Ask HN: Are a lot of books just useless?

47 points by adversaryIdiot ↗ HN
I'm trying to get into reading, but I keep running into an issue where a lot of these books feel like fluff. Like, why are there so many books around 250 pages? Surely, these authors are trying to hit a page count first, and then providing information second. It just feels disingenuous, which kills my vibe while reading the book.

There are some books I've read where it feels like every page is a gold mine of information. Is this whole fluff-to-information predicament a common thing in reading? What tools/metrics are there to help find meaningful books? For example, is it viable to only read books greater than 4.5 stars on Goodreads? Or is meticulously researching for good books just a matter of life in the book-reading hobby?

Maybe every book is valuable, and it's just a skill to read, to extract the meaningful information effectively. But honestly, as with everything in life, it's probably a mix of everything. Researching and reading skills will probably make the hobby more enjoyable. But I mean, since it's a hobby, I have the right to try to avoid books I would consider 'useless'.

53 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 119 ms ] thread
Sure. Lots of books are ten pages of real content forced into a 250-page package.

Likewise, lots of articles (both printed and online) are three paragraphs of real content forced into a four-page package.

And plenty of blog posts are one-sentence ideas spread out amongst five paragraphs.

As for finding good books, for me, one helpful clue is the author. If I like one book from an author, I very likely (though not certainly) will like another. Of course, sticking with one particular author can be very limiting. Another clue is the publisher; having found some books that I like all from one publisher, then that is encouraging to peruse more books from the same publisher.

And likewise, finding books that are poorly written and low on content from a publisher seems like a good warning to avoid getting more of their books.

It depends very much what you're trying to read.

Start with the 90 day Harvard classics https://www.myharvardclassics.com/categories/20120622

And also check out Penguins Great Idea series https://www.penguin.co.uk/series/PEN02/penguin-great-ideas

If a book was read 100 years ago and is still being read today then it's worth a read. Most books written a few hundred years ago are just as relevant (if not more so) today.

On the other hand, many books from the past are dreadful with respect to readability, pacing, period context stuff and more... Generally the evolution the feedback loop between readers, writers and editors has generated over the last 100 years.
Most books from the past were dreadful but there are a couple selection mechanisms at play. For one, we only promote the best ones. The further back it goes the more picky we get. Second, it was a lot harder to publish in the past, so those who did it had more reason to.
You are right, a lot of books are redundant. The gems are becoming rarer and rarer the more you read. You get the feeling that whatever unique message a writer has, if he has one, is buried beneath a ton of words.

You will also notice that the books you read become increasingly more arcane to the point where you question your own sanity. It's almost like porn, the more you watch, the more extreme the content gets. I think this is one of the main reasons for the prevalence of occult stuff over the ages.

Welcome to the majority of business/productivity/self-help literature.

I know from experience never to pick up a Cal Newport book again. 50 pages of well-written, cogent prose surrounded by 300 pages of repetition.

Same with James Clear's Atomic Habits. I was on his newsletter list for about a year prior to the book, and I can tell you there is almost nothing new in there. But that's really a testament to the quality of the newsletter. Once the book came out however, every email after that was an ad for the book. Unsubbed!

Correct. 19th century classics became so only because a good chunk of the populace was still illiterate, and not only could Austen, Balzac, Tolstoy, etc., write, they could write a thousand pages! So glibness was mistook for wisdom.

I read a ton only because today's movies and tv are so bad, and because I can go as fast as I want. I skim because I'm only gonna remember 10%.

> Glibness was mistook for wisdom.

You listed three realist authors. This is like complaining because you expected your apple to taste like an orange.

Books are a medium that has been elevated by pseudo-intellectualism into a divinity of sorts. They're as good as what's written in them and like most human output, most are garbage. Why should it be any different? Is most of TV that good? Most magazines? Most TikTok? Most music? Conversation?

What are you trying to read and why? From your description it sounds like you're reading to learn, which is fine but likely sub-optimal. Or are you reading to learn how to read?

Every medium has creation and consumption costs, and it affects their average quality. Books have a high creation cost: both in time and money, relative to electronic mediums. They also have a high consumption cost, as you cant read a book in a few seconds like you can watch shortform content. These factors select for quality.
You could say the same for TV or film and most of it is still garbage.
True, but their cost is still relatively cheaper considering the profit you can make from them is more than from books. Part of this is also because they are easier to replicate.
Yes, most books are useless.

