To speed read, or not to speed read

eskimocat

When I read a book I am a bit of a speed reader. I generally skim the parts that tend to be descriptive and go for the plot instead. This means I can get through books quite quickly but then get bogged down in very descriptive heavy books such as Lord of the Rings...

So my question is do you or don't you speed read?

Trying to add a poll to this thread, but we will see what happens.. EDIT: Yeah! there is a poll!!

E.T.

I don't think speed reading is the same as skim reading. I tend to speed read if it's something light or if I'm not that interested in it (god forbid I'd actually just not read it!). I used skim read in college when doing assignments that involved a lot of reading but I wouldn't actually take most of it in.

2 Miles From Narnia

eskimocat wrote: »

I generally skim the parts that tend to be descriptive and go for the plot instead. !

But then aren't you missing out on the atmosphere of the setting, subtle character building, or even small details of the plot which become more important later on?

MariaBlaah

if i get bored of what is happening in the book i just skip to then end and see how it finished, if its a good ending i go back and just skip on a few pages! did it recently and i was able to follow what was happening the same as if i hadnt!

eskimocat

Genereally I catch little nuiances that might become more relevant later, but yes i do admit to occasionally having to flick back a page or two to check something. As E.T said above, perhaps it's more accurately called skim reading and not speed reading.

If the book is really interesting I will slow down and read more carefully.

Do you mean speed reading or skim reading? My normal reading speed is fast enough that most people call it "speed reading", but if I am in a hurry I could speed up a lot more/skim. The result is far less retention of course
I don't tend to skip passages though.

stargazer 68

eskimocat wrote: »

Genereally I catch little nuiances that might become more relevant later, but yes i do admit to occasionally having to flick back a page or two to check something. As E.T said above, perhaps it's more accurately called skim reading and not speed reading.

If the book is really interesting I will slow down and read more carefully.

I do this too. Cant help it really. I dont need to know that the sky is blue and the trees are green but occasionally I do miss bits and have to go back!

Callan57

There's a big difference between speed reading & simply skimming.

I can speed read if I need to as in when I was in college & had huge amounts of text to get through & not all of it interested me.

But for pleasure reading I like to read at my leisure and the pace dictated by the text & I like to savor a well written, engrossing read.

Skimming is what you do in a bookshop or library when you are trying to choose a book.

Asphyxia

I'm a pretty fast reader as it is and I never skim read! I don't really see a point in it. Your missing bits in the book that could be important. Seriously if I buy a book I'm going to read it :rolleyes:

roosh

Has anyone tried any speed reading software, that they could recommend; or is there anywhere that provides a reliable review? I'm not overly convinced by the google results I'm gettting

kylith

The only books I've read where I didn't really read portions are American Psycho (couldn't take the multi-page descriptions of business cards) and The Hobbit/LOTR (bloody elf singing going of for fecking ages)

Jimmy Iovine

My granny used to read the back page of the book before starting to see if she liked where the book would be going. I don't think you can get any faster at reading than that.

I've skimmed over parts of LOTR before myself. As was mentioned above some of the songs in it got tiresome after a while and I just skipped them. I was only 13 when I was reading it so I can be forgiven surely.

I find myself skipping things when I read the paper, for example. I generally end up going back and re-reading the article though to make sense of it all so it takes twice as long. I should probably just stop skipping altogether.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

roosh

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Those motivational factors are an essential element of it but, from what I can gather, there is more to it than just that.

I'm going through "the Speed Reading book" by Tony Buzan at the moment, and I've picked up a few techniques in there that have certainly increased my reading speed, without affecting my comprehension.

I suppose it depends on what a person thinks speed reading is. I've seen people mention "skimming" here and skipping, but, from what I can gather, there is much more to speed reading. Skimming and Scanning are just a couple of techniques of the broader spectrum of speed reading, I think.

There are things to do with eye movements when reading which can affect a persons speed, without necessarily affecting comprehension. The use of a tachistoscope can, apparently, be used to increase the number of words that the brain can take in at a time. Apparently it was used by the RAF in one of the world wars to improve a pilots ability to recognise an enemy plane at a distance, and then later applied to speed reading.

