5 ms·

Reading is good, but re-reading is sublime. If you think of reading a book as something "good for you", the amount you gain on the second time around (in what y

Reading is good, but re-reading is sublime. If you think of reading a book as something "good for you", the amount you gain on the second time around (in what you commit to memory, and what you notice in detail, esp for works of fiction) cannot be overstated. If you've never re-read a book I highly suggest picking up your favorite work of literature and giving it a go. Now many people don't want to re-read a book because they could be reading a new book with that time, and many people say the world (even driving) is too distracting for full concentration on an audiobook. Let me propose that you try "re-reading" your favorite books by listening to them on audiobook. I have been doing this on my commute and it is 95% as good as giving the book a textual re-read. You are already familiar with all of the material, so spacing out for a minute here and there is no big deal. I don't want to descend into wacky hyperbole, but I really super strongly recommend listening to audiobooks that you have already read. Try it!

ericdykstra 8y ago
Agreed! I'd go so far as to say that book not worth re-reading isn't worth reading once. Audiobooks let me spend more time consuming books than I would otherwise, and thus more time rereading favorites.
- yesenadam 8y ago
  I'd go so far as to say that book not worth re-reading isn't worth reading once. That could work well as an argument against reading newspapers. Thoreau in Life Without Principle: "We should treat our minds, that is, ourselves, as innocent and ingenuous children, whose guardians we are, and be careful what objects and what subjects we thrust on their attention. Read not the Times. Read the Eternities. Conventionalities are at length as bad as impurities. Even the facts of science may dust the mind by their dryness, unless they are in a sense effaced each morning, or rather rendered fertile by the dews of fresh and living truth. Knowledge does not come to us by details, but in flashes of light from heaven. Yes, every thought that passes through the mind helps to wear and tear it, and to deepen the ruts, which, as in the streets of Pompeii, evince how much it has been used. How many things there are concerning which we might well deliberate, whether we had better know them,—had better let their peddling-carts be driven, even at the slowest trot or walk, over that bridge of glorious span by which we trust to pass at last from the farthest brink of time to the nearest shore of eternity! Have we no culture, no refinement,—but skill only to live coarsely and serve the Devil?—to acquire a little worldly wealth, or fame, or liberty, and make a false show with it, as if we were all husk and shell, with no tender and living kernel to us?"
adtac 8y ago
I can attest to this. I don't read that much (trying to change that), but I so badly wanted to re-read The Martian because it's just that good, and I must say I enjoyed it even more.
Schmazo 8y ago
Thank you. It seems that lately I've been reminded several times how simply re-reading articles can be a great memory improvement tool. An additional re-reading tool I had forgotten about for a while is by clicking my history button to remind me what caught my fancy on the 1st round and probably will be worth re-reading again. That, plus adding a star to certain articles.
- supernovae 8y ago
  Re-reading is actually not a good way to commit things to memory. It can be enjoyable, no doubt there, but for learning - such as focusing on non-fiction it uses more time than a good focused reading session over the first pass. Re-read for enjoyment! For learning/memory - You have to learn to encode what you want to learn into something you can remember. Some people use a "places" trick - where they remember a familiar house/place or commute to work and they can place things along this imaginary route for recollection. The idea is that we humans remember through images and association by evolutionary survival traits. You have to encode / chunk what you want to learn, you have to recall it and work on saving this to long-term memory by recollecting it at intervals that may be hours on day one, multiple hours day 2 and randomly as time goes on. For the most part, re-read because you enjoy it, but don't convince yourself its the optimal way to improve your memory of what you have read :)
derekp7 8y ago
I've had good success flipping between an audiobook while commuting, and reading the next chapters at home at night. My brain was able to seamlessly meld the two modes together.
- soganess 8y ago
  This. So much this. Specifically when reading fiction for pleasure, an audiobook can provide too much "color" not indented by the author. This, alone, makes it hard to recommend an audiobook as a solo source. However, having that second voice can force you to rethink your readings of specific situations. It can challenge you to really dig in when your understanding does line up with the reader's tone. The first example that comes to mind is the English translation of "100 Years of Solitude" on Audible. All the voices have a comedian's intonation, especially Melquíades, who is supposed to be an Armenian gypsy, but instead comes across like a poor man's Count Dracula. That said, the temporal complexity of the novel is really clarified with a second voice, regardless how over the top it is.
bachbach 8y ago
You should try rereading Gene Wolfe novels. Different book every time.
ycombinete 8y ago
I've read Heart of Darkness about 3 times. I get something new and wonderful from it every time. I've listened to Kenneth Brannagh's reading of it about 40 times, and get something new and wonderful from it every time.

