What's wrong with subvocalization?

Nothing, speedreading is a meme for people who like boasting about how many books they read.

Speedreading should be only for technical stuff. If you don't subvocalize when reading literature you're missing out.

Nothing, it just makes you slow. Which is okay, if you enjoy slow, thought, recital type of reading more power to you, but then you'd have to face the reality of spending 2+ weeks on one novel

Some say it slows you down.

>>8779561
That's what I thought too. Literature is not only in getting the ideas in your head, but the form of the writing. Especially poetry.
>>8779569
I'm fine with being slow, I usually reread books over and over again for months until they bore me.

Subvocalization is essential to comprehension and retention.

>>8779561

This. Also good if you're in a boring chapter in a long book.

>>8779603
>>8779561
Technical stuff?

You know in Philosophy many actually prefer to boast of how LONG they took to read a book, on their on or in class ("Oh we just spent the entire class discussing two lines of Wittgenstein). I think there's also that rumour of how, I believe it was Heidegger, spent an hour discussing just the first line of the Republic.

Tell someone you finished the Critique of Pure Reason in 2 weeks and see how quickly your laughed at.

>>8780251
For me, I read books that I dislike quickly, usually for class. But yeah, I agree that philosophy and any literature that you like should take a long time to read. I'm taking an entire class on just the Decameron next semester, and a whole class on just Milton too.

>>8779547

phonemic text was invented to be read

>>8780251
Technical does not just mean dense as fuck philosophy. I skim read a lot of non-fiction because for the most part it isn't that hard and there tends to be bloat.