Do you read on-line fiction?
J. Patrick McDonald
I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line fiction
in the various SF zines that publish on the net? I publish one of those zines,
and frankly have been disappointed in the response we've gotten. Granted we've
been around only a short while (Issue 4 should release soon), but we've
published what I believe to be some pretty good short fiction. We've published
authors like Hugo Nominated Lee Killough, Mark Rich, Sephera Giron and have a
story coming up in issue 4 from James Gunn.
Our circulation is still fairly small (though growing), and I need to know why
our circulation isn't growing more rapidly. I don't know if we just haven't
gotten the word out, or if many of you have checked out our site and didn't like
what you saw.
Maybe the market just isn't there for on-line fiction. (Even the venerated one
InterText has only a few thousand subscribers). How many people who read this
group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
J. Patrick McDonald | E-scape: the Digital Journal of Speculative Fiction
InterInk Publishing Co. | http://www.interink.com/escape.html
<j...@interink.com> | Original science fiction, fantasy, & horror
http://www.interink.com/ | Stunning color illustrations, articles, reviews
Blasting paper into bits. | Con information, and more.
Robert G. Buice, Jr
In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>, j...@interink.com (J. Patrick
McDonald) wrote:
> I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line
fiction
> in the various SF zines that publish on the net? I publish one of those zines,
> and frankly have been disappointed in the response we've gotten. Granted we've
> been around only a short while (Issue 4 should release soon), but we've
> published what I believe to be some pretty good short fiction. We've published
> authors like Hugo Nominated Lee Killough, Mark Rich, Sephera Giron and have a
> story coming up in issue 4 from James Gunn.
>
> Our circulation is still fairly small (though growing), and I need to know why
> our circulation isn't growing more rapidly. I don't know if we just haven't
> gotten the word out, or if many of you have checked out our site and
didn't like
> what you saw.
>
> Maybe the market just isn't there for on-line fiction. (Even the venerated one
> InterText has only a few thousand subscribers). How many people who read this
> group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
I try to, but the fact is that anyvody can start up an online ficiton zine
and that gives the whole class of ezines a bad name. I try to read all
the good fiction on the net every month, but there is so much bad stuff
out there, it dampens my enthusiasm.
Omni is always excellent. DarkCarnival is always good. Mississippi
Review is always great. Dream Forge is ok , although the format is poor.
Alsirat is very amateurish and immature in the writing style, but there is
an occasional goody.
But most other mags I have read on the net make me not want to come back.
I certain would not submit anything to an ezine unless it had been turned
down by every print mag in existance. This is just because of the
volitile nature of ezines and the generally low quality.
I haven't read E-scape yet. Never heard of it till now.
--
Robert G. Buice,Jr supe...@pop.uky.edu
Analytical Spectroscopy Group Phone:(606) 257-5175
College of Pharmacy
University of Kentucky
PGP Key: http://kerouac.pharm.uky.edu/buice/rgbuice.html
Lawrence Watt-Evans
In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>, j...@interink.com says...
>How many people who read this
>group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
I don't. If I'm at the computer, I have other stuff I should be doing. I
do my pleasure reading anywhere EXCEPT my office.
--
For information on Lawrence Watt-Evans, finger -l lawr...@clark.net
or see The Misenchanted Page at http://www.greyware.com/authors/LWE/
The Horror Writers Association Page is at http://www.horror.org/HWA/
BEKKI LYN
I don't read too much fiction on-line mostly because if I
did, I'd be wearing myself out in front of the computer.
Just keeping up with the newsgroups, mailing lists, and
the email rpg (which could count as fiction) I'm doing
can be a strain at times as having to sit so long
gazing at the computer is certainly uncomfortable
after a while and dries out my eyes.
I much prefer reading fiction when I can curl up in
a comfortable chair or lounge around almost anywhere
but glued to the computer. I like my fiction to be
portable. I can't print out the e-zines and such
because it would take forever and I'd still be
stuck at the computer making sure my little
dot-matrix doesn't jam from the paper insisting
on feeding back in a second time.
The quality of the stories have nothing to do with
my reading on-line e-zines. I just have the hardest
time reading such things on the computer. It is
possible that I would do fine with a portable computer,
but until then, most of my reading will end up being
off-line.
--
Bekki Lyn
======================================================
"In a dream / Let me drag you through my world
My kingdom for your thoughts / What is in your mind."
++TIAMAT++
------------------------------------------------------
"All acts of love and pleasure are Her rituals."
======================================================
Robert G. Buice, Jr
In article <4m170g$h...@clarknet.clark.net>, lawr...@clark.net (Lawrence
Watt-Evans) wrote:
> In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>, j...@interink.com says...
> >How many people who read this
> >group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
>
> I don't. If I'm at the computer, I have other stuff I should be doing. I
> do my pleasure reading anywhere EXCEPT my office.
Actually, I do read a lot of online fiction, but I always print it out. I
can't read off a screen for more than a paragraph.
Brad Templeton
I published Hugo and Nebula award winners and nominees online and on CD-ROM,
and while people bought the CD-ROMS they did not read the works online.
So even if you have top-rank, top-name professional stuff, people are not
yet ready to read it online, certainly not ready to buy it online.
That's partly prejudice, since 99% of what we read online is horribly
designed and gives people the impression that it is discomforting to read
text on a computer screen, when it need not be if design and user interface
are considered.
http://www.clari.net/hugo.html for more info.
--
Brad Templeton, publisher, ClariNet Communications Corp. in...@clari.net
The net's #1 E-Newspaper (1,300,000 paid sbscrbrs.) http://www.clari.net/brad/
Loki
In ashen ink, Brad Templeton (br...@clarinet.com) inscribed:
: That's partly prejudice, since 99% of what we read online is horribly
: designed and gives people the impression that it is discomforting to read
: text on a computer screen, when it need not be if design and user interface
: are considered.
Which it rarely is. :)
Perhaps if I did some of my browsing in Netscape rather than lynx, it
would make it more appealing, but by and large, I expect you won't make
me into an e-reading fan 'til I can get a nice active-matrix PDA reading
tablet, properly designed to make e-reading a breeze.
- Loki
--
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Geoffrey Wiseman | http://tdg.uoguelph.ca/~ontarion/users/geoff |
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
i wish I could just stop / i know another moment will break my heart /
too many tears / too many times / too many years i've cried for you
it's always the same / wake up in the rain / head in pain / hung in shame
Loki
I -can- read off the screen, I do for critiques and newsgroups and things
like that, but it's more tiring and less enjoyable than paper zines,
somehow. I don't really bother checking out epublication that often.
- Loki
--
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Geoffrey Wiseman | http://tdg.uoguelph.ca/~ontarion/users/geoff |
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
"Undoubtedly, none of these opinions are my own, let alone anyone else's."
EllenDat
>>>>Subject: Re: Do you read on-line fiction?
>From: supe...@pop.uky.edu (Robert G. Buice, Jr)
>Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 17:26:36 -0400
>Message-ID: <super295-280...@bird.pharm.uky.edu>
>In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>, j...@interink.com (J. Patrick
>McDonald) wrote:
> I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line
fiction
> in the various SF zines that publish on the net? I publish one of those
zines,
> and frankly have been disappointed in the response we've gotten. Granted
we've
> been around only a short while (Issue 4 should release soon), but we've
> published what I believe to be some pretty good short fiction. We've
published
> authors like Hugo Nominated Lee Killough, Mark Rich, Sephera Giron and
have a
> story coming up in issue 4 from James Gunn.
>
> Our circulation is still fairly small (though growing), and I need to
know why
> our circulation isn't growing more rapidly. I don't know if we just
haven't
> gotten the word out, or if many of you have checked out our site and
didn't like
> what you saw.
>
> Maybe the market just isn't there for on-line fiction. (Even the
venerated one
> InterText has only a few thousand subscribers). How many people who read
this
> group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
>I try to, but the fact is that anyvody can start up an online ficiton
zine
>and that gives the whole class of ezines a bad name. I try to read all
>the good fiction on the net every month, but there is so much bad stuff
>out there, it dampens my enthusiasm.
>Omni is always excellent. DarkCarnival is always good. Mississippi
>Review is always great. Dream Forge is ok , although the format is poor.
>Alsirat is very amateurish and immature in the writing style, but there
is
>an occasional goody.
>But most other mags I have read on the net make me not want to come back.
>I certain would not submit anything to an ezine unless it had been turned
>down by every print mag in existance. This is just because of the
>volitile nature of ezines and the generally low quality.
>I haven't read E-scape yet. Never heard of it till now.
--
>Robert G. Buice,Jr supe...@pop.uky.edu
>Analytical Spectroscopy Group Phone:(606) 257-5175
>College of Pharmacy
>University of Kentucky
> PGP Key: http://kerouac.pharm.uky.edu/buice/rgbuice.html
Thank you thank you. Unfortunately, we've done no publicity since we've
gone totally online so only a handful of people know we exist.This should
change soon as we're completely redesigning our website and will actually
"launch" September 1st. But we're online now with fiction and some
nonfiction. On May 1st we'll be putting up Robert Silverberg's "The
Martian Journals of Henry James." June 1st we'll be putting up Harlan
Ellison's "The Museum on Cyclops Avenue." We're hoping to other things on
the pages like bulletin boards, chat rooms, and author-author dialogs and
interviews but also always new fiction every month (keeping some of the
old stuff archived for awhile).
Ellen Datlow
Fiction Editor
OMNI
http://www.omnimag.com
Vicke Dovheden
[snip]
How many people who read this group actually read fiction from an on-line
source? If not, why not?
Dunno, actually. Two main reasons comes to mind, though:
1) I usually don't read short stories,
2) Since I'm hooked up to the 'Net via modem, and have a very limited
amount of free disk space, it is a somewhat slow process coupled with
a severe phone bill to access all the sites that really should interest me.
