I like the idea of "synoptic" reading to learn about a concrete topic. It makes sense when different works offer different versions of what happens and why.
But it seems weird to do it with fiction. If I'm reading fiction, I want to get into the world created by the author. I think repeatedly stepping in and out to compare it to other works, or analyze its construction, or think about a GoodReads review, all of that is going to impede that process. So I usually just get into the book's world, finish it, and then step back for 30 minutes a day or two later and write a few paragraphs of my thoughts.
This little essay often includes connections to other books, and articulating thoughts on a book right after reading it contributes a ton to my appreciation and understanding. It makes it a lot easier to pitch the book to somebody else, for example (easier than saying "it's...it's just so good, just read it"). And for me this process works best if I refrain from doing it too consciously during the reading process. The experience of immersing your unconscious in something is pretty unique.
That said, I don't finish every book I start, and I don't write comments unless I feel like there's something to work out. But there's usually something to work out!
Unrelated pedantic comment: TFA attributes this quote to Edgar Allan Poe
> Marking a book is literally an experience of your differences or agreements with the author. It is the highest respect you can pay him.
But it doesn't sound like him, and the internet suggests it's actually a quote from this other Adler guy also referenced in TFA?
I'm rereading "How to Read a Book" by Mortimer Adler and Charles Van Doren right now. It's worth picking up if you're interested in getting more out of your reading.
I interpreted the four levels of reading to be a subsection of "Category 3: Reading to Understand". So as I understand it, reading fiction in the way you describe would be reading to entertain, but if you are reading to study fiction of a certain kind as a topic, synoptic reading would apply?
Also, to your other point, the author seems to be fast and loose with his facts - clickbait titles and unverifiable Einstein quote too!
But it seems weird to do it with fiction. If I'm reading fiction, I want to get into the world created by the author. I think repeatedly stepping in and out to compare it to other works, or analyze its construction, or think about a GoodReads review, all of that is going to impede that process. So I usually just get into the book's world, finish it, and then step back for 30 minutes a day or two later and write a few paragraphs of my thoughts.
This little essay often includes connections to other books, and articulating thoughts on a book right after reading it contributes a ton to my appreciation and understanding. It makes it a lot easier to pitch the book to somebody else, for example (easier than saying "it's...it's just so good, just read it"). And for me this process works best if I refrain from doing it too consciously during the reading process. The experience of immersing your unconscious in something is pretty unique.
That said, I don't finish every book I start, and I don't write comments unless I feel like there's something to work out. But there's usually something to work out!
Unrelated pedantic comment: TFA attributes this quote to Edgar Allan Poe
> Marking a book is literally an experience of your differences or agreements with the author. It is the highest respect you can pay him.
But it doesn't sound like him, and the internet suggests it's actually a quote from this other Adler guy also referenced in TFA?