Opinion New Books Aren’t Worth Reading

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Link/Archive
1768395940512.png

It’s a symptom of our growing illiteracy that the act of reading is considered an intellectual exercise. “It doesn’t matter what you read, just that you read it.” This sentiment would be familiar to an Englishman in the 1300s (in fact, 14th century English criminals convicted of manslaughter could avoid hanging by reading a single verse of the Bible). The same sentiment could get you 1M likes on TikTok today. But your great grandfather was reading Cicero in Latin.

So why do you even read books? Have you ever thought about it? Forget technical manuals for a second; if you’re reading Excel for Dummies or Advanced Quantum Mechanics, you probably have a concrete practical purpose in mind. Good for you, I am proud, you are still allowed to read those. Instead let’s focus on the soft stuff. Literature, history, philosophy. What’s the point?

Entertainment Vs. Information

There are two sides to this debate: entertainment or information. Unfortunately, reading books for entertainment is ridiculous. You do not live in a log cabin on the prairie. You have Netflix, you have video games, you have TikTok, you have Twitter (you really spend too much time on Twitter anon). No one reads books for entertainment anymore, because paper is an inferior entertainment platform. The only people who still read books for entertainment are women who prefer their porn to have DIY visuals. The stats back me up on this. If you’re tempted to disagree, go walk the aisles of Barnes & Noble.

So we’re left with one answer: information. But what kind of information are you trying to learn from a fiction book? The book is literally labelled FALSE on the cover. I can hear the outraged answer from the literati already. It will be something like “I read to understand the human condition by engaging deeply with a wide breadth of human experience and perspectives.” Good. I agree. And since this is the same basic answer as to why you should read history, philosophy, etc as well (books that are deceptively labelled NOT FALSE on the cover), I think it’s fair to lump all these subjects together.

But if this answer is correct, it leads us to a troubling conclusion: New books are not worth reading. Why? Because everyone alive today has the same perspective, and none of us have experienced a wide breadth of anything. Especially not those of us who are likely to get platformed by a major publisher.

1768396067680.png

Take history books. The average ancient historian led troops, tutored a prince, governed a province, advised a king, made a fortune, fell from favor, was exiled, and buried 7 of their 10 children. The average modern historian passed a few tests then wrote a book on their laptop next to their cat. And worse, they all passed the same tests at the same institutions. And they all wrote the same statements on their applications to get into those institutions. And while attending those institutions, they all adopted the same opinions. Anyone who did otherwise was filtered out before they could become a professor with a publishing deal. Everything is like this now.

Meanwhile Xenophon was an Athenian student of Socrates who joined a Greek mercenary group that marched 1000 miles into Persia to overthrow the King of Kings on behalf of the King’s brother. When the King’s brother died and the group’s commanders were all killed by Persian treachery, he led the troops 1000 miles home himself while being constantly harried by hostile armies. He then tried to establish a colony on the Black Sea, survived a mutiny, raided the Thracians, fought for the Spartans, was exiled by Athens, and settled down to manage an estate and write it all up.

1768396122504.png

How To Find Perspective​

Contrast Xenophon with Mary Beard, who studied at Cambridge and now teaches at Cambridge. She holds the same opinions as everyone else at Cambridge. She’s remarked before that, “I actually can’t understand what it would be to be a woman without being a feminist.” This seems like a peculiar failing for an ancient historian. After 9/11, she wrote an article saying that many people thought “the United States had it coming,” and that “world bullies, even if their heart is in the right place, will in the end pay the price.” That caused some controversy on the world stage, but earned her a promotion at Cambridge. I don’t know if she’s ever talked publicly about religion or democracy or climate change or immigration, but I could tell you exactly what she thinks about these things anyway. So why would you bother reading what she thinks about Rome? The answers are just as predictable.

Thankfully it’s still possible to find people with unique experiences and perspectives. But you can’t find them by traveling around the world. The world is too hyperconnected now, and everyone is converging to the same opinions. You have to find them by traveling back in time. There are hundreds of people with just as much experience of the human condition as Xenophon who have written great books throughout the millennia: Polybius was a Greek politician taken hostage by the Romans, who befriended Scipio Aemilianus and stood beside him as Carthage was burned to the ground. Bernal Díaz del Castillo was a conquistador who wrote about conquering the Aztec Empire. William Wells Brown escaped slavery in America at the age of 19 before writing biographies of Black Americans. Konstanty Michaowicz was a Christian Serb who wrote about being captured by the Ottoman Turks and being trained as a Janissary before escaping. Talk about the breadth of human experience! Have you read all of these? If not, why would you even consider picking up another book written by another Cambridge professor?

