# Reading: Quality or Quantity



## Southern Presbyterian (Sep 13, 2008)

I have limited time to read, and when I do I try to get the most out of it by highlighting, underlining and making notes in the margins of my books. Though this slows down the reading process it does help me internalize what I'm reading. However, I've noticed that some folk on the PB read several books in the time it takes me to get through one. So here is my question: is it better to read slowly and "digest" most of what you read, or is it better to get in as much reading as possible and let what sticks stick and hope the Holy Spirit will dredge it up from the subconscious when needed? Note: I'm not a seminary student, or anything like that, so my reading is for personal edification and growth.

Any thoughts?


----------



## SolaScriptura (Sep 13, 2008)

Southern Presbyterian said:


> So here is my question: is it better to read slowly and "digest" most of what you read, or is it better to get in as much reading as possible and let what sticks stick and hope the Holy Spirit will dredge it up from the subconscious when needed?
> 
> Any thoughts?




Well, everyone has a different opinion, but here's mine:

To address the specific selection I quoted, I think it depends. Some books need to be read slowly, and require a lot of thought and effort in order to understand and "digest" it. Other books are easier to read and you can get the author's gist without so much work. 

When I read at work I am subject to many interruptions... People just pop in for counseling, the phone rings a lot, I have appointments to keep, people to visit, etc... so I read "lighter" stuff at work so that I won't suffer so much from having to put the book down at the drop of a hat. For instance, I read "practical" works such as various biblical counseling works, I'm reading "When Sinners Say I Do," and "Love That Lasts." 

When I am at home I read "heavier" stuff. I'm almost finished with my 8th reading of Reformed Pastor, and I'm about 3/4 finished with Vol 1. of Bavinck's Reformed Dogmatics. I read these slower and I spend time digesting them a bit more.

Just my thoughts... nothing at all prescriptive.


----------



## christianyouth (Sep 13, 2008)

Ah, thanks for asking this question, brother. James! This is something I have wondered about.


----------



## Athaleyah (Sep 13, 2008)

I think you need to read at whatever rate seems appropriate to you. I read the Bible slower than I read other books. Some people can read really fast, but that's just them. Would it really be worth it to force yourself to read faster if you are going to get less out of it? I'd say make the time you can spend count and get the most out of your reading that you can.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 13, 2008)

I remember about 10% of what I read and about 90% of what I hear. So I try and find audio files/books when I can... So needlessly to say I read slowly...


----------



## Pilgrim72 (Sep 13, 2008)

Good question. 

For me, I'm kind of a slow reader. I like to underline and write in the margins too. And most of the time I find myself getting lost in thought about the subject I'm reading.

And if I try and burn through books without taking the time to internalize them, I feel that it's only time wasted.

So, I would say that it's best to read the best of books and make sure you get the most out of them no matter how long it takes. 

A shame we're all not like Charles Spurgeon. I read somewhere that he had a photographic memory and read an average of 6 books a week!


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 13, 2008)

Rushdoony was the same as Spurgeon.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Sep 13, 2008)

I had a professor in college who said, "We all have photographic memories but some have less film in the camera than others."  So I guess today's analogy would be the memory card, well mine is only 16mb.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Sep 13, 2008)

> is it better to read slowly and "digest" most of what you read, or is it better to get in as much reading as possible



*Yes.*

I know-- what kind of answer is that? Well, let me explain.

Often I am reading as many as 4 books at time-- (not all at the same moment, of course). 

Generally, I have one book (or set) that is a special area of study, for instance, presently I have been going through David B. Calhoun's two volume set on Princeton Seminary. (I have been reading this set for about two months now, a few pages at a time, taking notes, as I go).

At work, during breaks I often read a different book, presently I am reading through Sproul's Faith Alone. This is a "quick" skimming sort of read-- some highlighting of passages I may wish to go back to at a later time.

Personal devotional reading (in the AM) is presently reading through Spurgeon's Devotional Bible. And I have also, recently been looking (in the PM) at many of the works of Thomas Watson.

One of the last works of Watson that I "crashed through" quickly was his A Body of Divinity. It is my intent, knowing the richness that is there from my previous speed read, to read that work in a slow methodical way after I have finished the Calhoun set.

Well, that's my 

Not saying my way is the best way, just it is what seems to work for me.


----------



## Pergamum (Sep 14, 2008)

Audio books are awesome!


Read what you want. You absorb the most when you enjoy it.


----------



## py3ak (Sep 14, 2008)

It's true that by reading whatever you enjoy you will actually read and may profit more. "A man should read exactly as inclination leads him, for what he reads as a task will do him little good" -Dr. Johnson. 

