Is speedreading just a maymay?

>>8345675
Speedreading doesn't exist. However, my boner...

File: 1467927940572.png (710KB, 576x864px) Image search: [Google]

710KB, 576x864px

>taking a few weeks to read Middlemarch
>someone sees me with it a few times
>"Wow anon, you sure are taking a while on that!"
MFW

>>8345675
Speedreading can work if you're reading something that essentially should have been a short essay but was stretched into a book. Pop science, self-help, basically anything that's garbage. Doesn't work on fiction or philosophy though, if you try it with those you're going to at best get an understanding of the overall work and nothing more- and if that's all you were seeking, you could have just read the wikipedia description of the book and it would have been faster still.

>>8345675
It doesn't work. I cringe when someone says that they speedread. It makes some of the text abstruse. Some people, however, are tenacious in their belief that it works.

spritz it, mane

>>8345710
Had the same thing happen multiple times with Gravity's Rainbow. Finished it in a month but like

who is this cum bum

Speedreading is for autists who read manuals and textbooks. Doing it with literature it's retarded.

It's like going to a Michelin restaurant and bragging about eating really fast.

>>8345675
You shouldn't speedread literature. And don't be all like "don't tell me what to do" because really, at that point, reading is like watching a film sped up x4. You won't retain or appreciate any of it, and gain nothing more than huh huh huh look at what *I* finished reading.

>>8345880
UN Women Goodwill Ambassador and feminist activist Emma Watson.

>>8345883
You are insane. Speedreading is easier with literature. Speedreading a physics book or a math book is impossible.

Speed reading isn't reading, it's just skimming. Your retention is garbage. Fine if you're reading garbage, not if you're reading something worth reading.

>>8345891
Sounds like she's an intelligent and goodhearted woman. All the good to her!

>>8345892
It's not about ease, it's about savouring the language.

>>8345891
literally, who?

It literally took me 3 years to finish Moby-Dick

>>8346014
Seriously? I just finished it in five days.

I think I read too slow and retain less information.

If I had faster I think I understand more.

>>8346021
It was like a slow, sensual fuck

>>8345710
>not staying where you are until you're finished wth what you started
always pleb

>>8345883
>textbooks
And... dropped.
>>8345892
>Speedreading is easier with literature
But, like, why? Read what you like, speedread what you hate the shit out of. And whatever you do, don't watch movies.

Some shit you can spreedread. I got talked into reading Ready Player One and I sailed through that thing at a few seconds a page. It was garbage, too

Some stuff you definitely can't. It depends on the depth of the vocabulary, the complexity of the ideas (sometimes you gotta reflect on it, nigga), and your interest level (why speed through something you love?)

File: 13528968_1034386699961573_4661769945371063148_n.jpg (17KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 600x337px

>>8345899
kek

File: 1455115804005.jpg (51KB, 680x684px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 680x684px

>>8346832
>tfw when I really think like that

I think feminism isn't bad, I've never met one of those super annoying feminists that get triggered even though I live in a nordic country and being a UN goodwill ambassador is, well, quite worthless, but at least people can listen to speech about important issues while they jerk off to Emmas sweet sweet face :-)

1. Depends on what you mean by speedreading (faster-than-average or maximum speed?)
2. Depends on what you want to speedread.

I'm naturally a quick reader w/ good reading comprehension (probably thru learning it at a very young age and reading a lot as a kid) + I know a basic form of speedreading.

Basically; never speedread good fiction, speedread philosophy only if you just want a general idea of the work. But speedreading works fine for newspapers, some opinion pieces, blog posts, some non-fiction or for when you want that overall image of something. Basically: it works for acquiring information, not for much else. Sorta like viewing an image to know what something is like vs appreciating visual arts.

Its pretty cool to be able to quickly go through popular contemporary political/autobiographical/etc non-fiction books, gotta add. Makes them sort of worth it for knowing what's up in the world around me.

>>8345675
it's real but it only works with texts that contain raw and simple information. for example a weekly team report at your company. it's text that has no literary value. you can read it extremely fast and the words stick to your mind because they do not hide any deeper meaning. quite like what I'm writing here, as an example. the second you start reading anything with and kind of substance, speed reading is out.

I remember when Obamacare was being debated and it was the biggest story in the country Hannity had like a 4 hour special where he had some apparently famous speed reader to go through all 10,000 pages or whatever of the bill. The camera would cut to him every now and then and he would essentially just qucikly shuffle the papers at a speed that would make it impossible for anyone to retain anymore than a sentence per page. I figured it was just a dumb symbolic gag (well it was) and that this guy was just some actor but it turned out he actually had his own Wikipedia page thanks to his speed reading skills. I wish I knew his name to show you what a fraud he was.

https://youtu.be/620BII22Jfk

Here