And again I suddenly missed those days. Wonder why I’ve been getting all nostalgic about Uni days again. Maybe I’m missing the group of friends I thought I would have for life. Shan’t get sentimental and strangely depressive. Oh well.

This previously-classified program hasn’t been published in the past because nondisclosure agreements are normally required when training these agencies. But the results were so amazing that Scott threatened to walk if he wasn’t allowed to release it to the public—and in a total break with precedent, the government types not only agreed, they’ve given testimonials in open support of the program!

And you learn that sometimes, people are just not meant to study, and they are miserable. And you learn that sometimes, parents just don’t care about that.

Two things occur to me while reading the comments I wrote for my Literature classes in University:

1) I played the stereotypical melodramatic literature student so well.

2) I miss being able to talk about how the mode of irony shifts in a novel and having people (very smart people) agree with me and acknowledge that it is a good point.

Now everything in my life is just about money and how much do I have and how much do I need and why what I have doesn’t meet what I need. The “smartest” thing I am expected to do these days is to be able to dumb something down so that people of a lower competence level can understand without difficulty.

I am made for more than this.

Why doesn’t work end when work ends?

Why is everything so expensive here? Just wanting to buy a couple of things becomes a gargantuan financial decision of world economic proportions.

I heard an advertisement on the radio the other day thanking listeners for supporting one of the stations for the past 20 years. In the advert, it was said that one could have read 29,000 books in 20 years. Inspired, I tried to break down the figures. Turns out that to read 29,000 books in 20 years, one will have to polish off three books in a day. To be more accurate, one has to digest 10 books every three days. The more realistic figure (one book every three days) of 2,900 books in 20 years sounds depressing. Even if I were to be really studious, I am unlikely to have read 10,000 books.

Considering that I will probably have taken at least 14,600 showers, slept for 36,500 hours and consumed about 14 million calories, it is pitiful that I won’t be able to even read 3,000 books in that time–even if I make real effort. The other stuff I don’t even need to think about to just rack up the numbers.

But perhaps I am just affected by the numbers. If an average book has about 40,000 words, then the 2,900 books will boost my numerical conquests up to a dizzying 116 million words, or 3000 words for every hour I will sleep. Now it sounds more respectable. I could probably dress it up even more and say that it’s about 100 pages for every hour I sleep. Now it has become something to brag about: Hey I’ve read 100 pages for every hour that I sleep. What have you done today?

That advert made me search for something I came across some years ago: a challenge to read 100 books a year. Some of the people whom I found undertaking the challenge seem to me to mar any victory they can gain by being too lax about what is considered “books”. Abridged versions, children’s books read to their  young ones, and even graphic novels are thrown into the basket. It is a worthy challenge to read 100 books a year, or even just 50, but if 15 of those are graphic novels which can be polished off in about two hours, then what’s the point? Is it really the same to say that “I managed to read a book while browsing in the bookstore” when you mean “I managed to read about 4000 words and glanced at 200 pictures”?

I feel like there must be some guidelines at least to determine what cannot be counted as books:

1. If it is abridged, but less than 200 pages, it is NOT a book.
2. If it is less than 100 pages, it is NOT a book (it is a novella really…). This include journals, no matter how “serious”.
3. If graphics occupy the page more than the words, it is NOT a book.
4. If it has words on one page and just graphics on the facing page, it is NOT a book. This includes magazines.
5. Anything meant for browsing through (volumes of quirky facts, collection of lists) is NOT a book.
6. A dictionary is NOT a book (though if you read one, that’s quite impressive).
7. Books way below one’s reading ability are NOT books (includes user manuals, no matter how thick).
8. Anything smaller than two open palms put side by side is NOT a book, unless it’s a “pocket version” of an existing title.
9. Simplified versions of existing titles meant for vocabulary learning or for lower ability readers are NOT books.
10. A reader of any kind CAN be considered a book, provided every collected article within the volume is read.

And why not? With these guidelines, even if one manages only 60 volumes a year, there is no fear of being called a cheat because you slipped in Watchmen. I admire Alan Moore and the genre of serious, adult-oriented comics, but they are just not books. Not when the bragging rights of having read 100 books in a year are at stake anyway.