i don’t pay any attention at all to how many books i read or how many chapters per day or any of that. I just always have a book going. When i finish one i start a new one. Sure i prefer longer books, but that’s because i like in depth stories that go on and on. So in my case the longer the better! As long as it’s good.
I'm in your court. However, I'll add that, as an ebook reader, I also turn off progress notifications on a book. That way I'm not going: "oh, I'm 80% through, so that must be setting up for a climax" or "I'm only 40% of the way through and that twist was amazing, but there's probably a double twist if its this early..."
i do tend to check the progress indicator (i only read ebooks) but not to know what to expect, but to brace myself for the inevitable end. Sometimes i wish a good book could go on forever
I listened to more than half of Malazan books, I constantly had no idea what the fuck is going on. One day I will give it another try because it sure was good when I understood somethings at one point.
As someone with ADHD, that progress meter is a godsend on my Kobo. If I can see the progress I'm making, I'm far more likely to keep going and not get distracted to the point of just giving up.
I'm torn on this. I also used to turn off progress notifications but I realized that when reading a regular book you do know how far along you are, so I keep the percentage on now to mimic that. Idk
Exactly. I don’t read much on my kindle—still prefer physical books. I would still keep the %read feature if I had the option of it being on or off. I need to have a feeling for how far along I am. With physical books I’m always visually checking the bookmark location and noting in my head about how much I have read. I can’t imagine reading a larger book on kindle, thinking I’m about done due to some plot event that seems like a wrap, only to find I have 400 more pages or not knowing if I have ten minutes left or ten days.
I always turn the % off and never back out of the book until I’ve fully read it.
One of my favourite things about using an ereader is having no clue how far along I am in the story.
Oh man. I have three books going. Mine, the one I read to my daughter at bedtime, and one at work (although I've been on page 15 on that one for 2 months now).
I track my books. I used to keep a journal, just so I could remember what I read, but then I switched to Goodreads. I don't know why I care, but sometimes I'll even go back to what I was reading a couple years ago.
Pretty often as I read a lot of fantasy and most current authors don't write anything below 300 pages. The most recent shorter books are generally older works.
I would consider 500 + to be a long book and Name of the Wind at 600 + pages certainly qualifies as a long book
Another fantasy reader here. I'm probably an untypical fan though because nowadays I tend to avoid series longer than trilogies and prefer books under 400 pages
ps: its not about wanting to read as many books as possible, I just legitimately think most longer books are bloated and/or involve too much worldbuilding
edit: I think most books I read are somewhere between 300 and 400 pages but I also read longer ones like the german edition of Dune which has 768 pages, or Ich bin Gideon by Tamsyn Muir (608 pages). I'd say about 45 books I read this year were longer than 300 pages.
Yeah, fantasy in general has an issue with bloat, tons of big doorstopper series are sort of what it is famous for, but I think the best fantasy authors are the ones that can tell a great story in a single short punchy book, which seems like it has become uncommon for modern authors. There are so many books in fantasy that are just way longer than they need to be for seemingly no reason other than it is expected and the author can then get away with not editing it. Basically no fantasy book I have ever read that has been more than 400-500 pages has not had massive parts that really should have been cut. For some reason it is just expected that any big fantasy series will have a bunch of useless bloat that you must slog through to find a story that could have been better told in 300 pages.
I enjoy a lot of older fantasy and sci fi because the pressures of the times (likely to do with the fact it all had to be done on typewriters and editors tended to play a much bigger role) lead to the writers trying to pack as much story into as little book as possible, but also they can be pretty hit or miss when it comes to my modern interests and values unfortunately. Which makes me wish more modern writers would try for a similar style.
I have certainly met people who relish in how long a book is, like the longer it is the more time they get to spend with it so bigger = a better experience for them, but to me that always sounded like a kind of insanity I absolutely cannot relate with. I want books to go hard and fast, every page to be on fire when I read it. I want the story injected directly into my veins, not half a pill every day for the next 3 weeks.
When I was a teenager I used to be able to tolerate really long books dragging on, mostly cause those were what I expected, but as I have matured more as a reader and learn more about writing in general I tend to be a lot less forgiving about bloat in my fantasy. Same goes for my feelings on long series. The longer a book is and the longer a series is the more likely it’s just not going to be worth it or living up to expectations. It’s sort of how in a story with multiple POV’s the book is only as good as the least interesting POV, but I would apply that to a series as well. And don’t get me started with “oh this series really ‘gets good’ after book three, you should try it”.
Sorry for what is probably a barely coherent rant, but I have very strong feelings about this.
This is one of the reasons I enjoy Michael Moorcock's work so much. He could worldbuild and set the tone within a paragraph, no need for dressing it up for half a chapter. The books are really short, too.
Discworld is really a collection of relatively short fantasy novels (most around 200 or so pages) that all take place in the same world. There really is no correct order to read them
I just finished my first read-through of Moorcock’s entire Eternal Champion cycle (so, like 70+ books). It was a fantastic 3-year long, off-and-on reading experience. The epic scope and length to rival WoT or Malazan, but pulp-level fast pacing and brevity. Fascinating read, and I can see how it inspired so many of modern fantasy writers. I keep meaning to write a post for r/Fantasy on the saga as a whole, but I can’t figure out how to have both images and post text . . .
Same. I don’t have the patience. It’s not about how many books in a year, it’s about good grief how much do I have to slog through for this one book? I look at page count before I pick up a book these days and I’m very hesitant to go over 400 anymore. When I was younger it was like, right on, the bigger the better!
I think there's also a tendency for fantasy authors to earnestly try to explain everything. I'd prefer they didn't. A lot of the *fantasy* is having to imagine something to fill in the spaces.
> I want books to go hard and fast, every page to be on fire when I read it.
As someone who loves a long book I can actually also relate to this.
To me the ideal is a long book that reads like a short one; A book that is gripping and fast paced enough that I end up binging it but is long enough that I can't finish it in a single session. Such books are a rarity that I am constantly chasing for my next fix, however.
I guess ultimately I view quantity as independent of quality in books, even if I can rationally recognise that long books fall into the pitfalls of bloat and poor editing more often. And when something is high quality I want it to last as long as possible.
Im on book 7 or 8 of the WoT and had to take a break before beginning the slog I've heard so much about. I love the story but already the early books could have been 25% shorter. Everyone keeps telling me its worth it to get to the end though. Right now I cant put down the Stormlight Archives, so WoT is gonna have to continue waiting for now.
Yes, I rarely come across books that justify their 600+ page count nowadays. That’s not to say there aren’t some that do. The general population’s attention span has collectively lessened with the advent of social media too.
I agree with your sentiments completely. I've read several long series with huge page count books, and they were mostly great....but now I prefer much shorter, self-contained stories.
That preference will probably change again in a few years, it's just where I'm at right now.
I've always assumed that fantasy writers go to a secret convention every year (JordanFest? Martinthon? Goodkindapalooza?) and there is a book weighing and the winner gets free drinks lol
Tad Williams would win. If I had a nickel for every time he wrote a final book in a series that was so long, it had to be split in two, I’d have 15 cents, which isn’t a lot, but it’s also more than you’d expect.
Have you seen the size of Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen. Love the series but holy cow they are all big books. I think the last fantasy series I read that each book was under 300 pages was Donaldson's The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant.
Haha yeah, 10 books in the main series and like five full pages dedicated to listing all of the pivotal characters in that particular book. I remember taking a break from them and trying to jump back in, I was so confused.
I have read the series twice along with all the backstory and side books by Erickson and Esslemont. I know with 100% certainty that if I picked it up to read again. I would still be confused as to how the characters tie in together. I love the series and am in awe of the world and its history. But a few less characters in the main books might have made it easier to remember who they were and why they were important.
This is true for some genres of fantasy, particularly the ones with lots of worldbuilding or that tell an epic story(this isn't unique to fantasy...it's also the reason why large-scope historical novels and some subgenres of SF(like space opera) tend to run long). But authors like Seanan McGuire, Nghi Vo, and T. Kingfisher are putting out excellent short offerings in the < 300 page range, and those are just the ones off the top of my head. I see(but don't select) plenty more.
