And by the way, I don't believe in giving up on junk books. I think a good mix of fun but trashy and serious books is better. Just like anything in life: I wouldn't want to have only deep meaningful conversations or eat only fine dining or only write computer programs that do something useful or stop playing basketball just because I'm terrible at it or learn only prestigious fields of math... I think it's OK to do something just for fun, not everything needs to be edifying.
They are absolutely horrible. They give you nothing of value, not even education. They were mostly written by two authors who grew to despise each other,
They take a couple of hours to read, maybe a little more. They are the pinnacle of pointless time wasting. I read most of them while in the service.
They are perfect in every way.
------------
[1] David Morrell is probably best known for First Blood, the novel Rambo is based on.
Personally I also feel like books don’t “numb” my brain the way TV does. Sitting down with a book for hours, even “junk” doesn’t leave me feeling dumber the way watching hours of TV does. I imagine that reading activates higher order brain function a lot more than TV.
Competing demands for my time cured me of this list, and I came to view reading not as something indisputably virtuous (as my schooling had trained me to do), but as just another form of consumption.
There is such a thing as too much consumption. Junk books are no better than junk food, and even a diet of classics might be no better for your head than constant fine dining is for your gut.
I now take more care in choosing to give my time and energy to reading.