Sunday again already – and it’s a long weekend so I’m not back to work until Tuesday!
While I was trying to think of a topic for this week’s After the Sunday Papers post, it occurred to me that it’s been a while since I reviewed a newly published book. Recently I’ve been reading a lot of classics and books from the early 20th century. I don’t know if anyone has a problem with blogs that review older books, though I’m guessing that if you’re following my blog you probably don’t mind!
We all have different reading tastes – some of us like to read the latest books as soon as they are published; others prefer Victorian classics or World War II era books; many of us just read whatever we’re in the mood for or whatever happens to be on our shelves. But have you ever thought about when most of the books you read were published?
If you had asked me that question yesterday, I would have said that I don’t read enough new books. It’s not deliberate – I do read other people’s reviews of the latest releases and make a note of the titles, fully intending to read them, but when it comes to actually buying books or borrowing them from the library, I find myself choosing books that sound interesting regardless of publication date and regardless of whether everyone else has already read them years ago.
However, today I took the publication dates of the 35 books I’ve reviewed so far on this blog, put the figures into a pie chart maker…and this is what it came up with:
As you can see, I’ve obviously read more books from the last decade than I thought! What about you? Do you read mostly new books, older books or a mixture?