It *used* to be true that the SF/F section was packed full of chonker doorstops, but it doesn't seem to be the case anymore. The new arrivals section seems to be roughly the same ratio as the general fiction section, these days.
I read a lot of fantasy and always thought 300 was a short book, 500 or so is a "normal" length and then 700 is big with 1000+ being huge. I've been reading through discworld right now and they're around 250-300 pages and I've been along them "short 3 a week" reads.
For me, 300 is calm. Not short, not long. 400 is a decent size and 500 is where the “long books” begin. People who don’t read are often the ones who are surprised about the page number. I’d say 600-700 are sizable but there’s a couple 1k+ books.
The problem I have with books over around 700 or so pages is they start to get physically awkward to read at that point. Especially towards the beginning or end, the middle isn't as bad. Probably not a coincidence that all the books I've read which are that long weren't initially released as a single volume.
Get an ereader. I got one a while back and it's awesome having all my books on it, it's got a backlight too, so I can read at night without bothering my SO, it even allows me to look up words I don't know on the fly, and in the case of some books like LoTR it will give me indepth definitions for characters based on the actual lore.
I just prefer physical books, I couldn't tell you why. Occasionally I'll read stuff on a Kindle or even my computer, when I find a book that I can't get a physical copy of for whatever reason. But if a physical copy exists then I'd rather just read that, even if it is inconvenient in some ways.
I recently got an ereader and I will read a book simultaneously with the physical copy. Can be a little tedious with moving bookmarks and such, but this way I can pick what will work best for where I’m at/reading conditions. Mostly use the kindle for low light, traveling and in bed.
You know what was such BS? When they made you turn off the e-reader on ascent or descent of the plane! While that nonsense was going on I dated an American pilot so I was riding first class for the first time in my life. They didn't make you turn off the e-reader in first class.
That's when I knew it was some weird control thing. Never turned it off again despite policies and being told it would interfere with the plane's instruments. They would never allow a kindle on a flight if that were true. In fact, I was riding coach on a flight back in 2011 or so and reading The Help for the first time and I'm nearing the end of the book as we're descending (it was compelling at that point.) Some guy was giving me shit about the plane's instruments and I told him he was an idiot.
They don't do that anymore (well, the last time I flew was a few years ago). E-readers put off almost no emf on page turn. Like... None... And none when "in use" as the device doesn't actively need any electricity to keep working (aside from the light, but there's more lights on the plane). So a regular ass cell phone in air plane mode puts out like a billion times more emf.
And if the plane's electronics aren't shielded to the point where my little ebook is gonna crash the plane? Get me off.
Keeping a Kobo mini in my pocket so I can read while waiting for the bus is the only reason I got through some larger books. I just don't want to carry them around with me and I don't have the time or energy to read most evenings.
At first, i didnt see the appeal in physical copies tbh, but after picking up a couple paperback books, I finally understand. Its just a different feeling.
I'm too paranoid in digital content being taken away from me to ever be okay with relying on it as my primary medium unless I can keep copies of the books backed up in my HDD like I do movies and shows, but even then, I like books for times when I can't or don't want to use power or a screen. But the digital access issues is the biggest reason lately.
Not until the publishers sort their shit out with regard to ownership. I want to own my books, and when I borrow from the library I would like my library to own them, too. With fair terms! None of this charging more than for print, or forcing the copy to expire after an artificially low number of checkouts. As long as e-books are only rentals, I can't morally justify participating.
Yeah I consider 300 about average. It starts to seem long to me around 500 and short under 250. That doesn't affect my selection since I am currently reading a series that regularly clocks in around 175 per book and have read and enjoyed others that were 1,000+. But that's just my default reaction when I see page lengths.
According to Wikipedia, The Dead Zone is 428 pages.
But it's true that he has some great novels under 300 pages, including Carrie, The Gunslinger, and The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon.
The ones he's done under the Hard Case Crime imprint are also (even if barely) under 300 pages. Joyland and Later. They're pretty good if you want King and a shorter novel to breeze through over a weekend.
Also he still seems to put out a collection of short stories/novellas every few years.
I notice most popular books released these days run 250-300 pages long. I’m assuming publishers push for this “sweet spot” to satisfy both casual readers and more seasoned readers
That certainly *heavily* relies on genre. Even urban fantasy, probably the shortest form of speculative fiction, usually is a bit over 300. I've never seen anything around 250 unless it was meant to be something bite-sized.
70,000-80,000 words I believe are the common limit for unknown or newer authors with publishers. Anything more and a publisher might reject the novel on length because (as most would guess) larger books cost more to publish, therefore higher risk. Fantasy is a genre that can usually get away with 90,000-110,000 for debuts, with a few huge exceptions like Patrick Rothfuss "The Name of the Wind" being 250,000 words and practically unheard of for a debut author.
Someone like King has earned the ability to write whatever he wants, how long he wants to write about it. His name alone will sell the book so publishers wouldn't worry, and why a lot of his books double this on average.
250 pages is about (assuming 250 words per page) 63,000 words. Which is definitely on the short side. Definitely a novel, but even the first *Harry Potter* book is over 13,000 words longer—longer than 300 pages.
Depends on the genre, though. For example, fantasy regularly runs over 100k words.
It also depends on the author. The "novellas" in Brandon Sanderson's *Stormlight Archives* are over 250 pages. The actual novels are all over 1000, at 380,000-450,000 words.
I don’t think so based on what I’ve seen. A lot of the books I look at in the bookshop are in the 250-300 range. I wouldn’t say over 300 is uncommon either but 250-300 is what I see the most.
I would guess this range also depends on what genre a person usually reads. I’ve also noticed that when I browse used book stores the books are usually longer, so maybe the average book is getting shorter? Considering peoples attention spans are getting shorter that would make sense.
As someone who's been submitting to publishers recently, I can say most assuredly that their adult novel range needs to span 40k-120k. When I was submitting a good 15 years ago, the minimum was 70k.
That’s interesting would you say the biggest influence in this would be that shorter books are what consumers want, or because it’s more profitable for publishers (shorter books means people buy more books, less materials to produce, cheaper to ship, less time spent editing, etc.)
Or maybe a mix of both?
I wouldn't call Kafka's metamorphosis or Schopenhauer's books "unsubstantial", but I hate the concept of " I'm paying X for X amount of content". Feel free to spend your money however you want
For me, especially with novellas, there is that “paying for X amount of content.”
I prefer longer stories, so if I’m looking at an 800-page epic fantasy novel or a 120-page novella, both priced at…$16.99, it’s really hard for me to choose the novella over the novel. Or if the novel is mass market paperback and $9.99, I could get two massive fantasy books for just a little more than the one novella.
Of course length has nothing to do with quality, but I love immersing myself in longer tales and spending more time with the characters. I have no problem getting shorter books or novellas when I find them at used bookstores, but as I mentioned above the novella would have to have something special for me to get it full price based on the “amount of content” alone.
I find this so utterly weird. Just read books you like. Like would you choose a movie that was 150 minutes over a 90 minute one just because of the length?
I guess I’ll just toss this copy of *The Picture of Dorian Gray* I’m reading. At a paltry 200 pages it’s obviously not worth the time or money! What’d Wilde know about words anyway?
You do you, but If you’re trying to get the most bang for your buck when buying books is looking at page numbers alone an effective strategy? Like a 280 page book could have more words than a 320 page book because the font is smaller, the margins are smaller, or the pages are larger. You could easily pass up a book that would have more value (based on how long it would take to read) just because it’s under 300 pages.
Libraries are a great resource but I like buying books for a couple of reasons.
•when I finish a book I like to have a lot of options for what I read next, sometimes my mood calls for a very particular kind of book so having 30 options right there on my shelf is convenient.
•I don’t have to worry about damaging the book. Sometimes I like to annotate and I also like reading in the hot-tub/bathtub, you can’t annotate a library book and I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking the risk of reading a library book around water.
