Non Fiction readers

[MotherLodeBeth]

I read non fiction and rarely ever read fiction. Am curious how many others dont read fiction, and if so why not?

~Beth~

[natselrox]

I gave up fiction two years ago. I feel it's more of a waste of time. And I'm seriously and desperately short of time now. But somehow I manage to find time to post a lot in this forum! Damn! Atheism is addictive!

[glopez]

Fiction bores me. I l enjoy reading is that are intelligent and or invormative

[glopez]

That was a spelling fuck up but whatever

[Guy McNally]

I don't avoid fiction as much as I gravitate toward non-fiction. I feel like I need to be learning something while I'm reading. Whether that actually happens is another thing.

[toejoetwo]

Fiction bores me. I l enjoy reading is that are intelligent and or invormative

The implication here is that all fiction is boring and unintelligent. I disagree. The best writer for example in SF is Alistair Reynolds, an astrophysicist whose best work is absolutely stunning and who I would recommend to anyone. Also you would have a very hard job making a convincing case that Shakespeare, Dickens, Christie and Orwell for example were dull and mundane. Just because an author chooses to write fiction doesn't mean one shouldn't read them. Having said that, the last three books I've bought have all been factual: Climbing Mount Improbable by RD, Freedom Next Time by John Pilger and Nixon and Kissinger by Robert Dallek. I think it is important that one reads quality non-fiction, but we shouldn't get elitist about this. Let people read whatever they want. Remember that sometimes they want to escape, something for which fiction is totally suitable. It isn't imperative that we learn something every time we turn a page. I am sure that Richard for example reads fiction. I would be very surprised if every purchase of his was on Evolution. Each to his own, I say. For me, it's too many books, not enough time!

[CdesignProponentsist]

The only thing I read anymore are science mags and books. Scientific American mostly. Elegant universe was the last book I read really. Before that I read Black holes and Time Warps by Kip Thorne.

[MotherLodeBeth]

Fiction bores me. I l enjoy reading is that are intelligent and or invormative

The implication here is that all fiction is boring and unintelligent. I disagree. The best writer for example in SF is Alistair Reynolds, an astrophysicist whose best work is absolutely stunning and who I would recommend to anyone. Also you would have a very hard job making a convincing case that Shakespeare, Dickens, Christie and Orwell for example were dull and mundane.

Am commenting on this part of your post. You are 100% correct. And I do like them as well as other fiction writers, but most were authors from before I was born. Its just that Dawkins, Hitchens and others deal with issues of today and give me so much food for thought. And I am an avid readers, and read on average three books per week.

~Beth~

[stargazerthree]

And I am an avid readers, and read on average three books per week.

Really? Either you read very fast or the books in question are rather short. I do not work so have free time 24/7. If I were to read a four hundred page novel, it would take me at least three days. I remember reading It by Stephen King in seven days: it's 1,116 pages. I have actually read a book in a single day. That was The Rats by James Herbert. It was only 189 pages. Do you have a particularly high speed or is it that you simply read for very long periods of time? It's not that I doubt you, but you must be really dedicated if you get through that much so quickly. It's probably not a good idea since the quicker you read, the less time you tend to absorb. Nevertheless, I am impressed! Herculean or what? I can read quite fast myself, but tend to gravitate towards a soberly medium pace.

[MAPN]

For most of my life I've leaned toward fiction for my recreational reading. I suspect it's because, as a child, reading was my main available form of entertainment. No TV (very unusual even then) or any of the electronic timewasters available today. Most of my non-fiction reading has always been history.

In middle age I've become increasingly aware of the vast gaps in my knowledge, and have started reading a lot more science and philosophy, even trying to learn some more math. I still like fiction, though, and have never understood how it's possible to find fiction in general to be boring. Just one of those matters of taste, I suppose.

[j.mills]

Used to read mostly fiction, now I alternate fiction and non-fiction books. If I didn't follow that rule, I'd probably gravitate towards non-fiction more these days, but I want to maintain a balance - not least to provide fuel to my own futile writing ambitions. But also because fiction opens you to other worlds and perspectives, exercising the mind and emotions in ways different to those of factual books. That is to say: it's fun!

Shakespeare, Dickens, Christie and Orwell

Christie? Who s/he?

[MotherLodeBeth]

And I am an avid readers, and read on average three books per week.

Really? Either you read very fast or the books in question are rather short. I do not work so have free time 24/7. If I were to read a four hundred page novel, it would take me at least three days. I remember reading It by Stephen King in seven days: it's 1,116 pages. I have actually read a book in a single day. That was The Rats by James Herbert. It was only 189 pages. Do you have a particularly high speed or is it that you simply read for very long periods of time? It's not that I doubt you, but you must be really dedicated if you get through that much so quickly. It's probably not a good idea since the quicker you read, the less time you tend to absorb. Nevertheless, I am impressed! Herculean or what? I can read quite fast myself, but tend to gravitate towards a soberly medium pace.

