Why no-one reads, and 500-year old wisdom and how to do it more

I think one of the best things you can do to improve your quality of life is to read. I’ve said it before, but almost no one reads. People say they do, some may even think they do, but in my experience when you dig into what people have read recently, you’ll get some version of the answer ‘I’ve been battling through Sapiens for the last 3 months’.

While a literature PhD student is of course going to have much more time to devour pages than a corporate executive with 4 kids, I think everyone is able to read about 50-100 pages a day. That’s a book or two a week, 50-100 a year, in time your life will be much richer for it.

The more interesting question to me is not why we should read more, but why people don’t. In this newsletter, we’re going to answer that by taking some lessons from the original thinkboi.

In 1571, at the age of 38, a French aristocrat, who’d spent a life holding various political positions, engaging in diplomatic activities and socialising with the elite of the day, decided to retire from life, recluse to his family estate, and spend the remainder of his days following his intellectual curiosity.

In the 20 years that followed, Michel de Montaigne did nothing but read and write. He’d burn the candle down to the early morning hours, diligently absorbing thousands of books, treaties and scrolls. In an effort to distil the wisdom he had gained from his reading, Montaigne invented the writing format that today we know as the essay.

It’s safe to say that there is probably not a person, alive or dead, who’s dedicated more hours to the art of reading than Montaigne. Reading, like anything else, is a skill, a skill that our educational system only scratches the surface of. Sure, everyone knows how to consume information, but great readers digest literature by using it as a tool to transform their lives.

Luckily for us, Montaigne left us a blueprint to follow in order to become a truly great reader. I read this essay for the first time at the age of 30, my only regret is not having read it sooner. Here are the six biggest lessons I took from this essay.

Read only books you enjoy

“From books all I seek is to give myself pleasure by an honorable pastime: or if I do study. I seek only that branch of learning that deals with knowing myself and which teaches how to live and die well”

How many of us think of reading as a chore? This is the number one and most foundational mistake we make when we read. If you want to get fit, you need to enjoy exercising, if you want to lose weight, you need to make healthy, but tasty food. If you want to succeed in your work, you need to enjoy it. Most know this, anything that isn’t fun is something you’ll soon grow to hate. Reading is no different.

Enjoy what you read. If that means starting off by reading sci-fi or kids’ books, then that’s where you start. Eventually, you’ll find this stuff doesn't stimulate you like it once did. You’ll naturally move to higher-brow literature, then, you might start on the classics. If you are a novice and you launch yourself into War and Peace or Nietzche because you saw them on The Guardians 100 top books to read before you die, you’ll find it impenetrable and won’t get past the first couple of pages. There are levels to this game, and you must be honest about your ability to read and focus through the process.

The next point Montaigne makes is about studying philosophy, but I think we mustn’t take this too literally. Montaigne argues that when he seeks to study, he seeks books that deal with stuff that’s important to him, for you that might be something completely different. That might mean business, science, or art, yet the important thing is that it is something you are interested in and take pleasure in. I genuinely love reading biographies of entrepreneurs, the fact that I learn something from them is a tangential benefit, I don’t necessarily read them seeking to learn.

This advice from Montaigne may seem counterintuitive but if you want to get the most from reading, the first thing you have to do is drop any expectation you will gain anything from this practise. Just enjoy, the rest will come.

Don’t tough it out

“If I come across difficult passages in my reading I never bite my nails over them after making a charge or two I let them be. If I settled down on them I would waste myself and my time for my mind is made for the first jump, what I fail to see during my original charge I see even less when I stubborn it out. I can do nothing without gaiety, persistence and too much intensity …. if one book wearies me I take up another, applying myself to it during only during those hours when I begin to be gripped by boredom at doing nothing.”

A lot of us have a completionist attitude when it comes to reading. We read one book at a time, starting a book only once we’ve finished the one we are on. I’m not sure where this mentality comes from – but it’s ubiquitous. My theory is we have too much respect for books. We view them as a step above all other forms of content. Financially, books are vastly more expensive than tweets or blog posts. Physically, they also demand some level of respect, ink printed on textured paper within beautiful weighty covers. We need to push this respect for books to the side. Respect reading, but books should be viewed as objects that can be discarded as fervently as a bad Netflix series

I always have at least 3-4 books on the go, usually some meaty classic in physical form, a lightweight business book or biography on my Kindle, and some other book I’m re-reading (Taleb, mainly).

Reading should be fun, as Montaigne says, it is only ‘with gaiety’ that we can fully absorb the pages, if you are struggling - just let it go.