The basic premise is that if you practice "reading" at a very high rate, basically just running your eyes over pages of a book without worrying about comprehension, then the brain adjusts to this high rate, so that when you reduce your rate to allow for comprehension you find that your reading speed has increased.

There are speed reading world championships as well where comprehension is tested, and people can apparently develop really high reading speeds.

raah!

I think that it's important to draw the distinction between 'comprehending the meaning of the words' and understanding what it is the author is saying. There could be certain passages for which it takes some reflection to understand, like the meaning of a metaphor, rather than just what the words mean in english. This kind of understanding is not dependent on how fast you can read the words, but is something worth slowing down for when reading.

So in this sense, while I wouldn't mind having a greater perceptual capacity for taking in letters and proccessing them, I would never want to be a 'fast reader', as this implies that on first view you did not spend much thought on what was there. And no matter how good you are at thinking, thinking longer is always better than thinking for less time, imo.

roosh

raah! wrote: »

I think that it's important to draw the distinction between 'comprehending the meaning of the words' and understanding what it is the author is saying. There could be certain passages for which it takes some reflection to understand, like the meaning of a metaphor, rather than just what the words mean in english. This kind of understanding is not dependent on how fast you can read the words, but is something worth slowing down for when reading.

So in this sense, while I wouldn't mind having a greater perceptual capacity for taking in letters and proccessing them, I would never want to be a 'fast reader', as this implies that on first view you did not spend much thought on what was there. And no matter how good you are at thinking, thinking longer is always better than thinking for less time, imo.

I would generally be in agreement with you on that, which is part of the reason why I was such a slow reader, but speed reading doesn't necessarily prevent you from doing that. With the techniques to improve eye movements it simply increases the number of words you process at a time, which is what helps to increase your reading speed. And you may [or may not] be surprised that the brain will process the information just the same, but potentially quicker. I am far from an accomplished speed reader however, so I can't say with any real conviction if that is 100% true, but I have seen indications that it is.

There is also a section on speed reading poetry, which I haven't got around to yet, which would pertain directly to that affect.

raah!

Yes I suppose getting the words down your gullet as fast as possible will always be desirable. I'm off to find a tachistoscope .

On a serious note though that is rather interesting, and I think I'll look into it further. Although the extra speed with which you read the words may pale in comparison to the time spent after reading a passage or sentence.

It's interesting that poetry was mentioned in your book, I see it also as undesirable to read something beyond the pace that the author intended. For example, two people are having a conversation, I like to read through it at the pace that the conversation would take place. If there is some hectic battle scene or such, I find myself flying through the book.

So I guess my final position on the matter is that I find it aesthetically and intellectually improper to read at speeds greater than the restrictions placed on me by the time it takes to reflect, and the pace set by the authors themselves. At the same time, being able to read super fast, should I need to , would naturally be something you'd rather have than not.

Grievous

I don't see the point of speed reading. Unless someone is paying you read books really fast

Every reader should have their own pace, depending on what you want out of any single work.

Students of literature should be pacing themselves nicely and soaking up as much as they can from each text so as to be able to speak and write about the narrative, themes, and all the other things one would talk about while studying literature.

Casual readers should pace themselves aswell. Just because one doesn't study literature in any offical capacity doesn't mean one can't reap the benefits from the subtext, narrative and story as well.

Niles

Depends, if I had to read something for college I'd tend to speed read unless I was particularly interested in it - not necessarily recommending this but it got me through. If I'm reading for pleasure then I tend to take my time with it. Speed reading for pleasure would be a bit like fast-forwarding a movie in my opinion.

Grievous

Niles wrote: »

Depends, if I had to read something for college I'd tend to speed read unless I was particularly interested in it - not necessarily recommending this but it got me through. If I'm reading for pleasure then I tend to take my time with it. Speed reading for pleasure would be a bit like fast-forwarding a movie in my opinion.

You must be really bright, did you steal someone's notes?:D

Niles

Grievous wrote: »

You must be really bright, did you steal someone's notes?:D

Yeah, and I sped-read my way through them too! :pac:

cynder

I read 100 pages an hour, to me that's the norm and not speed reading. I read the entire hunger games trilogy in 17 hours (with breaks in between books) from 2pm to 7.10am. at an average of 100 pages an hour, seems to be quite a normal rate for seasoned readers.