After my husband was disabled and couldn't read for himself, I started reading books aloud to him, and to keep myself from being bored (long story) I hit upon the idea of reading 1-3 chapters from three books per day aloud, and discovered I never was bored of what I was reading, and that within seven days I had gone thru three books. And no these were not and are not short books. Give me a book I love and I am so dang happy. And I miss reading aloud and then pausing to talk about what I just read. ~Beth~

[j.mills]

I should think that reading aloud to someone else compels you to maintain the pace, whereas reading to oneself permits the mind to wander off for a while. Similarly, it takes me far longer to read a Shakespeare play than it does to watch one, even though it's the same number of words to take in!

EDIT: There used to be a speed-reading thread around here somewhere, but beggared if I can find it.

[Dummkopf]

I gave up fiction two years ago. I feel it's more of a waste of time. And I'm seriously and desperately short of time now. But somehow I manage to find time to post a lot in this forum! Damn! Atheism is addictive!

This is the reason why I stopped reading fiction. Not saying you can't learn valuable things from fiction, just I feel I have better things to be reading. That said, I still have a fat, and I mean thousand page long, Tolstoy collection waiting for me when I finish everything else I brand more important.

[TBOARDMAN]

I read non fiction and rarely ever read fiction. Am curious how many others dont read fiction, and if so why not?

~Beth~

I have chosen to read non-fiction over fiction becausse I find truth more interesting--but now, as a theology student I'm back to fiction

[natselrox]

I gave up fiction two years ago. I feel it's more of a waste of time. And I'm seriously and desperately short of time now. But somehow I manage to find time to post a lot in this forum! Damn! Atheism is addictive!

This is the reason why I stopped reading fiction. Not saying you can't learn valuable things from fiction, just I feel I have better things to be reading. That said, I still have a fat, and I mean thousand page long, Tolstoy collection waiting for me when I finish everything else I brand more important.

Tolstoy is waiting for me too!!

[pcCoder]

I prefer non-fiction. If I read fiction I prefer short stories that can be completed fairly quickly. Personally if I want fiction I may just play a game or watch the television. I guess maybe it's because I like to learn new things or learn additional stuff about things I already know.

[James5D]

Having read a fair bit of fiction....only a very few stick in the mind....Shogun by James Clavell, as well as King Rat by same author.....and of course The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien.....there are others I've enjoyed, but these days I am getting a lot more out of my non-fiction reading.

[Varangian]

Used to read mostly fiction, now I alternate fiction and non-fiction books. If I didn't follow that rule, I'd probably gravitate towards non-fiction more these days, but I want to maintain a balance - not least to provide fuel to my own futile writing ambitions. But also because fiction opens you to other worlds and perspectives, exercising the mind and emotions in ways different to those of factual books. That is to say: it's fun!

I'm alternating between fiction and non-fiction for pretty much the same reasons. As I'm into WW2, I prefer an memoir before a fictious account, though.

[Dummkopf]

I gave up fiction two years ago. I feel it's more of a waste of time. And I'm seriously and desperately short of time now. But somehow I manage to find time to post a lot in this forum! Damn! Atheism is addictive!

This is the reason why I stopped reading fiction. Not saying you can't learn valuable things from fiction, just I feel I have better things to be reading. That said, I still have a fat, and I mean thousand page long, Tolstoy collection waiting for me when I finish everything else I brand more important.

Tolstoy is waiting for me too!!

Oh snap.

[Primate]

I read 95% non-fiction. I do like me some Dostoevsky, and Herman Hesse occasionally. I figure if I'm going to read fiction, it has to be something great. I liked Dune, too. Lately I have only had time to read my organic chemistry and physics textbooks. O-chem is pretty amazing, to say the least!

[Russell]

Nearly everything I read is non-fiction. Undoubtedly there is much fiction I would enjoy, but find it easier to get non-fiction as it is more of a known quantity. With non-fiction I know where to start, but tend to get baffled by the choice when I think about getting fiction.

[TBickle]

99 percent of my reading is non-fiction. Reality is often more interesting and strange than fiction.

[Grizby]

I'm definitely in a non-fiction phase at the moment (actually last two years). I think it's because as I learn more I'm finding truth is far stranger than fiction and a lot more interesting... although I'm tempted to revisit the Hitchikers Guide To The Galaxy some time soon.

[Tom Morris]

All my reading is non-fiction. Postgraduate study in philosophy tends to involve reading ridiculous amounts. I get my fiction fix from TV/movies, which I tend to watch when I'm too tired to read (or theatre occasionally). I know this makes me a very unbalanced person and I really need to remedy my lack of fiction soon.