Runes -no spoilers

[Iryssa]

I find it very difficult to read at the same spead as I speak (maybe if I read at the same rate I used to speak French...*ponders*)...I just get too excited. I usually read a book I like a couple times at least, though, so it doesn't worry me.

[ZefaLefeLaH]

Ah, Iryssa. For your many kindnesses, I'll flip the coin & stay my hand in this.

[Edge]

Zeph, that might be what works best for you, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's what works best for everyone else.

Firstly, the idea that books are 'meant' to be read at the speed the words would be spoken is arbitrary. It doesn't create a 'real-time' experience of the book - you're talking about a medium in which years can go by in one paragraph, and 5 minutes can take a chapter to describe.

Secondly, you're making wrong assumptions - "If you read at the speed of light, you have to be missing things." I read fast. I don't miss anything at all. A person who learns to read fast through 'intensive' training methods (i.e. learning 'speed-reading' which uses physical signals and methods) does indeed comprehend and retain less; but a person whose speed in reading is from the 'extensive' method (they read fast because they have so much practise in reading) actually has better comprehension and retention than the average reader.

And it dosn't detract from enjoyment of the experience, either; it actually makes it more intense.

Thirdly: this is an interesting discussion and should possibly be split to its' own thread.

[ZefaLefeLaH]

It is for Iryssa's sake that I tread lightly to respond. The coin has flipped.

You're absolutely right. I could quiz you on your read & you would have all the answers, perhaps moreso than the slower reader.

But you would not have had all the time that a slower reader has to daydream during his or her read. Consider, we both read a poem. It takes you less than two minutes. I finish it in just over five minutes. Who had the greater experience... intelligence aside, who lived the poem more?

You could say that I lived it longer, but that isn't necessarily more. Although for a book as awaited as Runes of the Earth I don't see why someone would wish to shorten the experience. I mean, it took me a couple of weeks to read it, between the gaps of my daily life. And I was able to dream nightly of the Land because it was on my mind & I was still experiencing the first read of it over an extended period of time.

You could say that because you read it faster, that you have powers to hold the words. Perhaps because you can reclaim the words, you will eventually surpass my longer time to initially read it. Although, most fast readers are avid readers and it is just as likely that you'll simply have moved onto something else.

But the truth that I feel about it is that the first time is the best time. The first kiss is special to most people. The first time you see a great movie can never be replicated. You will always know what will happen next whenever you "reread" it. The +5 minutes it took me to read it equates to more than twice the time it took you. This means that I lived more than twice as long enjoying something great for the very first time. You can read the book a thousand times if you want & spend hundreds of more time in it than I ever will, but you'll never be able to go back & spend more than twice the time doing it slow & capturing all your thoughts on the side as you do so for the first time again. There is no such thing as the first time again. So while I read Runes of the Earth over two weeks of time, I was able to dream about it all during that time each night, extending my experience. I was able to think about how the land feels and wonder what Linden would do for far longer than you could. When she was kissed with Aliantha berries by the Manthrall after the Horseright, I spent more than twice as long in that moment gathering subtle nuances that would have otherwise escaped me as I read. Was the Manthrall in a very light manner, raping her? Why didn't they have spoons? Would she feel relaxed if she became lucid before him because he was older and therefore may have been more innocent? Or rather would she feel more ire because he was older & the older become only more guilty rather than more innocent over time & he was simply more cunning in his wanton lust?

Now these questions, comments, and viewpoints are probably not your own; everyone views the world around them differently, including their perceptions of the Land. But the point is that I had time to actually consider them while I was reading. You were already to the point where she was telling everyone about her experience in the South. You missed that chance to feel that moment as much as I felt it. It will never be the first time for you ever again. You can't feel it the same way ever again. And you sped past it & let it pour through you like water instead of savoring it like a good Thanksgiving meal with friends & family.

I suppose now that we'll have some huge disagreement & like the Masters you'll refuse to acquiesce anything I had to say on the matter. It's a pity that these forums seem to always degenerate into debate instead of people learning from each other. But I have no quarrel with you. I am not disagreeing with you to prove you wrong! I'm showing you that there is usefulness in your speed, but that when something truly and anxiously awaited comes around that you should embrace it and love to live it, not merely inhale it. There is only one first time for such experiences & they should be treasured.

