Perhaps an odd topic title, but this question has been on my mind for the last week after I discovered that I read differently than at least two other people. This is something I've known but couldn't quite place, so here I am. As it turns out, I'm all about the details. Whenever I read a book, I absorb as much as a can about what I'm reading as I'm reading it. Sometimes I'll go back and reread to make sure I can visualize and play out the scene, characters, atmosphere and all else in my head. This has worked wonders for conceptualization purposes but unfortunately this also means I miss out on the actual story. Or rather, becoming a part of the story. Being less objective. I find I can only read a few chapters here and there which ultimately hinders me in the end as I begin to lose interest in the whole of what I'm reading and just stop altogether. I have always been this way with books, with the exception of a few. So I suppose I'm wondering, am I alone in how methodical I read? Or is there some sort of block that's preventing me from reader fulfillment (like genre, writing style)? I should also add that I'm a naturally creative/imaginative person and so I find it surprising that I struggle with just sitting down and getting lost in the story of a good book. Literature is the one art form I have the most difficulty with feeling from the heart rather than thinking from the mind. My friend thinks a World Lit class would be worth checking out - apparently students of those classes read alike (or need to in order to grasp symbolism, contrasts, characterization, and various other literary devices haha).
I read the book and mock up the scene in my mind like it's a movie. I do enjoy the details, but I only go back to re-read if I get distracted by my own thoughts. I get VERY annoyed when a book is followed by a movie and the two don't match. Since I read the book, I've basically already created the movie in my mind and seeing it on screen makes me angry when the mind version and the official version don't mesh perfectly. Eragon did this to me. Deeply aggravating. So yes, I see what you mean but I'm just not on your level. I also get lost after a few chapters in the book. If it doesn't suck me in after 2 or 3 chapters I'll never touch the book again.
I tend to prefer non-fiction over fiction, so I don't tend to visualize things. It's hard to find novels that I like, whereas I'm fascinated by true crime, and most other non-fiction genres. I do like some novels, but I find that overall they're wrought with cliches, they're harder to learn from than non-fiction (partly because of how cliche they tend to be, but also because the intent is to tell a story) and they're not gripping at all, even when they do have some originality. It's seldom to find a novelist who was both style and substance, so when they lack either I find it hard to finish reading their works, but Stephen King is a reliably good writer. When I read his stuff I don't make an effort to envision the scene as it's always written so vividly. I tend to read paragraphs multiple times to help absorb everything I'm reading, and I read no more than two chapters per time - otherwise it's an information overload. I also take notes in order to analyze the information, organize my thoughts about it, remember it better, and to summarize my thoughts but I also read aloud if I'm alone, because that hastens the process of remembering the stuff I'm reading. I pay particular attention to the new facts and information that I learn from a book to enhance my perspective and overall understanding of a subject, while filtering out everything I do know.
When I go into reading fiction if it's good I tend to just disappear into it. Completely accept that I'm within the setting of the book. Some non-fiction can do that to me too, Roger Deakin's Waterlog gets me completely immersed (pardon the pun) and I almost feel like I'm him or at least swimming in the same places. My Dad highlights passages in books that interest him or mean a lot to him, which drives my Mum nuts as she was brought up to never 'damage' books. I like borrowing a book from Dad that he's highlighted because it creates a connection by letting me see which bits meant a lot to him and that makes me think about those passages in more detail.
It depends. If it's basic facts such as history or chemistry, I put it into a figurative file in my brain. With fiction/conceptual non-fiction, it's more like a giant blackboard with the main themes/characters circled with little circles containing details/minor themes/minor characters surrounding the theme circles. I think they're rather bad analogies, but they're perfect for me, if that makes sense.
I read and imagine what the scene looks like, which is probably why I don't read fast. If I just skim through the text I can repeat it from memory, but nothing is absorbed unless I read the orginal text once again.
