Chess books are so hard to read

Reading chess books is so hard for me. It's so annoying I prefer not to do it. However we all know that chess books have the good stuff any player needs to improve. Will getting better at the game help me with this? Like, is it easier for a 2000 to learn from a chess book than for a 1700?

My main focus is otb so I'd get really happy if you take that into consideration.

Any reply is appreciated. 

https://www.chess.com/blog/TheMonkPlayingChess/the-first-step

I have covered about few books in this which are highly recommended by many titled players , you can try those . 

let me know if it helps 

Let us know which books you found difficult, and what your OTB rating is please.

Try to feel chess easy .

You are new, it's why you don't want to play chess.

With more experience, reading chess books does get easier. Either your board visualization gets better (making it easier to follow the variations without setting up a board), or you learn how to skim the material for information that is helpful to you. (For example, you may not need to play through entire GM level games to understand the strategies built around the isolated Queen's pawn).

But something outside your control is that most chess books are unfortunately bad. It seems like every GM and IM writes one at some point in their life, and not all GMs and IMs are good at explaining things. They are often especially bad at explaining things to players who are not prodigies capable of visualizing multiple complicated variations.

Fortunately not all chess books are bad. For example, @RussBell has compiled a great list of good chess books. The easiest chess books to read are the ones with lots of diagrams and little-to-no chess notation. Something like Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess or Levy Rozman's How to Win at Chess.

It isn't about whether a 1700 vs a 2000 can read chess books. If you really want to get better, you need to get out a board and read chess books. The problem with chessable and e-books is just clicking through stuff teaches you little to nothing. You won't absorb it.

And as far as rating, different books are meant for different ratings. A 2300 wouldn't be reading Winning Chess Tactics by Yasser Seiriwan while a 1200 player wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) be reading Devoretsky's Analytical Manual.

And chess is not just tactics. Just trying to do problems here is completely insufficient. There are FAR more aspects to chess, some even more important than Tactics!

If you want to be any good, you need to know Endgames, Strategy, Tactics, Calculation, Positional Play, Psychology, Openings, Prophylaxis, Defense, etc.

And get out a board and pieces when going through these books.

Good Chess Books for Beginners and Beyond…

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/good-chess-books-for-beginners-and-beyond

Don’t push through books you hate; use the method that keeps you motivated.