M ASTER OF FAST READING is not the title one should be proud of. As well as the ability to read fast is not the skill we should be proud of. We rather should be ashamed of it, and if we are not, then we should at least use it sparsely and sporadically, like we shouldn't eat fast not to choke, and not to cause heavy indigestion. Mind can also choke, brain can also be totally upset and produce but a diarrhoea of thoughts. Is fast reading guilty about such intellectual collapse? Or: is fast reading the only reason of such mental confusion? Rather not. There's never but one reason. There is always a bundle of reasons and coincidences which are linked with each other by more or less mysterious dependencies... Nevertheless fast reading is one the reasons belonging to such a group, maybe even the core of it, although not necessarily the set of reasons must have hierarchical, concentric, structure – it can be as well an amorphous cloud, multi-nucleus plasma changing the shape constantly, crawling from one place to another... For example: fast reading causes lack of reflections. A reflection needs time, while there is no time, because we consume it for more and more phrases, paragraphs and pages. Pondering what we have just read, and what we are reading, is perpendicular to the direction of reading. It is as if we left for a moment the road we are walking along, turned left or right, took a narrow, winding path, went among trees, found a shelter in a shadow not to see the road for some time.... or we climb a hillock to see from its top the road, to change our eyes into bird's eyes and cover with our sight the whole territory this road runs across, thus we can check if it is the main composition line or one of many not so important strokes...... But to turn to the left or to the right, to leave the main road, to be able to do this, we must walk, we can't rush like mad. If we take a super fast train we won't have such a chance, and our delight and joy caused by the fact we covered a very long distance in a very short time should be balanced with sadness caused by the fact we didn't see the land we have just rushed through. That's a pity. We have just passed by an old tree of extremely interesting shape, with boughs distorted unimaginably and impossibly.... over there a beautiful composition of roofs, fields, meadows and orchards could be found..... here is an unknown word, surprising with its combination of consonants never met before, however sounding quite familiar, not really incomprehensible though its meaning can turn out different than the one we expected due to certain analogies and contexts – it is like a huge mossy stone projecting from the rushing stream-sentence that roars and winds violently to slow down suddenly and spread into a large, calm, silent pond.... And these are not purely aesthetic experiences, this is not the matter of taste. Pure aesthetics does not exist for there is no form that has no meaning at all, that would not give shelter to some other meanings besides the one, or those ones, displayed outside, as if to protect those others which not necessarily must be in opposition since they can be a subtle extension, a kind of frame we use to build a tent on. Well, let's think for a while about punctuation. It seems everything is absolutely clear. However it is not. For example, an ellipsis... suspension points... Yes. Yet the suspension can be longer or shorter, it depends on situation, it depends on many reasons. And regardless the situation and all other reasons we always put three dots. Why? Why always three?.... Four dots could suggest a bit longer suspension – a break to raise your head, to look aside ..... Five dots with a space before could give us a chance to look around ............... While many dots could convince us to drink a cup of tea and consider carefully the issue of hyphens and dashes: - – — ..... . . . . . . and their combinations, accelerating and slowing, contracting and stretching - - - - - And how about many spaces? How about double colon? And triple colon? And quadruple colon? And how about comas? Where are comas? What about the discrimination of comas? Are they cripple? Are they clumsy? , , , , , , , Yes, they are. Well, well, well... Quite a lot of possibilities. But there the point is to simplify to HAVE NOTHING THAT COULD DISTURB OUR READING, to LET OUR EYES GLIDE OVER THE LINE OF TEXT WITHOUT ANY OBSTACLES, to be able TO READ AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. While here the point is to complicate. HERE we do not straighten the paths – here we tangle and scramble the paths to sharpen, not to numb, our awareness and attention constantly. Was it a good example? It looks like discussing the expected reform of orthography... While we were to welcome the patients warmly... So we welcome you warmly. Sorry for this boring speech. Take it easy. Let's concentrate on something more important – let's chose the method of treatment and exercises. Is it really that important? Making a choice is not obligatory. Nor treatments are. You can just go for a walk to the park or to the forest, got lost there and never come back here. word twisting >>> reading backward >>> parallel reading >>> text in text >>> lexical walks >>> lying supine  >>> prosaic views >>> Accommodation. This is the problem of those who would like stay here longer (maybe even for ever). You can commute, if you want. You can also stay at home, if you want, and make exercises sitting in you favourite armchair – nothing can beat the favourite armchair. However you must be aware of the fact that your favourite armchair, though it seems the most secure place in the world, can be really dangerous, just because it is so safe – which doesn't mean you should at once replace it with a raft tossed by furious ocean. But it's worth considering . . . . . . And if we could keep this furious ocean and replace the robust raft with so comfortable, and favourite, armchair? OK, then the lazy stay at home. And the non-lazy have a choice: double deck shack – type A dugout – type n dugouts – types u or V apartment - type S <<<