4 ms·

I do. It takes a bit to enter that space. Need a couple hours of reading to get the most vivid experiences. And it can be spooky. There is a scene in Lord o

I do. It takes a bit to enter that space. Need a couple hours of reading to get the most vivid experiences. And it can be spooky. There is a scene in Lord of the Rings, where frodo is talking to a lord in a castle, near Mordor. They look down at a pool, and see Golum enter, catch a fish. When I watched the movie, I found many places familiar, but that scene, where Golum enters, the pool all matched my minds eye well. It was deja vu. I said to my wife on first viewing: There it is, I see it, Golum will be over there... What you need to do is read slowly at first, close your eyes and try to see it. It can help to physically turn, point, and imagine the feel, sights, sounds, smells. What you need to do is invoke your ability to create. Trying to actualuze a scene in your mind takes some effort at first. I think some of us just do it. But I think anyone can, if they seek it and are helped along some. Then read more, alternating, until you reach a point whrre the worfs flow and so does that scene in your minds eye. I remember one of my first. Was the ooening paragraphs in "Lucky Starr and the Pirates of the Asteroids." It talked about a ship, on the moon, sleek, shiny... as a little kid, I saw it vividly. Went and drew it, just savoring that sight. Others observing me reading say I will read a chunk, pause, read more, and sometime look choppy doing both. To me, once I am in that state, I am not aware of the pauses. It is just reading, flow... Try watching a movie first. I usually reccomend the other wsy, book first. If you do not visualize well yet, a movie may really help as you will have msterial to draw on. The book will expand on the m9vie considerably. What shoukd happen is your mind will fill in the blanks to give you new "scenery." It can also help to read simpler, but vivid books. Try different things. You want this to happen for you. When it does, books becomr amazing! Ever play old text adventures, like ZORK? Words are the ultimate canvas. And ever notice how sound can trigger spatial sensations? What you may want to seek is a little like that. The "WOOL" series is amazing, and it starts in modern day, familiar settings. As it takes off, you should experience this "mindsight" (my personal word for it) easily and vividly. And, if you enjoy horror, Stephen King "paints" some of the most vivid pictures there are. He can be quite remarkable.

ddingus 8y ago
Sorry for "line noise" in that one written too quick on mobile.
vidarh 8y ago
I construct a conceptual and spatial view of what I read, but never visual. Not even my memories are visual for the most part. I can force fuzzy, dark outlines of things, and "construct" imagery of sorts, but even staring at something, closing my eyes and trying to visualise it will at most give vague outlines. If I were to do that and draw the object instead of visualising it on the other hand, I'd generally do it with ease and quite precisely. Similarly my memory of books and movies tends to be very strongly focused on the underlying concept and logic rather than visual impressions. > Try different things. You want this to happen for you. When it does, books becomr amazing! Books are amazing without it. I've read hundreds of books, through 35 years of reading, and I've never understood why people care so much about wanting to visualise something; it's not needed to enjoy a book. Maybe that's why I care so much about language, and it may well explain the type of books I prefer (I will often skip overly descriptive language by skimming over it unless the language in itself is beautiful to me). Seeing the other references here to Aphantasia, I'm curious to what the distribution of visualisation is in the population as a whole, and to what extent there is a correlation - if any - to whether or not people enjoy reading. I could see some would find reading boring if they can't visualise them, maybe, but while it's a possibility, I don't think it's at all a given that it's a major factor - I often prefer to read to watch movies, even though one gives me that visual experience and the other doesn't, and that extends to often preferring the book relative to a movie version of a book.
- ddingus 8y ago
  >skimming over it unless the language in itself is beautiful to me I appreciate that too. And you are not wrong. Books, sans visualization are amazing. Language can invoke many things. I once fixed a black and white TV for an elderly woman. I could have set her up with a color one. Didn't need or want it. Her apperciation for the programs was sans color. Totally hear where you are coming from. The comment is also for passers by who may well feel differently. There are times when I skip descriptive parts of a text myself. It is not always germane to the overall experience.

ddingus 8y ago

Sorry for "line noise" in that one written too quick on mobile.

vidarh 8y ago

I construct a conceptual and spatial view of what I read, but never visual. Not even my memories are visual for the most part. I can force fuzzy, dark outlines of things, and "construct" imagery of sorts, but even staring at something, closing my eyes and trying to visualise it will at most give vague outlines. If I were to do that and draw the object instead of visualising it on the other hand, I'd generally do it with ease and quite precisely. Similarly my memory of books and movies tends to be very strongly focused on the underlying concept and logic rather than visual impressions. > Try different things. You want this to happen for you. When it does, books becomr amazing! Books are amazing without it. I've read hundreds of books, through 35 years of reading, and I've never understood why people care so much about wanting to visualise something; it's not needed to enjoy a book. Maybe that's why I care so much about language, and it may well explain the type of books I prefer (I will often skip overly descriptive language by skimming over it unless the language in itself is beautiful to me). Seeing the other references here to Aphantasia, I'm curious to what the distribution of visualisation is in the population as a whole, and to what extent there is a correlation - if any - to whether or not people enjoy reading. I could see some would find reading boring if they can't visualise them, maybe, but while it's a possibility, I don't think it's at all a given that it's a major factor - I often prefer to read to watch movies, even though one gives me that visual experience and the other doesn't, and that extends to often preferring the book relative to a movie version of a book.

ddingus 8y ago
>skimming over it unless the language in itself is beautiful to me I appreciate that too. And you are not wrong. Books, sans visualization are amazing. Language can invoke many things. I once fixed a black and white TV for an elderly woman. I could have set her up with a color one. Didn't need or want it. Her apperciation for the programs was sans color. Totally hear where you are coming from. The comment is also for passers by who may well feel differently. There are times when I skip descriptive parts of a text myself. It is not always germane to the overall experience.