Used to do the 52 books in 52 weeks challenge for multiple years, until I felt I was just padding my stats with books that weren't useful
Then I saw a Naval tweet that was: "I would rather read the best 100 books over and over again until I absorb them rather than read all the books.”
And I adopted that strategy, which has been more useful for me
I'd like to think there's a period in your youth when you devour everything - even, god forbid, modern books on management. From here you move on to the classics - Dickens, Twain, Tolstoy, Fitzgerald. If a book bores you, drop it. After enough years, inevitably, you reach a point where you're ready for real literature - Dostoevsky, Proust, Molière, Kant - the greats.
Some books can't be summarized (poetry and real literature), some can be compressed to about ten pages and the majority to 0 pages.
Don't have an answer unfortunately, still looking for one myself!
I do agree with the method you describe: taking the recommendations of others, and then later navigating toward what you feel is best for yourself
Not if you're like me - my total number read is only about that many in my adult life (other than textbooks and reference books).
That said, how would you pick the “best 100 books” to reread?I also tend to reread things that I enjoyed in the past but it seems like there might be a better way to go about this. I do read from a lot of the “Best books of all time” type of lists and I don’t find a markedly higher success rate with that strategy.
I can’t remember the source, but I like the saying “if a book isn’t worth reading twice it’s probably not worth reading once”