> What tools/metrics are there to help find meaningful books?

Okay, first I never read a book that is less than 10 years old. Why? Because 10 years is roughly the time needed for a book to withstand the wheel of time. 100 years, as noted in other comments as well, is even better. If old books are still read, they are probably good books. But I cannot tell you the best books of last year. The only thing I can do, is tell you what the most popular books of last year were. But popular books are not the same as best books.

Secondly, I only read books I'm willing to read multiple times. Reading a book more than once is a great experience. Usually, I get more out of the second or third read than from the first read. If, after reading a couple of pages of a book, I realize I will not want to re-read the book, I quit reading it.

How do you know if you're willing to read a book multiple times before, you know, getting acquainted with it by reading it?

Do you have a 100% accurate method to ensure you never ever start reading something not-awesome?

Most of my life, I've been a completionist and would power through any book I started reading. Same for tv series, etc.

But then I found that forgiving myself for quitting had some really good consequences and few bad ones. So if a book/show isn't cutting it, I am mindful of the sunk costs fallacy and get onto something better. I've been happier.

I think there is only one 100% accurate method to ensure you never start reading a non-awesome book, and that's by never read any book at all.

Instead, admit quickly that you made a mistake and stop reading a book if it turns out to be not-awesome after a couple of pages.

I have a huge collection of quotes I gathered from Facebook, Tumblr, Reddit, and Twitter which are from classic self-help books and I prefer them over memorizing a whole book. You can sometimes distill the essence of what was said in a book into a small morsel/quote. The stoic ones are my favorite. They were the kings of one-liners.
On the other hand, you may as well read the Enchiridion cover to cover, since it's basically formulated as a bunch of short tips and one liners anyway.
The best way is finding a community and/or individuals you trust and getting their opinion. By community, I mean something much smaller than "HackerNews" or a subreddit.
most nonfiction books are either:

- padded blogposts/tweets to appear thicker/more valuable - rampantly wrong pseudoscience and opinion pieces that trigger emotions instead of brains - once useful advice that is now horribly outdated - if accurate, then too dry to become actually popular

and then there is fiction, which is at least honest about being fiction, but constrained by the authors imagination as well as the target reading groups average expectations. Thats why most SciFi stuff is some kind of stupid dystopia to provoke fears about the future instead of guidance towards a good path like solarpunk.

After having read dozens of books for college I feel that book for "retail" have so little information that I just don't bother anymore.
As someone that wrote a $19, 47 page book, it's because you get tons of criticism that you can get a 300 hour course for $9, what possible value could you provide in 47 pages
Books are frequently useless. I only buy used (thrift books, local book stores) or get them from the library. If I dont have a compelling reason to finish it after about 20-50pages, I just re-sell/give away/throw it in the nearest gutter.
When I get a recommendation from an actual human being I know and trust, I typically enjoy it, but when it’s a book that influencers say “changed their life” or gets good reviews from NYT, or Goodreads, etc, I enjoy it much less so.

There’s nothing wrong with not being into the same books everyone else pretended to read. A good book should feel like entertainment or an interesting diversion, not a chore to slog through. There are some classics (like Dickens) that I just can’t get into, and I’m OK with that.

Stephen King describes his books as the literary equivalent of a “Big Mac and Fries” and you know what? Sometimes a Big Mac is what sounds good for lunch.

One genre I particularly like is non-fiction about interesting events, like “Endurance” about Shackleton’s failed voyage to the South Pole. It’s a great book and I learned more about leadership from it than all the other self-help books combined.

Yes, most books are crap. But Sturgeon's Law is a thing, so that should not be surprising. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law

It took me years to get past the first 100 pages of both Dune and Stars in my Pocket like Grains of Sand but once I did, both turned out to be excellent. The only reason I kept trying is that I'd heard they were both good and I couldn't figure out what I was missing until I found it.

IME, the only way to know if you're likely to enjoy a book is if it's recommended by someone who knows your taste very well. Or if you have a favorite author. Other than that, it's a crapshoot. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you waste a few hours.

One of the nice things about brick & mortar bookstores and libraries is being able to browse around until you find something good.

> It took me years to get past the first 100 pages of both Dune

Oof.

I was easier for me, because I was like 12-14y/o at the time. Honestly, I don't remember a shit about it, except what it was good at times. I wouldn't mind to try it again (and not an extremely poor translation now) but... I know it would be quite tedious and I know what I wouldn't make it. Hell, I didn't finished books what very relevant for my interests for years now.

