Look at me: participating in Sunday Salon!
It’s a dual thing this morning… a response in Suey’s recommendation that I blather more and a column in this morning’s paper about reading only one novel at a time. The author, Lisa McLendon, wrote about how she finds it difficult to read multiple books, commenting:
Confusion aside, reading multiple books at once seems to me to give short shrift to all of the books involved. You can’t give your undivided attention to a book if another book beckons from the coffee table, competing for your eyes. Plus, when a novel transports you to another place, placing you inside another person’s life, it feels almost like two-timing to delve just as deeply into something else.
She ends the piece by asking for responses: how do those of you who read multiple books do it?
I have to say that for many, many years I was on the same page as Lisa: I only read one book at a time, savoring it fully to its conclusion (whether it was good or bad) before moving on to another one. And, honestly: for the most part, I still do that. I’m not a serial double-booker (or triple-booker), I do feel like I should give each book its due; that the time the author put into writing it is deserving of the time I can put into reading it.
However… lately (meaning the last couple of years), that’s not always been the case. Partially, it’s due to book blogging: there are now so many more books I want to read and not enough hours in the day, that I feel almost compelled to double book. But I do it carefully. Take the last couple of weeks, for instance.
I decided to pluck Tess of the d’Urbervilles off my pile. I started reading, trying to get into the language and plot and characters of the dense Hardy novel. Then, I popped by the library and saw that this years’ big read was Edgar Allan Poe. I figured, what the heck, why not pick that up, to. Except that it was a 14-day check-out, as opposed to the usual four week. So, it got bumped to the top of the pile. I didn’t want to give up on Tess, and I needed to read Edgar… so I alternated. I’d read one story of Poe’s (or a couple of poems), and then a couple of chapters of Tess. Then, because all that 19th-century language (and depressing plots) was dragging me down, I complimented them both with a bunch of YA and Middle Grade novels.
So, my reading went like this: one Poe story, two or three chapters of Tess (I’m almost done with it!), half of a contemporary novel. Lather, rinse, repeat.
But how did I keep them all straight?
Partially it’s because when I double- (or triple, in this instance) book, I choose novels that are so far removed from each other they’re easy to keep straight. I’m not going to go confusing plots from a Poe story with the drama in Tess’s life with the middle-grade Indian fantasy. I think that’s crucial, actually: as Lisa pointed out in her piece, if you pick two books (they don’t have to be novels) that are similar in any way, then the tendency to get them confused will be stronger.
It would also help if I took notes on the book — I have noticed that when I double-book too closely, my posts are not as detailed (or as good) as when I only read one at a time.
But, until my reading list gets shorter, or someone invents a way to have 26 hours in a day (with the extra two devoted entirely to reading!), then double-booking is the only way I’m going to get through all the books I want to.
What about you? Do you double-book? If so, how do you manage it? If not, why not?
The Book Nut 
I tend to read more than one book at a time, but not always. I'm not sure how I manage it. I just read what I feel like at the time. I double up especially when one book is really long or difficult.
LikeLike
My standard reading involves quadruple-booking! 🙂 I read 50 pages of each (unless I feel like reading more! but 50 is the minimum) and alternate fic/nonfic/fic/nonfic. I also make sure the nonfic and fic books are from different genres (like you). I find it pretty simple to keep things divided that way…of course, sometimes a book really grabs my attention and I read it straight through, but that's pretty rare. 🙂
I don't feel guilty about quadruple-booking. To me, it's like having a well-rounded meal instead of eating just one thing.
LikeLike
I used to read more than one book at a time, but not really this year… I am not sure what changed, but for whatever reason I have stuck with just reading one book at a time. I keep thinking I should go back to my old habits of reading more than one, but it hasn't happened yet. I also cut back on my non-fiction reading this year, which is horrible, but I think that is why. I used to read fiction and non-fiction at the same time… I think in 2010 if I want to work non-fiction back in I will have to go back to more than one book at a time!
LikeLike
Yes, I doouble book. Usually I can only do 2 books at a time although I have done 3.
Usually I'm reading one classic for my book club- so I only read that week's milestone. Then I read one for pleasure and the past few weeks I've been reading a book of short stories.
It doesn't really bother me. I understand what is going on in each book.
LikeLike
I'm doing it right now. For awhile, I had Lolita, Dracula, The Feminine Mystique (at least that one is on audio) and Baking Cakes in Kigali going. I feel so scattered, though.
I've finished Lolita and Cakes, but I'm not sure I'm up for just Dracula, so I'm sure I'll find something else. Even though I feel scattered, some books are still a little much on their own.
LikeLike
I realize that you are backed up with book to read, howver if you want a book to read while you lay back and relax, check out the new fantasy novel, “Gateway to DreamWorld,” was released last month. It will take his mind off of the harsh reality around him.
The book is listed on Amazon.com or Barnes&Nobles.com
LikeLike
I tend to read just one book at a time and even if I do happen to have multiple books going at once (like one at work and one at home) there's always one that gets the most reading time. I find if I read more than one book, my immersion in the books is not as complete (and thus my enjoyment is lessened) as it would be when I read just the one book.
LikeLike
You know, there's really no method to my madness. What you've described sounds exactly like what I do pretty much. I read what I “need” to read, when I need to read it. I'll start something, drop it, pick up something else, come back to the first thing. Sometimes I'll start something thinking I'll just read a bit, then get caught up in it and read the whole thing before I go back to other things. It's just all over the place. But like you I'm usually mixing up the genres so things don't get too confusing.
Only two extra hours a day for just reading? I'd ask for twice that! 🙂
LikeLike
I am almost always reading multiple books at a time. I think it is because I'm over-committed.
I've almost always got something going for a book club or reading group or here lately my mother-daughter reading challenge. And I've almost always got at least one classic that I'm reading.
And I usually have one book from the library pile at least.
Plus one book from my own tower of review copies.
I like to layer my reading, if that makes sense. Have one book I'm *nearly* finished with (100 to 150 pages left) one book I'm halfway through, and one book that I'm just getting started in. Does that make me weird?
LikeLike
Eva– I like that comparison. Very apt. And quadruple-booking? Wow.
Kailana — that's interesting that it was the non-fiction that bumped in your reading lineup. I have noticed that mine has gone down, too… maybe I'm just double-booking with the wrong books?
softdrink — I'd forgotten about double booking with audio books. I know lots of bloggers do that: have one in print, and then one to listen to while commuting to/from work. I'm sorry you're not up for Dracula, though. I loved it when I read it last year.
Suey — yeah, I probably should. Maybe a whole extra reading day once or twice a week?
Becky — You're not weird. I've often wondered how you get so many books read! And layering is an interesting way to accomplish that.
LikeLike
I don't know that I've ever read more than one book at a time. I'm pretty sure I haven't, but who knows. The only exception I'll make is reading both an audiobook and a hard copy at the same time. Sometimes I find myself confusing the two, but I like both formats (so far . . . I am really new to audiobooks).
LikeLike
I double- and triple-book. I do get confused from time to time, or the storyline gets stale and I sit there wondering where a particular character came from. On the whole, however, I prefer to have more than one book going because I often get bored with a single book unless it is an absolute page-turner.
LikeLike
The only way I double-book is I read one book and I listen to another book on audio when I am driving.
I tried reading more than one book at a time and one of them would always get abandoned for the sake of the other so I just figured why even bother at all.
LikeLike
I absolutely suck at double-booking. I think it actually slows me down in my reading, because I'm always trying to catch myself back up when I return to one book.
But, I still try… right now, I've just started a novel and a nonfiction parenting book. So, very, very different, and we'll see how I can balance it…
LikeLike