
Ask HN: Is a summary of a non-fiction book a good substitute for the whole book? - projectramo
For fiction the way a writer tells you a thing really matters.<p>But for non-fiction books isn&#x27;t the summary good enough?<p>I am thinking, in particular, of business books.<p>On reading an interview with Doerr of his new book (measure what matters), I feel I have a good sense of what is in the book and how to implement it.<p>Do I? Has anyone read the whole thing? Can they comment?
======
AnimalMuppet
It depends on the kind of book.

For something like "measure what matters", the basic idea comes through in the
title. I would expect that a summary would capture things pretty well - it
will omit some detail, but it will be just detail. The big idea is the point,
and that comes through even in the title. I suspect that most business books
are in this category, but I am not sure.

For some things, though, the details _really matter_. Take "The C++
Programming Language", for example. You could, maybe, write a summary of that
book. Do you know anything from reading it? Not really. Too much of the
content is details. The whole point is the details.

------
yigitcakar
I think the difference between reading the whole thing and the summary is
about making the knowledge yours.

If the non-fiction book has merit, it usually includes the rationale and real-
world examples of the thing explained. Therefore you can examine the idea and
have a deeper understanding of the subject or even improve on the original
work.

Summary forces you to memorize a few facts and you wouldn't even have a basis
to evaluate the validity of the idea. I read summaries only when the book is
written for the general public and I already have expert knowledge about the
subject.

In my opinion, reading summaries give a false sense of accomplishment. Reading
is not about understanding one idea and implementing it. It is about
understanding how to reach that idea, therefore you can improve on it.

