3 ms·

My average for the last four years (since I started tracking) is 43.5. I think reading 100/year would require reading books instead of watching TV nearly every

My average for the last four years (since I started tracking) is 43.5. I think reading 100/year would require reading books instead of watching TV nearly every night. Here's confessions of someone who read 164: http://www.vox.com/2015/12/29/10634416/reading-list-books http://www.vox.com/2015/12/29/10634416/reading-list-books Blogger/economist Tyler Cowan also advises quitting books that are a slog.

joshyeager 11y ago
You are correct, you have to make time for reading by reducing other entertainment time. I hit 100 books last year without too much trouble, but I've really struggled with my goal of 125 this year (123 now, and two days left). 2 books per week was an amount that makes me happy, so I kept up with it easily. I fell behind early this year because my wife and I wanted to catch up on a couple of TV shows, which meant I needed to average over 2.5 books per week. That was enough to kill part of the fun, which is why I've struggled. A goal is great because it helps you get started on the next book when you might want to do something easier. But if it's too big it just makes reading a chore.
fogus 11y ago
> I think reading 100/year would require > reading books instead of watching TV nearly > every night. That's about right. I spend about 2-hours per week on television (depending on the season I spend zero) and I haven't played a video game in 5 years. There have been many times that I've wanted to see certain shows (Supergirl looked fun) but when the time comes reading wins out almost every time. I can only read this much because I love reading more than any other form of entertainment. It would be impossible otherwise. It does kinda stink to never be able to engage in conversations about games and shows though. Maybe there's a market for semi-annual books about current media. ;)

joshyeager 11y ago

You are correct, you have to make time for reading by reducing other entertainment time. I hit 100 books last year without too much trouble, but I've really struggled with my goal of 125 this year (123 now, and two days left). 2 books per week was an amount that makes me happy, so I kept up with it easily. I fell behind early this year because my wife and I wanted to catch up on a couple of TV shows, which meant I needed to average over 2.5 books per week. That was enough to kill part of the fun, which is why I've struggled. A goal is great because it helps you get started on the next book when you might want to do something easier. But if it's too big it just makes reading a chore.

fogus 11y ago

> I think reading 100/year would require > reading books instead of watching TV nearly > every night. That's about right. I spend about 2-hours per week on television (depending on the season I spend zero) and I haven't played a video game in 5 years. There have been many times that I've wanted to see certain shows (Supergirl looked fun) but when the time comes reading wins out almost every time. I can only read this much because I love reading more than any other form of entertainment. It would be impossible otherwise. It does kinda stink to never be able to engage in conversations about games and shows though. Maybe there's a market for semi-annual books about current media. ;)