ericdykstra 8y ago

Agreed! I'd go so far as to say that book not worth re-reading isn't worth reading once. Audiobooks let me spend more time consuming books than I would otherwise, and thus more time rereading favorites.

yesenadam 8y ago
I'd go so far as to say that book not worth re-reading isn't worth reading once. That could work well as an argument against reading newspapers. Thoreau in Life Without Principle: "We should treat our minds, that is, ourselves, as innocent and ingenuous children, whose guardians we are, and be careful what objects and what subjects we thrust on their attention. Read not the Times. Read the Eternities. Conventionalities are at length as bad as impurities. Even the facts of science may dust the mind by their dryness, unless they are in a sense effaced each morning, or rather rendered fertile by the dews of fresh and living truth. Knowledge does not come to us by details, but in flashes of light from heaven. Yes, every thought that passes through the mind helps to wear and tear it, and to deepen the ruts, which, as in the streets of Pompeii, evince how much it has been used. How many things there are concerning which we might well deliberate, whether we had better know them,—had better let their peddling-carts be driven, even at the slowest trot or walk, over that bridge of glorious span by which we trust to pass at last from the farthest brink of time to the nearest shore of eternity! Have we no culture, no refinement,—but skill only to live coarsely and serve the Devil?—to acquire a little worldly wealth, or fame, or liberty, and make a false show with it, as if we were all husk and shell, with no tender and living kernel to us?"

adtac 8y ago

I can attest to this. I don't read that much (trying to change that), but I so badly wanted to re-read The Martian because it's just that good, and I must say I enjoyed it even more.

Schmazo 8y ago

Thank you. It seems that lately I've been reminded several times how simply re-reading articles can be a great memory improvement tool. An additional re-reading tool I had forgotten about for a while is by clicking my history button to remind me what caught my fancy on the 1st round and probably will be worth re-reading again. That, plus adding a star to certain articles.

supernovae 8y ago
Re-reading is actually not a good way to commit things to memory. It can be enjoyable, no doubt there, but for learning - such as focusing on non-fiction it uses more time than a good focused reading session over the first pass. Re-read for enjoyment! For learning/memory - You have to learn to encode what you want to learn into something you can remember. Some people use a "places" trick - where they remember a familiar house/place or commute to work and they can place things along this imaginary route for recollection. The idea is that we humans remember through images and association by evolutionary survival traits. You have to encode / chunk what you want to learn, you have to recall it and work on saving this to long-term memory by recollecting it at intervals that may be hours on day one, multiple hours day 2 and randomly as time goes on. For the most part, re-read because you enjoy it, but don't convince yourself its the optimal way to improve your memory of what you have read :)

derekp7 8y ago

I've had good success flipping between an audiobook while commuting, and reading the next chapters at home at night. My brain was able to seamlessly meld the two modes together.

soganess 8y ago
This. So much this. Specifically when reading fiction for pleasure, an audiobook can provide too much "color" not indented by the author. This, alone, makes it hard to recommend an audiobook as a solo source. However, having that second voice can force you to rethink your readings of specific situations. It can challenge you to really dig in when your understanding does line up with the reader's tone. The first example that comes to mind is the English translation of "100 Years of Solitude" on Audible. All the voices have a comedian's intonation, especially Melquíades, who is supposed to be an Armenian gypsy, but instead comes across like a poor man's Count Dracula. That said, the temporal complexity of the novel is really clarified with a second voice, regardless how over the top it is.

bachbach 8y ago

You should try rereading Gene Wolfe novels. Different book every time.

ycombinete 8y ago

I've read Heart of Darkness about 3 times. I get something new and wonderful from it every time. I've listened to Kenneth Brannagh's reading of it about 40 times, and get something new and wonderful from it every time.