Summer Reading List

Seconded. I love this book. I was surprised to see it on the list because I expected them to all be recently published.

Self-fulfilling prophecy. If we shut down the conversation about literature when it starts, then yes we'll never discuss it ;)

I'm always pleased to see posts on literature show up on the HN[0], but often disappointed to see so few comments. But enough people are up-voting them that they do regularly appear on the front page, so there's clearly enough interest around here.

[0] e.g. see https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nybooks.com and https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=lrb.co.uk

I am not the original thread author, but I would postulate that it first depends on what each individual considers time wasted vs time well spent.

Many consider a relaxing, entertaining read to be worthwhile after a hard week of work in its own right.

For those who need a more "tangible" return on reading, though, many fiction books, intentionally or not, introduce ideas, philosophies, thoughts and perspective. Some explore political systems, others philosophies, others social/economic constructs, yet others interpersonal relationships, etc. From that perspective, one can learn from many fiction books, exercise one's mental muscles, gain new perspectives, and even take actionable insight.

I'm not saying Danielle Steel or Sydney Sheldon are necessarily likely candidates for bringing lifestyle change; but I have personally found many fiction (particularly SF in my case) books to have played a large part in influencing my perspective on the world and people within it, impact my likes and priorities, and so on.

I don't agree with ideas in Starship Troopers but found them challenging my own worldview. Arthur Clarke put Sri Lanka / Ceylon on my bucket list, made me interested in astronomy AND computer science. Neuromancer instigated my trip to Japan and visit to Tokyo, where I very much experienced the night-time vista through Case's eyes. A lot of Tom Clancy (I know... I know;) renewed my interest in flying and geopolitics, and I've happily used the word "nekulturny" in my daily usage since. Karl May's doubly-fictional accounts of American West and Arabian Peninsula added them to my own imagination. Tau Zero, Childhood's end, and Children of men made me realize how much I empathized with success and continuation of species more than Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" or Dawkins' "Selfish Gene" ever did. And so on...

My $0.01 CAD :)

Speaking for myself, I tend to alternate between fiction and non-fiction books. Generally, fiction books are story-driven (any sci-fi/fantasy/general fiction) and center around relationships between characters overlaid with some other topics. This means any good fiction is a setting custom built to examine specific aspects of humanity or some aspect of the world we live in or could live in. Any reasonably 'good' fiction is an exploration of highs and lows and challenges and redemptions, and I believe that these lead us to be better able to understand our fellow humans, and allow us to better think about and imagine the situations we might face in our lives or re-examine experiences we've had.

Sometimes the pleasure of reading fiction is simply to be entertained. Look at the popularity of TV and film - can you imagine never watching a fictional story again?

Teachers always tell their pupils to read often and to read widely. Why? Because the more you expose yourself to a wide range of writing styles the greater the chance it will help improve your own writing (regardless of whether you write fiction or non-fiction).

Fiction arguably lets the writer compose sentences with more freedom and creative licence than the non-fiction writer. The more you read, the more likely that some of that will rub off in your own writing or influence the rhythm of your own writing.

It exposes me to viewpoints, warnings, or subjects I wouldn't have learned otherwise.

For example, I've never given time to reading about gene editing, but after reading Change Agent I've been reading about gene editing and Crispr. I also have some minor understanding of the dangers and benefits of where that could take civilization.

I hadn't thought about what would happen in doomsday scenarios, like a large virus outbreak or an EMP blast, but Holding Their Own and One Second After exposed me to that.

Reading Seveneves exposed me to space travel and Lagrange points, I had no idea about these otherwise.

Authors like John Fante are great story tellers and he's such a joy to read instead of watching a tv series.

Depends on the kind of fiction, and what you're trying to get, I guess.

Personally, I see lot of value in science fiction books. They're good at exploring impact of technological changes on people (both on individual and societal level), and they can also be very inspiring. Also, the less such work is about people and their relationship, the more I like it - what I look for in science fiction is ideas and inspirations, not the boring interpersonal drama our lives are so full of already.

Not the parent but this article discusses benefits: https://open.buffer.com/reading-fiction/

They discuss benefits in: 1. Increasing empathy 2. Decreasing stress 3. Sleep 4. Relationships 5. Memory 6. Inclusivity 7. Vocabulary 8. Creativity 9. Pleasure

Depends how you count "wasted", but time to relax is important.

