101–110 of 167 posts
If you can stick to a rigorous reading and writing program, yes, that will give you the most rewards. But even reading 20 minutes of lightweight fiction before bed every night is much better than nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This may be cultural but I just cannot bring myself write in a book even in pencil. post-its notes for me this is a great idea if I have the discipline
It may help to look at it this way: A book you won't write in is a book that owns you, rather than you owning the book. A book is designed to convey information on the page, writing in your book only adds to and fulfills it's purpose.
I mean, suppose you have a 100 books. You're not reading more than 2 or 3 of them at once, if that; and it's not like you're doing anything with the rest other than keeping them on a shelf.
Now, Once you either have a family, or have friends with similar interests, or with kinds of similar interests etc - those 98 (or 100) books become something you lend, or even give away. And when you get older, you will pass on your entire library, at some point, or sell it off, or bequeath it etc. At any of these points, you want the book to be free of your personal jots and notes, and as close to pristine condition as possible, for the other readers.
Write your notes in a notebook, or on your PC or laptop (or whatever). They'll also be searchable and easily editable.
Well, anyway, I was reading this James Bond book, and right away I realized that like most books, it had too many words. The plot was the same one that all James Bond books have: An evil person tries to blow up the world, but James Bond kills him and his henchmen and makes love to several attractive women. There, that's it: 24 words. But the guy who wrote the book took thousands of words to say it.
Or consider "The Brothers Karamazov", by the famous Russian alcoholic Fyodor Dostoyevsky. It's about these two brothers who kill their father.
Or maybe only one of them kills the father. It's impossible to tell because what they mostly do is talk for nearly a thousand pages. If all Russians talk as much as the Karamazovs did, I don't see how they found time to become a major world power.
I'm told that Dostoyevsky wrote "The Brothers Karamazov" to raise the question of whether there is a God. So why didn't he just come right out and say: "Is there a God? It sure beats the heck out of me."
Other famous works could easily have been summarized in a few words:
* "Moby Dick" -- Don't mess around with large whales because they symbolize nature and will kill you.
* "A Tale of Two Cities" -- French people are crazy.
-- Dave BarryAs a voracious reader, I've personally found that I got the most out of books when I stopped trying to summarize and highlight. I very rarely do either anymore.
I realize that what happens is sort of a Darwinian "survival of the fittest ideas" in my head, often subconsciously. Once I relaxed and decided, "If the stuff in this book is good enough, my brain will keep it FOR me" both my satisfaction AND utility of books increased dramatically.
(which is to say, it's not that I never write anything down. It's that if I do, it's not tied to the book, but to the "thing" or "topic" that I'm interested in, with a reference TO the book)
I can't speak for others, but for me this headline and idea is exactly and perfectly wrong, so I suppose I just want to reach those for whom this generates unnecessary "guilt" or something like that. As a voracious reader, I've personally found that I got the most out of books when I stopped trying to summarize and highlight. I very rarely do either anymore. I realize that what happens is sort of a Darwinian "surviva…
Insightful → process subconsciously;
Informative → summarize.
--
Update: yes, it is not just a matter of texts. The annoying snipers that infest these boards should summarize as a general practice: this will help them with an exercise in thinking, expression, so that maybe one day they will also be able to formulate and present an argument. And stop abusing the freedom they should not be granted.
Learning is about recalling information. The more you practice recalling a fact, the more the memory "sticks".[1]
Writing summaries is an effective way to both 1) identify the most important information, and 2) practice recalling it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could be an autobiography.
An autobiography is not a novel, because it lacks the fundamental aspect of being fictional . There is such a thing as an autobiographical novel, but that is not nonfiction. Because novels are, by definition, works of fiction. The closest thing to a ‘nonfiction novel’ is probably the historical novel, which is a fictionalized historical account… but I’m not sure why such a thing would particularly be suited to this s…
It’s not worth summarizing every book. I took a course at UChicago on how to read a book based on Mortimer Adler’s book of the same name, and the takeaway is that the first reading of a book should be a quick one (table of contents, skimming, dipping into pages). Only after a book is shown to have promise are we then to engage in deep reading which not only involves summarizing but also syntopical reading, which is t…
> Finally all good books should be read twice or more. Good reading is rereading. Fully agreed! > This is a hard rule to follow because nobody has time to read the same book twice Disagreed. I read fiction and I tend to re-read a lot, sometimes three or four times. I read for pleasure, so I have the time. Reading is "me" time, and I spend it however I want. It's only hard to re-read if you have some silly goal like "…
Writing small summaries weekly (or daily) about what’s on your mind or what you’ve learnt is the simplest and most powerful way of self development I know of.
Do you review what you've written at a later date or is the value gained just in the initial writing?
I can't speak for others, but for me this headline and idea is exactly and perfectly wrong, so I suppose I just want to reach those for whom this generates unnecessary "guilt" or something like that. As a voracious reader, I've personally found that I got the most out of books when I stopped trying to summarize and highlight. I very rarely do either anymore. I realize that what happens is sort of a Darwinian "surviva…
It strictly depends on the category of the book: Insightful → process subconsciously; Informative → summarize. -- Update: yes, it is not just a matter of texts. The annoying snipers that infest these boards should summarize as a general practice: this will help them with an exercise in thinking, expression, so that maybe one day they will also be able to formulate and present an argument. And stop abusing the freedom…
If it's informative, you have to read and take your conclusions. And if you later decide to use the information for different conclusions, you'll have to read it again.
It's little wonder that informative texts don't usually come in the form of books.