I’m starting to fall behind on my self-stated goal of reading 24 books each year. I had a wicked start, but have been stuck on a single book for the last couple of months. It’s a good book, but I haven’t been taking the long chunks of time I need to get through it.
This has led me to question my fixation on reading books in particular, and the motivation behind tracking that metric of reading without bothering with anything else. As my book reading has slowed down, I have increased time going through longer investigative articles, particularly those written by The Atavist Magazine. Each is about a half hour read. Similarly, I have collections of essays and short stories I hope to make my way through, but there’s a nagging feeling that those aren’t books, and hence they don’t count towards this ideal "total" that I have in mind.
One reason to focus on books is that they are the ultimate time and attention commitment. I get to traverse a story over several hours of reading, which itself is typically spread over days. I have to keep the details somewhere in my mind, but the only way (for me) to do so is by reading for at least a half hour of mostly consecutive time. I get put on edge, and experience immense buildup and resolution that is almost never found elsewhere. Books have historically had the largest affect on me out of all forms of media, and so I feel compelled to keep track of them.
However, I also began tracking books to hold myself accountable, and encourage myself to read more often. I don’t want to be between books for any period of time, and I try to read every day. Yet I’m trying to balance that desire with wanting to go outside and exercise.
Perhaps the happy medium is a binge and rest way of reading books. Take a week to really kill a book, then in an "off week" read lighter, or shorter, material.
While this post has no answers, it’s allowed to me to consider the reading habits I’ve formed, and examine the mental model I have about what "counts" as reading. I’ll see where this can lead me.