Yes, this must be exactly what I mean. No strawman whatsoever here.

@A1fredo cmon, thats funny... the serious bit is over there

ugh... I appreciate the info... but... too corporate. Perhaps it may be better to leave it alone xD lol

I don't recall using such word anywhere in my post. What are you talking about?

@A1fredo We need to stop wanting to be "better" than other by keeping others down.

@cRaZyTMG I'm well aware there's no such a thing as free stuff. You are misreading my post, or maybe I miswrote it, but I have no clue what part it is that you're misunderstanding so I can clear it up. That line refers that seems to me that some people like the fact that books are not as reader-friendly because they can feel superior knowing that the masses haven't read as much as they do. That has nothing to do with free stuff.

@A1fredo so I may be butting in a bit here, I think when you suggested that poor people are poor because life hasn't given them opportunities, you are suggesting that opportunities are things that are only given out to certain people. by extension, the opportunity being absent, you would assume things need to be done to make up for it, typically, that is code for free stuff. might be completely off base and have no idea what I'm talking about there.

I would take issue with your desire to take the art out of art. I personally hate reading, but when I do read, each word is a stroke of the brush painting a picture or note in the song singing to the soul. most people who enjoy reading don't approach it with a "hurry up and finish already " attitude.

you probably disagree, so the solution would be to write new stories with the attributes you describe than to wreck already existing works for people whom you describe as not having the time or money to spend on reading anyway.

@solopro Here's the thing, Im not suggesting to extract the art, Im suggesting to extract the conceptual content for people who don't care about the rrading experienxe. Just as if I quoted the lyrics of a song to you to explain some point. That would help for people to understand each other better as we love referencing such pieces of art all the time. For example, 1984. You knoe that people pretend theyve read it but havent. Lets facilitate things. They won't read it otherwiae because aome don't care for that experience.

About the free stuff thing. Well, 1. youre assuming too much. 2. We don't all live in the land of the American dream, but Im not getting into it because i get pissed off when wealthy Americans understimate our sitation. 3. By assuming the worse, you only precent other ideas from coming through. I am suggesting facilitating knowledge for everyone -even you have books youll never read and could take advantage of knowing the basics. But its a way also to help the people who couldnt go to college not to feel intimidated. You know college doesnt make you smarter, and it would also bring college student down from their high horse.

@A1fredo Truth requires effort. Skimming 600 pages of a personal (someone who was there) story will not give you the truth either. You have to research the author, understand his perspective and the politics of the time, then READ the book again.

Reading a twatter twat or news headline is analogous to your "condensed books" and look where that's gotten us.

@cRaZyTMG First of all, that's not a fair analogy. Second, it's not the twatter twats nor newa headlines, it's both the intention of making them misleading on the part of the journos, and the lack of maturity and strenght of Americans to even consider they may be wrong when confronted with evidence. This argument is almost in favor of censorship, as if it was okay to prevent people from ezqessing their wrong ideas instead of having people actually learn how to use their brains to filter information, and the strenght to deal with them being fooled by an authority from time to time. Third, what truth? Fiction is lies, religious texts are metaphores and academic texts are what we know to the best of our abilities so far. There is no "truth" in books. Fourth, yes, of course it would have to be done by an artistic type who is passionate and knowleadgeable about the book in question. They don't need to know anything about the time period though as he would only be compressing the piece without adding absolutely anything else, so he's got all he needs within the piece itself. Jesus Christ. It's not like it would affect you, or as if we were to burn the originals afterwards. What's your problem?

@A1fredo thats exactly what you are doing. removing the context removes the art. altering the story alters the meaning of the quotes. remember my gag about Romero and Juliet ? I turned a tragedy into a "strawman" even tho I was literally exactly right in my condensing of the story. if you really believe that reading a fictional story will do something to bring a college educated asshole off his high horse, you don't understand academia at all. lol !
quick aside: the American dream isn't a paycheck, its a burning in the soul to be free, an intense flame that inspires us to risk everything for that freedom. you don't have to be in America to have the American dream, and being in America doesn't mean you have it, seems we both make lots of assumptions.

@A1fredo You can't shake hands with a clenched fist.

The written word only gains value only when it is read. Good writers (artistic?) make it easy and enjoyable to read. I skim 1-5 books per week and read maybe 1 per month. Reading is hard work, and turning what I read into truth or lies is my responsibility as I am the only audience. As the old saying goes: I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you. All books contain truth and falsehood - including fiction. Labeling academic writing as more truthful is a fallacy of authority. I am not saying they are not truthful but assuming they are is dangerous. Just as dangerous as reading a synopsis, headline or twat for truth. There always is "... the other side of the story" or "...the rest of the story" to consider.

btw, Reader's Digest is still in business and many publications such as Science Digest exist for specific audiences.