Reading: Quantity vs. Quality?

[FNAWrite]

Put me down for disagreeing with the premise as well. Slow readers get more from a book than fast readers? Yeah, you slow readers wish that. (kidding).

As noted elsewhere, there's different kinds of reading. No I don't give the same level of attention to MC Beaton's Death of a Macho Man as I do to Kitty ferguson's The Music of Pythagoras and I don't think anyone should. How much am I supposed to take out of the Beaton book? All I want to take out of it is a couple hours of pleasure. Many books are like that. At least for me, that's what makes up the bulk of the books I read. A book like the Ferguson referenced above will take a week to read, but I can read a couple few lesser books (yes, there are such things, all books are not crerated equal) at the same time.

As noted above, I also will pick up another book immediately upon finishing reading.

As for a question above, about how long to read Slaughterhouse Five, it is only a couple of hundred pages - I'd guess between 3 tor 5 hours, easily done in a night.

[The Bookaholic]

Quality definetly, I feel like you get more out of a book.

[Amna Khalid]

I think reading more and remembering less. Even if I read 1 or 2 books a month I only remember 1 or 2 of my favorite scenes, but no more than that. So, I would prefer reading more books cause time is less and books are many.

[Steinkar]

It depends on my goal. As a literature teacher, I obviously had to read and reread and analyze many texts. I loved doing that and teaching kids how to do it. However, reading for pleasure is much different for me. Sometimes, I just want to get lost with the characters on their adventures.

[Rosemary Owolabi]

I rarely read, I like to jot down my thoughts and ideas instead. But I am getting back on the horse now, read, read and read.

[Tori_J]

In life generally, reading inclusive, I always prefer quality to quantity.

[Alissa Nesson]

I think different people absorb information at different speeds, so sometimes people can read more and still remember everything they read and thoroughly enjoy it. If it were a choice between one option or the other, I’d rather read fewer books and really enjoy them, but how quickly I read to accomplish that will be different from somebody else. But this is why I don’t pressure myself with reading goals, especially because some of the books I read are quite long.

[Varisha Khanna]

I prefer reading a book whose story I enjoy, a great quality book. If I can mange to read more books in the year which are of great quality then perfect! I don't ever prefer to go for quantity over quality though.

[Blueberry Dragon]

I tend to read a lot when I get going, but I'm beginning to wonder whether I should focus on reading a few, enjoying them, and rereading them, if necessary, for a better experience over all.

[Lorna Kimondo]

This was a very general way of looking into the topic, I believe the approach really depends on your goals and what you value most in your reading experience. If your aim is to deeply understand and retain the information from each book, then reading fewer books but with more focus and thoroughness might be the best approach. On the other hand, if you’re interested in broadening your perspectives, exploring diverse topics, or simply enjoying a wide range of stories, then reading more books with perhaps less depth for each can be equally fulfilling. You do not have to remember every detail. I find exploring different ideas and view points more rewarding.

[Genesis Haney]

I think that quality is much more important then quantity as an author that has 10 average books cannot match an author who has 1 book but a great one.

[George Okello 2]

It is better to read a book and understand it better.But people are different,someone have high speeding rates and can read many books in a short time and still understand them deeply.

[Koffie Solomon]

Concentrating on quantity removes the dedication and commitment needed to read books so I'll would rather prefer quality

[London Baum]

I read roughly 200 books year, I do reread a couple a year. I can do that before on a reread I read it faster, I know what happens overall so I can skim parts I know aren’t critical. I read really fast and it’s my primary hobby, I still very much in each book (excluding the ones that just aren’t great).

[Violet Devreaux]

I keep hearing about people reading hundreds of books a year.
I don't see how it is possible unless they read all their books just once.

Obviously the best option is to read a lot of books AND have a great recollection of each, but that isn't possible because all that is read is converted into short term memory and only a little of it is actually assimilated into long term memory.

So, my question is:

Is it better to read and thoroughly learn from a book (reading less per year, but gain a solid understanding of each), or is it better to reading a lot of books per year (With less understanding for each)?

Some of us are just naturally fast readers. I don't think I understand less because I read quicker.