An old profesor of mine who used to review computer science books as a side gig told me he never bothered to read them, all he needed to do was check the contents page to see if they were good or not. I've been applying that method for figuring out whether a non fiction book is good or not and it works like a charm.if the contents are in a weird order or there isn't the right amount of specificity in the contents its prob not good. Also don't commit to reading any big non fiction books without checking Wikipedia and doing some 30 min research on the topic first. Easier to spot the bs that way
Absolutely yes - a lot of nonfiction books that are intended to be a deep dive into a particular topic written by experts are like this, and I think it's clearly because they need to hit a page count as you've suggested.

I just finished a book called Arbitrary Lines, about land zoning in the US. I was looking for a really deep dive into the history of zoning and how it ended up in its current state, or perhaps comparative analysis of different zoning policies. In reality, the book was maybe 25% technical/historical information about zoning and 75% the author going off about how zoning is unfair and leads to inequality. That's all fine, but I was picking up the book because I already have a clear understanding that zoning is the source of problems and wanted to understand how we got to where we are (and maybe learn about what the expected benefits of the existing zoning rules are that got them implemented, which the author didn't even pretend to be interested in because he's totally anti-zoning).

In any case, this is all to say that I strong recommend two things. First, skim! You don't actually have to read the whole book. I'm currently reading a book called Limitless, which is about the Fed's actions during the early days of the pandemic. It started with some history of the Fed, which makes sense in context, but I've already read about the history of the Fed, so I just read initial paragraphs of chapters and initial sentences of paragraphs to make sure I wasn't missing anything important by skipping it. Second, be willing to put down books. It took me a while to be okay with this, but at the end of the day you only have so much reading time in your life, and there's no shame in setting down a book that's disappointing and moving on to something else.

In terms of finding books, if you're looking for this kind of nonfiction, I like recommendations from experts. I really like Bill Gates' reading list. NPR Best Books (https://apps.npr.org/best-books) as well.

I've been exploring book summary services as a means to narrow down my reading choices. Once I have decided to read a book, I find it helpful to keep the summary on hand to improve my comprehension and keep track of the book's main ideas.
I'm going to assume you're talking about nonfiction books, because this is highly subjective for novels/fiction.

Most books are terrible, and even most "good" books have large swaths of filler content. Very few books are packed with useful content from front to back cover.

I think this is largely due to pressures from publishers and the way books are traditionally published and sold.

A 50 page book that is jam-packed with goodies and has no filler won't sell nearly as well as a 300 page book that seems to be full of stuff from an expert in the field. A 300 page book looks a lot better on a shelf than a 50 page pamphlet. Most of us know in our brains that quality > quantity, but our hearts often tell us the opposite.

Some fixes already exist: Online content, blogs, developer docs, and self-published books.

Practically, I would say don't worry about skimming books or parts of books if they seem like they are mostly fluff or overly repetitive. Because they probably are.

SOunds like you're talking about nonfiction books and indeed, like most things, those are mostly crap.

As far as fiction goes the same is true but there's one weird trick I use: by and large I only read books by dead authors. The volume of the world's books is enormous, and again, most is crap. But if someone has died (no more book publicity tours!) and their book is still in print or readily available, there's a better chance that it's worth reading.

There's more to it than that of course; naïvely following this rule would suggest reading (ugh) Ayn Rand. But there's a big variety of good stuff still in print or easily findable at a used book store.

The best nonfiction books are specialized textbooks. They're not fun to read, but that's where all of the valuable information is.
(comment deleted)
> I have the right to try to avoid books I would consider 'useless'.

Yes! Of course you have the right to choose what you are reading. Don't forget about it.

> What tools/metrics are there to help find meaningful books?

Do you really want a metric on a highly subjective matter? Does a bad rating on Goodreads means what the book is bad? Does that that mean what you wouldn't enjoy it if it relevant for your interests?

> it's probably a mix of everything.

Of course.

Try this[0] (or find a text copy, it's available on archive.org too), it's short and...

[0] https://archive.org/details/ExhalationByTedChiang

This is like everything else in life - people, education, work places etc..

Having said that, books with rating > 4.7 (of 5) on amazon are generally v.good.

I think an important thing is to understand why you're reading. What are you wanting to get out of it? That will inform the sorts of books that are of value to you and the sorts that aren't.

One person's indispensable book can be, and often is, another person's complete waste of time. It depends as much on the reader as on the book.