1768396188567.png

I haven’t even bothered to trot out the usual argument in favor of reading old books, which is survivorship bias: Any book written hundreds of years ago that people are still talking about is likely to be very good. This is true but uncontroversial, so what’s the fun in discussing it? I state it here only so that you know that I know it.

In conclusion I leave you with a rule of thumb for actually understanding the human condition by engaging deeply with a wide breadth of human experience and perspectives: Half the books you read must’ve been written before WW2, half of those must’ve been written before the American Revolution, and half of those must’ve been written before the fall of Rome.
 
Half the books you read must’ve been written before WW2, half of those must’ve been written before the American Revolution, and half of those must’ve been written before the fall of Rome.
That's a good, insightful rule of thumb. However, It ain't happening.
 
So why do you even read books? Have you ever thought about it?
Yes

No one reads books for entertainment anymore
I do

The only people who still read books for entertainment are women who prefer their porn to have DIY visuals.
No you're confusing the topic with "people who buy new books"

But what kind of information are you trying to learn from a fiction book? The book is literally labelled FALSE on the cover.
There is no particular difference between literary fiction and a philosophical treatise on the world, you illiterate retard

New books are not worth reading. Why? Because everyone alive today has the same perspective, and none of us have experienced a wide breadth of anything.
Projection alert! Projection alert!

The average ancient historian led troops, tutored a prince, governed a province, advised a king, made a fortune, fell from favor, was exiled, and buried 7 of their 10 children. The average modern historian passed a few tests then wrote a book on their laptop next to their cat.
If you actually read old books instead of talking to Greek statue avs on Twitter about how much you all totally read old books, you'd know that calling each other plebes and rubes exactly this way has been going on since we invented writing. Ever heard of the whole Atlantis thing in Plato? You fucking illiterate?

Mostly notable for his pedophilic Socrates fanfiction.

Half the books you read must’ve been written before WW2, half of those must’ve been written before the American Revolution, and half of those must’ve been written before the fall of Rome.
Performative memery looking for asspats and good boy points from the autist section.



Thank you for your attention to these matters
 
After I was done with the classics, I tried contemporary literature, and it was all shit, not worth the time.

The only thing I read now is 40k novels, and they are more of a guilty pleasure.
 
I’ll be honest, I am severely questioning the amount of people who actually read books anymore. Like the number of Americans who were born after 1981 who read The Iliad, I think maybe like 10,000. The rest just read a summary.
 
e4a6a3f4a4bf8313c457f4b463271249e2641459ecb241484535cb258dc3caae_1-3357741478.jpg
“I read to understand the human condition by engaging deeply with a wide breadth of human experience and perspectives.” Good. I agree
Sounds to me like you spend your afternoons huffing farts.
There are two sides to this debate: entertainment or information. Unfortunately, reading books for entertainment is ridiculous. You do not live in a log cabin on the prairie. You have Netflix, you have video games, you have TikTok, you have Twitter (you really spend too much time on Twitter anon). No one reads books for entertainment anymore, because paper is an inferior entertainment platform.
Nitwit take.

Most of us have access to a wide array of entertainment platforms and still choose to spend time reading books, just because you'd rather spend that time watching Netflix slop or god-forbid - TikTok 'content' doesn't mean the medium is bad, if anything it just proves that the author of this article is a moron that can't visualize an apple.
 
Last edited:
Half the books you read must’ve been written before WW2, half of those must’ve been written before the American Revolution, and half of those must’ve been written before the fall of Rome.
That's a cool idea for a very serious reader. A more achievable challenge might simply be to read a book from before each of those events, as a start.

I recently saw that someone is training a series of LLMs using written works up to a certain date, ie a hard cutoff before the American Revolution, another going up until 1913, etc. And predictably there's much oy-veying about how the American Revolution one doesn't know about Muh Slavery, the 1913 one doesn't know about Hitler and can't imagine women voting, etc.

