News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Things I Should Have Known at 20 by pg on Friday June 01, 2012 @02:49AM (#4052288)
There are several different types of reading slowly.

Math is slow because you have to work things out as you read it.

Books written very long ago are slow because I read them like a detective, looking not just at what the author means to say, but also at what he's saying implicitly about how things were at the time.

Other books I read slowly because they're so good I don't want them to end. I used to have to make a conscious effort to make Patrick O'Brian novels last, and I stopped reading them at about number 12, to save the rest for later. (I worry though that I wouldn't like them so much now.)

Re:Things I Should Have Known at 20 by reneherse on Friday June 01, 2012 @03:02AM (#4052320)
If I could do it over, I'd read O'Brian's novels with several months to a year between each one (perhaps one every winter and summer solstice). There's really something to be said about savoring such an authentically detailed, nuanced, and intellectual universe.

As it is, I find my recollections of the Aubrey-Maturin adventures muddled and vague, since I burned through the first 20 at an addict's pace. Not recommended.

Re:Things I Should Have Known at 20 by timclark on Friday June 01, 2012 @04:56AM (#4052580)
They keep going with the same level of quality until the very end. Even the three draft chapters of the unfinished 21st volume left me wanting more.
Re:Things I Should Have Known at 20 by r7000 on Friday June 01, 2012 @11:46AM (#4054045)
Agreed. I read them as slowly as I could manage over the course of about five years. Even 21 was a great read. I was blown away that I was still maintaining the same enjoyment 15, 16 books in. I just assumed the quality would have had to deteriorate. Although O'Brian does get a lot of reuse out of Stephen's joke about the dog watch being cur-tailed.

I wish I still had eight and a half more to go!