Classics, classics, classics

“I do not have much to do with books by modern authords since the ancient seem to me to be more taut and ample”

When given the option between a classic and a newer edition, it’s likely wiser to read the classic. Say you are interested in Stoicism (as Montaigne was). You could go out and buy Ryan Holiday’s books on the topic, and I’m sure they are well-written, but why not just read the original texts? Marcus Aurelius ‘Meditations’ is very readable, as are most of Seneca and Cicero’s works. If you buy a more modern interpretation, all you are getting is a layer of abstraction from the original, laced with the bias of the author.

I don’t subscribe to the idea we should only be reading classics, great new books are released every year, but if you read something that is 500 or 1000 years old, the probability that it contains timeless wisdom and that it will be around for hundreds more years, is far higher than a recently released volume (lindy)

Don’t be afraid to disagree with the status quo, but do so with humility

“I freely say what I think about all things - even those about which doubtless exceed my competence and which I in no wise claim to be within my jurisdiction. When I express my opinions it is so as to reveal the measure of my sight not the measure of the thing. When I find I have no taste for the Axiochus of Plato - a weak book considering its author, my judgement does not trust itself. It is not so daft as to oppose the authority of so many other judgements which it holds as its progressors and master: rather is it happy to err with them.”

This quote reflects a humble and open-minded attitude towards expressing opinions, something I could definitely learn from. Montaigne argues you should freely share your thoughts on various topics, even those you may not be fully knowledgeable on. Montaigne clarifies, that an opinion is just that - an opinion, it's more about showing your own perspective rather than making definitive statements about any subject.

Rather than insisting Plato's "Axiochus," is weak, Montaigne instead accepts that his opinion might be wrong, especially when many other knowledgeable people think differently. He’s comfortable with the possibility of being incorrect and values learning from others more than being right.

We should be making our minds up about what books (and therefore ideas) are weak and which are strong. If you find yourself agreeing with every bestseller you buy, you have a problem. On the other hand, we shouldn’t be arrogant in thinking just because we find a book to be bad, that it necessarily is, it’s just not something that will shape our worldview.

Pay attention to the author’s actions, not just their words

“I also like reading Ciceros Letter to Atticus not only because they contain much to teach us about the history and affairs of his time but, even more, as as to find out from them his private humours. For as I have said elsewhere I am uniquely curious about my authors soul and native judgement. By what their writings display when they are paraded in the theatre of the world we can indeed judge their talents but we cannot judge them as men nor their morals”

Montaigne thought it important to know those he was reading. Anyone can preach values in a book, but whether they live up to them – that’s a different question. You could argue that you should separate the art from the artist, but when it comes to reading, I don’t think that’s true. A book (even one that appears harmless fiction) is a collection of ideas, in my eyes, it doesn’t make sense to imbibe these into your own if the writer is a charlatan.

Montaigne argues for reading private works and letters, but in the modern world we thankfully don’t need to go to such lengths – it’s much easier today to understand a writer’s true beliefs. You could be enthralled by Sam Harris’ arguments in ‘Making Sense’ but you simply need to watch his talks on current affairs to understand what a buffoon he is. On the counter, I’ve yet to find a single disparity between what Nassim Taleb writes, and how he acts on Twitter or in podcasts.

While it is more work, I do think (especially if you are finding yourself, particularly with an argument) a bit of research into the author is worthwhile. As Montaigne says, understand their soul, not just their words.

History

I like either very simple historians or else outstanding ones. The simple ones who have nothing of their own to contribute merely bringing to their task care and dillifence in collecting evertything which comes to their attention. Outstanding historians are capable of choosing what is worth knowing , they control the narrative…. The ones who lie between spoil everything for us”

This is such a good point. Either give the facts or give me an edited version by someone who really knows their stuff. Don’t give me a heavily edited version by a quack. Rather than labour the point I’ll list a few modern historians who, I think, fall into each bucket

Outstanding: Richard Graber
Graber explains history in such a nuanced way while still telling a great story. He completely controls the narrative, but when explaining complex topics regarding anthropology, finance and more, he does not apply a reductionist lens.

In between (avoid these): Noah Hurari
Hurari is an incredible storyteller. His books have reached best-seller lists across the globe. The issue? He’s probably a quack. Sapiens tries to explain one of the most complex happenings in global history (the evolution and rise of our species) with a single, reductionist theory – that we are great storytellers. It sounds nice, but it’s dangerous, it’s an argument that lacks nuance. If anything sounds clean and simple, especially for something as complex as evolution, run for the hills.

Simple: Edmund Morris
Unless you are a history buff, I think it’s quite difficult to find writers who simply write the facts. Facts don’t sell, stories do. Having said that I think Edmund Morris’ biographies of past presidents are some of the most meticulously researched (and therefore often dry) biographies I’ve read.

---

Hopefully, this highlight reel of Montaigne’s essay ‘On books’ has given you some food for thought on your own reading habit. If you like this summary do read the whole essay, you can pick up his works on a Kindle for pennies.

As always, if you enjoyed this share it with a friend.

Big love

Tom x