Oh, a third one just cropped up: there seem to be so many of them 'Net
zines lying about, so I don't know where to start. So I don't.
Vicke
E. W. Bennefeld
j...@interink.com (J. Patrick McDonald) wrote:
>I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line fiction
>in the various SF zines that publish on the net? I publish one of those zines,
>and frankly have been disappointed in the response we've gotten.
>
<snipped>
>
>Maybe the market just isn't there for on-line fiction. (Even the venerated one
>InterText has only a few thousand subscribers). How many people who read this
>group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
>
>
For myself, I work with computers for a living. Reading sci. fi. or
fantasy is relaxation (a rare and precious occasion), properly taking
place curled up in bed or on the sofa with a cup of hot chocolate and
a bowl of popcorn or lying stretched out on a blanket in the back
yard. Wouldn't have occurred to me to look on the net for something
to read, particularly considering my reading speed. I would expect to
find short stories on the net, which are a mere nibble. I read the
average-sized novel in 50 to 75 minutes, which is enough time that I
feel I've gotten away from the stresses of the day and had a chance to
unwind.
Also, I choose my reading material, for the most part, by author. If
I knew that something was on the net that was written by a favorite
author, I would search it out . . . just on general principle.
Hope this is of some help to you.
--Elizabeth
lab user
In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>, j...@interink.com (J. Patrick
McDonald) wrote:
> I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line
fiction
> in the various SF zines that publish on the net? I publish one of those zines,
> and frankly have been disappointed in the response we've gotten. Granted we've
> been around only a short while (Issue 4 should release soon), but we've
> published what I believe to be some pretty good short fiction. We've published
> authors like Hugo Nominated Lee Killough, Mark Rich, Sephera Giron and have a
> story coming up in issue 4 from James Gunn.
>
> Our circulation is still fairly small (though growing), and I need to know why
> our circulation isn't growing more rapidly. I don't know if we just haven't
> gotten the word out, or if many of you have checked out our site and
didn't like
> what you saw.
>
> Maybe the market just isn't there for on-line fiction. (Even the venerated one
> InterText has only a few thousand subscribers). How many people who read this
> group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
I'd love to; I want all the scifi I can get. Unfortunately, a lot of the
stories on the Net are of... ahem... poor quality, and the sci fi stories
are the epitome of this. The emphasis is too commonly not on the story or
characters, as it should be, but on the nifty gadgets they carry around.
Of course, a lot of mainstream scifi is like this too...
EllenDat
>>>>Subject: Re: Do you read on-line fiction?
>Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:12:47 GMT
>j...@interink.com (J. Patrick McDonald) wrote:
>I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line
fiction
>in the various SF zines that publish on the net? I publish one of those
zines,
>and frankly have been disappointed in the response we've gotten.
>
<snipped>
>
>Maybe the market just isn't there for on-line fiction. (Even the
venerated one
>InterText has only a few thousand subscribers). How many people who read
this
>group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
>For myself, I work with computers for a living. Reading sci. fi. or
>fantasy is relaxation (a rare and precious occasion), properly taking
>place curled up in bed or on the sofa with a cup of hot chocolate and
>a bowl of popcorn or lying stretched out on a blanket in the back
>yard. Wouldn't have occurred to me to look on the net for something
>to read, particularly considering my reading speed. I would expect to
>find short stories on the net, which are a mere nibble. I read the
>average-sized novel in 50 to 75 minutes, which is enough time that I
>feel I've gotten away from the stresses of the day and had a chance to
>unwind.
>Also, I choose my reading material, for the most part, by author. If
>I knew that something was on the net that was written by a favorite
>author, I would search it out . . . just on general principle.
>Hope this is of some help to you.
< --Elizabeth
Can we assume you mean either that you read novelettes in 50-75 minutes or
that you read *for* 50-75 minutes at a time??? Are you *really* saying you
read a novel an hour????
Ellen Datlow
Fiction Editor
OMNI Magazine
Donna Woodka
In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>,
J. Patrick McDonald <j...@interink.com> wrote:
>I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line fiction
>in the various SF zines that publish on the net? I publish one of those zines,
>been around only a short while (Issue 4 should release soon), but we've
>published what I believe to be some pretty good short fiction. We've published
>authors like Hugo Nominated Lee Killough, Mark Rich, Sephera Giron and have a
>story coming up in issue 4 from James Gunn.
>
>Our circulation is still fairly small (though growing), and I need to know why
>our circulation isn't growing more rapidly. I don't know if we just haven't
>gotten the word out, or if many of you have checked out our site and didn't like
>what you saw.
>
>InterText has only a few thousand subscribers). How many people who read this
>group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
I might read short pieces on-line, but I wouldn't pay to read it - there's
too much out there on-line for free. I wouldn't read anything more than a
short story on-line, because I'm too aware of reading it on the computer -
it doesn't "absorb" me the way reading a book does, where I can actually
forget the mechanics of reading beyond having to turn the page. Also reading
the screen for a long time with no breaks is hard on the eyes.
I wouldn't regularly read a web site, even an interesting one. I tend to
view them once for information, link it in the bookmarks list, and go back to
it if I need it again some other time. I think that is how most people tend
to use them as well.
--
Donna Woodka | "A hundred years from now, it will not matter what my
| bank account was, the sort of house I lived in, or the
woo...@sdsc.edu | kind of car I drove... but the world may be different
| because I was important in the life of a child."
E. W. Bennefeld
elle...@aol.com (EllenDat) wrote:
>>>>>Subject: Re: Do you read on-line fiction?
>>From: EWBen...@worldnet.att.net (E. W. Bennefeld)
>>Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:12:47 GMT
>
>
>Can we assume you mean either that you read novelettes in 50-75 minutes or
>that you read *for* 50-75 minutes at a time??? Are you *really* saying you
>read a novel an hour????
>Ellen Datlow
>Fiction Editor
>OMNI Magazine
>
>http://www.omnimag.com
I read 4 to 6 pages a minute (unless I'm really in a hurry to find out
what's going to happen next). Average fantasy and sci. fi. books by
the authors I like are somewhere between 250 and 350 pages long.
--Elizabeth
The Great Grendel-Khan
In <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com> j...@interink.com (J. Patrick McDonald) writes:
>I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line
>fiction?
Someone's reading it. I have a few short stories on my page and I get a
lot of hits (some over 9,000 times a month). I have a email list of
people who have requested to recieve a notice whenever I add a story.
This list has grown to around 100 people. This is a one-way mailing
list and very low traffic (10 messages or so in about as many months).
I also have another list of people who want to discuss the stories
there. this actually way cool as a writer, as it lets me eavesdrop on
what people think of the stories and to participate when I feel like it.
Try either of these ideas.
>in the various SF zines that publish on the net? I publish one of those zines,
>and frankly have been disappointed in the response we've gotten. Granted we've
>been around only a short while (Issue 4 should release soon), but we've
>published what I believe to be some pretty good short fiction. We've published
>authors like Hugo Nominated Lee Killough, Mark Rich, Sephera Giron and have a
>story coming up in issue 4 from James Gunn.
I never heard of you. Which is what you're saying your problem is. One
of the ways to increase hits is to find pages similar to yours and ask
for a reciprocal (sp?) link. Offer to link their page if they'll do the
same for you. There are a lot of writers who may be willing, some other
magazines, and such. Whenever I come across a page like mine I email
the author and ask for a link.
>Our circulation is still fairly small (though growing), and I need to know why
>our circulation isn't growing more rapidly. I don't know if we just haven't
>gotten the word out, or if many of you have checked out our site and
>didn't like what you saw.
So you are in webpage? Isn't Intertext a listserve? How are you
measuring hits? There really isn't a "circulation" to webpages.
>Maybe the market just isn't there for on-line fiction. (Even the venerated one
>InterText has only a few thousand subscribers). How many people who read this
>group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
I read on-line works. I'll check out your site.
chris
>J. Patrick McDonald | E-scape: the Digital Journal of Speculative Fiction
>InterInk Publishing Co. | http://www.interink.com/escape.html
><j...@interink.com> | Original science fiction, fantasy, & horror
>http://www.interink.com/ | Stunning color illustrations, articles, reviews
>Blasting paper into bits.| Con information, and more.
--
What do you mean I can't read alt.sex | arg...@iastate.edu
or rec.arts.erotica? Can I have my money back? | <The Great Grendel-Khan>
| since '91
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~argent/grendel.html
The Great Grendel-Khan
In <4m170g$h...@clarknet.clark.net> lawr...@clark.net (Lawrence Watt-Evans) writes:
>In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>, j...@interink.com says...
>>How many people who read this
>>group actually read fiction from an on-line source? If not, why not?
>I don't. If I'm at the computer, I have other stuff I should be doing. I
>do my pleasure reading anywhere EXCEPT my office.
Are you saying rasfw isn't pleasurable? Good idea though (reading away
from your office), but then you are a writer. I think that this is a
defensive habbit that you'd have to have, otherwise you'd get nothing
done except on-line reading, newsgroups, and several wasted hours of
Civilazation. I think it's different for people who approach the
computer as an entertainment tool, as opposed to a working tool.
What do you think?
chris
Jeremy P Lakatos
I don't read on-line fiction because of several reasons:
1) The majority is very bad. Especially bad fan fiction (I have no
problem with good fan fiction, but then it transcends itself and becomes
something other than fanfic, I guess). But because of the lack of respect
(and readership) in online fiction, writers who have written something
that is quite good would still rather sit on their manuscript than give
away any chance of that manna, publication.
2) 90% of normal fiction (I'd say more, even) is very bad. But with normal
fiction, there's a community of readers to say, "Hey, read Iain Banks,
he's pretty cool" (so I will be, soon). There is no such thing for online
fiction. I am a person who very rarely will read a story that has not been
favorably suggested. But believe me, day one I hear of Harlan Ellison
putting a story on the web, I'm there.
