Hacker News Reader

Comment by leokennis | Hacker News Reader

This article is, perhaps unsurprisingly, very well written and structured. A joy to read compared to most internet writing!

It vibes pretty well with my own "rules" for reading:

* I read one book at a time

* In general I only read when I feel like it, but I will read every day: if I don't feel like it, I'll just read one page

* At any point am I allowed to stop reading a book and pick up a new one

* I do not track "pages per day" or "books per year", I do not participate in "reading challenges"

This way, reading has most personal value to me without becoming a "second job" with the pressure to "perform" that comes with it.

View on HN

>> without becoming a "second job" with the pressure to "perform that comes with it

Exactly. If you can develop a skill of reading in this manner, it's not something anyone can take away from you. No matter what happens to you: illness, imprisonment, poverty, divorce. No one can take that from you.

> This article is, perhaps unsurprisingly, very well written and structured. A joy to read compared to most internet writing!

Aeon and its sister site Psyche are genuinely awesome. Probably the best sites I've discovered in years. Would definitely encourage you to read more of their work. There are definitely arguments I disagree with, but nothing to complain about how they're presented or sourced.

I like those longer reads that are somewhat detached from daily events that you can't really learn anything from.

Why do you read one book at a time?

Have you tried more than that and found it unsatisfactory?

I usually have two books on the go. I leave them in different places. That’s key. I am a different person in each place, and I can keep my associations separate and distinct for each book.

Given enough places, I’m confident I could read more than two books in parallel.

I have added your response to my collection of wisdom; particularly for the statement "I am a different person in each place."

I read almost exclusively on my ereader, so “two books in different places” does not apply to me. But years ago before the ereader existed I also self-disciplined to one book at a time.

If I don’t, my reading will become like my internet browsing: chasing my interest of the moment, half reading something about it, going on another chase and never properly engaging with one subject.

Of course some people will be better at context switching and the discipline to actually finish the multiple books they’re reading…but not me.

I was a one-book-at-a-time person for the longest time, and in the last two years relaxed what I realized was an arbitrary rule and allowed myself to read any of a number of books (because I buy them faster than I can read them anyways) depending on my mood. I currently have at least one going in each of these areas:

- technical

- design

- autobiography

- classic fiction

- short nonfiction anthology

- history

Progress is a lot slower per book, but it’s not a race. I much prefer being able to pick up whatever I’m interested in at the time than having to wait, feeling like I have to slog through the end of the current book.

By the way, this is also a much better learning strategy. Switching topics means to recall the information before continuing, which is very much desirable.

One of the books I’m reading is Swann’s Way, which is basically stream-of-consciousness in structure, and there’s an appendix with a synopsis that references page numbers. I usually read the latest paragraph of that to bring me back up to speed before diving into the text. Super useful tool that I wish came with every book… I see things like Sparknotes in a whole new light now. But manual recall is definitely a good exercise!

I read promiscuously. I want the ideas from disparate topics to have sex and produce novel offspring in my mind.

That's such a good way of describing it!

I have a similar approach. I'll read a math textbook and a novel. Helps keep me motivated to read more rather than thinking "Ugh, I need to read that textbook now."

I also do two, usually one fiction and one non-fiction.

I'd guess reading ebooks, even on tablets or phones, makes one-book-reading the path of least resistance. I mostly read multiple because I physically keep the (paper) books near where I read them. I'll read a different book in bed than at my desk than in the living room, because that's what's there. Some of those (the bedside one, especially) don't tend to travel with me. Others might. It's mostly a result of the physicality and locality of the actual books, as objects.

However, if I'm reading a book on my phone & tablet, I'll mostly stick to one until I'm done with it. They way they sync reading status and time-of-last-access across devices encourages it, even with multiple devices.

Yeah, I don't understand this. I actually read 5 to 10 books at a time. Many "classics" that we have these days were actually published as periodicals/in serial form. So when War and Peace was first published, no one sat down and just read 1500 pages. New chapters were released once a month or so over the period of 2+ years.

So if that's how War and Peace was originally read, why shouldn't I read it the same way?

It would be neat to be able to subscribe to a monthly email that sends a chapter at a time.

That would be a fun project to create for public domain works. And not especially difficult.

Reading a fiction and a non-fiction is doable. Non-fiction and another non-fiction as well. But not two fiction novels at the same time.

I generally agree with all of these, the one thing I guess that can be an issue for me is if I go too long in between picking up a book, then I'll kind of forget the context.

I am pretty much the exact same as you. Only difference is I set a "reading challenge" every year, but it's more of a guide then a rule. I've failed the goal multiple years; I am just happy as long as I am within a few books of my goal.

Does rule 1. And 3. Not mean you read multiple books at once? Just not simultaneously :)

Haha nice catch ;-)

What I meant with “stop reading” is “stop reading entirely”. If I read a book and at 50% think: I could probably finish it but it’s not really enjoyable at all, I just delete it from my ereader.

No sunk cost fallacy here :-)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com