Why can't we understand text without subvocalizating it? I wonder why can't we understand text the same way we understand pictures?

Everything we see but text we understand without the inner voice, we don't subvocalize/describe a forest, a street or anything. We just understand it. 

Why can't reading work the same way? When I look at words I recognize them but they have no meaning until I read them in my mind.

Is there even anyone who got rid of subvocalization completely and can read a 300 page book just in one evening understanding pretty everything?

It even works the same the other way around. If I try to see a textural representation of some thing like let's say a table, I first have to say in my mind. Why is it so? It's really annoying.

text &gt; voice (in my mind) &gt; understanding


why not

text &gt; understanding


I also don't get it why people consider this normal. It slows everything down. Imagine you could read a book in a single eventing if not the subvoc. We must do something terribly wrong when learning to read.

I'm not asking about speed-reading because subvoc is not only an issue there - although it is most noticable when reading - but it also interfers when thinking and forces you to say your thoughts.
In japanese language, kanjis are more than phonemes but represent an idea. For instance, both tree and spirit have the same sound (ki) and can be written with the hiragana "letter" き. But when kanjis are used tree is 木 while spirit is 気.
Therefore, it is possible to read without subvocalizing. We can read as if it was graphics.
So, when using kanji is much more like text > undestanding.
But is hard to think doing it purely because we use many words that have no physical meaning such as "as", "such", "meaning" etc.