3) The interface sucks. We really need something better than big clunky
terminals, and maybe a smoother page-turning mechanism. I read novels
mostly, but I find it almost impossible to stick to even a good length
short story online (maybe I'm spoiled...I read pages and pages of usenet
but usually jump to the next message if a post is longer than five pages).
Oh, and BTW...
E. W. Bennefeld (EWBen...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
> I read 4 to 6 pages a minute (unless I'm really in a hurry to find out
> what's going to happen next). Average fantasy and sci. fi. books by
> the authors I like are somewhere between 250 and 350 pages long.
This is INHUMAN. (: I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing. I
read and want it to take time, but then I'm NEVER going to get to read
close to as many books as I have to read.
--
jeremy <*> afn3...@afn.org Ben Tucker: "In capitalism, man exploits man.
In socialism, it's exactly the opposite."
The Great Grendel-Khan
In <4m5lvv$j...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> elle...@aol.com (EllenDat) writes:
In reference to someone's reading speed you write:
>Can we assume you mean either that you read novelettes in 50-75 minutes or
>that you read *for* 50-75 minutes at a time??? Are you *really* saying you
>read a novel an hour????
Well, I read at the rate of a page a minute (or a little better, as a 200
page novel takes me slightly under 3 hours). Now I've met people who
read a lot faster than me. I have a bookstore customer who comes in and
reads a couple books in an evening (just hangs out and reads). He
always buys what he reads (and more), and we actually like to encourage
people to read, so no one ever says anything to him. I asked him how
long it took for him to read Assassins Aprentice (a book I recommended
to him), he said, "About an hour." So I can actually believe the
poster's claims. Can't see how people enjoy a book that fast, but
that's a different idea. I had to actually slow dowm my reading, and
sometimes set the book down, while I was reading Assassin's Apprentice
(didn't want it to end too fast).
The Great Grendel-Khan
>> How many people who read this group actually read fiction from an on-line
>>source? If not, why not?
>Dunno, actually. Two main reasons comes to mind, though:
>1) I usually don't read short stories,
I've only recently begun to read short works. Mostly because I've
decided that short stories are a good break between longer works, sort
of a cleansing of the mental pallet. A lot of times I am dissapointed
by what i read, othertimes a whole book is a great find.
The Great Grendel-Khan
>I don't read on-line fiction because of several reasons:
>But believe me, day one I hear of Harlan Ellison
>putting a story on the web, I'm there.
I think Ellan Datlow said the Omni site will have a Harlan story on it.
Or is my memory going? Seemed like only an article or two back....
Mike Berro
j...@interink.com (J. Patrick McDonald) wrote:
>I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line fiction
>in the various SF zines that publish on the net?
I don't read *any* fiction on my computer, at least not on purpose.
<g>
There are several reasons, no doubt not all of which I'm conscious
of. To me, reading is a complete experience, which includes the
tactile experience of holding a book, as well as a (hopefully) quiet
and comfortable atmosphere. My computer is a bit noisy, and I also
prefer to recline while reading.
Being a game programmer by profession and avocation, I also
associate the computer with a multimedia experience. Reading off my
monitor doesn't add to the experience (just the opposite), whereas for
an interactive experience I'm willing to put up with the distractions
I mentioned above, mainly because I have no choice.
---Mike Berro
Website Manager of "Compuserve Book and Magazine Catalogs" at
http://www.massmedia.com/~mikeb/
Website Manager of "Jack Vance Information" at
http://www.massmedia.com/~mikeb/jvm/info.html
Jeff Stehman
The Great Grendel-Khan (arg...@iastate.edu) wrote:
: I asked him how
: long it took for him to read Assassins Aprentice (a book I recommended
: to him), he said, "About an hour." So I can actually believe the
: poster's claims. Can't see how people enjoy a book that fast, but
: that's a different idea. I had to actually slow dowm my reading, and
: sometimes set the book down, while I was reading Assassin's Apprentice
: (didn't want it to end too fast).
There are times I really enjoy plodding along a 40 pages/hour. Check out
Born Loser's take on this...
http://www.unitedmedia.com/comics/bornloser/archive/bornloser960420-1648.gif
--
Jeff Stehman Senior Systems Administrator
ste...@southwind.net SouthWind Internet Access, Inc.
voice: (316)263-7963 Wichita, KS
URL for Wichita Area Chamber of Commerce: http://www.southwind.net/ict/
EllenDat
>>>>From: afn3...@afn.org (Jeremy P Lakatos)
>Date: 30 Apr 1996 23:43:09 GMT
>I don't read on-line fiction because of several reasons:
>1) The majority is very bad. Especially bad fan fiction (I have no
>problem with good fan fiction, but then it transcends itself and becomes
>something other than fanfic, I guess). But because of the lack of respect
>(and readership) in online fiction, writers who have written something
>that is quite good would still rather sit on their manuscript than give
>away any chance of that manna, publication.
>2) 90% of normal fiction (I'd say more, even) is very bad. But with
normal
>fiction, there's a community of readers to say, "Hey, read Iain Banks,
>he's pretty cool" (so I will be, soon). There is no such thing for online
>fiction. I am a person who very rarely will read a story that has not
been
>favorably suggested. But believe me, day one I hear of Harlan Ellison
>putting a story on the web, I'm there.
>3) The interface sucks. We really need something better than big clunky
>terminals, and maybe a smoother page-turning mechanism. I read novels
>mostly, but I find it almost impossible to stick to even a good length
>short story online (maybe I'm spoiled...I read pages and pages of usenet
>but usually jump to the next message if a post is longer than five
pages).
snip
>jeremy <*
Well, I'm happy to inform you that Harlan Ellison will indeed have a story
on the net as of June 1st. It's called "The Museum on Cyclops Avenue,"
it's an original, and will eventually be reprinted (printed?) in his
upcoming collection, Slippage. Meantime you can read it on OMNI online.
Ellen Datlow
Fiction Editor
OMNI
Loki
In ashen ink, Jeremy P Lakatos (afn3...@afn.org) inscribed:
: 2) 90% of normal fiction (I'd say more, even) is very bad. But with normal
: fiction, there's a community of readers to say, "Hey, read Iain Banks,
: he's pretty cool" (so I will be, soon). There is no such thing for online
: fiction. I am a person who very rarely will read a story that has not been
: favorably suggested. But believe me, day one I hear of Harlan Ellison
: putting a story on the web, I'm there.
I do believe Ellen Datlow said something earlier in this thread about
there being an Ellison story on OMNI's page starting June 1st. :)
: This is INHUMAN. (: I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing. I
: read and want it to take time, but then I'm NEVER going to get to read
: close to as many books as I have to read.
Whenever I hear quotes of that kind of speed, I'm always tempted to
assume that they can't possibly be getting the same level of detail and
enjoyment that I do. I read quickly, but not THAT quickly, and I prefer
to slow myself down from my faster pace, to enjoy it more and let it sink
in properly.
Now, if someone claims that they're getting the full effect, I'll still
have my doubts, but I'll keep 'em to myself. :) 'Notherwords, I can't
imagine, but if you say so...
- Loki
--
| GothCode 2.0: GoCS+Hu+ TAn(Fe) B8/16Bk)B20Bk]4( cWB(LB)c-5
--+-- PSaShMo(!) V-s M+4 mGoGnInCl C+3p6u a21= n++ b: h188
| g+L mEa1+3T1)@S( w+! r--B D++~* h++TAnFe s8 k++BSMDsW
| Rn SrYy N0393*n LcaON+ HzS(*1)
| -- Geoffrey Wiseman (gwis...@uoguelph.ca)
Emanuel Brown
"j...@interink.com (J. Patrick McDonald) wrote:
"
">I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line fiction
">and frankly have been disappointed in the response we've gotten.
a 4.5lb laptop that I lug everywhere, but for reading while standing on the
el platform or on the train, as well as lots of other places, you can't eat
the portablilty of paper. I can haul a paperback or magazine out at a
moment's notice, and can carry either one in a pocket. Not so any
electronic device that I'd be comfortable reading from. And most people
read in a relaxed posture, which sitting in front of a computer monitor at
a desk isn't. But, even when I *am* slouched on the couch with my laptop
and a soda, I'd rather do something interactive like surf the web, IRC
chat, or answer my email.
It's weird when you consider I'm a prime candidate for e-text: I live a
4 blocks from my ISP so the call is always just a nickle, I get unlimited
hours, and I love to read. I guess it boils down to convenience and habit.
I more used to books for reading and my computer for *doing.*
Hope this helps,
Emanuel
epb...@suba.com
laptop central: www.suba.com/~epbrown/
Jean Lamb
I did! Read all the short stories, all of CHINA MOUNTAIN ZHANG, STEEL
BEACH and most all of RED MARS that way (had already read DOOMSDAY
BOOK at the library). Reading onscreen is something that can be
learned. Now, I must admit, that I do prefer to read while lounging on
the couch, e-reading in one hand or in lap and something sippable in
the other, but that's an engineering problem, not a screen one.
And I sure wish you'd put out some more of those CD's (got Vernor
Vinge to autograph the liner notes for FIRE UPON THE DEEP).
>br...@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) wrote:
>I published Hugo and Nebula award winners and nominees online and on CD-ROM,
>and while people bought the CD-ROMS they did not read the works online.
>So even if you have top-rank, top-name professional stuff, people are not
>yet ready to read it online, certainly not ready to buy it online.
>That's partly prejudice, since 99% of what we read online is horribly
>designed and gives people the impression that it is discomforting to read
>text on a computer screen, when it need not be if design and user interface
>are considered.
So I'll cheerfully buy a good e-reader (NOT the Sony Dataman, its
display sucketh severely), preferably one that will not die if I spill
coffee on it or drop it, and will read online like anything. So there.
>http://www.clari.net/hugo.html for more info.