And of course we can't possibly release them to the public, exposing people to perspectives 99% of humanity held just a century ago. They should remain purely for "academic research" by ((trusted experts)).
 
Last edited:
This reads entirely like a poser that thinks reading makes him smart when we all know he spends most of his day doom scrolling.

So we’re left with one answer: information. But what kind of information are you trying to learn from a fiction book? The book is literally labelled FALSE on the cover. I can hear the outraged answer from the literati already. It will be something like “I read to understand the human condition by engaging deeply with a wide breadth of human experience and perspectives.” Good. I agree. And since this is the same basic answer as to why you should read history, philosophy, etc as well (books that are deceptively labelled NOT FALSE on the cover), I think it’s fair to lump all these subjects together.
If you read for information I will treat you like a dumb smartass acting like you're better than everyone else and the people that do read for information know which books is worht it or a waste of time. And fiction does not mean "fake and gay" it is just a tool of expression, heck a few infamous examples is Frankenstein or Moby Dick.

And finally nothing is interesting to read today because publishers have a bias against white men and want novels to fulfill a diversity quota, not because we are dumb niggers.
 
Performative memery looking for asspats and good boy points from the autist section.
Also, according to the nerds who try to quantify these things, the arc of very high Western IQ starts around The Sorrows of Young Werther and ends somewhere near Gravity's Rainbow.

That's the era of literature (and literary memoirs, etc.) that both statue tweeters and "Nietzsche was a spiritually brown incel" conservatives-turned-"dissident"-traditionalists don't know anything about.

Peak whiteness was degenerate ackshually.
 
The thing with historians is technically correct, but leaves a lot out. Yes, academic historians who never leave college campuses pass a few tests and then write a book, but they also write a bunch of articles and read tons in grad school. But here's the other thing they do: spend years researching a single topic to write that book. Some of those students end up learning two or three dead languages just to real the original documents in archives spread across the world. And it isn't unheard of for those doctoral candidates to spend years or even decades grinding away at those dissertations and do it knowing they're never going to be one of the select few who are graced with a tenure-track position. Some of the best historians aren't even in the academic track and are just doing the research and writing of local history and are doing it as a hobby or because they simply love it.

We don't live in a world where a man can start his apprenticeship at 10 and be a master of his craft by 20or where a man can just go from job to job to job or uproot and go to the frontier and start over. We don't live in a world where someone can be born into the nobility and lead an army at 18 or be able to have one good day on the battlefield and turn that glory into a lifetime of ease because someone rich and powerful becomes a patron and grants our hero an estate and slaves and a lifetime pension. We live in a world where everyone is a cog in a machine and is treated the same way and where we are numbed by tv and the internet because our lives have become a trudge where we no longer have communities and festivals and holidays and the joys that come with life.

I wish we still had a world where the classical education was still the basis, but Western Civilization is now evil and we had to dumb down everything before I was even born just to be able to turn education into a one-size-fits-all deal so we could be cogs in a giant machine.

And there is no escape from it and it sucks.
 
Also, according to the nerds who try to quantify these things, the arc of very high Western IQ starts around The Sorrows of Young Werther and ends somewhere near Gravity's Rainbow.

That's the era of literature (and literary memoirs, etc.) that both statue tweeters and "Nietzsche was a spiritually brown incel" conservatives-turned-"dissident"-traditionalists don't know anything about.

Peak whiteness was degenerate ackshually.
I also like to bomb countries with my erect penis.
 
There were great, entertaining, and meaningful books being published right through the early 2000's. It's true that new books aren't worth reading, but its only because women now dominate publishing, The problems with female dominated media have been articulated a thousand times, but it all boils down to "they produce shit". In a hundred years, every book lover's collection will have the same gap in it, starting around 2010 and ending... who knows when.

The last 15 years have destroyed the popular, positive image of women. The only demo that's made itself more hated via modern media is niggers.
 
I've given reading a try many times, and with the exception of technical literature and Godel, Escher, Bach, I have found it to be mostly a waste of time every time.