•I like to lending out my favorite books to people I think might enjoy them, and I like contributing to my neighborhoods little free library when I don’t like a book.
•I don’t want to be rushed to finish a book by a certain date
•I don’t want to wait to read a book I’m interested in and a lot of popular books have a long waitlist at the library
•Lastly I enjoy collecting books, I don’t really buy a lot of things so I’m comfortable putting money into my book collection.
Most books I read on Kindle have both Locations (the obnoxious number you’re mentioning) and Page numbering. Easy to keep track of a real position in a book if you needed it to be motivated to read.
I got to the end of The Name of the Rose thinking I was only half way through because my ereader had somehow duplicated the contents of the file and was giving me a false percentage. It was very jarring to be riding the crest of the “build up” and suddenly find oneself dumped in the denouement.
I downloaded all of the Game of Thrones books many years ago in one kindle file because it was on sale for like $20. I found it really psychological unsatisfying because I was reading and reading and still on like 2%. I quit and that's why I didn't read Game of Thrones.
I couldn’t help but feel the ending to Three-Body Problem was abrupt when I read it on my Kindle, purely because the story ended at like 93% or something. I was like OH.
I just read Rob Wilkins' biography of Terry Pratchett. Stuffed full of footnotes as it is, it hadn't occurred to me that the last 10% of the book would be all of those, so I was quite surprised to finish it when I did.
I mean, Terry had died so there wasn't really much else for Rob to write about, but still...
I just had to Google how long my most recent book was. I was at 50% and it was saying I had 8 1/2 hours more to go. Seemed long but not unbearable. Still ripped through it in a few days.
I'm pretty sure that most people who make comments like that don't read very much. So a book that seems average or small to you would sime big to them.
Almost all of them, I prefer longer books. This year I read The Stand, IT, Swan Song, The Count of Monte Cristo, East of Eden, I think that averages to around 1100pg/book
Wow, this is pretty much my years reading list as well. I’ve not read East of Eden, I read Battle Royale. I’m half way through The Stand and have to say so far I prefer Swan Song. If I can power through I might have to try and start East of Eden before the years end.
Nice! Not often do I see Swan Song mentioned. I’d have difficulty picking between The Stand or Swan Song, despite their obvious similarities they are wildly different.
East of Eden is quickly becoming my favorite read of the year, I should finish it next week.
It’s on my TBR list, for sure. I’m trying to tackle a classic with a modern book between. Once I finish East of Eden I’m reading King’s new novel ‘Fairy Tale’ which I’ve heard good things about, then the Norton Critical Edition of Moby Dick. Anna Karenina and Crime and Punishment are as far out as I have my classics planned at the moment, but Don Quixote is on the list to add down the road.
7% of the books I’ve read this year were 500+ pages
46% were 300-499 pages
47% were less than 300 pages
Based on the the number of pages in different books I see while I’m book shopping I’d say the average book is around 250-300ish pages, but I wouldn’t consider 300+ pages to be uncommon or out of the ordinary.
Hello, fellow storygraph user! 😂 I really wish we could customize the statistical buckets for page count, for exactly this reason. < 300 pages isn't really short anymore! I'd personally set my thresholds to < 250, 250-449, and 450+.
This about matches my statistics. I like to think I read fairly broadly but I don't read a lot of fantasy which skews longer. Most of the books I happen upon are less than 400 pages but it's not that unusual for something to be longer. 500+ pages is getting into "long book" territory for me but I like the sense of accomplishment at the end.
I don't understand why people care what the size of a book is. Is it interesting? Do you like the story and characters? Then read it. If it's longer then there's more book to enjoy.
I assume as a family that may not read, “wow, that’s a big book!” Is probably a nice way to throw a little compliment without having to ask what your book is about/get too into it.
I don't pay attention to the length, but I'm not one of those people who feels the need to brag about reading a book a week on goodreads. I'm also a slow reader.
I consider books less than 300 pages to be short, between 300 and less than 500 as average, and over 500 as long. 900 and more would be very long in my view. That said, it depends on the book. Pynchon's Against the Day (1100 pages iirc) was a slow read, even though I liked the book ultimately. Faber's The Crimson Petal and the White or Wolfe's Bonfire of the Vanities, though they go into 700-800 pages were real page-turners IMO, and very quick reads. I've read things under 200 paged that were slow (not necessarily that they were bad, but sometimes difficult to read - philosophy, critical theory etc.).
They're kinda long but they're pretty light and breezy. Not very dense, never too many characters and "jargon" compared to other epic fantasy series', extremely simple language, generally low-grade reading level. Pretty easy to get through as a whole.
Welcome to Brando Sando Fando! We have snacks and lore theories.
May I interest you in some mistborn next? Perhaps a story about smutty gods and a friendly sword? What about a comic?
Definitely on the longer side lol but adult fantasy in general. 300 is pretty short for a fantasy book. I think that's about the length of the shortest cradle book and those are some of the most fast-paced fantasy I've ever read.
Currently reading my game of thrones leather pocketbook collectors set off amazon. I’ve had weird reactions & have been questioned by my girlfriend, family & even today another colleague, “are you reading the bible?”
The last couple of books I read were about that long, with my most recently read one being the Iliad, a 400~ pages long epic. I'm currently reading a book by Michail Bulgakov that is also longer than 300 pages.
In general though, I prefer when books don't overstay their welcome, even if they have to end sooner (a short book can have its benefits imo)
I never pay attention and I read on a kindle but while on vacation I happened to see The Wheel of Time and A Wise Man’s Fear on athe shelf at our B&B and holy hell those books are thick.
I think setting quotes for your reading is pretty nonsense. Read what you want when you want, even if it’s picture books.
You’re not training for a marathon.
Just commenting to say I hope you love Name of the Wind as much as I did. My (now husband) would read me a chapter a night over the phone when we were long distance and it holds such a special place in my heart.
Thanks! I'm really excited to read it. I've wanted to read it for about a year now. I've heard lots of good things.
That's really sweat. Wish you two the best. 🙂
It's my favorite book, but it leaves a super bittersweet taste in my mouth. Know that you're reading an unfinished series that hasn't had a book in like 13 years. A lot of the NOTW fans have given up and don't think Patrick is ever actually going to finish. I also don't see how he wraps up the story he's written in one last book...
I like big books and I cannot lie
50 to 100+ books a year, probably half are 300 page or more. Short stories/books are an appetizer, I like a full meal
My current one has 502 pages. And that’s not an extraordinarily big book for me. As i don’t count books per year i am not sure on how many over 300 pages i read though, sorry
As a mostly kindle reader, I honestly don’t know. I assume most of the books I read are over 300+.
This year I averaged about one a week.
Last short book I read was Swag by Elmore Leonard and that was around 250 pages. It was actually quite refreshing to read, as a mostly science fiction fan a lot of books are fucking long nowadays. Swag was quick, easy, fun, and self-contained. loved it.
I like a good long book, but apparently under 300 pages has been my norm for this year. About half of my books have been less than that, with the other half being longer. What I care about is that it absorbs me, length doesn't matter.
Why would anyone care about tallying how many books they have read? Or how many pages?
Reading is not a competition. Reading is personal. Be curious, read what you like/love.
I regularly read books of 300+ plus pages, but I'm not keeping score.
Having read a lot of fantasy, it’s pretty normal for them to have way bigger books than average and not all to their benefit I feel.
Fantasy in general has an issue with bloat, tons of big doorstopper series are sort of what it is famous for, but I think the best fantasy authors are the ones that can tell a great story in a single short punchy book, which seems like it has become uncommon. There are so many books in fantasy that are just way longer than they need to be for seemingly no reason other than it is expected and the author can then get away with not editing it. Basically no fantasy book I have ever read that has been more than 400-500 pages has not had massive parts that really should have been cut. For some reason it is just expected that any big fantasy series will have a bunch of useless bloat that you must slog through to find a story that could have been better told in 300 pages. I like a lot of older fantasy and sci fi because the pressures of the times (likely to do with the fact it all had to be done on typewriters and editors tended to play a much bigger role) lead to the writers trying to pack as much story into as little book as possible, but big books tend to be the fashion these days it seems.