>--
>Brad Templeton, publisher, ClariNet Communications Corp. in...@clari.net
>The net's #1 E-Newspaper (1,300,000 paid sbscrbrs.) http://www.clari.net/brad/
Jean Lamb
Queen of her own Universe, Unrealty Office opening soon!
See her story "Galley Slave" in the August _Analog_.
Brian L. Matthews
In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>,
J. Patrick McDonald <j...@interink.com> wrote:
|I have a question for all of you SF fans out there. Do you read on-line fiction
|in the various SF zines that publish on the net?
I don't, probably for the usual reasons:
1 - The e-zines I've tried have been, in a word, crap (thus it might make
you happy to know I haven't tried E-scape :-)). Bad writing, bad editing,
bad layout. I've probably read about 20 issues of various on-line magazines,
and, except for the Omni's I've read, I can't recall one with more than one
good story, or one that hasn't been full of typos, spelling, punctuation,
and grammatical errors. I do like the issues of Omni I've read, and I
suspect a big part of the reason is that they've got professional's
running things. Even if I didn't know otherwise, with one reading it
would be blindingly obvious that they have a real editor who can work
with authors and tell them when they're being long-winded or obtuse.
Editing is more than just running a spelling checker over a document,
something the e-zines I've read haven't learned.
2 - The whole accessibility thing. Poor screen resolution and small
screen size make stuff online harder to read than printed material,
and while I can pull out a book and read a few paragraphs while waiting
for a bus, waiting for my printer to print, waiting for the microwave,
etc., unless I'm at my computer, logged in to my ISP, and have Netscape
running, by the time I do all that, whatever I'm waiting for is done.
I could print things, but then I've got this big sheaf of unconnected
paper lying around, and it seems to defeat much of the purpose of
being online if I print something instead of reading it online.
3 - I've got plenty to read as is. I could probably stop all my
magazines and stop buying books today and still have reading material
for 10 years (not because I don't read much, I do, but because I spend
way too much on books and magazines, and never manage to stay even,
let alone catch up with the years of accumulated stuff :-)).
So, given that I've got plenty of printed stuff to read, why should
I go out of my way to read what most probably will be inferior
material?
Brian
--
Brian L. Matthews Illustration Works, Inc.
For top quality, stock commercial illustration, visit:
http://www.halcyon.com/artstock
E. W. Bennefeld
gwis...@uoguelph.ca (Loki) wrote:
>In ashen ink, Jeremy P Lakatos (afn3...@afn.org) inscribed:
>
>: This is INHUMAN. (: I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing. I
>: read and want it to take time, but then I'm NEVER going to get to read
>: close to as many books as I have to read.
>
>Whenever I hear quotes of that kind of speed, I'm always tempted to
>assume that they can't possibly be getting the same level of detail and
>enjoyment that I do. I read quickly, but not THAT quickly, and I prefer
>to slow myself down from my faster pace, to enjoy it more and let it sink
>in properly.
>
>Now, if someone claims that they're getting the full effect, I'll still
>have my doubts, but I'll keep 'em to myself. :) 'Notherwords, I can't
>imagine, but if you say so...
>
> - Loki
>--
>
With regard to reading speed/appreciation/retention (yes, I hadn't
really thought about it, but I guess I AM a speed reader from a family
of speed readers), my husband, who savors every word and sentence of
the books he reads, constantly expresses disgruntlement at my being
able to recall names, places, plot lines, and action (although I have
a very poor memory for book titles and authors' names) from books I
read last week or 40+ years ago and enjoy them again in moments of
retrospection.
But, if you've always read that way, in a large family that taught
that reading is the ultimate in both education and recreation, you
pretty much take it for granted and are shocked when you discover that
other people don't do something as basic as reading a book in the same
way you do.
--Elizabeth
E. W. Bennefeld
The Written Word Glistening raindrops
EWBen...@worldnet.att.net glide faster and faster down
Fargo, North Dakota USA the breath-clouded pane.
[From Seasonal Quartets]
Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew
Loki (gwis...@uoguelph.ca) wrote: [about reading 4-6 pages per minute:]
> Now, if someone claims that they're getting the full effect, I'll still
> have my doubts, but I'll keep 'em to myself. :) 'Notherwords, I can't
> imagine, but if you say so...
FWIW, I can read 200-300 pages per minute when I have to, but it's hard
work.
--
Ahasuerus http://www.clark.net/pub/ahasuer/, including:
FAQs: rec.arts.sf.written, alt.pulp, the Liaden Universe
Biblios: how to write SF, the Wandering Jew
J. Patrick McDonald
afn3...@afn.org (Jeremy P Lakatos) wrote:
>I don't read on-line fiction because of several reasons:
>1) The majority is very bad. Especially bad fan fiction (I have no
>problem with good fan fiction, but then it transcends itself and becomes
>something other than fanfic, I guess). But because of the lack of respect
>(and readership) in online fiction, writers who have written something
>that is quite good would still rather sit on their manuscript than give
>away any chance of that manna, publication.
We try really hard to publish only the best fiction we can get our hands on.
We're really a semi-pro market as we pay 1-3 cents/word for fiction. This has
really helped us with the quality of the stories, at least IMHO.
There still seems to be a lack of respect for the market however. I hope that
with things like OMNI going on-line this will improve in the future. I hope it
does so quickly.
>2) 90% of normal fiction (I'd say more, even) is very bad. But with normal
>fiction, there's a community of readers to say, "Hey, read Iain Banks,
>he's pretty cool" (so I will be, soon). There is no such thing for online
>fiction. I am a person who very rarely will read a story that has not been
>favorably suggested. But believe me, day one I hear of Harlan Ellison
>putting a story on the web, I'm there.
Well, if I may be so bold, check out "Dumb Luck" by Mark Rich in issue 3. It's a
pretty good story, and its not to long. If you like it there is plenty more
available. :)
We've had pretty good reviews from the few people who've actually read the mag.
One reader went so far to say that at least one of our stories could have easily
been published in OMNI, Asimov's, or Fantasy and Science Fiction!
I certainly think we have better stories than you're likely to find in the
typical SF zine.
>3) The interface sucks. We really need something better than big clunky
>terminals, and maybe a smoother page-turning mechanism. I read novels
>mostly, but I find it almost impossible to stick to even a good length
>short story online (maybe I'm spoiled...I read pages and pages of usenet
>but usually jump to the next message if a post is longer than five pages).
We've obviously got some interface problems with E-scape, and that's one of the
things I'll be working on. Unfortunately I don't think there is an ideal
solution.
One answer is of course to print the stories out. We've tried to make this
easier, by publishing in Acrobat format and configuring HTML so that you can
print the magazine and preserve the page format. This results in a large
Acrobat file, and an HTML interface that requires a little thought--I'm
rethinking this, but it will probably be volume 2 before we make any wholesale
changes. Suggestions of course are always welcome.
And of course, I'm not in the business of creating hardware, so I can't come up
with that easy-on-the-eyes PDA we're talking about.
Thanks for your (and everyone elses) input. I'm compiling all these messages,
and it will help me with some strategic planning for E-scape.
J. Patrick McDonald
arg...@iastate.edu (The Great Grendel-Khan) wrote:
>In <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com> j...@interink.com (J. Patrick McDonald) writes:
>Try either of these ideas.
>I never heard of you. Which is what you're saying your problem is. One
>of the ways to increase hits is to find pages similar to yours and ask
>for a reciprocal (sp?) link. Offer to link their page if they'll do the
>same for you. There are a lot of writers who may be willing, some other
>magazines, and such. Whenever I come across a page like mine I email
>the author and ask for a link.
We've done that, although apparently not enough of it. I just did a reverse web
crawler search (A cool thing to do), and it only found 13 pages with links to
our site. I'll have to make the effort again.
>>Our circulation is still fairly small (though growing), and I need to know why
>>our circulation isn't growing more rapidly. I don't know if we just haven't
>>gotten the word out, or if many of you have checked out our site and
>>didn't like what you saw.
>So you are in webpage? Isn't Intertext a listserve? How are you
>measuring hits? There really isn't a "circulation" to webpages.
Yes, it is a web site. InterText also has a website. We are getting about 200
hits on the main page each week. Less on each individual page/story of the
magazine. We publish in multiple formats, so while there isn't really a
"circulation" there also sort of is. Many of our readers actually download the
Adobe version of the magazine. I've taken disks with the mag on-line to hand out
at cons, and we've got a small but apparently loyal following on Compuserve.
When I say circulation, I'm referring to total readership. This translates as
people who've gotten the adobe file plus people who've read on-line.
>I read on-line works. I'll check out your site.
>chris
Thanks, let us know what you think.
EllenDat
>>>>Subject: Re: Do you read on-line fiction?
>From: rogu...@ix.netcom.com (Rogue 007)
>Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 18:19:35 GMT
>On 1 May 1996 10:29:24 -0400, in rec.arts.sf.written, elle...@aol.com
>EllenDat) wrote:
>Well, I'm happy to inform you that Harlan Ellison will indeed have a
story
>on the net as of June 1st. It's called "The Museum on Cyclops Avenue,"
>it's an original, and will eventually be reprinted (printed?) in his
>upcoming collection, Slippage. Meantime you can read it on OMNI online.
>Ellen Datlow
>Fiction Editor
>OMNI
>http://www.omnimag.com
>Will it actually be on the net or will it be on AOL? I looked for the
>Silverberg story this morning on OMNI Internet and it wasn't there
>yet. I assume when you say these things are going to be on the net
>they are actually going to be in AOL. AOL is not the net. Sheesh.
--------------------------------------------------------------
When I say the net I mean the net. I've just spoken to our tech guy and he
didnt' have time to put the story up yesterday (and was awaiting a bio,
which he did not get, from me). It should be up by 11am today--on our
internet site.....sorry it's a day late; these things happen.
The story will probably be on our aol site, as well, but I don't know
when. We have a different person in charge of that site.
