Thinks back on this gem (from all of ~1 day ago) that is, at its core, anti-intellectualism. It treats reading as a game where you’re trying to run up the score, not an activity that leads to increased understanding or a new perspective or (god forbid) pleasure.
And we simply cannot trade true understanding or pleasure for an impoverished facsimile; we just can’t. Knowing the synopses of many of major works of literature might be helpful at pub trivia but it’s meaningless for you as an individual and how you interact with the world on a daily basis.
I'm weak on literature, and never read "Moby Dick" in school. It was such a ubiquitous part of the culture that in my 20s I decided I should just read it. Sure, I knew what it was all about in advance (AI-style), but reading it was a different experience, and one that I treasured.
In fairness, there is an entire business pre-Gpt doing just this -- blinkist. And to the extent that it works it's because a lot of non-fiction nowadays is basically a handful of ideas repeated over 200 pages of anecdotes
this works on poorly written business books where everything you need to learn can be found in the title: subtitle!
UGH!
Sometimes I think that us not putting GPAs on diplomas is the one thing that keeps us from inadvertently dangerously sliding into this.
Do people on Facebook or wherever brag about doing those Goodreads challenges? “Read 50 books this year challenge” kinda shit. I don’t understand the thinking that reading books is a competition.