3 ms·
It highly depends on the book! A lot of these types of books are simple lessons with a LOT of fillers. IMO they are bad books. Most often, an author has a lot o
by baby 5y ago
It highly depends on the book! A lot of these types of books are simple lessons with a LOT of fillers. IMO they are bad books. Most often, an author has a lot of things to say in their first book, but much fewer things to say in subsequent books, so first books are always a good bet.
For example, “the subtle art of not giving a fuck” is mostly fillers, but books from robert greene or malcolm gladwell are always filled with interesting stories that don’t feel like fillers.
- HPsquared 5y agoThe marketing folks think (probably correctly, they tend to be quite data-driven) that consumers don't want to pay $10 for a pamphlet, no matter how good is the information therein.
- bittercynic 5y ago"The subtle art..." is one of the first books I think of re: filler, too, but I do think the filler can have value as a way to spend more time with a valuable idea. Many of these books contain some valuable idea that could have been completely explained in a couple of paragraphs, but then you wouldn't have a built-in way to spend a couple of hours with the topic to give it time to get a little deeper into your psyche. In a way it's equivalent to packaging a small item in a larger box to make it easier to keep track of. Wasteful on the surface, but there's an undeniable value to it that would be hard to achieve more efficiently.
- Trex_Egg 5y agoThat's a great way of putting things with your explanations.
- antonvs 5y ago> For example, “the subtle art of not giving a fuck” is mostly fillers A meta-lesson from the author perhaps, demonstrating his art.