Fiction is a petri dish for all of those ideas you're consuming in non-fiction books.

Have you ever had an idea that you thought could change the world? Write a short story about it. When you are really forced to create different viewpoints in your head, put those viewpoints into characters, and then have those characters come into conflict with one another, you're subjecting your idea to scrutiny that costs nothing more than a few bytes in word processor and a few hours of time.

In that way, I think a lot of non-fiction is time wasted. I think more non-fiction writers should be fiction writers.

Do you consider time experiencing any art to be wasted?

I find it to: enhance empathy; expose me to new ideas and perspectives (both of background and state of mind); improve my writing; allow me to experience the beautiful and the sublime, which I'd count as among the least-wasteful uses of time; act as a kind of therapy by letting me see that my struggles both great and mundane are, without exception, not only my own; generally aid self reflection, understanding, and improvement.

Granted few or none of these things may result if we're talking about trash fiction, which isn't better than any other time-waster one may choose (TV, say—though both are fine if one's goal is simply entertainment). The above is what The Good Stuff does, by definition—achieving most or all of those things is overwhelmingly why those works are considered great.

[EDIT] I'd add that even mediocre fiction can be a great source of inspiration and ideas, while also being entertaining.

I held the same belief as you a few years ago - I only wanted to read something if it was going to increase my technical skills.

But there's certain works, literary classics, which started to fascinate me - because these books changed the world. Nowadays, it's technology that changes viewpoints - but there are parallels between good technology and good storytelling.

I also see certain classic films being just as important. Watch all of 'easy rider' and see how it affects you, moves you emotionally.

I still read mostly technical documents, but reading some of the classics can expand your viewpoints. I reread 1984 and brave new world last year for example - I'd read them in high school but clearly didn't appreciate them back then. Just being able to discuss those books with others who have read them have opened up some amazing conversations.

I guess I have two thoughts. The first concerns what is "wasted" time? If fiction is enjoyable, why is that waste of time? You might say you should use your time to gain new skills or hone your old. But to what end? If all your time is spent on non-fiction, when are you truly enjoying yourself? (Unless of course you truly enjoy non-fiction more than fiction). Life is short and nobody will remember you in 10000 years from now, why not enjoy the time you have?

The other is the hidden benefits of fiction. You'll be exposed to different world views than your own, different social constructs and different time periods which can shape how you see events. It's possible to live your life, in very different ways, in fast forward with fiction hundreds of times. You can gain new ideas, new creative energy or it may help you relax and recharge energy for when you don't want to "waste" your time.

It's important to think about what is or isn't wasted time. I think about it a lot, because to me, time is the most precious resource - I won't be alive for that long, my time being young is almost over...

To make the most out of my time as a human in this planet, I seek novel things, that will enrich my experience. Doing the exact same things today that I did yesterday is wasted time, because I will feel the same way, and I will be repeating the experience.

Reading good fiction improves my experience as a human. The feeling of the places, the characters and the occurrences is always unique, and (with a good book) I gain new insights of what being a human means.

Non-fiction books are also good, but I don't really get the same feeling for them. The best way of explaining it is also the most boring: It's like watching a good movie vs a good documentary. I get a totally different feeling from a movie, and given the choice, I will almost always go for the movie.

I have no idea if this is valid, but it is often said that people who read a lot more fiction tend to have more of a certain type of empathy.

Not all types of empathy. I think the idea is that when they see someone behave in a negative manner, they are more likely to conjure up a scenario in their mind where that behavior makes sense.

I remember one communications workshop I took where one of the lessons was: "When someone acts poorly or irrationally, try to ask yourself: Why would a reasonable person ever behave this way?" If you can come up with a scenario, then you don't automatically attribute negative qualities to the other (irrational, jerk, etc).

The claim is people who read a lot of fiction are much better at this. Anecdotally, I often find I'm better at this than most around me - even people who I view as much more intelligent. Often gets me in trouble, as well (e.g. my refusal to blanket condemn Wall Street professionals after the 2008 crisis (the key word being "blanket")).