What would one class as speed reading? how many pages per hour?

eclectichoney

100 pages per hour? It depends on the book (I am much slower at non-fiction for example) but I would consider that really fast - I would struggle to do 60 pages in an a hour with fiction and consider myself a quick enough reader - obviously not lol!

Byron85

With fiction, I read around 50 - 60 pages per hour, although it's hard to be precise. I read the K-Pax trilogy in about 2 - 3 days which is 800 pages. I read fiction a lot faster than non-fiction though. When it comes to the latter i'm pretty slow; averaging around 15 - 20 pages per hour.

roosh

grindelwald wrote: »

What would one class as speed reading? how many pages per hour?

The World Championship Speed Reading Competition stresses reading comprehension as critical, and that the top contestants typically read around 1,000 to 2,000 words per minute with approximately 50% comprehension or above, the world champion is Anne Jones with 4,700 words per minute with 67% comprehension

wiki

cynder

Anne jones must have some sort of photographic memory. 4, 700 words a min... :O

It makes my 385 words a min a bit lame! But then thats the normal rate i read at i dont try and speed read, its an enjoyable read.

If i was reading something i didnt really enjoy it would be around 50 pages an hour.

Paco Rodriguez

Speed reading is like ingesting a chocolate cake by blending with water and injected into the bloodstream

roosh

grindelwald wrote: »

Anne jones must have some sort of photographic memory. 4, 700 words a min... :O

It makes my 385 words a min a bit lame! But then thats the normal rate i read at i dont try and speed read, its an enjoyable read.

If i was reading something i didnt really enjoy it would be around 50 pages an hour.

apparently there are techniques you can do to increase the number of words you take in per "fixation", as well as other techniques to eliminate bad habits - sub-vocalisation being one.

r3nu4l

A lot of people are using LOTR as their example and I can understand why

I rarely speed read these days. I find it anathema to my enjoyment of whatever I'm reading. I really like the description put forward by Paco above

Paco Rodriguez wrote: »

Speed reading is like ingesting a chocolate cake by blending with water and injected into the bloodstream

kylith wrote: »

...and The Hobbit/LOTR (bloody elf singing going of for fecking ages)

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

M
I've skimmed over parts of LOTR before myself. As was mentioned above some of the songs in it got tiresome after a while and I just skipped them. I was only 13 when I was reading it so I can be forgiven surely.

This is totally understandable for me and I did the same when I first read LOTR. However, I'm a huge fan of the work, particularly Tolkien's attempt to generate a whole mythology with a full 'History' and therefore the songs and poems are vitally important. Tolkien understood (as he should have given his background), the importance of oral tradition in passing along cultural history and that's what these songs, lamentations and poems were doing. With that in mind, when I re-read the books (I've read them a few times now), I pay particular attention to these sections and even cross-reference them against the appendices and timelines presented by Tolkien.

I read for enjoyment so the notion of getting from cover to cover in X number of words per minute or even the notion of timing how long it took me to read a book, just doesn't sit well at all. I find it ridiculous, although will admit to making such notes when I was about 12 years of age. Fine for technical texts but not for something I'm reading for pleasure.

My brother once loaned LOTR to a friend of ours who returned it two days later having read it all. He said his favourite character was Strider and was disappointed that he exited the story so early...

When I queried that with him it turned out that he genuinely hadn't copped that Strider also had another name in the books...

So that's one person whose comprehension during speed reading was well below 50%

roosh

Just wondering if anyone has actually looked into the theory behind speed reading, or read up on it?

I'm only starting to, but there are some interesting points about habits we may have picked up when learning to read, that slows us down.

cynder

I have no intention of ever speed reading i read for enjoyment only, I do say the words aloud in my head as i read them and can visualise what i am reading as im reading it and if its a 2 person dialogue i can can see both of them talking as im reading it.

I would say if i didnt have all that going on i could read a bit quicker but tbh im quite happy reading into the early hours if the book is good enough.

johnnyskeleton

I read different things in different ways. I tend to skim newspaper articles to get the gist of them. If there might be something insteresting in them I read more slowly.

