Live data from Hacker News

Rules for Choosing Nonfiction Books

herman.asia

61–70 of 205 posts

Re: Rules for Choosing Nonfiction Books

#61

In recent years I've switched a lot to watching a non-fiction author's 30 minute talk on youtube about their book rather than reading the book entirely. This is especially true for business/self-improvement type books, where I've found its almost never really time efficient when I'm really just looking for the list of 5 things I should be doing and skipping the extraneous pages of anecdotes.

Business/self-improvement books are the worst for having 3 pages of ideas and expanding it to the publishers 200 pages minimum.

Re: Rules for Choosing Nonfiction Books

#62
I like reading non-fiction. I think my rough heuristics for picking books are:

1. Aim for topics I was already interested in before I knew the book existed. There is something to be said for books so good they draw attention to the topic, but that also increases the odds of the book's rating being based on popularity and not quality. I'd rather read a good book about niche topic that is particularly meaningful to me than a better book that just happens to hit the zeitgeist. In other words, I pick a topic and hunt for books.

My most recent non-fiction books were Derek Wu's book on Spelunky, Chapman Piloting & Seamanship, and Thinking with Type. None of those are going to make Oprah's Book Club, but all were very enchriching for me because they aligned with areas that matter to me.

2. Aim for books that are "canonical" according to people in the field. Signals for this are lots of reviews, especially many reviews over a period of years because that shows consistent relevance. When people I respect that I share interests with mention a book, that's a strong signal. When reviews of other similar books mention as a point of reference, that's a strong signal.

3. Read a few pages and judge the quality of writing. I have read very very few books where the underlying concepts were valuable enough to be worth wading through bad writing. On the contrary, my experience is that deep, clear thinkers produce quality at all levels of exposition. They wrap their good ideas in good chapters with good paragraphs full of good sentences. Life is too short for shitty prose.

I also have a simple rule for how to increase the quantity of non-fiction I read: Put it in the bathroom and don't bring my phone in there. You'd be surprised how much text you can get through one poop at a time. This is great for books where reading it is not super engaging but I want to have read it.

Re: Rules for Choosing Nonfiction Books

#63
post #5

The idea that only 4+ star rating books are worth reading is laughable. Reading only very popular books is a recipe to read only books that fit into your own preconceived worldview.

I think it's more laughable for fiction books and less laughable for nonfiction books. Nonfiction books are like tools to me: they either perform or they don't.

Re: Rules for Choosing Nonfiction Books

#64
post #16

John Carreyrou wasn't an expert on phlebotomy or biochemistry. Roger Lowenstein wasn't an expert on hedge funds or technical finance. Eric Schlosser on nuclear command and control? Nope. Woodward and Bernstein and constitutional law? Not so much! I don't think these are very good rules. I thought it was especially amusing that this person doesn't trust journalists to write about anything but journalism. If you believ…

I don't know any of the authors you've mentioned, but in my own experience, not reading books written by journalists is a good rule of thumb. That doesn't mean, obviously, that it's impossible for a journalist to write a good book. By profession, journalism is both shallow and narrow: it focuses on the surface of events in the given moment. That tends not to equip someone with the knowledge or expertise to write a truly insightful book.

Re: Rules for Choosing Nonfiction Books

#66
post #16

John Carreyrou wasn't an expert on phlebotomy or biochemistry. Roger Lowenstein wasn't an expert on hedge funds or technical finance. Eric Schlosser on nuclear command and control? Nope. Woodward and Bernstein and constitutional law? Not so much! I don't think these are very good rules. I thought it was especially amusing that this person doesn't trust journalists to write about anything but journalism. If you believ…

I don't know any of the authors you've mentioned, but in my own experience, not reading books written by journalists is a good rule of thumb . That doesn't mean, obviously, that it's impossible for a journalist to write a good book. By profession, journalism is both shallow and narrow: it focuses on the surface of events in the given moment. That tends not to equip someone with the knowledge or expertise to write a t…

As a funny counter-point, Marx was a journalist and Capital is one of the most insightful books I'm reading at the moment.

Re: Rules for Choosing Nonfiction Books

#67
#2 shouldn't be a hard and fast rule, especially, with respect to textbooks and, especially, when it comes to subjects like math. A student rating a phenomenal book 2 stars because "...it was assigned and we had to buy our book. But the book is too hard to understand, explains jack shit and totally worthless. I give it two stars only because I bought it at 1/4 the price on sale, otherwise this book barely deserves 1/2 star at most. Believe me, I am not dumb - I sometimes even read straight out the textbook." is not rare.

I read comments only after I'm done with the book.

Re: Rules for Choosing Nonfiction Books

#68

Here's a rule: read stuff that you think is interesting.

And what's your answer to " But how can we identify those, without first reading them? "

My system: Read the summary, read two reviews that sound vaguely sensible, take a guess. It works out well most of the time.
Post reply on HN