History in particular is worse than worthless. Everyone I've talked to who reads History recreationally comes away from every book parroting misrepresentations or even outright lies, and even if you read multiple conflicting history books, and get into the primary sources (basically nobody does this btw), your mind is still of your time, and can only understand to a limited extent the worlds of the past. Consider that we don't even understand the world we've spent our entire lives in, and the idea of "understanding" the past just by reading words is so prideful and naive that it's downright infuriating.

I'm still willing to give Philosophy another chance, but so far I've mostly been engaging with French, "Existentialist", or Greek philosophers, and with very few exceptions, it's all been trash. The books that haven't been complete trash have usually contained basically one blog post of actual interesting shit to say, and the rest of the book is bloat. This shit does not belong on a pedestal.

Brevity is the soul of whit. Books aren't.

Most of us have access to a wide array of entertainment platforms and still choose to spend time reading books
Who is "us"? Reading may not be completely dead, but to claim it's anything like a majority of the population is outright laughable. Reading is like exercise now: What was once a natural part of life is now a chore that most people don't bother with.
 
There are two sides to this debate: entertainment or information. Unfortunately, reading books for entertainment is ridiculous. You do not live in a log cabin on the prairie. You have Netflix, you have video games, you have TikTok, you have Twitter (you really spend too much time on Twitter anon). No one reads books for entertainment anymore, because paper is an inferior entertainment platform.
This nigra is retarded.
  • Videogames are ok but are extremely niche: you have to both be good enough and capable of getting better, which drastically narrows the selection for a lot of people.
  • Movies require superhuman attention.
  • Twatter and tiktok have no plot; if you're entertained by that, you can be entertained by static noise.
  • Books are the superior entertainment. Paper kind of sucks, but this is why we have e-ink.
So we’re left with one answer: information. But what kind of information are you trying to learn from a fiction book? The book is literally labelled FALSE on the cover. I can hear the outraged answer from the literati already. It will be something like “I read to understand the human condition by engaging deeply with a wide breadth of human experience and perspectives.” Good. I agree.
I don't! I dont' give a fuck about the "breadth" of human experience, I want the greatest human experiences, which I naturally cannot experience due to not being great. I don't want "relatable", and I don't want cuntsuffering (unrelatable but trash).
Take history books. The average ancient historian led troops, tutored a prince, governed a province, advised a king, made a fortune, fell from favor, was exiled, and buried 7 of their 10 children. The average modern historian passed a few tests then wrote a book on their laptop next to their cat. And worse, they all passed the same tests at the same institutions. And they all wrote the same statements on their applications to get into those institutions.
This is why I read fiction books by a guy who through his own merit commanded a victorious army at 14. (They're romances mostly, in the early-modern sense.)

The last 15 years have destroyed the popular, positive image of women. The only demo that's made itself more hated via modern media is niggers.
"15 years have destroyed" -- in whose view?
"made itself more hated" -- by whom?
Nigga, you suck cocks at best and probably fuck animals.
 
Unfortunately, reading books for entertainment is ridiculous. You do not live in a log cabin on the prairie. You have Netflix, you have video games, you have TikTok, you have Twitter (you really spend too much time on Twitter anon). No one reads books for entertainment anymore, because paper is an inferior entertainment platform.
Couldn't make it past this paragraph. How much of a low IQ gorilla nigger do you have to be in order to believe that books can't provide a person with sufficient entertainment - let alone be so smug about how [current year]'s peak slop hubs are somehow superior in that regard? Is this guy one of those retards who can't see pictures in his head? He has to be. I want to see him try to get through Charlie and the Chocolate Factory without stroking out.
 
Couldn't make it past this paragraph. How much of a low IQ gorilla nigger do you have to be in order to believe that books can't provide a person with sufficient entertainment - let alone be so smug about how [current year]'s peak slop hubs are somehow superior in that regard? Is this guy one of those retards who can't see pictures in his head? He has to be. I want to see him try to get through Charlie and the Chocolate Factory without stroking out.
It's not even like books are good because they allow you to render RTX raytraced BAZINGA graphics in your mind. The actual writing itself has a beautiful and poetic texture when done well. A good writer could tell you a story about buying an apple at the store only to later find a worm in it and they could wind you around their finger the entire time. One of Hemingway's famous stories is just about a guy going to fish at a river. The way this author compares it to videogames and movies (both of which I also enjoy) is so asinine you have to wonder... if he even reads.
 
Back
Top Bottom