If I am looking for particular inormation eg from a text book, I read through it rapidly, not really paying full attention until I hit the relevant portions.

If I am reading an easy to read book (unfortunately all too often these days) I read at a slow and steady pace. If I am Reading a good book I read it very slowly and often take time to think about it or indeed about other things that it reminds me of.

Niles

From looking other comments it seems I must be slow. When it comes to reading fiction I tend to dither along at 30-40 pages an hour comfortably, maybe 50. But 100!

[-0-]

Skipping parts of a book is unacceptable. By engaging in this conduct you are not getting the full experience the author wished you to have.

meganj

I usually speed read the first time. That is to say I read the book cover to cover at a speed that some people would deem very fast and I might very occasionally miss stuff. This has become more apparent since I started reading Nordic literature. I noticed I wasn't fully picking up everything as I would find it difficult to keep the characters names in line.

But then if I have enjoyed a book (even moderately) I re-read it and I would play very close attention to the authors styling, character development etc.

For example I read We Need To Talk About Kevin in about two days I think. Since then I've read it another eight times which means I'm pretty sure I have every word rolling around somewhere in my noggin.

eskimocat

It has been interesting to read what people think about speed reading, or skimming or whatever term you prefer yourself. If I really like a book, I will re-read it several times (no idea of the actual speed mind you, it feels fast though ). That's what makes it fun to have a library in my house.

The debate reminded me about different learning styles (examples include Kinaesthetic, Auditory, visual) in adult education and I wonder if there is a link between the various styles and the preferred method of reading. I am aware that there is no hard and fast rule where both are concerned but generally it would be interesting to find out if research has been done on this. I would like to read it!:)

Posy

I read very fast, but if it's something I'm reading for enjoyment, it's not deliberate.
Sometimes if it's a really fast paced/exciting plot, I find myself speeding up just to get to the conclusion!
I could easily read a 400 page book in one sitting, but it depends totally on the book. I do admit to occasionally getting confused and going back a page if it's a complex read!

eire4

Not for me speed reading. In fact I always read with a dictionary at hand which slows the process up a bit but I enjoy really taking my time and getting the full meaning as much as I can from the book I am reading.

Posy

I read so fast as a child (I'd certainly read a Roald Dahl or Enid Blyton book in under an hour) that my mother stopped buying me books and got me to join the library.

mrsWhippy

I had to google what a tachistoscope was, and in the process I found this demo:
http://www.angelfire.com/nb/improvedreading/tachistoscope.htm

Very interesting ideas there!

PurpleBee

I have a friend who buys books simply based upon how many pages they have

more pages = more value

I know its extreme, but I see no sense even in a diluted version of that policy where reading faster = better as if the faster you read the quicker you'll get to the end of literature, you won't!

JohnMearsheimer

In college I always skimmed politics related books and journal articles, things that I had to read. I always took my time reading things that I chose to read at my normal slow pace.

roosh

mrsWhippy wrote: »

I had to google what a tachistoscope was, and in the process I found this demo:
http://www.angelfire.com/nb/improvedreading/tachistoscope.htm

Very interesting ideas there!

site is blocked at work for some reason; I'll check it out when I go home, cheers.

here is an online speed reading application; you can copy and paste text in there and then choose the settings. Generally, to train yourself, I think your supposed to set it at a pretty high speed and then gradually bring it down.

finality

I admit to skipping the chapter on Whitney Houston in American Psycho. I was determined to read it all but I couldn't take it. :L
Usually I don't skip anything, the subtle details can add a whole other dimension to a book.

BostonB

I do speed/skim bits I find boring. Especially in a book like LOTR.

Kinski

[-0-] wrote: »

Skipping parts of a book is unacceptable. By engaging in this conduct you are not getting the full experience the author wished you to have.

I prescribe a weekend with "The Lovers' Tale" sections of Melmoth the Wanderer for you. Supplemented by a generous helping of Tom Bombadil from Lord of the Rings.

Seriously, I can't bring myself to skip sections either, but some books almost seem to dare me to do so.