[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 70 KB, 620x675, glasses.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21915622 No.21915622 [Reply] [Original]

Is it a bad idea to read multiple books at once? Should I just stick with one book at a time?

>> No.21915626

Sure why wouldn’t it be

>> No.21915641

How do you look at multiple books at once? I tried getting my eyes to go both ways, but can't

>> No.21915694

>>21915622
From my experience if you read several books at the same time you will always end of favorizing the one you like the most over the other and finish that one first. There is nothing wrong with this, but if you are reading for reasons other than pure page-turner enjoyment (education, autodidact) then you might as well finish each book you start and see it through to the end.

>> No.21916159

>>21915622
no matter what people tell you, human attention isn't supposed to be one thing at a time for weeks-months (depending on difficulty and length). This is the problem with th whole "start with le greeks", it assumes that you will be interested in philosophy for 10 plus years which is not natural even if you like philosophy.

it's good to find a book you're interested in and read it, if you lose interest, read something else. Unless you find you have a lack of attention span (due to internet use), this should be fine. Read more and read quality books and you will be ok.

>> No.21916347

>>21915622
I always have multiple books I’m reading in the same period of time. Feels a lot more efficient. Life is short. Cram those books in. A significant passage/chapter/chunk of one, then some significant passage/chapter/chunk of another. This especially makes sense for nonfiction (philosophy, theology, history, the works) because the goal is at least as much to absorb new knowledge or perspectives as it is to be conventionally “entertained.”

This is after all how a university education in the humanities works — you’re doing multiple readings on different subjects at the same time, an efficient way of massively broadening your intellectual horizons over the span of a few years if the coursework and your effort is sufficiently rigorous enough.

>> No.21917003

>>21915622
I used to cling to the idea that I should start and finish one book at a time. But it just resulted in me wasting reading time on YouTube and other nonsense. I read much more when I read what I want when I want to. I even end up going to that chosen book more because of it. It will also be more memorable because you *want* to read whatever you are reading rather than treating it like a chore you have to do *before* you read what you actually desire (in the moments).

>> No.21917041

>>21917003
This.

>> No.21917153

>>21915622
If you have time to read why read something else instead of finishing what you've started?

>> No.21917858

>>21916159
>the greeks is philosophy
anon...

>> No.21917877

>>21915622
>>21915622
I normally read one normal book for 3 hours a day in my spare time + a poetry book everyday while going to work
I find it hard to understand poetry and I think that a lot of times you have to read and reread poems for multiple days, during the passing days to fully understand it. So I always read one poem or 2 when I have nothing better to do

>> No.21918085

>>21915694
This only happens if they are similar books. For example, this won't happen if you are reading a novella and a non-fiction, or if you are reading a religion book and a novella. They are so different in content that you don't even compare them.

>>21916159
When people say "Start with the greeks" they refer to The Iliad and Odyssey, right?

>>21915622
Can you say what you plan to read at the same time?