Until recently, I would get quite frustrated with those who were quick to judge in situations where I could come up with (reasonable) scenarios vindicating the person, and could clearly see the person judging had not ruled those out. But in the last year or so, people have sent me signals that this is hard for the average person to do and I'm much better than most.

And the advice I keep hearing on how you can develop that skill is "Read more fiction".

Anyway, my 2 cents. Would love to see if this is backed by anything rigorous.

Could I ask you to begin with stating why you think it is "wasted"? That seems like a very odd viewpoint to take. If nothing else, entertainment has value in itself.

Have you considered Snow Crash, then? It would have been on top of my list.

Blond Sight by Peter Watts. Available in CC license on his website rifters.com

There are a lot of fiction books that will make you think differently more than non-fiction.

Ha-Joon Chang has very approachable books about capitalism and economics.

* Twenty-Three Things They Don't Tell You about Capitalism [1]

* Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism [2]

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/...

[2] https://www.amazon.com/Bad-Samaritans-Secret-History-Capital...

Obviously these lists are subjective but a couple of examples would be:

The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins (Evolution)

MindStorms by Seymore Papert (Education)

Structure of Scientific Revolution by Thomas Kuhn (Scientific Method/ Philosophy)

Gödel, Escher, Bach by Douglas R. Hofstadter (Formal Systems)

The Innovators Dilemma by Clayton Christensen (Entrepreneurship)

Innovation and Entrepreneurship Peter F Druckert (Entrepreneurship but most likely because I had a quite crazy experience while reading it)

They are all books written by what I consider careful thinkers i.e. people who are able to avoid confusing what they want the world to be with what they actually observe.

They don't have to be right and can be highly subjective as long as their premise is clear and they are aware of it.

Why the West Rules for Now - broad coverage of human history, starting with pre-human hominids. Loosely guided by looking for an account of why in 20th century so much power was concentrated in the West compared to the East, but that guiding question only comes up occasionally. It's mostly a plain history book.

I've also heard Our Kind recommended for this kind of thing, but I haven't read it myself.

Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond offers an interesting and academically quite solid perspective.

Highly recommend, Ideas: A History by Peter Watson.

Has a little less about historical events and more on the ideas that shaped humanity. The part on early human development is also fascinating.

https://www.amazon.com/d/Books/Ideas-History-Peter-Watson/07...

I'm about one third of the way through, but I was turned off by him dismissing Kant and Bentham's moral theories because they are autistic ("diagnosed" on the basis of circumstantial evidence).

I see the value of bringing systematizing vs empathizing in the picture, but you can do that without character-assassinating them. It was really bizarre to read him bring up their autism, then insist he didn't commit Ad Hominem, then continue on as if he had invalidated Kant's view (without actually making any substantive argument).

I'd be more than happy if the proceeds went to ACLU or Watsi or one of the YC non-profits

I donate all my smile bucks to the Youth Competitive Programming Circle.

Well, in this case if you were going to share anyway, why not send some of that money to somewhere other than Jeff Bezos' pockets, be it yourself or a charity?

Speaking only for myself: I consider it woo-woo because there's no real set of steps which makes it repeatable for a majority of people. What works for one person works for one person, but it's sold like it works for everybody.

I've heard of folks who are capable of meditating their way through a root canal. Should we stop offering Novocain to patients? Should we start actively discouraging dental patients from getting Novocain?

To me (dons flameproof suit), it's a lot like Homeopathy - another attempt to sell the placebo effect.

> It always surprises me that people find the concept of the brain being connected to the body to be "woo-woo"

I don't think it's an objection to psychosomatic phenomena as much as just skepticism towards Sarno's work specifically, lack of support from other MDs, lack of strong peer reviewed evidence, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tension_myositis_syndrome#Cont...

IMHO we're fairly likely to eventually find that what he calls TMS is an early precursor / catch-all to a larger class of health issues (like "cancer"), and as we find better ways to classify, distinguish and diagnose these, we're also going to be able to run better studies and come up with more specific treatments that satisfy the medical community's standards of proof.

