberation for a long time now.

>>2772388
Agreed. Make sure that it's not too long. I recently read Hardy's Tess Of The D'Urbervilles and had something like an interlude with an essay by Martin Walser. If done right, it works exceptionally well, as you read the essay less like work and more like leisure. After you're finished, you'll tear into the nove with renewed vigour.

>>2772395
>Marcuse
lachendemädchen.jpg

I've never been able to finish books while reading them at the same time, except for university essays, which is mostly skim reading anyway.
The Idiot is excellent. I understand what you mean though, I couldn't finish C&P or TBK because of Dostoyevsky's style, I enjoyed every page of the Idiot though.

>>2772413
Indeed, it's very inviting and definitely engrossing, but what bothers me is the sheer depth of meaning in each of the small chapters. Each one explores a theme very thoroughly and from different angles, it's almost too much to synthesize.

>>2772370
I read up to 7 books at the same time. Any more than that is too much. I'm reading 4 at the moment.

>>2772453
Ever considered turning that energy flow against your own self, instead? Read your own thoughts. It's harder than reading books.

>>2772464
I introspect probably more than I read. Self-analysis is a strange beast, though. It's hard to discern realization from rationalization.

I read multiple but I'm trying to transition to one at a time. I feel like I'm not retaining what I'm reading so well anymore, so I'm hoping the transition will improve that.

>>2772469
It's also difficult to judge because you can't help but be subjective. It takes another to make a more reasonable judgement.

I usually have two books on the go. Right now I am bouncing between 'Origins - Neil deGrasse Tyson' and 'Kafka on the Shore - Murakami'.

I sometimes have more, but don't usually like to be reading multiple fiction novels simultaneously.

I have seven books "opened", by which I mean I've read pages from them. Though, I usually actively read three at a time, OP. If you can handle Fyodor (which I'm far too lazy and unpretentious to do), then yeah, you'll be fine. You won't lose track of the story.
But there is a difference. Along with my "literary" books, I read fantasy, which isn't that hard to keep up with and doesn't need to be analyzed.
Tl;dr, you can, just not too many at a time.

>>2772477
You must detach.

I usually only read one fiction book at a time, although I might have several philosophy books going at once. But then philosophy is my work, so it's fairly compartmentalized in my mind from the fiction.

>>2772488
I was assigned it for a Russian Literature class and decided to finish it.

I've also read some of his short stories, which is a good place to start if you're unsure if you want to dive right into his longer works.

I'm reading one fiction and one non-fiction book at any given time.

Its brain confusion, works like muscle confusion in weight lifting. works left and right brain.

Usually I'll have a primary book that I'll read the fastest, and a secondary book that I'll read some of only occasionally.

About 5 right now, I wish it weren't so.

hai guise. Im faily new to reading, I dont;think i could manage to read two books at wonce. dont the stories get intermergeconnected when you try and understand them?