[Edge]

There's only one thing you said that I disagree with:

It's a pity that these forums seem to always degenerate into debate instead of people learning from each other.

On the contrary: it's in debate, in exchanging viewpoints and opinions, that people learn best from each other. I have no argument with anything else you say, in that it's what you prefer and it works best for you. And you gave very good reasons as to why it works for you; but that still doesn't mean it's the only way and everyone else should do it that way.

In this case, I don't believe your approach would work for me, because firstly: to read slower, I'd have to make a conscious effort to do so. That would make me too conscious of the words on the page, instead of just absorbing them and living the experience in my mind, and that would just spoil it for me. Secondly: I really enjoy reading a book in one sitting; I enjoy the intensity of it. I like the fact that when I finish, the whole thing is fresh in my mind - and I can then ponder on it, dream of it, even analyze it, as a whole.

I'm not saying that's what everyone should do - just that's it's the method I like, and it works best for me.

[Jasmina]

Sounds like you all feel pretty strongly about this...
I haven't gotten my own copy of the book yet and I only found this website yesterday(newbie alert). When I learned of the new book (in early October) I went straight out and bought all six earlier books. (over the years I've loaned them out so many times and read them so many times that I didn't have a complete set that pleased me) I'm reading them relatively slowly and am now 'rounding the home stretch' on The Wounded Land.
I read the first bits of RotE on-line, and like all of you...I can't believe I get to go back to the Land!!!!! When I read a book for the first time I tend to read pretty darn fast. (too fast?) But that's not EVEN the scarey part...You want something to talk about????? Here is my dirty little secret (I hope I'm not alone)

If I get REALLY involved...if I can't STAND IT!!!!....if the Tension gets Soooo bad...I will do the unthinkable and turn to the last page.

Before I get crucified.....
I am strict when I cheat. The last page means the last page. If it's two words....that's all I get. If it's a whole paragraph....or an entire page??? I can't explain. Sometimes I just GOT to know who is still around?
PLease tell me I'm not alone!!!!

Pretty awful, eh?

[dlbpharmd]

Jasmine, I flipped to the last page one time, with WGW, and read this line:

Spoiler

Spoiler

With her right hand, Linden Avery kept a sure hold on her wedding ring.

And boy, was I pissed. So I vowed never to do it again.

[CovenantJr]

I can only read at the speed I speak. If I try to do it faster (and I have tried) I just don't take anything in. It took me two weeks to read Runes, and I was rushing a little so I could send it to Gart. It took me a year to read the first six books. I couldn't have done it faster - I read everything as though I'm reading it aloud to someone else. And in one important respect, I strongly agree with Zeph: I wouldn't change my reading style if I could - I spent a year in the Land, and it's all the more a part of me as a result.

[Iryssa]

It is for Iryssa's sake that I tread lightly to respond. The coin has flipped.

You honor me, my friend *smile*

Consider, we both read a poem. It takes you less than two minutes. I finish it in just over five minutes. Who had the greater experience... intelligence aside, who lived the poem more?

I definitely agree that poems must be read slowly. Perhaps it's because poems are usually shorter that I'm not worried about getting to the end of them quickly.

Although for a book as awaited as Runes of the Earth I don't see why someone would wish to shorten the experience. I mean, it took me a couple of weeks to read it, between the gaps of my daily life. And I was able to dream nightly of the Land because it was on my mind & I was still experiencing the first read of it over an extended period of time...

I definitely admire your ability to take your time like that...I bend far too easily to the pressure of curiosity (I simply must know what happens next...or so I tell myself). I still had dreams about it, but if you've read any of my posts on dreams, you'll see how easily books affect my dream-life.
Still...one thing I've found is that it's easy for me to recover the excitement I feel reading a book for the first time on my second and third readings...maybe it's because I miss things the first time through (one of the aforementioned problems with reading too quickly)...

[Believer]

I'm with you, Iryssa. I read things quickly the first time through, and then if I notice bit sand pieces of writing I want to savor I'll slow down, or think, hey, I should re-read this.

I want to re-read Runes just because. So when I find a weekend I'll do that, and savor it. But the first time through I'm definitely interested in what happened, and for that I read fast. Later on I'll soak in it.

It's only old books I can't read fast. Austen and Dostoevsky, for example, don't let me read fast. I'm not sure what the difference is... Something keeps me from barreling ahead like I can with a Star Wars novel.