But I do see two problems with reading only those things you naturally enjoy, two things that you lose out on. (Now let me be quite clear that if you are reading something and you're not enjoying, understanding, or being profited by it, it is smart to stop.)
1. Reading has an impact on us. If we only let what we naturally enjoy influence us, the influence is likely to be very one-sided. Take the example of a naturally sarcastic person, who enjoys seeing things made fun of. He can find a lot to read, and he will enjoy it, and he will probably see through many errors and follies as they are satirized. His reading is so far good for him. But, there is nothing in what he is reading to put the brakes on his sarcastic tendencies, there is nothing to give him sheer delight: and so he runs a greater risk of becoming a scorner, one who discerns all things but doesn't hold fast anything good. So because of its ability to influence us, we need to be sure that what we read is challenging and nurturing to us, not always something that carries us along in the direction of our natural tendencies. A chronological snob, for instance, is not challenged by reading just his contemporaries.

2. We miss out on many enjoyments. Finding pleasure in _George and Martha_ is easy, natural and right. It is excellent writing. But it is not the only excellent writing there is. _Alice in Wonderland_ and _Dymer_ are more difficult but they are also excellent. If I never put in any work, then I'm limited to one kind of enjoyment, when in reality there are hundreds. I can like and enjoy Gouda for being an excellent cheese, but that doesn't mean that Provolone and Chihuahua are not also excellent, and to be enjoyed. Or think of swimming. The ocean is too hard at first; but once you've come to swim in the ocean, the little plastic wading pool in the backyard isn't enough. You have to put in some work to be able to enjoy the ocean: but when you put in that work, you find far more delight than you did in what was easy.

So in reading, yes, read what you enjoy; but be aware of the possibility and the desirability of learning to enjoy other kinds of writing.


----------



## Grace Alone (Sep 14, 2008)

Because I do not have a lot of time for reading, I choose very carefully. I rarely read fiction and I try to almost always read reformed writers. I am a slow reader because my mind wanders on a particular topic (theology books) and then I find myself going back and rereading sections to get back on track. I am not as disciplined as I would like in reading scripture.


----------



## Staphlobob (Sep 14, 2008)

Since I too have limited time to read, but love to listen to mp3s, I'm also intrigued by the thought of audio books. I've looked up some sites, but am hesitant to pay a monthly fee for use of my Ipod. If I have no other choice I will, but I'm not too keen on the idea. I'd prefer to pay full price for the books I want.

Does anyone have suggestions regarding sites where good books (i.e., classics, decent theology, etc.) may be downloaded for use on an Ipod?


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Sep 15, 2008)

Staphlobob said:


> Since I too have limited time to read, but love to listen to mp3s...



In my job I do a lot of driving from place to place. I listen to a lot of mp3 sermons and shows, like White Horse Inn and The Edinburgh Inn. But I have not invested in any audio books because I imagine that they would be very tough to use as a reference source not to mention that highlighting a passage would be impossible.

Now to another question that some of the other responses have brought to mind. How would you separate "serious" reading materials (those you want to spend time with and really digest) from "less serious" reading materials (those that require less focused attention and would be read for general informational purposes)?

P.S. Sterling, I generally have 3 or 4 books going at once too. However, in using my normal study practice it causes me to take even longer to get through any of them. Perhaps it is just a more disciplined life that I need?


----------



## Herald (Sep 15, 2008)

Don't read. Just look at picture books. 

Seriously, I agree with Ben. Depends on what you're reading and what you want to get out of it.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Sep 15, 2008)

North Jersey Baptist said:


> Don't read. Just look at picture books.



That's what I did, when I was a Baptist.


----------



## Kim G (Sep 15, 2008)

I think that quality is much more important than quantity. I wish I could practice that, though.

You should see my bookshelf. For a 24-year-old woman, it's quite extensive. I've read most of the books on the shelf, but I don't remember many of them. My problem is that I read WAY TOO QUICKLY. On the plus side, I breezed through college with all A's (but one) because I could read 90 pages of the Iliad in one night and get all the answers correctly on the quiz the next day. On the minus side, I don't remember anything I read more than a week ago.  My ability to re-read books amuses my husband. I can read a book ten times and still be surprised at the ending because I forgot what happened.

However, when I read serious literature, I try to slow myself down. I'll use a pencil to underline, which forces me to stop and pay more careful attention to what I'm reading. And, if it's religious literature, I will often copy quotes into a journal so I can remember what I read.


----------



## Herald (Sep 15, 2008)

Southern Presbyterian said:


> North Jersey Baptist said:
> 
> 
> > Don't read. Just look at picture books.
> ...



touche


----------

