3 ms·

I find Cal Newport quite repetitive. He has some good ideas, I'm sure - but his recent book "Digital Minimalism" was a disappointing read. It was very much a re

I find Cal Newport quite repetitive. He has some good ideas, I'm sure - but his recent book "Digital Minimalism" was a disappointing read. It was very much a rehash of Deep Work in simpler terms with some portion of the book dedicated to discussing the Amish and Mennonites. Several parts of the book felt very disjointed. One such part of the book discussed a colleague of his, whose entire name he kept repeating every other sentence. In contrast to other section of the book, where he only stated their first name a couple of times. Then parts meandered into segments about Solitude that just felt out of place. It just felt tenuous. This book could have easily been just a series of essays. In fact, essays probably would have reached a bigger audience - but you can't cash on previous successes and make bank that way.

skydhash 3y ago
I split my non-fiction books in two rough types: Non-fiction—when my aim is to understand some ideas—and technical—when I seek to improve my skill. Some of the first can be bloated. But I only read in a linear fashion on my first skim. Just seeing what's the main ideas are and the author's perspective on them. I view stories taken as example as a kind of slice of life illustrating the ideas. On subsequent reads, if the book warrants it, I just go straight to what I need. If I have the time to do so, I summarize it, put it in my wiki, and uses that instead. I never remember the author's words—if there's a sentence I like, I quote it in my wiki—, only the ideas. How it is phrased don't matter as long I can understand. If the writing is atrocious, I just quit. The only books I'm really critical are fiction books, because they promise a good story.