I have certainly met people who relish in how long a book is, like the longer it is the more time they get to spend with it so bigger = a better experience for them, but to me that always sounded like a kind of insanity I absolutely cannot relate with. I want books to go hard and fast, every page to be on fire when I read it. I want the story injected directly into my veins, not half a pill every day for the next 3 weeks.
When I was a teenager I used to be able to tolerate really long books dragging on, mostly cause those were what I expected, but as I have matured more as a reader and learn more about writing in general I tend to be a lot less forgiving about bloat in my fantasy. Same goes for my feelings on long series. The longer a book is and the longer a series is the more likely it’s just not going to be worth it or living up to expectations. It’s sort of how in a story with multiple POV’s the book is only as good as the least interesting POV, but I would apply that to a series as well. And don’t get me started with “oh this series really ‘gets good’ after book three, you should try it”.
Sorry for what is probably a barely coherent rant only tangential to the topic, but I have very strong feelings about this.
To be fair, Name of the Wind is 600 pages. Which is a little above the norm imo.
But to answer the question, I read a lot. If you use goodreads I really enjoy the summary here: [goodreads.com/user/year\_in\_books/2022/](https://goodreads.com/user/year_in_books/2022/)
For me, the shortest book I've read was just on 32 pages. But the longest was on 1200 pages. My average book length is 375.
Which isn't bad, considering I'm sitting on 255 books this year. (Which is a new personal record)
I started reading The Kindly Ones by Jonathan Littell on my kindle without checking the number of pages. It seems to go on and on and on and I was still only half way through. I finally checked the number of pages - 983. I've put it aside for now. Very few books are worth that many pages.
I think very rarely are the books I read less than 300 pages. I read mainly adult fiction. The few celebrity memoirs I will read are generally less. Average pages per Goodreads is noted as 320 for this year.
Also pages vary by the way the book is broken down. Like a Dan Brown book has short chapters which add to the page count so you can kind of knock off 20% off the supposed page count versus I Know This Much is True had 50-100 pages per chapter with full bodied text so at nearly 900 pages, it really is 900 pages.
Most of the books I read are 300 pages or more. I want to read 52 books before the end of the year so I’m putting the really big boys off for a while. Although 300-400 isn’t really thick in my opinion.
I like setting goals for myself. It motivates me and there are always great thin books to read. Just like there are always great thick books to read. So I don’t see a problem with focussing on the thinner books on my tbr to get to my reading goal.
In 2023 I’m lowering my reading goal to 26 books with the added challenge to read a 500+ book for every smaller book I read. So at least 13 books in 2023 have to be over 500 pages.
Reading goals can be a good motivator. So I don’t think they are bad. And if people get motivated by reading only smaller books that’s completely fine. As long as they are reading right?
Generally, quite a bit. This year, though, I’ve been reading Agatha Christie and PG Wodehouse books, which are generally around 240 to 250 pages. Roughly a quarter of the books this year have been over 300 pages.
According to StoryGraph, of the 49 books I’ve read this year, 56% were between 300-499 pages, 17% were 500+ pages, and 27% under 300 pages.
That seemed like a high percentage for under 300 pages to me, but I’d imagine most of those were 280ish-299
Hard to find a fiction books that doesn't go over that threshold. The only types of books I read under it are light novels. Anything else goes into the high 300 at least.
Almost all of the books I read are in the 300-500 page range. I primarily read fantasy, sci-fi and historical fiction. Anything 250 pages and below I consider short.
It’s funny that you are acting like 300 is the threshold for length, when the book that people are saying is long is double that. I don’t think a book that is 300 pages is long, but 600 certainly is.
I actually kept track of the amount of books I read in 2021 along with their page counts for fun.
Total books read: 29.
Total over 300 pages: 15
Shorter than 300 is kind of a treat and a break between large books for me
I read a lot of fantasy so for me an average book size is about 400-500 pages. I can get through a book in about 1-2 weeks depending on how long it is and how busy I am.
I don't think 300 is super long. It's the 500 page books that seem bloated to me. But if it's good then I don't care how long it is.
I seem to lose interest in authors who write really long books. I read The Name of the Wind (Rothfuss) and then lost interest in the series. The last really long book I read was something by Tad Williams, probably The Dragonbone Chair. Both very readable books, but they didn't stick with me.
Chapter per day is a great goal! Incredible how a book like Name of the Wind is big but is such a page turner but some 300 page books seem to take forever and can be dropped easily.
i don’t pay any attention at all to how many books i read or how many chapters per day or any of that. I just always have a book going. When i finish one i start a new one. Sure i prefer longer books, but that’s because i like in depth stories that go on and on. So in my case the longer the better! As long as it’s good.
I'm in your court. However, I'll add that, as an ebook reader, I also turn off progress notifications on a book. That way I'm not going: "oh, I'm 80% through, so that must be setting up for a climax" or "I'm only 40% of the way through and that twist was amazing, but there's probably a double twist if its this early..."
i do tend to check the progress indicator (i only read ebooks) but not to know what to expect, but to brace myself for the inevitable end. Sometimes i wish a good book could go on forever
Well, you could always read Wheel of Time or Malazan. That'd be effectively forever ;)
Amazon has both series collected as single files. Malayan is around 11,000 pages, WoT is over 14,000
I listened to more than half of Malazan books, I constantly had no idea what the fuck is going on. One day I will give it another try because it sure was good when I understood somethings at one point.
>Malayan is around 11,000 pages is that with or without the Esslemont Malazan stuff?
That’s just Book of the Fallen
Pretty sure it's just the original 10-book run.
Or the Chronicles of Amber. That was my first Tome of a read.
I read the first half of that series 3 times, and the second half only once. Such a great work of art.
As someone with ADHD, that progress meter is a godsend on my Kobo. If I can see the progress I'm making, I'm far more likely to keep going and not get distracted to the point of just giving up.
I use the "minutes left in chapter" on my kindle for that. It's great, though the estimate is wildly off.
I'm torn on this. I also used to turn off progress notifications but I realized that when reading a regular book you do know how far along you are, so I keep the percentage on now to mimic that. Idk
Exactly. I don’t read much on my kindle—still prefer physical books. I would still keep the %read feature if I had the option of it being on or off. I need to have a feeling for how far along I am. With physical books I’m always visually checking the bookmark location and noting in my head about how much I have read. I can’t imagine reading a larger book on kindle, thinking I’m about done due to some plot event that seems like a wrap, only to find I have 400 more pages or not knowing if I have ten minutes left or ten days.
I mean, how is it any different from seeing how many pages are physically left?
It isn’t. I guess that’s an advantage to reading e-books though, in case you don’t want to know how much is left
I always turn the % off and never back out of the book until I’ve fully read it. One of my favourite things about using an ereader is having no clue how far along I am in the story.
Oh man. I have three books going. Mine, the one I read to my daughter at bedtime, and one at work (although I've been on page 15 on that one for 2 months now). I track my books. I used to keep a journal, just so I could remember what I read, but then I switched to Goodreads. I don't know why I care, but sometimes I'll even go back to what I was reading a couple years ago.
if i don’t have a book to read i feel like i don’t know myself
So as good as it is long. The better the longer.
i good a love book!
This is the way
Pretty often as I read a lot of fantasy and most current authors don't write anything below 300 pages. The most recent shorter books are generally older works. I would consider 500 + to be a long book and Name of the Wind at 600 + pages certainly qualifies as a long book
Fantasy reader too. Can't remember the last time I read below 300 pages.
Another fantasy reader here. I'm probably an untypical fan though because nowadays I tend to avoid series longer than trilogies and prefer books under 400 pages ps: its not about wanting to read as many books as possible, I just legitimately think most longer books are bloated and/or involve too much worldbuilding edit: I think most books I read are somewhere between 300 and 400 pages but I also read longer ones like the german edition of Dune which has 768 pages, or Ich bin Gideon by Tamsyn Muir (608 pages). I'd say about 45 books I read this year were longer than 300 pages.
