[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 51 KB, 413x243, 1592150121276.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15605326 No.15605326 [Reply] [Original]

>reading books
Why should I read books when summation in articles are good enough? There is nothing that can't be summed up in 2000 words. Anything technical goes in a Paper or a textbook.

I don't really want to read analogies, which is what books are chokeful of anyway. I only want to see logic of the argument.

>> No.15605333
File: 297 KB, 1356x1198, 1532559917617.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15605333

This is what Taleb says. Do not read books which can summarized in a few pages.

>> No.15605374

>>15605333
How do you know if it can be summarized if you haven't read it? Are you just going to trust the person who claims to summarize it?
Why not trust the author who believed there need to be many pages in order to convey his thought.

>> No.15605388

>>15605374
because if history serves as any indicator of the future, i have read a lot of books where they could have been summed up much quicker. of course your point is good because how can you know without reading. perhaps from the summary you can get an idea if it would be better to read it to truly comprehend it?

>> No.15605391

>>15605374
Since I don't read fiction, I can find out the writer's argument and read summary plus commentary on the same

>> No.15605427

>>15605326
>Why should I read books when summation in articles are good enough?

you should see the movie Metropolitan. there's a character that makes the same argument.

>> No.15605440

>>15605333
Haven't read this guy, but surely he didn't mean this to apply to fiction. I just want to know if I can write him off completely.

>> No.15605531

>>15605326
Literature is art. From what you're saying it follows that, for example, a film can be merely reduced to its script, which is retarded. While it's true that the "useful" knowledge in books is important, one can never discard the form in which it is presented.

>> No.15606260

>>15605374
Right on. Also not everyone summarizes shit equally. We may derive different messages from the same text.

>> No.15606762

>>15605531
What do you think about reading plays?

>> No.15606836
File: 66 KB, 1000x1000, 58F6216F-F02E-42B6-B7C2-33D1B012E1B6.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15606836

>>15605326
>fiction
For the enjoyment of a plot unfolding at the authors curated pace, and the aesthetic appreciation and lessons/wisdom you can get from it.
>non-fiction
To form your own conclusions and have a full understanding of the authors arguments instead of reading a summary which will almost always omit small but important details or have the summarizers bias built into it.

Read summaries all you like, but you are ruining/missing the experience of reading a fiction book for the first time, or you will quickly be outed for not really understanding a non-fiction work.

>> No.15607147

>>15606762
The text in a play, like the one in a poem, can stand on its own as an artistic product. Even though originally meant to be played/recited, it's always interesting to experience the work and its subtleties (at least in your first exposure) through the text alone. imo it's more *rewarding* to read a play than seeing it irl, but it's definitely more *entertaining* to watch it in a theatre.

>> No.15607209

>>15605326
If you're asking this question, the answer is that you shouldn't, and should also fuck off. Really you have no reasom to be literate at all and are better off watching tiktok videos and taking in tweets consisting mostly of emojis.