How many times do you read a book before you feel like you

>>9617690
I quit reading Harry Potter as a kid shortly after the 5th book came out, wrote a small essay/thing describing what would happen in 6 & 7, and ruined both of 7's parts for a local Nurse's Union by predicting them 10 minutes before their fancy theatre date.

Finnegans Wake on the hand has me constantly going back to it to see just how much was referenced that I missed.
>I haven't found any less than 10 new things every time I go back, at ~514 ref's now;
>some anons have quoted in the upper 6-8000's

And then there's shit like the King James Version of the Bible, the Torah, Qur'an, Vedic scriptures, and older Chinese writings.

Emerald Tablet's not necessarily a book, but I've read dozens of theories and translations and feel no closer to a full comprehension than when I'd first heard of it.

Chaucer and Joseph Campbell, even Dundes and Muehler and Heinlein were a second read after reading analyses and other works related to them.
>will admit I'm shite on philosophy, so Being and Time was a third go while Republic was a one-shot

Scandinavian and Russian stuff is typically once in English and second time in its own language. I hate French lit, it's fucking snooty.
>there was one oddball comic I recall reading in French that was bretty gud
>I think it was banned for outliving its time for depicting a teen girl doing stupid amounts of drugs then fucking and exploiting a robot
>though it did shit on retarded folk and siamese twins with a retarded siamese twin autist that used a chainsaw to tear people apart while half-naked teens on drugs ran screaming through the streets, so there may have been a few reasons to put that one to sleep

>>9617690
Once

>>9617690
Depends on the book. One or two.

Once because I'm not a pseud with no attention span. Focus on what you're doing and actually think about what you're reading. It isn't that difficult.

>>9617694

kek

>>9617690

I have yet to understand anything (books included) a fraction as much as I hoped I would

>>9617694
underrated post

>>9618377
Overrated post

>>9617690
I don't need to read them, just the Wikipedia page

>>9618471
Properly rated post

>>9618478
I thought it was overrated myself.

>>9618522
Underrated post