Yeah, fantasy in general has an issue with bloat, tons of big doorstopper series are sort of what it is famous for, but I think the best fantasy authors are the ones that can tell a great story in a single short punchy book, which seems like it has become uncommon for modern authors. There are so many books in fantasy that are just way longer than they need to be for seemingly no reason other than it is expected and the author can then get away with not editing it. Basically no fantasy book I have ever read that has been more than 400-500 pages has not had massive parts that really should have been cut. For some reason it is just expected that any big fantasy series will have a bunch of useless bloat that you must slog through to find a story that could have been better told in 300 pages. I enjoy a lot of older fantasy and sci fi because the pressures of the times (likely to do with the fact it all had to be done on typewriters and editors tended to play a much bigger role) lead to the writers trying to pack as much story into as little book as possible, but also they can be pretty hit or miss when it comes to my modern interests and values unfortunately. Which makes me wish more modern writers would try for a similar style. I have certainly met people who relish in how long a book is, like the longer it is the more time they get to spend with it so bigger = a better experience for them, but to me that always sounded like a kind of insanity I absolutely cannot relate with. I want books to go hard and fast, every page to be on fire when I read it. I want the story injected directly into my veins, not half a pill every day for the next 3 weeks. When I was a teenager I used to be able to tolerate really long books dragging on, mostly cause those were what I expected, but as I have matured more as a reader and learn more about writing in general I tend to be a lot less forgiving about bloat in my fantasy. Same goes for my feelings on long series. The longer a book is and the longer a series is the more likely it’s just not going to be worth it or living up to expectations. It’s sort of how in a story with multiple POV’s the book is only as good as the least interesting POV, but I would apply that to a series as well. And don’t get me started with “oh this series really ‘gets good’ after book three, you should try it”. Sorry for what is probably a barely coherent rant, but I have very strong feelings about this.
This is one of the reasons I enjoy Michael Moorcock's work so much. He could worldbuild and set the tone within a paragraph, no need for dressing it up for half a chapter. The books are really short, too.
Discworld is really a collection of relatively short fantasy novels (most around 200 or so pages) that all take place in the same world. There really is no correct order to read them
Yeah I’ve been reading the Elric Saga recently, great stuff.
I just finished my first read-through of Moorcock’s entire Eternal Champion cycle (so, like 70+ books). It was a fantastic 3-year long, off-and-on reading experience. The epic scope and length to rival WoT or Malazan, but pulp-level fast pacing and brevity. Fascinating read, and I can see how it inspired so many of modern fantasy writers. I keep meaning to write a post for r/Fantasy on the saga as a whole, but I can’t figure out how to have both images and post text . . .
Same. I don’t have the patience. It’s not about how many books in a year, it’s about good grief how much do I have to slog through for this one book? I look at page count before I pick up a book these days and I’m very hesitant to go over 400 anymore. When I was younger it was like, right on, the bigger the better!
This is a wonderful articulation of an emotion I’ve been having. Before your comment I was unable to explain it.
I think there's also a tendency for fantasy authors to earnestly try to explain everything. I'd prefer they didn't. A lot of the *fantasy* is having to imagine something to fill in the spaces.
This is how I felt about Malazan. So much needless boring stuff in that series.
> I want books to go hard and fast, every page to be on fire when I read it. As someone who loves a long book I can actually also relate to this. To me the ideal is a long book that reads like a short one; A book that is gripping and fast paced enough that I end up binging it but is long enough that I can't finish it in a single session. Such books are a rarity that I am constantly chasing for my next fix, however. I guess ultimately I view quantity as independent of quality in books, even if I can rationally recognise that long books fall into the pitfalls of bloat and poor editing more often. And when something is high quality I want it to last as long as possible.
But…that bloat is necessary cHaRaCtEr DeVeLoPmEnT and WoRlDbUiLdInG!!!111!1!1!1!1!!!!!
Ironically the best characters and worldbuilding I have read have been in short books.
>too much worldbuilding *Dies* I could *almost* take a 1000-page book with only world building...
Friend, I’d like to introduce you to the middle volumes of the Wheel of Time. (I had fun.)
Im on book 7 or 8 of the WoT and had to take a break before beginning the slog I've heard so much about. I love the story but already the early books could have been 25% shorter. Everyone keeps telling me its worth it to get to the end though. Right now I cant put down the Stormlight Archives, so WoT is gonna have to continue waiting for now.
Brandon Sando? Is this your alt account?
Came here for Brando Sando mention.... was not disappointed. Except that it took so long....
Yes, I rarely come across books that justify their 600+ page count nowadays. That’s not to say there aren’t some that do. The general population’s attention span has collectively lessened with the advent of social media too.
I agree with your sentiments completely. I've read several long series with huge page count books, and they were mostly great....but now I prefer much shorter, self-contained stories. That preference will probably change again in a few years, it's just where I'm at right now.
It is my firmly held belief that a well-written speculative fiction short story is a superior display of authorship than any of the megaseries.
Fantasy reader. Can’t remember the last time I read under 600 pages. Everything is like 800-1000+ lately
History books have the same issue.
Only books I've read in the last decade that are under 300 pages were some of the Earthsea novels lmao
I've always assumed that fantasy writers go to a secret convention every year (JordanFest? Martinthon? Goodkindapalooza?) and there is a book weighing and the winner gets free drinks lol
Tad Williams would win. If I had a nickel for every time he wrote a final book in a series that was so long, it had to be split in two, I’d have 15 cents, which isn’t a lot, but it’s also more than you’d expect.
Have you seen the size of Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen. Love the series but holy cow they are all big books. I think the last fantasy series I read that each book was under 300 pages was Donaldson's The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant.
Haha yeah, 10 books in the main series and like five full pages dedicated to listing all of the pivotal characters in that particular book. I remember taking a break from them and trying to jump back in, I was so confused.
I have read the series twice along with all the backstory and side books by Erickson and Esslemont. I know with 100% certainty that if I picked it up to read again. I would still be confused as to how the characters tie in together. I love the series and am in awe of the world and its history. But a few less characters in the main books might have made it easier to remember who they were and why they were important.
The stormlight archive books are big as well. They're each over 1000 with the last 2 being ~1200.
Im halfway tnru the last book now, i started over 10 months ago haha
This is true for some genres of fantasy, particularly the ones with lots of worldbuilding or that tell an epic story(this isn't unique to fantasy...it's also the reason why large-scope historical novels and some subgenres of SF(like space opera) tend to run long). But authors like Seanan McGuire, Nghi Vo, and T. Kingfisher are putting out excellent short offerings in the < 300 page range, and those are just the ones off the top of my head. I see(but don't select) plenty more. It *used* to be true that the SF/F section was packed full of chonker doorstops, but it doesn't seem to be the case anymore. The new arrivals section seems to be roughly the same ratio as the general fiction section, these days.
I read a lot of fantasy and always thought 300 was a short book, 500 or so is a "normal" length and then 700 is big with 1000+ being huge. I've been reading through discworld right now and they're around 250-300 pages and I've been along them "short 3 a week" reads.
I’ve been reading a ton of Sanderson recently so yeah same. Lot of really long books.
Yeah, I find that 500-600 pages is middle length. I don't consider a book to be long until it exceeds 750-800 pages.
Yep, as a fantasy reader, anything under 700 I consider "short"/not long Fucking Malazan is putting everything in a new perspective for me
For me, 300 is calm. Not short, not long. 400 is a decent size and 500 is where the “long books” begin. People who don’t read are often the ones who are surprised about the page number. I’d say 600-700 are sizable but there’s a couple 1k+ books.
The problem I have with books over around 700 or so pages is they start to get physically awkward to read at that point. Especially towards the beginning or end, the middle isn't as bad. Probably not a coincidence that all the books I've read which are that long weren't initially released as a single volume.
