The thing with these guys is they view communications media (speech, fiction, film, TV series, drama, you name it) as data transmission and nothing more. The Great Gatsby is a list of events and characters and if you can cut that down to 500 words, you're maximizing something.
This is why these folks believe 'plot holes' are the most egregious narrative crime imaginable and 'plot hole' is defined by anything that happens where the audience does not already have full understanding of the contributing factors to the event.
If I could add to everything above and go back to the original post; "maximising your reading potential"? This would do the complete opposite no? Reading isn't just knowing the plot.
People have already pointed out that Classics Illustrated and Cliff Notes/Spark Notes have done this for a long time. Let me be the first to point out: m.youtube.com/watch?v=uwAO...
So I briefly advised one of these. The business idea was classroom material for K-8 kids with serious cognitive impairments, so they could read the same things as kids in their grade.
I'm not sure who this one is selling to, but "if you've got brain damage, this is the book for you" is accurate
This whole concept is essentially Google Translate for morons: reduce everything, even the richest and most sophisticated writing, to something an 8-year-old could understand.
It's infantilism leading to infantilization of an entire society.
This is like what people do to real food to make baby food except for books. I'm pretty sure I can comprehend this man-made horror but I don't think I want to.
When my kid was, like, 10 I pulled a Cormac McCarthy novel off a shelf to make a point about the style of prose and what it adds to a read; how come he could get it and - you know what, never mind
This mindset is the (current) abso distillation of the ancient Greek despising of work, as something to avoid or put on the backs of lesser people while one enjoys leisure. Anything -reading, creating art, cooking/eating, etc - perceived as work must be made efficient or offloaded to lesser beings.
The bit driving me bonkers is the flattening of “younger and more vulnerable years” to “young.”
Even if you’re simplifying the sentence as a learning aid, vulnerable is doing a lot of heavy lifting to tell you what’s happening!
they're happier reading wikipedia summaries than actually watching things because it means they're less efficient somewhere else. the idea of savoring is alien to them.
This is so wild. How a book is written and how the characters speak is so central to my enjoyment of the novels I like. Taking out the weird turns of phrase from something like 1984 or Fahrenheit 451 completely destroys the world building.
I just actually read the example... These people don't comprehend wanting to feel things, to grapple with those feelings to understand oneself and the world around them, and wanting to convey feelings to others. Is it just tv static between their ears?
Possibly the funniest example of this. Gatsby’s beauty is almost exclusively in its prose. But my students tried this as well—to somehow distill the plot outline & themes from online sources. Such a waste of time! The love story is sort of immature; the sentences are some of the best in English.
ages back I recall ads for subscriptions of simple versions of airport bookstore hits meant to "save time" so you could regurgitate (not digest) talking points on the latest Robert T. Kiyosaki, Dave Ramsey or Thomas Friedman banger
It's not just "these guys" - everything is seen now as data to mine. We're all caught in it. The challenge isn't stopping AI; it's preserving what remains in a world that treats everything as a resource to be extracted for profit.
I assume it’s because these people don’t read for fun or knowledge, they read only so they know enough of the gist to prove they know it and thus can “prove” they’re smart to other people who also don’t read books.
In the 90's there was a movement to translate Shakespeare into "modern" English to the kids could appreciate Shakespeare's... plots, I guess?
Remember that? Right. No one does. This will be gone and dust before the leaves fall in Vermont.
Same people who when they do engage with art, it’s almost always on purely superficial levels of stuff like plotting. Also typically the same people who like to assert that there is “objectively” good and bad art.
fascists also are determined to remove everything that makes people think and feel anything other than fascist thoughts and feelings completely from the world
if they can't get away with book burnings, they go this route
yeah, its one of the reasons I get a bit twitchy when, in librarian speak, everyone is considered an "information bearing object" - because eventually that way means text stops being an aesthetic and just something to be altered or removed.
When I was in high school, a classmate read a summarized version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. But that summary, which was written by a person, was so condensed and so simplified it was essentially a different book, that he failed the reading comprehension test.