Diary - Today, I read a book about reading skills.

[Maybo]

This is an entry from my diary. Please check it and correct any mistakes.

Today, I read a book about reading skills. The writer mentioned that when we decide on whether to read a book or not, we can try to start from reading the middle part of it because if there are any structural or logical problems, it's easy to be shown. I agree with him because sometimes, when I read novels, I find every opening of them are intriguing but as I continue, some are getting lengthy and boring. I still remember a writer used a long paragraph to describe sand and stones which made me lose interest.

 

[emsr2d2]

Today, I read a book about reading skills containing tips on how to decide whether to read a particular novel or not. The writer author mentioned that when we decide on whether to read a book or not, we can try to suggested start from reading a few pages from the middle part of it the book because it will be easy to spot because if there are any structural or logical problems. it's easy to be shown.

I agree with him. because Sometimes no comma here when I read novels, I find every opening of them are the beginning intriguing but, as I continue, some are getting they become lengthy and boring. I still remember a writer used reading a long paragraph to that described sand and stones, which and it made me lose interest in the whole book.

See above. In your opening sentence, try to include more information about what you're going to be talking about. The book you read wasn't about "reading skills" at all.

I'm not sure I agree with the author at all. He seems to think that writers might wait until the middle of a book before producing "structural or logical problems" (I don't actually know what that means - tell me what you think it means).

In my experience, the blurb on the back of a book usually makes it look pretty interesting but within the first four or five pages, I know if I'm going to continue reading it or if it's just not my cup of tea.

 

[Maybo]

I'm not sure I agree with the author at all. He seems to think that writers might wait until the middle of a book before producing "structural or logical problems" (I don't actually know what that means - tell me what you think it means).

He thinks that most people would read the opening of a book and decide to buy it. However, he suggests reading a few pages from the middle of the book first because that part is usually the weakest. For example, someone is writing a science book and he has coherence or logical problems, it will be spotted easily in the middle chapters. That method can be applied to reading other books.

 

[emsr2d2]

He thinks that most people would read the opening of a book and decide to buy it. However, he suggests reading a few pages from the middle of the book first because that part is usually the weakest. For example, someone is writing a science book and he has coherence or logical problems, it would be spotted easily in the middle chapters. That method can be applied to reading other books.

Well, I disagree with his opinion. Also, I was under the impression you were talking about novels. I wouldn't expect factual/scientific/non-fiction books to suffer this problem. I still don't understand why the "coherence or logical problems" would be clear in the middle of a book. If you haven't read the beginning of the book, the middle is very unlikely to make sense!
Can you tell us the name of the book and the author please?

 

[Maybo]

Well, I disagree with his opinion. Also, I was under the impression you were talking about novels. I wouldn't expect factual/scientific/non-fiction books to suffer this problem. I still don't understand why the "coherence or logical problems" would be clear in the middle of a book. If you haven't read the beginning of the book, the middle is very unlikely to make sense!
Can you tell us the name of the book and the author please?

I read it in a library. The book is a Japanese book and its Chinese translation name is “the skills of reading”. I already forgot the name of the author because I didn’t borrow it.

 

[Maybo]

Well, I disagree with his opinion. Also, I was under the impression you were talking about novels. I wouldn't expect factual/scientific/non-fiction books to suffer this problem. I still don't understand why the "coherence or logical problems" would be clear in the middle of a book. If you haven't read the beginning of the book, the middle is very unlikely to make sense.

Maybe some science books have different chapters and they can be read by topics. Usually, the topics would be more and more difficult as it goes. Maybe he thinks that some writers can’t manage difficult concepts and these could be spotted easily in the middle. That’s what I guess.

 

[Tarheel]

@Maybo
I can read the first few pages of a book and decide if it appeals to me.

I'm not sure what you mean by logic problems.

 

[Maybo]

@Maybo

I can read the first few pages of a book and decide if it appeals to me.

I'm not sure what you mean by logic problems.

The author thinks that some weak writers can handle easy thoeries and explain them clearly but as they explain more difficult theories, they cannot handle and make a mess.

 

[Maybo]

I think the author focus more on academic books and his main point is “the middle part of a book is usually weakest. If a writer has problems of writing, the middle part is the most obvious.” I think his suggestion could be applied to other books so I talked about novels. When I read novels, the first part is usually good and sometimes the middle is boring. (In a novel, I don’t focus much on logical problems but storytelling) If I had seen the long paragraph that described sand and stones earlier, I’m sure I would not have bought that book.

Maybe when “the skills of reading” book has the English translation, everything will be explained clearer.

 

[Tarheel]

@Maybo

The author thinks that some weak writers can handle easy thoeries and explain them clearly but as they explain more difficult theories, they cannot THEM handle and make a mess OF THINGS.

That's not about the writing itself. That's saying some people write about things they don't fully understand. (If you're not an expert yourself how do you know if somebody else has it wrong?)
**theories

 

[Tarheel]

I guess you don't want to read "Moby Dick".

 

[Maybo]

That's not about the writing itself. That's saying some people write about things they don't fully understand. (If you're not an expert yourself how do you know if somebody else has it wrong?)
**theories

Of course if someone is a beginner, it's impossible for him to know if somebody else is wrong. However, If someone is a language teacher and he sees a new grammar book, he can read advanced grammar chapters in that book to see if the writer explains rules well or not(or even the rules are wrong!).
The author is just trying to give suggestions for choosing books. Of course, his suggestions might not suit everyone or every situation. I just described my thoughts in a diary and I'm not trying to convince anyone to follow his suggestions.

 

[Tarheel]

I didn't know you were talking about grammar. In that case, I might look through it to see what the different chapters looked like.

Do you like books about science?

 

[Maybo]

Do you like books about science?

I like science fiction but I don’t like science.

 

[Tarheel]

I recently talked to somebody about the discovery of penicillin. Do you know that story?