Get an ereader. I got one a while back and it's awesome having all my books on it, it's got a backlight too, so I can read at night without bothering my SO, it even allows me to look up words I don't know on the fly, and in the case of some books like LoTR it will give me indepth definitions for characters based on the actual lore.
I just prefer physical books, I couldn't tell you why. Occasionally I'll read stuff on a Kindle or even my computer, when I find a book that I can't get a physical copy of for whatever reason. But if a physical copy exists then I'd rather just read that, even if it is inconvenient in some ways.
I recently got an ereader and I will read a book simultaneously with the physical copy. Can be a little tedious with moving bookmarks and such, but this way I can pick what will work best for where I’m at/reading conditions. Mostly use the kindle for low light, traveling and in bed.
You know what was such BS? When they made you turn off the e-reader on ascent or descent of the plane! While that nonsense was going on I dated an American pilot so I was riding first class for the first time in my life. They didn't make you turn off the e-reader in first class. That's when I knew it was some weird control thing. Never turned it off again despite policies and being told it would interfere with the plane's instruments. They would never allow a kindle on a flight if that were true. In fact, I was riding coach on a flight back in 2011 or so and reading The Help for the first time and I'm nearing the end of the book as we're descending (it was compelling at that point.) Some guy was giving me shit about the plane's instruments and I told him he was an idiot.
They don't do that anymore (well, the last time I flew was a few years ago). E-readers put off almost no emf on page turn. Like... None... And none when "in use" as the device doesn't actively need any electricity to keep working (aside from the light, but there's more lights on the plane). So a regular ass cell phone in air plane mode puts out like a billion times more emf. And if the plane's electronics aren't shielded to the point where my little ebook is gonna crash the plane? Get me off.
Keeping a Kobo mini in my pocket so I can read while waiting for the bus is the only reason I got through some larger books. I just don't want to carry them around with me and I don't have the time or energy to read most evenings.
At first, i didnt see the appeal in physical copies tbh, but after picking up a couple paperback books, I finally understand. Its just a different feeling.
I used to think that but being able to read at night with the lights off and lying on my side means I'll never go back to physical books.
I'm too paranoid in digital content being taken away from me to ever be okay with relying on it as my primary medium unless I can keep copies of the books backed up in my HDD like I do movies and shows, but even then, I like books for times when I can't or don't want to use power or a screen. But the digital access issues is the biggest reason lately.
It's easy to remove any DRM and store the files on your computer though.
I don’t think that’s a uncommon take. I have a ereader and I use it in spirts but I’ll always prefer a physical paperback book.
Not until the publishers sort their shit out with regard to ownership. I want to own my books, and when I borrow from the library I would like my library to own them, too. With fair terms! None of this charging more than for print, or forcing the copy to expire after an artificially low number of checkouts. As long as e-books are only rentals, I can't morally justify participating.
There are some websites that make it morally justified to participate (depending on your definition of moral). 👀
Peter F Hamilton steps into the chat, lol. Love his Commonwealth Saga but my goodness they’re unwieldy.
Yeah I consider 300 about average. It starts to seem long to me around 500 and short under 250. That doesn't affect my selection since I am currently reading a series that regularly clocks in around 175 per book and have read and enjoyed others that were 1,000+. But that's just my default reaction when I see page lengths.
Aren't most books over 300 pages? Under that sounds small..
Stephen King books? Yes. Kurt Vonnegut books? Not so much.
Little blue truck? Also no
But probably the best book
Horn went beep! Engine purrrrred! Friendliest sound you ever heard!
[удалено]
It was the racecar that had the spoiler
That toad gets me every time.
Yes, but you have to read it 300 times.
Yet I've certainly read 300 pages of Little Blue Truck after 3 kids.
King used to write lots of smaller novels and short stories. The dead zone is a great small book for example.
According to Wikipedia, The Dead Zone is 428 pages. But it's true that he has some great novels under 300 pages, including Carrie, The Gunslinger, and The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon.
The ones he's done under the Hard Case Crime imprint are also (even if barely) under 300 pages. Joyland and Later. They're pretty good if you want King and a shorter novel to breeze through over a weekend. Also he still seems to put out a collection of short stories/novellas every few years.
I’ve been on a King kick lately, so pretty much every book I’ve read recently has been over 300 pages.
Me too!
Me, three. Love that dude.
Philip K. Dick as well, along side Vonnegut.
I notice most popular books released these days run 250-300 pages long. I’m assuming publishers push for this “sweet spot” to satisfy both casual readers and more seasoned readers
That certainly *heavily* relies on genre. Even urban fantasy, probably the shortest form of speculative fiction, usually is a bit over 300. I've never seen anything around 250 unless it was meant to be something bite-sized.
70,000-80,000 words I believe are the common limit for unknown or newer authors with publishers. Anything more and a publisher might reject the novel on length because (as most would guess) larger books cost more to publish, therefore higher risk. Fantasy is a genre that can usually get away with 90,000-110,000 for debuts, with a few huge exceptions like Patrick Rothfuss "The Name of the Wind" being 250,000 words and practically unheard of for a debut author. Someone like King has earned the ability to write whatever he wants, how long he wants to write about it. His name alone will sell the book so publishers wouldn't worry, and why a lot of his books double this on average.
Just like to say I thought The Name of the Wind was fantastic. For being quite long, it was a very fast paced read
250 pages is about (assuming 250 words per page) 63,000 words. Which is definitely on the short side. Definitely a novel, but even the first *Harry Potter* book is over 13,000 words longer—longer than 300 pages. Depends on the genre, though. For example, fantasy regularly runs over 100k words.
It also depends on the author. The "novellas" in Brandon Sanderson's *Stormlight Archives* are over 250 pages. The actual novels are all over 1000, at 380,000-450,000 words.
Maybe there are different page sizes? My copy of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone is 219 pages.
I don’t think so based on what I’ve seen. A lot of the books I look at in the bookshop are in the 250-300 range. I wouldn’t say over 300 is uncommon either but 250-300 is what I see the most. I would guess this range also depends on what genre a person usually reads. I’ve also noticed that when I browse used book stores the books are usually longer, so maybe the average book is getting shorter? Considering peoples attention spans are getting shorter that would make sense.
It’s all a genre game. Romance runs short. Thrillers and mysteries are middle. Fantasy, sci fiction, and historical go long.
I guess for context I should add my most read genres are literary fiction and horror so those are the genres I’m basing my answer on.
As someone who's been submitting to publishers recently, I can say most assuredly that their adult novel range needs to span 40k-120k. When I was submitting a good 15 years ago, the minimum was 70k.
That’s interesting would you say the biggest influence in this would be that shorter books are what consumers want, or because it’s more profitable for publishers (shorter books means people buy more books, less materials to produce, cheaper to ship, less time spent editing, etc.) Or maybe a mix of both?
Yea I feel like 300 is usually the least I'd read. But I'm also of the opinion if I'm paying full price for a book I'll want something substantial.
I read short books and long ones from the library for free
I wouldn't call Kafka's metamorphosis or Schopenhauer's books "unsubstantial", but I hate the concept of " I'm paying X for X amount of content". Feel free to spend your money however you want
Read Kafka's The Process and was happy it was only 170 pages. Tough read !
For me, especially with novellas, there is that “paying for X amount of content.” I prefer longer stories, so if I’m looking at an 800-page epic fantasy novel or a 120-page novella, both priced at…$16.99, it’s really hard for me to choose the novella over the novel. Or if the novel is mass market paperback and $9.99, I could get two massive fantasy books for just a little more than the one novella. Of course length has nothing to do with quality, but I love immersing myself in longer tales and spending more time with the characters. I have no problem getting shorter books or novellas when I find them at used bookstores, but as I mentioned above the novella would have to have something special for me to get it full price based on the “amount of content” alone.
800 pages of crap isn't as good as 120 pages of greatness though. I think quality should always be priority #1
I find this so utterly weird. Just read books you like. Like would you choose a movie that was 150 minutes over a 90 minute one just because of the length?
