Sorry to be a little off topic, but I notice that most of my friends and family spend a lot of time watching movies and other streaming media, but from conversations it seems to me like they spend little time reading (with some exceptions). We all get to allocate our own time, but I like limiting myself to a maximum of one movie a day, but I feel good about spending much more time reading, choosing an active pastime of visualizing the people and world depicted in books, rather than passively watching streaming content. A movie has to be really fantastic to get the same effect as just a good book.
"I spend my time doing better things than you do" risks coming across as arrogant, rather dissuades others from reading more, and also closes one's own mind to considering the strengths and depth of other types of media.
That said, I enjoy reading as much as you do. I am extremely grateful to my parents for encouraging the habit - I think reading books taught me as a young child to empathize with others around me, by letting me into the internal thought-worlds of their characters and getting me used to inhabiting other viewpoints. In that sense I think reading can also be very formative for comm skills during a certain time of life.
I have two different "modes" when reading - 1) for novels and light matsrial, which is just casual reading, 2) for material that warrants study, typically using a pen to underline critical information and write thoughts in the margins.
You seem to suggest that casual reading, while I'm sure shares some spillover benefit, should not be mis-characterized as active study and is closer to entertainment. Do you make a conscious effort to read most things actively?
Although I don't usually do this very much for for fun fiction, I otherwise select/hilite text that I think is important while I am reading. When I think of a previously read book, it is quick to open just the hilites - for me this is a great trigger for my memory (I am almost 70, so this helps!)
re: joy of reading: this really hit home when my grandchildren were really young, especially the transition from my doing all the reading to them taking over reading.
I am usually retired about 2/3 of the time since 1998. During periods when I am not working, I do watch more movies. I am super busy working for a unicorn startup right now, so extra movie watching is put on hold.
... Klara, the narrator of Ishiguro’s new novel, is a kind of robot version of Stevens, and a kind of cousin of Kathy H. She’s a carer, a servant, a helpmeet, a toy. “Klara and the Sun” opens like something out of “Toy Story” or the children’s classic “Corduroy” (in which a slightly ragged Teddy bear, waiting patiently in a department store, is first turned down by Mother, and finally plucked by her delighted young daughter).
In his kafka-like universe it might even work.
For the most part, no. I'm OK with a lot of the reading I do being purely for entertainment (yes, even the non-fiction books). To some extent the primary spillover benefit is that even years later, I will vaguely recall that I encountered a concept before and where - so when I need the details, I just go look them up again.
I don't think that reading for entertainment only is such a bad thing. Ok, so I just let a popsci book on $subject wash over me and in a year nearly all of it will be gone from my mind again - but while reading I felt immense joy at the new understanding and information. It positively reinforces curiosity and knowledge-seeking as an activity and and makes me happier. That does help with life.
With a number of books what I do is highlight references to names/concepts/ideas I feel are under-explained or worth some more research on, and then rather than googling them immediately, I finish the book first and then make some time to work through my list of highlights afterwards. It's tedious, but it also effectively forces me to skim through the book and the context of the highlights again. That (slightly) improves my recall later on, but it also often makes me realize the super-structure of the book much more (i.e. how was the author building up their argument over the length of the book, why did they chose to order things in the way they did perhaps, etc.)
Ask yourself what you want to read and what you want to get out of that.
If you read casually but don't actually enjoy the activity beyond the satisfaction that you are reading and that this is a Good Thing, there's no point. If you underline passages and study but nothing really comes out of that study over time, there's no point either assuming it is not an activity you inherently enjoy for its own sake.
That's why just having a vague goal of 'reading more' is a bit of a trap
The “whole point of art” for most of human history has been to continue a tradition of craftsmanship, and innovation has its place but is certainly not the whole point. It wasn’t until the 20th-century that innovation became “the whole point” for the Modernists, whose views were not universally shared. Down the centuries, works of literature, music and cinema have regularly featured references to the artist’s forebears without being dubbed "inane" for it. (There certainly is a qualitative difference from comic-book movies, which are low culture, often by their creators' own admission, instead of high culture). And whether a person can properly "digest" works of art at that pace completely depends on the person; evidently many people can.