写作与思考2018washingtonpost.com
每天读十万字，我们失去了什么
What we lose by reading 100,000 words every day
导读
这篇专栏文章讨论的是：每天在屏幕上吞下十万字的碎片化阅读，会怎样侵蚀我们沉浸于困难文本的能力。作者以自身经历说明，长期习惯了快速跳读之后，再读需要耐心的书会越来越吃力。对写作者来说，它提醒我们：读者的注意力是被训练出来的，而写作的节奏和深度本身就在与这种碎片化争夺读者。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
读者的注意力是会被训练和改变的：长期喂给读者短平快的内容，他们面对长句和慢铺垫时的耐心会下降，所以写作时要主动设计让读者愿意停留的理由。
- 02
不要只靠“信息密度”取胜：作者提到的问题不是网上内容没价值，而是跳读习惯会被不加区分地带到所有阅读上，写作应当提供跳读之外的结构和层次。
- 03
节奏本身就是一种表达：文章引用的老电影、老动画与当下的对比说明，节奏加快是可感知的，写作者可以有意识地控制段落长度、信息释放速度来塑造阅读体验。
- 04
为“深度阅读”留出空间：如果你希望读者读完长文，就要在前几段给出值得他们停下快速浏览的理由，比如具体的场景、真实的自述或一个需要思考的问题。
HN 评论精选
作者把“碎片阅读毁掉深读能力”简化成了“我停读小说后就难重新开始”，认为上网和读小说完全可以并存，问题在于时间分配而非媒介本身。
翻译过来就是：我不再读小说了，然后就发现很难重新开始。问题不在于我们在网上读的那些碎片垃圾，而在于长时间不读小说之后，再拿起一本小说并享受它就变得更难。但在网上读垃圾并不会让你停止读小说，就像看电视不会让你停止读小说一样。两者完全可能并存，前提是每个人的时间有限。浏览网络本身并没有什么内在的东西会让读小说变难。
dpark查看英文原文
> “My grafted, spasmodic, online style, while appropriate for much of my day’s ordinary reading, had been transferred indiscriminately to all of my reading, rending my former immersion in more difficult texts less and less satisfying,” she writes. Wolf soon tried again, forcing herself to start with 20-minute intervals, and managed to recover her “former reading self.” Translation: I stopped reading novels and then found it difficult to start again. The problem isn’t the fluff we read online. The problem is that when you go long periods without reading novels, it’s harder to pick up a novel and enjoy it. Reading fluff online doesn’t make you stop reading novels, though, any more than watching TV makes you stop reading novels. It’s entirely possible to do both, with the caveat that everyone’s time is limited. But there’s nothing about browsing online that intrinsically makes it hard to read novels.
借《华氏451》指出注意力缩短是更深层的问题：当读者只习惯声音片段式的信息，复杂的思想就变得难以进入。
这让我想到雷·布拉德伯里的《华氏451》。很多人以为这本书讲的是审查制度，但布拉德伯里本人在晚年公开表示，它讲的是人们越来越短的注意力。书里的人们害怕书，因为故事、思想和概念超出了简单的声音片段，对注意力已经缩短的大众来说无法理解。他写道：“广播助长了我们‘日益缺乏注意力’……这种跳来跳去的生存方式，让人几乎不可能坐下来沉浸于一本小说，包括我自己。我们变成了读短篇的人，或者更糟，变成了‘快读’的人。”
daveslash查看英文原文
This reminds me of Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. Many people believe the story to be about censorship, but Bradbury himself (in his later years) publicly claimed it was about peoples' increasingly short attention spans. In Fahrenheit 451, people were afraid of books because the stories, thoughts, and concepts were more than mere sound-bytes and were thus unintelligible to the masses with shortened attention spans. Radio has contributed to our ‘growing lack of attention.’ .?.?. This sort of hopscotching existence makes it almost impossible for people, myself included, to sit down and get into a novel again. We have become a short story reading people, or, worse than that, a QUICK reading people. ~Bradbury Source: https://www.laweekly.com/news/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted-2149125 [Edit] Punctuation & typos.
