Reading more than one thing at once

[Pizzabeak]

What's the general consensus on committing to more than one book at a time? Ideally, I'd like to focus on one at a time for purposes of maximum information retainage & utilization, but that could probably be achieved otherwise as well.

Certain situations would call for devoting to more than one and not related things at a time. Would there be any consequences to this whatsoever? It could be possible that reading 2+ books in a period would aid in info retainage, as opposed to sticking with one. Also, there are some people that "read one book a day" or read like 5 books at once, but I always thought that was kinda lame. Most of the time they seem to read about one fantasy or romance novel a day. However, for tomes that would contain info relevant to one's interest, fic or non fic, what would the best option be?

Would you try to focus on 1-2 and appreciate them, or try to rush a schedule and do whatever that calls for?

Kindly disregard any t.o.s. moments? Unless that's what life is about

 

[Puffy]

Reading multiple books is the bane of my life. I always have at least 3 (non-fiction largely) at a time, simply because my head's always on the go and I have a lot of interests. Ideally (and occasionally), the content between books I'm reading synergise and I get more out of comparing them than the authors could have originally intended. More likely, my progress slows from not getting far into much at a time due to distraction.

I think really it depends on what kind of books you're reading. If it's light, I don't see why a chapter every now and then hurts. If it's Ulysses, Being and Time, something really dense, they become projects in themselves and I'd rather just dedicate to it or not attempt it at all. No reason you couldn't do a heavy book as a main, and read something light before bed though.

(if it's non-fiction, I'd also bear in mind you don't always need to read the whole book to get what you want. Often I'll read a few chapters and decide I don't need to go further.)

 

[Anktark]

Depends on the book really. More than once I have started a book and only put it down after getting "Releasing liquid metabolism byproducts in 40 seconds. You have until then to relocate. Have a nice day, sir." warning.
Reading up to three books at once is not bad. I have two right now that are on back burner, the trick is to use bookmarks :P

I don't understand people with "One book a day attitude". It would get old after a week for me. And not all books can be read in 14 hours unless you have exceptional reading speed, cognition and memory capability. I don't have any of those, so when I read some books ( scientific or philosophy) I gotta stop and even read some pages twice, stop and think about them. But I am content with that.

 

[Turniphead]

I read multiple threads at once.

This is a good reminder that I want to read more books again, maybe even less than 10 at once.

 

[Pizzabeak]

I'm being forced to read about 5 books at the moment, and have managed to squeeze one casual/recreational title in there. Certain reasons would create decent motivation for wanting to go through all the "recreationals" but obligations may dictate it being better to focus on the ones you are being forced to read. That's why more time must be devoted to those, as opposed to the one's one is actually interested in reading through. When time is being used otherwise it makes one wonder if they should be focusing on obligations instead, deadlines. Also, there's an idea about reading one's self to the point of retardation which I would like to avoid. Again, I never felt too comfortable reading 24/7 anyway. If there was a really good book I probably wouldn't be more inclined to finishing it in one sitting, as I'd prefer to let it resonate for a while... After a continuous period my information processing abilities don't seem to be as adequate, and, depending on what's being read I'd like to comprehend it to the fullest extent. I'd also like to remember what particularly stands out in the case of needing to reference it again (off the bookshelf?). So, I'm not sure how comfortable I should be reading like 7 different tomes at once.. I wouldn't otherwise, I'd do like 1-3 for the sake of comfortability but one's own pace might not be enough sometimes.

I may have noticed something. After reaching what could be described as a capacity of enjoyment I seemed to be more inclined to desire other activities.


Not sat anyvun cares or anysing

 

[Pemi_g]

I'm taking a college literature class right now, and we're always reading at least 2 novels or plays, and I'm usually reading one book for my own pleasure. As it is, confusing texts isn't a big problem. If I didn't have to read the extra 2+ books for lit, I don't think I would read more than one book at once; however, I would probably cycle through books quicker.

 

[TimeAsylums]

I have the inability to focus and concentrate unless i am specifically reading more than one thing at once; my deductive reasoning demands such

 

[Cognisant]

I thought this was about reading multiple sentences in parallel.

 

[Pyropyro]

I read more than a book at a time not because I feel like it but because I'm taking a Master's degree.

 

[Pizzabeak]

merely a time management concern

I thought this was about reading multiple sentences in parallel.

Thing because book, magazine, articles; etc

 

[grayskies]

I personally don't like reading more than one book at a time. I rather start a book and completely finish and then move onto the next.

 

[Ruina]

I like to read several different types of book around the same time. Sometimes I take a long time to get through some books because they are really depressing (but also very good and raise interesting moral questions) and so I want to read on that is a little less serious on the side. A reading break from reading. Right now I am about midway through... 4 books... it was five but one of them was so bad I returned it. I don't think it is confusing. We can watch several different television series and not get confused by the plot. Why can't we do the same with books?

 

[Missfortune]

Ruina, I concur, but usually it's three for me.

However, I think it's more difficult to read multiple books at once than to watch several TV shows. Why, I'm not sure of. TV shows, I think, tend to be simpler. Maybe it's the multi-sensory experience of sight and sound. Maybe it's because we have to work to read while TV watching is a passive behavior. I don't have a good understanding of this. Maybe it's just because lots of us think reading multiples at once is more difficult so we actually have a harder time.