Ellen Datlow
Fiction Editor
OMNI
http://www.omnimag.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
BEKKI LYN
In article <4m8p0v$r...@ccshst05.uoguelph.ca> gwis...@uoguelph.ca (Loki) writes:
>In ashen ink, Jeremy P Lakatos (afn3...@afn.org) inscribed:
>
>: This is INHUMAN. (: I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing. I
>: read and want it to take time, but then I'm NEVER going to get to read
>: close to as many books as I have to read.
>
>Whenever I hear quotes of that kind of speed, I'm always tempted to
>assume that they can't possibly be getting the same level of detail and
>enjoyment that I do. I read quickly, but not THAT quickly, and I prefer
>to slow myself down from my faster pace, to enjoy it more and let it sink
>in properly.
>
>have my doubts, but I'll keep 'em to myself. :) 'Notherwords, I can't
>imagine, but if you say so...
<*grin*> I get to feeling the same way. In fact, I think
I get slower the more I read rather than the reverse. :-)
But often, I get to such a delightful paragraph or sentence
in a book, that I just have to read it over again even
slower than the first time. I *can* read much faster if
I had to, but I don't really see why I should speed
through something I'm really enjoying at the time.
There are always going to be books that I won't get to
reading, but I don't mind as I like the idea of lots
and lots of books lurking out there just waiting for
me to find them!
Of course, I also know people who read through books
fast because they skip over stuff periodically. If
the book starts a lengthy description of something, then
they skip it. I can't bear to do such a thing. I might
miss out on something.
Yet, we all have different ways of enjoying what we
do so we have to do what works for us individually
it seems. Perhaps spending more than a certain amount
of time on one book would inhibit the enjoyment
for some people and because it does, then reading
through it quickly is more enjoyable to them.
--
Bekki Lyn
======================================================
"In a dream / Let me drag you through my world
My kingdom for your thoughts / What is in your mind."
++TIAMAT++
------------------------------------------------------
"All acts of love and pleasure are Her rituals."
======================================================
Loki
In ashen ink, E. W. Bennefeld (EWBen...@worldnet.att.net) inscribed:
: But, if you've always read that way, in a large family that taught
: that reading is the ultimate in both education and recreation, you
: pretty much take it for granted and are shocked when you discover that
: other people don't do something as basic as reading a book in the same
: way you do.
'Cept for the fact that I gew up very similarly to that, and while I do
read faster than many people that I know, I also consciously slow myself
down because I find the reading more enjoyable that way, and even when
speedreading (not skimming) at the fastest pace I can go while keeping
good retention, I don't think I've approached 6ppm.
So, although I can imagine that some people are indubitably better/faster
readers than I, I do ultimately wonder if your internal experience is as
entertaining as mine is. Unfortunately, no-one can ever answer that.
Loki
In ashen ink, Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew (aha...@clark.net) inscribed:
: FWIW, I can read 200-300 pages per minute when I have to, but it's hard
: work.
Holy
Shit.
'Scuse me.
I'm going to have to go time myself to see bezactly what rate I do read
at these days. I suspect it might be in the 2-4 ppm range, but...
200-300 is frightening.
- Loki
--
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Geoffrey Wiseman | http://tdg.uoguelph.ca/~ontarion/users/geoff |
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
"It was the day my grandmother exploded. I sat in the crematorium,
listening to my Uncle Hamish quietly snoring in harmony to Bach's
Mass in B Minor and I reflected that it always seemed to be death
that drew me back to Gallanach."
Loki
In ashen ink, Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew (aha...@clark.net) inscribed:
: FWIW, I can read 200-300 pages per minute when I have to, but it's hard
: work.
God knows we can't accuse you of poor retention.
I still think you're an AI. :)
- Loki
--
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Geoffrey Wiseman | http://tdg.uoguelph.ca/~ontarion/users/geoff |
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
(i do not know what it is about you that closes
and opens; only something in my understands
the voice of your eyes is deeper than all roses)
nobody, not even the rain, has such small hands
nwein...@macalstr.edu
In article <4mb3n8$b...@ccshst05.uoguelph.ca>, gwis...@uoguelph.ca (Loki) writes:
> In ashen ink, Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew (aha...@clark.net) inscribed:
> : FWIW, I can read 200-300 pages per minute when I have to, but it's hard
> : work.
>
> God knows we can't accuse you of poor retention.
>
> I still think you're an AI. :)
Or perhaps one of the regul from Cherryh's "Faded Sun" books?
--
Nicholas Weininger
"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the
contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one
person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
-John Stuart Mill
Fuck the CDA. Fuck Congress. May they all choke on their own shit.
The above line will remain in my .sig until the CDA is overturned.
Disobedience to such unconstitutional laws is the right and duty of every
American net.citizen.
Robert G. Buice, Jr
As far as reading speed, I read about a page a minute, depending on the
quality of the paper/printing/layout when reading fiction. I read non
fiction articles 4-5 times as fast and can still remember the info from
it, but I find my perception of a piece of ficiton is negative if I try to
read it quickly. It just loses all its warmth.
--
Robert G. Buice,Jr supe...@pop.uky.edu
Analytical Spectroscopy Group Phone:(606) 257-5175
College of Pharmacy
University of Kentucky
PGP Key: http://kerouac.pharm.uky.edu/buice/rgbuice.html
RRHMAH
200-300 pages / minute? I remember being shocked that JFK could read 3000
words/minute (about 8-10 pages/minute).
I have read about 400 ppm for a long time. I took a reading course and
got up to 800-900 ppm, then two things happened. I started reading
poetry, and I started reading Physics textbooks. Neither is compatible
with reading fast! I slowed back down, and I think it improved my
fiction reading experience too (even in prose, the sound and "feel" of the
words is important.)
Rich Horton
Steve Patterson
In article <4mb3me$b...@ccshst05.uoguelph.ca>, gwis...@uoguelph.ca (Loki) says:
>
>In ashen ink, Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew (aha...@clark.net) inscribed:
>: FWIW, I can read 200-300 pages per minute when I have to, but it's hard
>: work.
>
>at these days. I suspect it might be in the 2-4 ppm range, but...
>
>200-300 is frightening.
I detect a slight exaggeration here; 3-5 pages per *second*? I can't
*turn* pages that fast.
(Do you have someone seperate the pages and put them on a belt-feed?)
---
"Animals have contempt for animal rights; cats don't treasure diversity,
except in a gustatory sense." -- Frederica Mathewes-Green
<BRAG>Creator and maintainer of the Legions of Steel Web Page!</BRAG>
http://www.hookup.net/~losglobl
Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew
Loki (gwis...@uoguelph.ca) wrote:
> In ashen ink, Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew (aha...@clark.net) inscribed:
> : FWIW, I can read 200-300 pages per minute when I have to, but it's hard
> : work.
Ahem. I meant "per hour". Sorry :(
> God knows we can't accuse you of poor retention.
I should also add that my standard speed is only 50-60 pages per hour
(pph). I can process the info and most of the underlying stuff at 200-300
pph, but it's no fun and quite exhausting.
> I still think you're an AI. :)
Believe it or not, but there exist folks who can read much faster than I
could ever hope to *and* who are certifiably human :)
Pat York
> I've only recently begun to read short works. Mostly because I've
> decided that short stories are a good break between longer works, sort
> of a cleansing of the mental pallet. (snip)
> chris
Oh, God, my life's work has been reduced to mental sherbet.
rupert smith
In article <4m9gkh$7...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, blch...@eos.ncsu.edu (BEKKI LYN) wrote:
>In article <4m8p0v$r...@ccshst05.uoguelph.ca> gwis...@uoguelph.ca (Loki)
> writes:
>>In ashen ink, Jeremy P Lakatos (afn3...@afn.org) inscribed:
>>: 2) 90% of normal fiction (I'd say more, even) is very bad. But with normal
>>
>>: This is INHUMAN. (: I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing. I
>>: read and want it to take time, but then I'm NEVER going to get to read
>>: close to as many books as I have to read.
>>
>>Whenever I hear quotes of that kind of speed, I'm always tempted to
>>assume that they can't possibly be getting the same level of detail and
>>enjoyment that I do. I read quickly, but not THAT quickly, and I prefer
>>to slow myself down from my faster pace, to enjoy it more and let it sink
>>in properly.
i'll read a book in a day or two (the comlete lord of the rings took me 4
days) but i'll usually read a book *at least* twice, and probably more times
if i like it (unless its trash, obviously)
swings and roundabouts, you know?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
rupert smith linc...@sable.ox.ac.uk http://info.ox.ac.uk/~linc0015
"if you believe your dreams'll come true
then sleep
is all you'll ever do." -- marion, sleep.
Jan Six
BEKKI LYN wrote:
> In fact, I think I get slower the more I read rather than the reverse.
> :-)
Funny - I tend to have the same problem. I used to be able to rush
through a novel in a few hours. These days... well, let's just say I've
slowed down a *lot*.
> But often, I get to such a delightful paragraph or sentence
> in a book, that I just have to read it over again even
> slower than the first time. I *can* read much faster if
> I had to, but I don't really see why I should speed
> through something I'm really enjoying at the time.
To paraphrase a friend of mine: "a quick read is like a quick fuck -
it may be fun at the time, but it's not very memorable"
> There are always going to be books that I won't get to
> reading, but I don't mind as I like the idea of lots
> and lots of books lurking out there just waiting for
> me to find them!
You should see my to-be-read stack! Must be close to 500 books by now,
distributed over at least three widely separate locations...
> Of course, I also know people who read through books
> fast because they skip over stuff periodically. If
> the book starts a lengthy description of something, then
> they skip it. I can't bear to do such a thing. I might
> miss out on something.
Well, I can claim with a straight face that I've read the _Name of the
Rose_ from end to end without skipping a single sentence, so...