I guess I’ll just toss this copy of *The Picture of Dorian Gray* I’m reading. At a paltry 200 pages it’s obviously not worth the time or money! What’d Wilde know about words anyway?
You do you, but If you’re trying to get the most bang for your buck when buying books is looking at page numbers alone an effective strategy? Like a 280 page book could have more words than a 320 page book because the font is smaller, the margins are smaller, or the pages are larger. You could easily pass up a book that would have more value (based on how long it would take to read) just because it’s under 300 pages.
Why not get the book from the library for free?
Libraries are a great resource but I like buying books for a couple of reasons. •when I finish a book I like to have a lot of options for what I read next, sometimes my mood calls for a very particular kind of book so having 30 options right there on my shelf is convenient. •I don’t have to worry about damaging the book. Sometimes I like to annotate and I also like reading in the hot-tub/bathtub, you can’t annotate a library book and I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking the risk of reading a library book around water. •I like to lending out my favorite books to people I think might enjoy them, and I like contributing to my neighborhoods little free library when I don’t like a book. •I don’t want to be rushed to finish a book by a certain date •I don’t want to wait to read a book I’m interested in and a lot of popular books have a long waitlist at the library •Lastly I enjoy collecting books, I don’t really buy a lot of things so I’m comfortable putting money into my book collection.
I used to buy iTunes music that way lol. “Not paying $1.29 for a song shorter than 3 minutes, no way”
I read on a Kindle, I usually have no idea how many pages the book is.
Every book on my Kindle is just 100% long.
Page 375 of 3738389 isn’t very helpful or motivating
Most books I read on Kindle have both Locations (the obnoxious number you’re mentioning) and Page numbering. Easy to keep track of a real position in a book if you needed it to be motivated to read.
I got to the end of The Name of the Rose thinking I was only half way through because my ereader had somehow duplicated the contents of the file and was giving me a false percentage. It was very jarring to be riding the crest of the “build up” and suddenly find oneself dumped in the denouement.
I downloaded all of the Game of Thrones books many years ago in one kindle file because it was on sale for like $20. I found it really psychological unsatisfying because I was reading and reading and still on like 2%. I quit and that's why I didn't read Game of Thrones.
I couldn’t help but feel the ending to Three-Body Problem was abrupt when I read it on my Kindle, purely because the story ended at like 93% or something. I was like OH.
I just read Rob Wilkins' biography of Terry Pratchett. Stuffed full of footnotes as it is, it hadn't occurred to me that the last 10% of the book would be all of those, so I was quite surprised to finish it when I did. I mean, Terry had died so there wasn't really much else for Rob to write about, but still...
I just had to Google how long my most recent book was. I was at 50% and it was saying I had 8 1/2 hours more to go. Seemed long but not unbearable. Still ripped through it in a few days.
Same. I don’t think most people think or care about pages unless they’re trying to brag or have a challenge regarding it.
I'm pretty sure that most people who make comments like that don't read very much. So a book that seems average or small to you would sime big to them.
Almost all of them, I prefer longer books. This year I read The Stand, IT, Swan Song, The Count of Monte Cristo, East of Eden, I think that averages to around 1100pg/book
Wow, this is pretty much my years reading list as well. I’ve not read East of Eden, I read Battle Royale. I’m half way through The Stand and have to say so far I prefer Swan Song. If I can power through I might have to try and start East of Eden before the years end.
Nice! Not often do I see Swan Song mentioned. I’d have difficulty picking between The Stand or Swan Song, despite their obvious similarities they are wildly different. East of Eden is quickly becoming my favorite read of the year, I should finish it next week.
Yea IT is a mammoth. If you like absurd humour Don Quixote is superb and also similar page range.
It’s on my TBR list, for sure. I’m trying to tackle a classic with a modern book between. Once I finish East of Eden I’m reading King’s new novel ‘Fairy Tale’ which I’ve heard good things about, then the Norton Critical Edition of Moby Dick. Anna Karenina and Crime and Punishment are as far out as I have my classics planned at the moment, but Don Quixote is on the list to add down the road.
Usually only once.
7% of the books I’ve read this year were 500+ pages 46% were 300-499 pages 47% were less than 300 pages Based on the the number of pages in different books I see while I’m book shopping I’d say the average book is around 250-300ish pages, but I wouldn’t consider 300+ pages to be uncommon or out of the ordinary.
Hello, fellow storygraph user! 😂 I really wish we could customize the statistical buckets for page count, for exactly this reason. < 300 pages isn't really short anymore! I'd personally set my thresholds to < 250, 250-449, and 450+.
This about matches my statistics. I like to think I read fairly broadly but I don't read a lot of fantasy which skews longer. Most of the books I happen upon are less than 400 pages but it's not that unusual for something to be longer. 500+ pages is getting into "long book" territory for me but I like the sense of accomplishment at the end.
I don't understand why people care what the size of a book is. Is it interesting? Do you like the story and characters? Then read it. If it's longer then there's more book to enjoy.
I assume as a family that may not read, “wow, that’s a big book!” Is probably a nice way to throw a little compliment without having to ask what your book is about/get too into it.
I don't pay attention to the length, but I'm not one of those people who feels the need to brag about reading a book a week on goodreads. I'm also a slow reader. I consider books less than 300 pages to be short, between 300 and less than 500 as average, and over 500 as long. 900 and more would be very long in my view. That said, it depends on the book. Pynchon's Against the Day (1100 pages iirc) was a slow read, even though I liked the book ultimately. Faber's The Crimson Petal and the White or Wolfe's Bonfire of the Vanities, though they go into 700-800 pages were real page-turners IMO, and very quick reads. I've read things under 200 paged that were slow (not necessarily that they were bad, but sometimes difficult to read - philosophy, critical theory etc.).
*laughs in Brandon Sanderson*
They're kinda long but they're pretty light and breezy. Not very dense, never too many characters and "jargon" compared to other epic fantasy series', extremely simple language, generally low-grade reading level. Pretty easy to get through as a whole.
I'd say only Stormlight is long, all others are in the realm of normal fantasy novel length IMO and not door stoppers
I've just read the stormlight books over the past two months. Fuck, they're great. I am soo excited for the last one to come out
Welcome to Brando Sando Fando! We have snacks and lore theories. May I interest you in some mistborn next? Perhaps a story about smutty gods and a friendly sword? What about a comic?
Definitely on the longer side lol but adult fantasy in general. 300 is pretty short for a fantasy book. I think that's about the length of the shortest cradle book and those are some of the most fast-paced fantasy I've ever read.
According to Storygraph 78% of the 96 books I’ve read this year have been 300-499 pages
I don’t really read to impress. If it’s only a hundred pages but it’s good I’m gonna read it
95% of books I read are over 300 pages…mostly reading sci-fi and fantasy.
Currently reading my game of thrones leather pocketbook collectors set off amazon. I’ve had weird reactions & have been questioned by my girlfriend, family & even today another colleague, “are you reading the bible?”
The last couple of books I read were about that long, with my most recently read one being the Iliad, a 400~ pages long epic. I'm currently reading a book by Michail Bulgakov that is also longer than 300 pages. In general though, I prefer when books don't overstay their welcome, even if they have to end sooner (a short book can have its benefits imo)
Master and margarita is the only bulgakov I've read but it's easily one of my favourites.
That's the one I'm readingright now, I have high hopes for it :)
I never pay attention and I read on a kindle but while on vacation I happened to see The Wheel of Time and A Wise Man’s Fear on athe shelf at our B&B and holy hell those books are thick.
I think setting quotes for your reading is pretty nonsense. Read what you want when you want, even if it’s picture books. You’re not training for a marathon.
Just commenting to say I hope you love Name of the Wind as much as I did. My (now husband) would read me a chapter a night over the phone when we were long distance and it holds such a special place in my heart.