Would you have been likely to recommend this book if your pain didn't resolve after trying it? I'm skeptical of this specific theory of how the mind and body are interacting to cause pain and what he thinks is the proper way to treat it. First of all, on the back cover a 2-6 week period is given. A lot of back pain resolves itself within this time frame so without a proper study done there is no telling how many of his "success" stories are just back pain taking it's usual course. He relies a lot on testimonials. That is never a good proof of a treatment's efficacy. Why not do a proper study and not push the treatment until the results are in? We see this a lot in the medical field where some doctor has convinced themselves they have found the key to treating something yet never actually bothers to do a proper study of it. I can understand that, studies are expensive and it's much easier to live in the world where you think you are helping people and the self-selecting testimonials reinforce this. On the flip side I see a lot of people who are convinced that some "alternative" therapy works for them simply because they tried it and got some relief but are convinced others are BS because it didn't "work" for them. The problem here isn't people not believing in the mind-body connection.

Edit: there may be some slight truth to why his treatment seems to work for some in that if you can mentally reframe your pain you are more likely to get better but that nugget seems to be buried in the fluff of his TMS theory: (https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/chronic-pain-a-disease-in-i...)

> "we haven't found a physical cause for most chronic pain conditions, so why not the brain?"

That makes more sense than I was expecting. In particular, pain must be felt in the brain. That is, my body can be suffering some trauma, but if the nerve signals don't make it to the brain, or the brain doesn't interpret them as pain, then I don't feel pain. (This is true of third-degree burns - they don't hurt very much, because the nerves got destroyed, so you don't feel how bad the burn is.)

But if the body isn't under (known) trauma, but the patient is experiencing pain, maybe the brain is a reasonable place to look...

This, so much this. I don't mind a day full of chores or yardwork if I've got a good book to listen to.

Especially when you realize that you can listen to a lot of books at 1.5x - 2x speed, with very little loss of comprehension.

Especially now that (more often than not) you can attach Audible books to your Kindle books for a fairly trivial price, and whispersync for voice means you can hop back and forth between reading and listening. Now, any time I'm using my eyes and hands, but not my ears and mind, I'm listening to books--increased my reading rate by a lot.

I've listened to 2 or 3 Audiobooks and nearly every one of them (short of Wheaton reading his own "Just A Geek") was unbearable to listen to. I don't know what the percentage of readers interject their own "emphasis" outside of just reading the words, but it's too many for my tastes.

I don't want a robot to read the book, but I also don't want the reader adding "color" by reading some characters with different voices (or - as i've heard in some cases - multiple readers each "in character").

Is this common?

E-book readers like Kindle are another neat trick. In my case, it increased the amount of reading sixfold, because it's just so convenient to read on an e-book reader during commute, waiting in queues, or just going down the street.

Benefits of an e-book reader over a phone or a tablet include a better screen for reading, and it being a dedicated device that doesn't distract you with notifications or the ability to start browsing random shit on the Internet.

I regret starting the routine of reading before bed. I think I've conditioned myself to sleep anytime I read something more than a couple of paragraphs long.

I like reading fiction before bed, but the end result is me forming a makeshift blanket cave for 3 hours while my partner snoozes. :o

> you don't retain the same amount of information as you do from read words

I think I'm the opposite. When I was in school I was able to learn things much faster by attending the lecture compared to reading on my own.

> I don't believe in audiobooks because you don't retain the same amount of information as you do from read words.

Huh, I'm the opposite, but I think it depends on the subject matter and how much you're reading. I have read about 70+ fantasy and science fiction audiobooks in the last year, but only each one once, and remember most details of all the books. Some characters from some series I've no doubt forgot their names, but soon as I listen to passage from the series my memory is brought back and I remember the details.

Non-fiction on the other hand I don't do too well with audio books. e.g. listening to an audio book on programming is never going to happen for me.

How long is your commute?

My dad reads about the same level as you do. My wife reads about the same speed as she speaks. I am probably half the speed as my father at my peak. I have found out that my dad really isn't a details person. Sadly I am more of a global view first then details and I have to process stuff into that global view all the time. Being a Theological student in grad school I would have about 2,000 to 12,000 pages of reading per class. UGH took me forever to learn how to up my speed and my retention.

Can I ask how fast your read? (words or characters/minute)

How do you know how many words you read?

I'm curious, how much do you actually get out of each book? Even at my pace of 1-2 a month I'm barely able to retain anything. I can't imagine reading ~8 a month and being able to remember what the book was actually about.