ObSF: and I did the same with the _Worm Ouroboros_ too :-)
______________________________________________________________________
Jan Six |"If you think you're unspeakably weird, you're
| probably wrong" - Lawrence Watt-Evans
Jan...@uku.fi | (-; Hey, I *like* being unspeakably weird ;-)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jay Thierry Han
>>>>> "BEKKI" == BEKKI LYN <blch...@eos.ncsu.edu> writes:
[About reading 4-6 pages per minute]
>> Now, if someone claims that they're getting the full effect, I'll still
>> have my doubts, but I'll keep 'em to myself. :) 'Notherwords, I can't
>> imagine, but if you say so...
BEKKI> <*grin*> I get to feeling the same way. In fact, I think
BEKKI> I get slower the more I read rather than the reverse. :-)
Funny it seems to happen to me too.
BEKKI> But often, I get to such a delightful paragraph or sentence
BEKKI> in a book, that I just have to read it over again even
BEKKI> slower than the first time. I *can* read much faster if
BEKKI> I had to, but I don't really see why I should speed
BEKKI> through something I'm really enjoying at the time.
This is happening to me more and more often. I guess it's all in the
process of maturing. When you read something, it sometimes clicks on
in the brain, which is a massive cross-referencing machine. For
example, I'll relate what I'm reading to other works of the same
author I've read previously, or points of view from other writers,
etc. Or I'll just re-read parts for pure enjoyment (this has been
happening a lot while reading Tolkien).
BEKKI> There are always going to be books that I won't get to
BEKKI> reading, but I don't mind as I like the idea of lots
BEKKI> and lots of books lurking out there just waiting for
BEKKI> me to find them!
Hmm. It's the whole point of SF anyway: there's a Universe out there
waiting... 8-)
BEKKI> Of course, I also know people who read through books
BEKKI> fast because they skip over stuff periodically. If
BEKKI> the book starts a lengthy description of something, then
BEKKI> they skip it. I can't bear to do such a thing. I might
BEKKI> miss out on something.
Well, I occasionally do. Recent instance was _The Doomsday Book_. I
had a hard time finishing it (I almost always finish books I start -
a matter of principle), and only did because I skipped more and more
often.
BEKKI> Yet, we all have different ways of enjoying what we
BEKKI> do so we have to do what works for us individually
BEKKI> it seems. Perhaps spending more than a certain amount
BEKKI> of time on one book would inhibit the enjoyment
BEKKI> for some people and because it does, then reading
BEKKI> through it quickly is more enjoyable to them.
One strange thing I caught myself doing was when I turn the page, I
read the bottom of the right-hand page to see what's coming before
resuming at the top of the left-hand page. Comes down to reading 1/4
of the book twice! :-)
--
-- Jay "Thierry" Han - Jay...@imag.fr - +33 76.61.52.70 - Perso: 76.46.11.26
La SF en francais : <URL:http://www-bi.inrialpes.fr/cgi-bin/han/francais.html>
LSR-IMAG. Unite de Recherche INRIA Rhone-Alpes.
655 av. de l'Europe. 38330 Montbonnot-St.Martin. France. Fax: 76.61.52.52
Marcus Ogden
>: ... re: somebody who takes 90 minutes to read an average novel ...
>
>: This is INHUMAN. (: I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad
>: thing. I read and want it to take time, but then I'm NEVER going to
>: get to read close to as many books as I have to read.
>
>Whenever I hear quotes of that kind of speed, I'm always tempted to
>assume that they can't possibly be getting the same level of detail and
>enjoyment that I do.
Absolutely.
I read considerably more slowly now than I did as a teenager, as I want
to be able to savour the language and the intricacies of what's going
on. On fifty pages of a good book, I would probably spend about an hour
to an hour and a half.
It's possible to skim through a certain type of book and just pick up
the plot, but that's not the kind of book I want to read these days.
Marcus Ogden <mw...@cam.ac.uk>
Loki
: Believe it or not, but there exist folks who can read much faster than I
: could ever hope to *and* who are certifiably human :)
Ah, but can they recall most about everything about every SF publication
in existence? [grin]
- Loki
--
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Geoffrey Wiseman | http://tdg.uoguelph.ca/~ontarion/users/geoff |
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
"On the whole, audiences prefer that art be not a mirror
held up to life, but a Disneyland of the soul, containing
Romanceland, Spyland, Pornoland and all the other escapelands
which are so much more agreeable than the complex truth."
Loki
In ashen ink, RRHMAH (rrh...@aol.com) inscribed:
: I have read about 400 ppm for a long time. I took a reading course and
: got up to 800-900 ppm, then two things happened. I started reading
: poetry, and I started reading Physics textbooks. Neither is compatible
: with reading fast! I slowed back down, and I think it improved my
: fiction reading experience too (even in prose, the sound and "feel" of the
: words is important.)
I'm assuming that you, as well, meant pph. :)
- Loki
--
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Geoffrey Wiseman | http://tdg.uoguelph.ca/~ontarion/users/geoff |
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
GothCode 2.0: GoCS+Hu+ TAn(Fe) B8/16Bk)B20Bk]4( cWB(LB)c-5 PSaShMo(!)
Loki
In ashen ink, Pat York (py...@moran.com) inscribed:
: Oh, God, my life's work has been reduced to mental sherbet.
Hmm. I almost want to make that a .sig. :)
Another word to go with 'mind candy', I suppose. "I liked the story well
enough, but more than anything, it was just mental sherbet to fit between
the novel I'd just read and the one I'm now starting."
- Loki
--
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Geoffrey Wiseman | http://tdg.uoguelph.ca/~ontarion/users/geoff |
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
Mike Sutton
In article <Dqn01...@clarinet.com>, br...@clarinet.com says...
>
>So even if you have top-rank, top-name professional stuff, people are not
>yet ready to read it online, certainly not ready to buy it online.
>
>That's partly prejudice, since 99% of what we read online is horribly
>designed and gives people the impression that it is discomforting to read
>text on a computer screen, when it need not be if design and user interface
>are considered.
>
I agree totally from my experience the last few months. There is a huge
acceptance curve to be overcome. I get a lot of old Prescot fans that
are very reluctant to view the electronic versions at first. I find once
they have them up on the system, most of them are pleasantly surprised
at how hard we've worked to capture the flavour of the old paperbacks,
and how readable they are. (A bunch of little things: fonts, artwork,
composition, etc.)
We also design explicity for the the screen, but we find the Acrobat system
prints out just fine to paper, so some of our fans take that option.
I've got one fan who is so excited (and was a complete computer
illiterate to start with) he is now buying a Pentium to view his sacred
Prescot. (And I thought I was a hard-core fan--I'm just a geek!)
I know this is a complete self-promoting spam, but the first e-book
in the Prescot series and the Reader are completely FREE to anybody who
cares to download it off the web-site, by agreement with the author, Ken
Bulmer. I'd invite anybody to download it and the Reader and then
tell me whether e-pubbing is viable or not.
Mike Sutton
President, Savanti Press
+---------- Publisher of Prescot Of The Internet -----------+
| email: ep...@savanti.com -<oo |
| [ URL: http://www.savanti.com/epub/ >o\\\\ o |
| O|\\\\\\|<>|==================================+ ]OOOO>oo |
| ] "You fight well dom--for an apim!" >o//// |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Twister
On Mon, 29 Apr 1996, Vicke Dovheden wrote:
> In article <4m0h2r$1...@news.flinthills.com>,
> j...@interink.com (J. Patrick McDonald) wrote:
>
> [snip]
> How many people who read this group actually read fiction from an on-line
> source? If not, why not?
Only fiction on-line I ever read is japanese animation fan-fiction.
There are some good stories at the archive if you look and the good ones
don't require knowing or watching the animation previously. Hey, they're
free so why not? B>
FTP at ftp.std.com directory /archives/anime-fan-works/
and from there you get the section of directories.
Orig. work is very rare there mind you, but otherwise there's more than
10meg of compressed text files.
Look out for the Ranma directory, quite a few there.
If anyone wants recommendations e-mail me at twi...@tendo-dojo.ranma.net
Twister.
=================
Twister(aka Darren Steffler) e-mail at:
twi...@tendo-dojo.ranma.net | fmw...@freenet.mb.ca
Anime Fan!!! Must watch BGC and Ranma 1/2 to the infinite!
Lynn Calvin
aha...@clark.net (Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew) wrote:
>Loki (gwis...@uoguelph.ca) wrote:
>> In ashen ink, Ahasuerus the Wandering Jew (aha...@clark.net) inscribed:
>> : work.
>Ahem. I meant "per hour". Sorry :(
The really scary thing is that I spent some brief amount of time doing
some calculations to see if you might really read that fast. . .
Lynn Calvin
lca...@interaccess.com
Alan Robson
In article <4m5lvv$j...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, elle...@aol.com (EllenDat) writes:
|> >>>>Subject: Re: Do you read on-line fiction?
|> >From: EWBen...@worldnet.att.net (E. W. Bennefeld)
|> >Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:12:47 GMT
|> I read the
|> >average-sized novel in 50 to 75 minutes, which is enough time that I
|> >feel I've gotten away from the stresses of the day and had a chance to
|> >unwind.
[snip]
|> Can we assume you mean either that you read novelettes in 50-75 minutes or
|> that you read *for* 50-75 minutes at a time??? Are you *really* saying you
|> read a novel an hour????
|> Ellen Datlow
|
I see no reason to be surprised at this reading speed.
In my teens, the average paperback novel took me about an hour to get through.
Things have changed a little since then though. Firstly novels these days
have two or three times the page count of novels from 30 years ago, and
secondly my reading has speed has dropped slightly from its peak (I
suspect that my reading speed dropped at university when I discovered that
you simply can't read text books in the same manner that you can devour a
novel). For both these reasons, the average novel today takes me about 4
hours to get through.
--
-A
Doug Tricarico
My first class in high school was Speed Reading. It was designed to
help you study, but the fallout for an avid reader was the ability to
become a ferocious reader.
