Your comment was also addressed.
“Why don’t I see __(some book)___?”
I do read fiction, but I don’t take notes on it. For fiction, I prefer audiobook.
I also read hundreds of books before 2007, but didn’t start taking notes until I realized I was forgetting what I had read.
And ultimately, I only read things that apply to my life or current interests right now. I say no to all requests, and publishers asking me to do reviews.
If you have a lot of dialog, like I do, I think a narrator can bring it to life, by inhabiting the characters. If you're reading the book, you might well be imagining the author talking to you, so an audiobook narrator becomes the voice of the author.
So no, they're not mutually exclusive.
So? This seems like a thought-stopping word: "Oh, gatekeeping! Awful". I'd say we could use some more gatekeeping.
>Some people rely on audiobooks
Well, if you mean the blind, or even people with no time outside car commuting, etc, well for them it's another matter.
I might rely on a walker to go around, but that doesn't mean that it's just an altertive for walking that I prefer, as opposed to a remedy for a health issue.
My sense is that when people talk about gate keeping there’s necessarily an emotional component. In this case I’d guess perhaps there’s a sense that “reading a book” is valuable or prestigious and they don’t want to exclude someone from it.
But to me it’s just an observation of how you consumed content, free of emotional charge.
Just this year I tried to read Musashi, Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and some classic Russian novels and I can’t do it. I’m not sure why and I’m well aware of the benefits. So to an extent I imagine Sivers is similar.
I don't think the images play in my head as well as other people and that is not really an issue with non-fiction. With non-fiction I am just parsing the content in a sense.
The negative tense of the name “non-fiction” is interesting too. The original categorizers must also not have thought too highly of it.
Real stories have a tendency not to be as real as one might hope.
Fake stories have a way of being more real than the "fake" label might imply.
He has these "conversations" between people 35 years ago, with wildly unrealistic dialog that no human would ever speak. And yet this qualifies as "non-fiction"?
Having done this reconstruction myself, I can tell you that absolutely NO ONE remembers what they said 40 years ago. No one remembers when meetings happened or who was there.
Take, for example, the famous Steve Jobs visits to Xerox PARC. I wasn't there so I didn't include them. But a podcast host told me he's talked to three people who were, and they have three different stories.
There are, in fact, some writers who manage to bring history to life without inventing dialog and scenes that maybe never happened. I salute them.
I stand by the saying "S.he who has read 1000 books has lived 1000 lives".
When fiction, the life of the characters. When "nonfiction", share the life and thoughts of the author(s).
I hope HN won't turn into Twitter where everyone finds something offending all the time.
Bourdieu is a good start on these topics.
Why would you do that? Why would you rather read something where you could learn something useful or even nice maybe? I mean of course you can read whatever you want. Genuinely curious.
Also shit or otherwise, it’s such a fallacious myth that you only learn from non-fiction.
I have not read through all the list but by skimming, there's a really huge majority of nonfiction books.
I love nonfiction and I'm reading quite a lot myself, but I can't imagine to not have a novel or any fiction book to balance it out.
The lack of fiction in this list also makes it indigestible to me.
Why would you spare yourself from the epic,from the beautiful or from the tragic of a fiction book? This is beyond me, but this is just me as well, so thanks for sharing the list, I'll read some of these :)