I have to say, that definitively wouldn't work for me. I take breaks when I need to de-focus from the problem and let my mind work on it unattended, so I can't do anything mentally demanding during them.

I'm pretty sure it's out of copyright!

Me either, and that's exactly the issue. Look at any top books list and it is mostly white males. Either men have an easier time getting published or men are inherently better writers. I believe the former is the case. By seeking out female writers and other diverse voices we can start to tip the balance.

Historically, men were the only ones that had the opportunity to write, so any books from older centuries are going to be by men. But that doesn't have to be the case now.

ps. Love Jane Jacobs! After you read that, if you are interested, you may want to check out The Power Broker to see the other side. It is one of my top nonfiction books. (warning, white male author ;)).

I adore NK Jemisin so much, the awards are all so deserved! It was particularly nice that she won the Hugo in the midst of all the drama, too.

Another author I want to throw out there, is Liu Cixin - his novel The Three-Body Problem won the Hugo for Best Novel the year prior. Not a woman, but scifi from a vastly different cultural/racial angle than a lot of us are accustomed to, I would imagine.

Perhaps because virtue signalling has never been more popular?

In an industry where we all earn well, have similar qualities of life, similar careers, etc. virtue signalling (often wherever possible) appears to have become the perceived fertile soil for differentiating yourself, and "elevating" yourself.

Because diversity of thought is important. You're missing a lot if you only read books by people with similar views and experiences. For example, if you're a white man and you ask all your white male friends for book recommendations, you're going to end up with a pretty homogeneous list.

I can second the Ninefox Gambit. It's a strange science fantasy (like Star Wars) which revolves around using mathematics and calendars to drive exotic machinery and technology.

I'll be honest, I found Ancillary Justice a little boring since the characters aren't very complex. It's interesting in that it's from an A.I.'s perspective involving many simultaneous inputs (multiple sensors, people, etc).

Also, I have to give the obligatory fiction recommendation for Red Rising. That trilogy is like the roman empire in space, but the characters are what really make it.

I cannot take the list seriously because of that.

I really don't understand why people respect Greenspan. His excuse for not having regulations was that he thought companies wont make mistakes so there is no need to regulate them.

Actually there is pretty limited support that placebo actually works on anything but subjective measured outcomes.

What if people try it instead of a scientifically supported treatment and then it doesn't work and they give up and get addicted to opioids when a real method would've worked for them?

Don't get me wrong I think the placebo effect is a very useful tool but best to combine it with other methods that work for many back conditions, such as yoga routines that strengthen the back muscles. Of course what works depends on your particular condition which is why anyone with severe back pain should see a medical professional to get advice for their specific problem.

Thanks! I actually did pick up Sarnos book after many recommendations. I didn't throw it out because I think it was completely invalid, but rather because it had a completely invalid basis. I'm glad to hear similar ideas are addressed elsewhere and if my pain comes back, I'll pick that up.

For another example, VS Ramachandran has shown that some people who have lost a limb experience significant pain in a phantom limb. And the pain can over time be significantly reduced and even eliminated with mental exercises.

With that in mind, I don't think it's anti-scientific to think there may be legitimacy to other mind-centered approaches to pain relief.

I don't disagree that this is a problem that should be solved, but it doesn't answer my question. Why should I, as a reader, just try to find quality interesting content care about the identity of the author. Authors are just individuals to me. Unless their experience by virtue of their identity is relevant to the subject matter at hand, why should use identity in deciding what to read instead of just relying on subject matter and positive reviews and recommendations?

I don't disagree with what you wrote, but it's like you didn't even bother to read and parse what I wrote before you responded:

> Unless the topic is related to the author's identity (i.e. it's about gender, race, sexual orientation, nationality, etc.), I don't see why someone should care about the identity of an author.

There are hundreds of thousands of non-fiction topics where the identity of the author is irrelevant (or at least one of the least relevant factors impacting the authors work). Why should I care in those cases?

I knew my little joke wouldn't fit well at HN, but posted anyway. Sometimes you just want to rebel against the stabilishment.

But thanks for the serious answer! Going all the way to the end of the page to find my grey comment. There was a sincere curiosity behind the comment.