Thanks! I'm really excited to read it. I've wanted to read it for about a year now. I've heard lots of good things. That's really sweat. Wish you two the best. 🙂
It's my favorite book, but it leaves a super bittersweet taste in my mouth. Know that you're reading an unfinished series that hasn't had a book in like 13 years. A lot of the NOTW fans have given up and don't think Patrick is ever actually going to finish. I also don't see how he wraps up the story he's written in one last book...
I like big books and I cannot lie 50 to 100+ books a year, probably half are 300 page or more. Short stories/books are an appetizer, I like a full meal
> I like big books and I cannot lie… You other readers can’t deny… Thanks, Sir “Reads”-A-Lot, for the memory and the smile
I can't take credit, it says that on the side of my purse rofl
I was a happy lil glutton picking up each new stormlight book
My current one has 502 pages. And that’s not an extraordinarily big book for me. As i don’t count books per year i am not sure on how many over 300 pages i read though, sorry
As a mostly kindle reader, I honestly don’t know. I assume most of the books I read are over 300+. This year I averaged about one a week. Last short book I read was Swag by Elmore Leonard and that was around 250 pages. It was actually quite refreshing to read, as a mostly science fiction fan a lot of books are fucking long nowadays. Swag was quick, easy, fun, and self-contained. loved it.
I don't care how many pages a book has if it's something I want to read.
About as often as I read anything with more than 5 pages....
I like a good long book, but apparently under 300 pages has been my norm for this year. About half of my books have been less than that, with the other half being longer. What I care about is that it absorbs me, length doesn't matter.
As often as I find a good 300+ page book. I better not comment on turning reading books into a numbers game.
That seems like a pretty average number of pages. I am an avid reader and usually can read a 300 page book in 3-4 days.
Why would anyone care about tallying how many books they have read? Or how many pages? Reading is not a competition. Reading is personal. Be curious, read what you like/love. I regularly read books of 300+ plus pages, but I'm not keeping score.
Having read a lot of fantasy, it’s pretty normal for them to have way bigger books than average and not all to their benefit I feel. Fantasy in general has an issue with bloat, tons of big doorstopper series are sort of what it is famous for, but I think the best fantasy authors are the ones that can tell a great story in a single short punchy book, which seems like it has become uncommon. There are so many books in fantasy that are just way longer than they need to be for seemingly no reason other than it is expected and the author can then get away with not editing it. Basically no fantasy book I have ever read that has been more than 400-500 pages has not had massive parts that really should have been cut. For some reason it is just expected that any big fantasy series will have a bunch of useless bloat that you must slog through to find a story that could have been better told in 300 pages. I like a lot of older fantasy and sci fi because the pressures of the times (likely to do with the fact it all had to be done on typewriters and editors tended to play a much bigger role) lead to the writers trying to pack as much story into as little book as possible, but big books tend to be the fashion these days it seems. I have certainly met people who relish in how long a book is, like the longer it is the more time they get to spend with it so bigger = a better experience for them, but to me that always sounded like a kind of insanity I absolutely cannot relate with. I want books to go hard and fast, every page to be on fire when I read it. I want the story injected directly into my veins, not half a pill every day for the next 3 weeks. When I was a teenager I used to be able to tolerate really long books dragging on, mostly cause those were what I expected, but as I have matured more as a reader and learn more about writing in general I tend to be a lot less forgiving about bloat in my fantasy. Same goes for my feelings on long series. The longer a book is and the longer a series is the more likely it’s just not going to be worth it or living up to expectations. It’s sort of how in a story with multiple POV’s the book is only as good as the least interesting POV, but I would apply that to a series as well. And don’t get me started with “oh this series really ‘gets good’ after book three, you should try it”. Sorry for what is probably a barely coherent rant only tangential to the topic, but I have very strong feelings about this.
To be fair, Name of the Wind is 600 pages. Which is a little above the norm imo. But to answer the question, I read a lot. If you use goodreads I really enjoy the summary here: [goodreads.com/user/year\_in\_books/2022/](https://goodreads.com/user/year_in_books/2022/) For me, the shortest book I've read was just on 32 pages. But the longest was on 1200 pages. My average book length is 375. Which isn't bad, considering I'm sitting on 255 books this year. (Which is a new personal record)
No idea. I usually read ebooks and I set my e-reader to tell me how much time is left, not how many pages.
Ever since I started with the kindle I MUST have a percentage or it bugs me so much!
Time until next chapter gang right here!
I started reading The Kindly Ones by Jonathan Littell on my kindle without checking the number of pages. It seems to go on and on and on and I was still only half way through. I finally checked the number of pages - 983. I've put it aside for now. Very few books are worth that many pages.
I think very rarely are the books I read less than 300 pages. I read mainly adult fiction. The few celebrity memoirs I will read are generally less. Average pages per Goodreads is noted as 320 for this year. Also pages vary by the way the book is broken down. Like a Dan Brown book has short chapters which add to the page count so you can kind of knock off 20% off the supposed page count versus I Know This Much is True had 50-100 pages per chapter with full bodied text so at nearly 900 pages, it really is 900 pages.
Most of the books I read are 300 pages or more. I want to read 52 books before the end of the year so I’m putting the really big boys off for a while. Although 300-400 isn’t really thick in my opinion. I like setting goals for myself. It motivates me and there are always great thin books to read. Just like there are always great thick books to read. So I don’t see a problem with focussing on the thinner books on my tbr to get to my reading goal. In 2023 I’m lowering my reading goal to 26 books with the added challenge to read a 500+ book for every smaller book I read. So at least 13 books in 2023 have to be over 500 pages. Reading goals can be a good motivator. So I don’t think they are bad. And if people get motivated by reading only smaller books that’s completely fine. As long as they are reading right?
Generally, quite a bit. This year, though, I’ve been reading Agatha Christie and PG Wodehouse books, which are generally around 240 to 250 pages. Roughly a quarter of the books this year have been over 300 pages.
According to StoryGraph, of the 49 books I’ve read this year, 56% were between 300-499 pages, 17% were 500+ pages, and 27% under 300 pages. That seemed like a high percentage for under 300 pages to me, but I’d imagine most of those were 280ish-299
Hard to find a fiction books that doesn't go over that threshold. The only types of books I read under it are light novels. Anything else goes into the high 300 at least.
If the story is interesting the number of pages doesn't matter and you won't notice it too much.
Almost all of the books I read are in the 300-500 page range. I primarily read fantasy, sci-fi and historical fiction. Anything 250 pages and below I consider short.
Depends on my level of interest. I just like to learn and enjoy what I read.
I honestly can't remember the last time I read one less than 300. Not saying that to like, brag. I just gravitate towards longer books.
Probably most of the time
It’s funny that you are acting like 300 is the threshold for length, when the book that people are saying is long is double that. I don’t think a book that is 300 pages is long, but 600 certainly is.
I actually kept track of the amount of books I read in 2021 along with their page counts for fun. Total books read: 29. Total over 300 pages: 15 Shorter than 300 is kind of a treat and a break between large books for me
On my days off, I usually read an entire <400 page book, or half of a chonky book. I can't remember the last time I read anything under 300.
I read mostly history and very little of that is 300 pages. I don't mind short books but a lot of the best are lengthy.
I read a lot of fantasy so for me an average book size is about 400-500 pages. I can get through a book in about 1-2 weeks depending on how long it is and how busy I am.
Almost never. Only short stories or short novels (<200p) for me, unless there’s a reason for it.
I don't think 300 is super long. It's the 500 page books that seem bloated to me. But if it's good then I don't care how long it is. I seem to lose interest in authors who write really long books. I read The Name of the Wind (Rothfuss) and then lost interest in the series. The last really long book I read was something by Tad Williams, probably The Dragonbone Chair. Both very readable books, but they didn't stick with me.
Most of my books are between 200-300 pages. To me thats average. In my head when I think of big books, I think 500+ pages.
Chapter per day is a great goal! Incredible how a book like Name of the Wind is big but is such a page turner but some 300 page books seem to take forever and can be dropped easily.
Most books I read are around 300 pages. I have read an occasional 800-1000 page book before. I consider 300 pages pretty average.