I walked into the class reading an average of 900 wpm. My top measured
speed with good comprehension was 2500 wpm. With almost zero long-term
comprehension but fair short-term recall (5 to 10 minutes - GREAT for
cramming moments before a test!) was about 5,000 wpm. To put this into
context, as I recall there are approximately 350 words per page in a
paperback.
Now I get distracted by typeface and font design, so it takes me quite a
bit longer as I contemplate the evolution of the question mark and the
different styles of the letter "g".
Doug
Dave Goldman
In article <pettit-0805...@130.248.179.206>, pet...@adobe.com
(Teri Pettit) wrote:
> The section was 6 pages long, and reading it took about 70 seconds.
>... But I read Sharyn McCrumb mostly for savoring the language
> and her evocation of Appalachian culture, and 12 seconds per page is
> plenty of time to read every word and feel its music and the images it
> conjures up.
Wow! Assuming that this is true, how did you learn to read so fast? I
can't even _imagine_ noticing, say, the alliteration of words in a
sentence if I were to read them an order of magnitude faster than I could
pronounce them aloud. Did you _learn_ to read at these velocities, or was
it a natural talent that just happened?
-- Dave Goldman
E. W. Bennefeld
da...@rsd.com (Dave Goldman) wrote:
As the one whose post initiated this reading-speed offshoot, I'd like
to respond to your question of how one learns to read at such a high
speed from my own experience. Can't remember a time when I couldn't
read. My parents read to me, pointing out the words in the story
books from the time I could sit in the highchair for meals. When I
was in grade school (about age 10--1956), my mother took a
speedreading course at a local college. She brought home the
materials and put myself and my younger brother (age 7) through the
course with her. Even got to go along to the lab and use the
equipment a couple times. I was already a speed reader, but learning
the proper techniques improved my comprehension and retention.
And, in response to the person who found that he started reading more
slowly once he got to the university . . . That's when my reading
speed picked up. After two years in math and chemistry, I started
(and finished) an English major (B average) my junior year, and
completed a Philosophy major (A- average) my senior year--and I had to
read faster in order to fit in the required reading without missing
out on any of my outside reading.
E. W. Bennefeld
The Written Word Chains of spider webs
EWBen...@worldnet.att.net sparkle, dew-covered, under
Fargo, North Dakota USA a pale summer moon.
[From Seasonal Quartets]
Diana Tixier Herald
> In article <pettit-0805...@130.248.179.206>, pet...@adobe.com
> (Teri Pettit) wrote:
>
> > The section was 6 pages long, and reading it took about 70 seconds.
> >... But I read Sharyn McCrumb mostly for savoring the language
> > and her evocation of Appalachian culture, and 12 seconds per page is
> > plenty of time to read every word and feel its music and the images it
> > conjures up.
>
> Wow! Assuming that this is true, how did you learn to read so fast? I
> can't even _imagine_ noticing, say, the alliteration of words in a
> sentence if I were to read them an order of magnitude faster than I could
> pronounce them aloud. Did you _learn_ to read at these velocities, or was
> it a natural talent that just happened?
>
Twenty years ago when my husband took a speed reading course I could
turn the machine up to full speed and still read with total comprehension.
In my case (and my son's too) I think we have something related to
dyslexia that works for us. I never used to notice if signs painted on
windows were facing me or not, they were readable both from the inside and
out. I was tickeled when I read _The Watsons Go to Birmingham--1963_ and
Kenny's teacher made him hold the book upside down to TRY to reduce his
reading speed. To reiterate what Teri was saying--this is not skimming!
I do think reading fast is a natural talent but also that everyone's
reading speed can increase the more one reads.
Happy reading,
Diana, or Di, or Didi (however you know me)
dhe...@wic.net
see my Genreflecting page at http://www.oz.net/ica/genre/
"Rosenberg's First Law of Reading: Never apologize for your reading tastes."
Robert G. Buice, Jr
>
> I do think reading fast is a natural talent but also that everyone's
> reading speed can increase the more one reads.
I can read non-fiction very quickly and remember all the details. I can
read fiction very quickly and remember everything that happened, but the
scence play through my head at the speed I am reading them, like fast
forward on a VCR, and I find this experience very unpleasent for fiction.
Richard Harter
Marcus Ogden <mw...@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>: ... re: somebody who takes 90 minutes to read an average novel ...
The average novel ... my default reading speed is about two hours. I
can read a lot faster if I want to but it's work. On the other hand I
usually reread anything I like several times, so if you count
rereading it comes out to 6-8 hours.
Does anyone in this thread have an eidetic memory for what they
read? I have it off and on -- mostly off but sometimes it's very on.
When I was in college and was taking tests there were times when
I could call up an exact image of the relevant page of text from the
textbook and visualize it. All I had to do was copy what I needed out
of the textbook. Very convenient. I'm not sure how long I kept the
eidetic memories, but it was long enough. It's a funny sensation
though because I didn't remember the words or text (that's a
different kind of memory). I remembered the page as an image and
read the page just as though I was reading it fresh from the book.
Richard Harter at c...@tiac.net | All staff happy and working hard
The Concord Research Institute | All projects under control
http://www.tiac.net/users/cri | All deadlines being met
1-508-369-3911 | All pigs fed and ready to fly
Richard Kennaway
In article <4mvgru$j...@news.htp.net> Diana Tixier Herald, dhe...@wic.net
writes:
>Twenty years ago when my husband took a speed reading course I could
>turn the machine up to full speed and still read with total comprehension.
What machine is this?
___
\X/ Richard Kennaway, j...@sys.uea.ac.uk, http://www.sys.uea.ac.uk/~jrk/
School of Information Systems, Univ. of East Anglia, Norwich, U.K.
Tim McGregor
In article <4n79eg$b...@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> Richard Kennaway <j...@sys.uea.ac.uk> writes:
>From: Richard Kennaway <j...@sys.uea.ac.uk>
>Subject: Re: Reading speed
>Date: 13 May 1996 12:20:32 GMT
>What machine is this?
It isa machine that projects a light bar onto the page and you only read what
is in the light bar and you can vary the speed that the light bar travels down
the page.
Tim McGregor
saru mo, ki kara ochiru, shinpai shinaide
John Gersten
Tim McGregor (timc...@insync.net) wrote:
: It isa machine that projects a light bar onto the page and you only read what
: the page.
I believe you are referring to a "Tachistoscope" (sp?) and it was indeed
used to train people to increase their reading speed. Robert Heinlein
refers to it in at least a couple of his books (I think he attributes it
to a fellow named Samuel Renshaw, who may or may not be the real-life
inventor of the device). I tried one once, and it was much as you
describe, although in addition to the light bar I believe the non-lit
text was actually covered up, rather than just dimmed.
Heinlein seemed to think you could train anybody to read at fantastic
speeds with one of these things. Unfortunately, in the class in which I
encountered it, no one but the teacher took it seriously and it was put
aside after the first day.
John
Lynn Calvin
da...@rsd.com (Dave Goldman) wrote:
> Did you _learn_ to read at these velocities, or was
>it a natural talent that just happened?
For me it is a natural talent, or at least it just happened. . .
I was reading at four, my father and my daughter, and my mother's
father all read at similar speeds. My mother and my son do not. I
can't remember a time when I didn't read faster than the tests on
speed that you are given in elementary school.
It was always torture to have to share a book in school, and read
something with someone else. I'd read the page 3 times and then wait.
My husband claims it is one reason I married him. He reads as fast as
I do (about 1000 words per minute. . .) The average novel takes us
one to 1 1/2 hours.
Lynn Calvin
lca...@interaccess.com
Gharlane of Eddore
In <4mvgru$j...@news.htp.net> Diana Tixier Herald, dhe...@wic.net writes:
>
> Twenty years ago when my husband took a speed reading course I could
> turn the machine up to full speed and still read with total comprehension.
>
In<4n79eg$b...@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> Richard Kennaway <j...@sys.uea.ac.uk> writes:
>
> What machine is this?
>
In <timcgreg.2...@insync.net> timc...@insync.net (Tim McGregor) writes:
>
> It isa machine that projects a light bar onto the page and you only read
> what is in the light bar and you can vary the speed that the light bar
> travels down the page.
>
Try "tachistoscope."
"tachy" <=> fast
"scope" <=> see
Mechanical tachistoscopes are completely obsolete, and have been since
the early eighties, when programs that perform similar functions on
a cheap P.C. became available.
Michael Leary
A while back, I was looking for speed reading
info on the net and found this. Also found out that
the "photo reading" program was a ripoff, FWIW.
Apologies to those with narrow screens, but my only
copy of this is formatted to my liking, and I just can't
be bothered to change it.
How does speed reading work?
Most speed reading courses focus on a number of similar principles. One major impediment to speed
reading is subvocalizing (saying words to yourself while reading). The motion of the eye is another key
factor. Instead of reading just one word at a time, you are taught to pick up phrases, sentences, lines, or
groups of lines in a single glance (depending on the method being taught). In order to increase
comprehension, some methods try to make the user more active in the reading process by having the
user take notes in a specific way, ask questions before and after reading, etc.
ji...@netcom.com (Jim Whitaker) writes:
Speed Reading Made EZ:
1) Sit down at a well lit table and sit up straight.
2) Take a hardcover book with big easy to read print. preferably not a novel -- some kind of no-brainer
non fiction works best
3) Take your finger or a pen and underline the words as you read them. Get used to pacing with your
finger for a few minutes.
4) Now speed up. Simply move your finger FASTER THAN YOU CAN SOUND OUT THE WORDS.
You probably will not be able to understand what you read. In fact, if you think you can comprehend
what you are reading, speed up till you simply see a blur of words that you recognize. If you are having
problems and keeps sounding out the words compulsively -- humm a tune. This disables your brain's
capacity for verbalizing words.
