4 ms·
Ask HN: Is a summary of a non-fiction book a good substitute for the whole book?
For fiction the way a writer tells you a thing really matters.
But for non-fiction books isn't the summary good enough?
I am thinking, in particular, of business books.
On reading an interview with Doerr of his new book (measure what matters), I feel I have a good sense of what is in the book and how to implement it.
Do I? Has anyone read the whole thing? Can they comment?
- AnimalMuppet 8y agoIt depends on the kind of book. For something like "measure what matters", the basic idea comes through in the title. I would expect that a summary would capture things pretty well - it will omit some detail, but it will be just detail. The big idea is the point, and that comes through even in the title. I suspect that most business books are in this category, but I am not sure. For some things, though, the details really matter. Take "The C++ Programming Language", for example. You could, maybe, write a summary of that book. Do you know anything from reading it? Not really. Too much of the content is details. The whole point is the details.
- yigitcakar 8y agoI think the difference between reading the whole thing and the summary is about making the knowledge yours. If the non-fiction book has merit, it usually includes the rationale and real-world examples of the thing explained. Therefore you can examine the idea and have a deeper understanding of the subject or even improve on the original work. Summary forces you to memorize a few facts and you wouldn't even have a basis to evaluate the validity of the idea. I read summaries only when the book is written for the general public and I already have expert knowledge about the subject. In my opinion, reading summaries give a false sense of accomplishment. Reading is not about understanding one idea and implementing it. It is about understanding how to reach that idea, therefore you can improve on it.