We should ask ourselves if reading a book we’re getting little out of is the best use of scarce resources.
[Cowen] takes his own advice, saying he finishes one book for every five to 10 he starts.
“People have this innate view — it comes from friendship and marriage — that commitment is good. Which I agree with,” he says. That view shouldn’t, he says, carry over to inanimate objects.
It’s not that he’s not a voracious reader — he finishes more than a book a day, not including the “partials.” He just wants to make the most of his time.
“We should treat books a little more like we treat TV channels,” he argues. No one has trouble flipping away from a boring series.
Books are another story. Mr. Cowen thinks our education instills the belief that books somehow are sacred. Not to him.
“If I’m reading a truly, actively bad book, I’ll throw it out,” he says. His wife will protest, but he points out that he’s doing a public service: “If I don’t throw it out, someone else might read it.” If that person is one of the many committed to finishing a book once started, he’s actually doing harm.
Mr. Cowen, who says he couldn’t finish Alexandre Dumas’ “The Three Musketeers” or John Dos Passos’ “U.S.A.,” offers a more direct economic rationale. He notes that many up-and-coming writers complain they can’t break through in a best-seller-driven marketplace. “We’re also making markets more efficient,” Mr. Cowen says. “If you can sample more books, you’re giving more people a chance.”
Nice viewpoint, though I can’t agree with this part.
“If I’m reading a truly, actively bad book, I’ll throw it out,” he says. His wife will protest, but he points out that he’s doing a public service: “If I don’t throw it out, someone else might read it.” If that person is one of the many committed to finishing a book once started, he’s actually doing harm.
Sell the book or donate it to a public library. That way you get some of your money back and if the book is no good this will, over time, be reflected in its price on the second-hand market. Simply discarding it will actually raise it’s price and thereby distorting the market through raising it’s price and thus it’s suggested value.
What I do with books that are no good but worthless to sell as their price in the low single digits, I put them in a moderately frequented area with a note saying “take me home!”. Then I don’t feel guilty about throwing away a perfectly good book, donating crap to a library and I don’t waste my time with inefficient ways to earn money. Oh and I get a nice warm feeling knowing that someone has the satisfaction of getting a book he or she wants for free or this person gets enjoyment from throwing a bad book in the trash.
On the topic of books, time-efficiency, and productivity, here is the Washington Times on books and Tyler Cowen:
Nice viewpoint, though I can’t agree with this part.
Sell the book or donate it to a public library. That way you get some of your money back and if the book is no good this will, over time, be reflected in its price on the second-hand market. Simply discarding it will actually raise it’s price and thereby distorting the market through raising it’s price and thus it’s suggested value.
What I do with books that are no good but worthless to sell as their price in the low single digits, I put them in a moderately frequented area with a note saying “take me home!”. Then I don’t feel guilty about throwing away a perfectly good book, donating crap to a library and I don’t waste my time with inefficient ways to earn money. Oh and I get a nice warm feeling knowing that someone has the satisfaction of getting a book he or she wants for free or this person gets enjoyment from throwing a bad book in the trash.