On numbers

If you follow my book reviews, you know that I've always kept track of the number of books I've read each year. I started doing this a long time ago-- back in 2005, I think, when I came across the "50 Book Challenge" as a blog meme. I wanted to make sure that I could read 50 books in a year, so I started reviewing them on my blog (this was back at a time when everything I did made it onto the blog), and I kept track of how many I'd read just to make sure I could hit fifty. I met the goal and then signed up for another year, and another, and another. Most years, I read more than I'd read the previous year, but I did have a few years that were a little slow. I did this mainly for myself, because I wanted to know how much I'd read, but after 2012, I'm abandoning the running ticker.

I'm doing this for a whole bunch of reasons. First of all, I realize that having a running ticker is a little braggy, which was not my original intent. Secondly, I sometimes find that I shy away from long or challenging books that I know will take me a long time to read because I know that they will mess with my average. I don't want to sacrifice quality for quantity. Back when I started back at school a few years ago, I thought my average would go down because I wouldn't have much time to read, but I found that between listening to audiobooks for two hours each day and doing lots of reading for class, I actually read more than I'd done previously. But with a toddler underfoot all day, and a job, and four big kids, I am definitely not reading as much this year. And next year, when I have two toddlers, I have a feeling it's going to be worse. And I don't want to have to stress about how much I read, since reading is supposed to be a pleasant escapism, not a death march. So there you have it-- starting January 1st, I'll still be providing short book reviews, but I'm abandoning the annoying counter of exactly how many books I've read. Add them up yourself if it's important for you to know.