<p>I realized in the second-half of my junior year that while I was reading, I wasn’t reading for “fun.” My reading consisted exclusively of textbooks and AP review books. Since I used to read for fun all the time, that bothered me quite a bit.</p>
<p>My English teacher assigned my group Their Eyes Were Watching God a week before AP exams started. Naturally, even though I very much wanted to read for fun, I couldn’t; the timing wasn’t right.</p>
<p>At the same time, I knew from experience that I would be emotionally and physically drained after finishing my last AP exam and that the last two weeks of school were mostly pointless. Thus, I wasn’t sure if I would be in the mood to read.</p>
<p>As it turned out, that was the ideal state to rekindle my love of “fun” reading. I opened Their Eyes Were Watching God, survived the initial barrage of ebonics, and discovered that I was reading a masterpiece. Though I had been assigned the book, I truly enjoyed it. My love was back.</p>
<p>So, how do you relearn pleasure reading? You just need to enjoy one book, and it’ll all come back. Which book, you say? Now that I can’t tell you. Go find out!</p>
<p>Interesting question. I would like to know people’s thoughts, too. Ever since high school, I’ve been unable to read anything but math books – as a diversion, I am thinking of reading a quantum mechanics book. That’s how bad it is – and I used to read for fun too. Can’t do it anymore. Come up with brilliant solutions, people!</p>
<p>This would be my best guess too – try reading something light and fun, that way it’s almost like watching a movie, which you probably can still do for pleasure. Slowly attempt to transition. This is probably the approach I’d take if I had the motivation!</p>
<p>are you reading books on topics you enjoy? I mean I don’t know how pleasurable reading War & Peace is for anybody. I think you should look for books that talk about things that you are really interested in like politics, war, love/romance, history, etc.</p>
<p>I say don’t read for pleasure. Just read Wikipedia. You get all the information without the actual reading. I’ts quick and effective, unlike actual reading which can be rather laborious. On Wikipedia, I’ve read many classic nvoels, like Brave New World, The Trial, Catcher in the Rye, etc. </p>
<p>I’m totally serious too. If that’s a little too abridged for you, there’s always Sparknotes. Though that wouldn’t include non-fiction.</p>
<p>Definitely get a book that sucks you right into the story from the first page and never lets up. For someone at your age, I’d say if you haven’t read the Da Vinci Code, try that. It’s a page-turner and way better than the movie. Or you could try re-reading books you have read before so you don’t spend so much time analyzing and looking up vocabulary. Is there a certain kind of book you really like? If so, tell us and folks can give you ideas for new books to read in that genre.</p>
<p>You should read stuff that’s fun and well-written, but not too sophisticated. If you like science fiction, read some Asimov, for example. Read some Tom Clancy novels. Stephen King, maybe.</p>
<p>Tom Clancy and Stephen King are kind of heavy for someone who is struggling. I would suggest Jodi Piccoult, Dean Koonz, the Harry Potter books are long but flow easily.</p>
<p>You just need to pick the right kind of books that hold your interest.</p>
<p>P.G. Wodehouse. Start with something like a collection of short stories if you’re struggling. They’re very funny if you have the right kind of sense of humor.</p>
<p>One could get more out of reading the book entertainment and educational wise. If a book is very good, it will be worth it. Wikipedia would dry in comparison and spoil good books if read first. If one is going to read Wikipedia, they should do so after reading the book to see if they have similar interpretations or to learn about the background of the novel. Wikipedia should be treated as an additional supplement instead.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Doesn’t this person want to read for fun? I don’t think this person is trying to skim through required novels for a test or paper. Reading is only laborious if you don’t like the book or you haven’t read in awhile. When I say reading, I mean a physical novel. It’s like building up stamina for a workout. Once one is gets up to a certain level of fitness, it’s not so laborious anymore.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you actually tell people you have read these novels while they think that you’ve actually read the novel rather than just the Wikipedia entry? I’m not trying to be mean, I’m just curious.</p>
<p>I agree that you should reread a childhood favorite. I, too, sometimes become disenchanted with reading when I’m burnt out on analysis from school and there’s nothing like an old favorite to get you back into your love of reading.</p>
<p>I’m a little odd. I have no attention span, but I love gaining knowledge. I honestly can’t read a selected work for more than maybe 5 minutes. That’s why I love Wikipedia. It has a ton of knowledge, but it’s short and quick.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No offense. I don’t think this has ever come up. So I can’t really answer it.</p>
<p>Wikipedia saved me from books like The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Beautiful story but too much description of walls and chairs. It feels a bit cheap to “read” the book that way, but it’s a lifesaver…</p>
Come up with brilliant solutions, people!</p>