5) Aim your eyes above the line of text you are reading, as if you were trying to read "between the
lines". This makes it easy to focus your attention on GROUPS of words rather than your eye stopping
on individual words, which slows you down. At first you are not aiming to understand; you are trying to
train your brain to accept that it can see and know what phrases of words mean simply by looking at
them.
6) Practice this exercise for no more than 15 minutes at a sittting, no more than one sitting per day,
usually after your morning wake-up ritual when you are at your prime. If you practice for more than 15
minutes, you will exhaust the overworked neurons that are trying to adapt to a new skill, and will have to
wait for 2 to 3 days and restart. If you try to push too hard or too fast, your brain hardware will resist
you.
7) After 8 or so sessions, your brain will start to abandon trying to comprehend what you read as
"sounds" and instead will visually grab words and process them in parallel, instead of one at a time.
Typical reading speeds at this point in time are around 800 to 1500 words per minute.
8) The ultimate key to speed reading is realizing that your brain is learning to process words with the
process of seeing them in groups, then processing their meaning. We are taught to read by seeing words,
sounding them out, and then using our spoken speech hardware to comprehend what we read. The brain
doesn't need this slow speech step.
9) After a number of sessions in which you are comfortable with this technique, get rid of the finger and
use a small brown index card with three black semicircular dots along one edge on it. The black dots tell
you where to position your eyes as you read across the page. Take this card, and drag it down the page,
scaning each line 123 123 123 123 with your eyes fixating either on the dots or above the text lines. With
your finger out of the way, you can pick up some serious speed. As with before, don't expect perfect
comprehension right away.
10) Lose the card. Get in the habit of just scanning with your eyes. (If I'm tired, sometimes I still pull
out the card. It's a great crutch.)
There are more techniques for speed than just these. I used to crank along at 30K WPM. This 10 step
plan is good for about 3K WPM or sometimes a little more. The fantastic rates come from learning to
scan in text essentially out of order, grabbing entire paragraphs as your eyes pop around them almost at
random.
Practice Practice Practice.
As you read, try to ask questions to yourself about what is going on, or who the material is suitable for,
or something to allow you to "correlate" it. If you are not reading with need or potential purpose in mind,
your brain won't remember it. In fact, your brain will not even process it. It will just see words flying by.
The purpose of studying for an exam just doesn't cut it. You have to try to imagine using the material in
the real world, or sifting it for "junk" or planning something to do with it, and considering what effect
what you are reading will have on your plan or your needs. In short, your brain will slowly get in the
habit of "asking questions" at lightning speeds. It won't even bother to sound these questions out or
formulate them -- just instantly come up with them and compare them relative to the material being read.
You will remember what you read relative to the questions you thought up as you read the material.
Some people try to speed read novels. Forget it. It really doesn't work so well. They become lifeless,
because you have to read for "this did happen and this did etc" Speed-read novels often lose that sense
of life. If you have an exam in a Lit class, then speed reading is for you. Just expect the novel to be a
little less "alive" than it might otherwise be when you otherwise read slowly and can feel the emotions
that were conveyed in the words.
Is speed reading really effective?
The success of speed reading varies from individual to individual and is likely dependent on commitment
and practice. The average reader reads about 350 words/minute. After speed reading training, speeds of
500-2000 words/minute are not unlikely. It is difficult to measure exactly how this effects
comprehension. I am not currently aware of scientific studies that show the effectiveness of speed
reading programs.
Where can I learn more about speed reading?
The most famous speed reading method is called 'Evelyn Wood's Reading Dynamics'. You can learn this
method through a number mediums including seminars, books, cassette tapes, or computer software.
The number to call for more information is 1-800-447-READ. A book is also available called "The
Evelyn Wood 7 Day Reading & Learning Program" , ISBN 0380 715775, $4.99. A computer software
program is also available called "The Evelyn Wood Dynamic Reader" from Timeworks. See Appendix A
for details.
Another program is called 'Speed Learning' from Learn Inc. They claim their program goes beyond
ordinary speed reading.
Next question Previous question Up to Contents
Last updated: 22nd June 1995
Loki
: Apologies to those with narrow screens, but my only
: copy of this is formatted to my liking, and I just can't
: be bothered to change it.
Narrow screens? :)
That amuses me. I'm not sure those reading in 80 cols have narrow
screens than those reading in more cols... :)
- Loki
--
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
| Geoffrey Wiseman | http://tdg.uoguelph.ca/~ontarion/users/geoff |
+------------------+----------------------------------------------+
i wish I could just stop / i know another moment will break my heart /
too many tears / too many times / too many years i've cried for you
it's always the same / wake up in the rain / head in pain / hung in shame
RRHMAH
In article <31a46d1c...@news.accessone.com>, le...@accessone.com
(Michael Leary) writes:
>A while back, I was looking for speed reading
> info on the net and found this. Also found out that
> the "photo reading" program was a ripoff, FWIW.
>Apologies to those with narrow screens, but my only
> copy of this is formatted to my liking, and I just can't
> be bothered to change it.
>
>
>How does speed reading work?
<followed by a clear explanation of the speed reading method I once
learned, including the key point that you must stop sounding out words in
your head>
The explanation cited admitted that this method is no good for reading
novels. I agree absolutely. It is even worse for poetry. I believe that
hearing the sound of the words is =essential= for poetry, and pretty damn
important for novels, or for any =good= prose. I learned speed reading
once, boosted my reading speed from 400 wpm to 1200 or so, then started
seriously reading poetry. Bam! Back to 400 wpm (probably slower for
poetry, actually). And it's stayed about there ever since.
For those who cite amazing reading speeds, I'm wondering, do you really
get the sense of the beauty of the writing? (If it is beautiful, that is.)
Don't get me wrong, you might just be incredibly more talented than me
(no great feat, I'm sure), but I just wonder, how may speed readers are
reading plots, and not novels (if you see my point)?
Rich Horton
sgf
In article <4o42vq$5...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, RRHMAH <rrh...@aol.com> wrote:
>
><followed by a clear explanation of the speed reading method I once
>learned, including the key point that you must stop sounding out words in
>your head>
>
>The explanation cited admitted that this method is no good for reading
>novels. I agree absolutely. It is even worse for poetry. I believe that
>hearing the sound of the words is =essential= for poetry, and pretty damn
>important for novels, or for any =good= prose. I learned speed reading
>once, boosted my reading speed from 400 wpm to 1200 or so, then started
>seriously reading poetry. Bam! Back to 400 wpm (probably slower for
>poetry, actually). And it's stayed about there ever since.
>
>For those who cite amazing reading speeds, I'm wondering, do you really
>get the sense of the beauty of the writing? (If it is beautiful, that is.)
> Don't get me wrong, you might just be incredibly more talented than me
>(no great feat, I'm sure), but I just wonder, how may speed readers are
>reading plots, and not novels (if you see my point)?
I'm not a Speed Reader (ack! just had an image of '70 anime there!), nor
do I play one on TV, but I do read vary fast. I have no idea what my wpm
rate is, but I read faster than anyone I know. I don't have problems
with plot comprehension, but I notice that my reading speed varies with
the intricacy of the writing and plot. Mercedes Lackey and other
"generic" fantasy I can whiz through in an hour or less, but Gene Wolfe
and CJ Cherryh force me to go slowly to have any idea of what's going
on. Also, the more caught up I am in a story, the faster I read it.
This tendency I really noticed when I was studying abroad in Wales; the
school's libary sucked and the town library was at the bottom of a
mile-and-a-half long hill. I had to carry everything I wanted to read.
So I read things like Wilkie Collins, Dickens, Jane Austen, Dumas, and
other "classic" authors to reduce the poundage. No point in carrying
ten pounds of books uphill if I'm going to finish them all in four hours
(learned *that* the hard way).
Poetry, though, I have to read slowly. I don't get the full image and
associations that each word produces by going fast.
--Stephanie
--
sfo...@odin.cair.du.edu <*> http://phoebe.cair.du.edu/~sfolse/
"Assiduous and frequent questioning is indeed the first key to wisdom ...for
by doubting we come to inquiry; through inquiring we perceive the truth..."
--Peter Abelard (..........I claim this .sig for Queen Elizabeth)
Barbara
sfo...@odin.cair.du.edu (sgf) wrote:
<snip>
> I notice that my reading speed varies with
>the intricacy of the writing and plot. Mercedes Lackey and other
>"generic" fantasy I can whiz through in an hour or less, but Gene Wolfe
>and CJ Cherryh force me to go slowly to have any idea of what's going
>on.
My husband claims that the speed at which you read a novel is
inversely proportional to the effort the author took to write it.
Barbara
Michael Leary
On 24 May 1996 06:28:10 -0400, rrh...@aol.com (RRHMAH) wrote:
>The explanation cited admitted that this method is no good for reading
>novels. I agree absolutely.... I learned speed reading
>once, boosted my reading speed from 400 wpm to 1200 or so, then started
>seriously reading poetry. Bam! Back to 400 wpm (probably slower for
>poetry, actually). And it's stayed about there ever since.
I once had a book that helped me top out and around 2500 WPM. (I'll
try to find the book and post the title/author.) Really cool, but it
takes consistent practice. Also, it doesn't work too well for
learning complex new material, and, as you said, completely sucks for
novels, *if* you're not getting the beaty of it. So, now I don't
read much faster than average.
OTOH, I met a girl once who simply *blazed* through books with every
bit as much comprehension as you or I would get. Apparently she was
never afflicted with subvocalization. To get an idea of how fast it's
possible to read *with* comprehension, try reading the same 5-10 pages
over and over, going faster each time (you'll be going so fast by the
3rd or 4th time, you won't be able to subvocalize). Amazingly enough,
it is possible to get full comprehension at those speeds--*as you read
it*, not just cause you read it before. Then when you're *really*
movin' along (after 5-10 passes) *keep reading* when you get to the
end of the section. Talk about mental roadblocks! "Hey, I can't
*really* read this fast!" Then I usually slow way down.
ML