碎片化不仅占用了时间，还训练出“自我打断”的习惯，让坐下来读书时大脑仍在等待下一条通知。
2016年大选之后，我在网上花了过多时间，不停寻找某条“新”信息，像个烟民在上一根烟还没抽完就点起下一根。我发现自己读起书来比平时更吃力。这个效应是双重的：我不但花更多时间上网，还把注意力打碎了；当我坐下来读书时，脑子还在等着被打断。我在训练自己自我打断。丹尼尔·莱维汀的《分心的心智》深入讲了这背后的科学，很值得一看。
gdubs查看英文原文
After the 2016 election, during which I spent an inordinate time online, constantly searching for some 'new' piece of information like a smoker lighting up a cigarette before the last one had finished burning, I realized that I was having a harder time than usual getting through the books I was reading. The effect was two-fold: not only was I spending more time online, I was fragmenting my attention; when I sat down to read a book, I found my brain was pausing for interruptions. I was training myself to self-interrupt. The book, "The Distracted Mind" goes deep into the science behind this phenomena, and is really worth checking out.
用多巴胺奖励循环和成瘾模型解释注意力碎片化，并指出这种节奏加快也体现在影视和儿童内容里。
希望有心理学家或神经科学家能把这个效应量化出来。我的假设是：它由寻求信息的某种多巴胺奖励循环驱动，而我们在执行功能上失去了调节它的能力，很像成瘾。数字干扰实在太多，也许类似注意力缺陷。这一点在现代电影、剧集和卡通里也看得到，节奏明显加快了，老片子现在很难看下去；对比《芝麻街》的老版和新版就能看出这种转变，而孩子们连新版都会看腻，最终的成瘾对象是 YouTube。我其实觉得适度看 YouTube 没那么糟，孩子会把里面的点子拿到现实中去玩，只要别过度暴露、别接触不健康的想法。也就是说，即便有 YouTube，我仍然看得到想象性的游戏。在这个超数字的世界里，我们感觉时间变少了，尽管时间并没有变。总有东西在争夺我们的注意力，大多数并不重要，但我们无法忽视。
sjg007查看英文原文
Hopefully, some aspiring psychologist or neuroscientist will be able to quantify the effect. My hypothesis is that this is driven by an information seeking dopamine reward cycle and that for some reason we lose the capacity in our executive function to regulate it. Much like an addiction. There is so much digital distraction. Similar to ADD perhaps? You can also see this in modern movies, shows and cartoons where the pace has quickened. It's hard to watch old movies or older cartoons etc... Watch old episodes of Sesame St vs new episodes and you can see the shift. And even then kids get bored of new episodes with the ultimate addiction being youtube. I actually don't find youtube too bad in moderation because kids do take ideas and try to play with them in the real world. You just have to be sure they aren't overexposed and exposed to ideas that are not healthy. What I am saying is that I do see imaginative play despite youtube or that incorporates youtube. So in this hyper digital world it feels like we have less time. Even though time remains the same. There is always something seeking our attention and for the most part it is unimportant but we can't ignore it.
同类还值得读
不要想好再写，要写来思考
Don’t think to write, write to think
这篇短文主张不要把写作当成思考完成后的记录，而要把写作本身当作思考的工具：动笔的过程会逼出想不清楚的地方。
写作与思考2022 · 553 分 · 145 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作即思考：学会自信地写作
Writing Is Thinking: Learning to Write with Confidence
这是一篇讲“写作即思考”的博客：作者认为写作不是把想好的东西誊写出来，而是借助写作本身把想法想清楚，因此写作者应当建立信心、敢于先写烂稿。
写作与思考2019 · 529 分 · 83 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何用写作来思考
How to think in writing
这篇文章讨论的是「用写作来思考」：作者认为写作不只是把想清楚的东西表达出来，更是想清楚本身的工具——文字落在纸上，你才有机会看见自己思路里的跳跃、含混和漏洞。
写作与思考2024 · 424 分 · 120 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作，帮你逃离默认的人生设置
Write to Escape Your Default Setting
文章的核心主张就写在标题里：写作是帮你逃离「默认设置」的手段——日常的思维和表达都有惯性默认的默认模式，而落笔能逼你跳出来，重新看清自己到底在想什么、要说什么。
写作与思考2025 · 407 分 · 93 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作就是思考
Writing is thinking
文章以“写作即思考”为题，讨论写作不只是把已有想法记录下来，而是帮助澄清、组织和推进思考的过程。
写作与思考2025 · 330 分 · 128 评4 条写作要点编辑精选