This reminds me a lot of Harold Bloom’s How to Read and Why. Bloom also offers his views on what makes a good reader. Here are some his suggestions:

“Clear your mind of cant.”

This idea derives from Samuel Johnson and suggests that we should let the work teach us how to read it. Pretty similar to your point! Good readers stop themselves from imposing their own desires or ideologies onto the work. Let the work reveal its artistic vision. Don’t assume there is only one correct style or way to construct a story, poem, or book.

“Do not attempt to improve your neighbor or neighborhood by what or how you read.”

Literature can improve you by expanding your horizons, your imagination of what’s possible, it can teach you what people valued in the past, and offer insights into what makes your neighbor tick, while transporting you to different times and places, but Bloom warns that it won’t change the world for the better in terms of offering some kind of social program. At best, it can only assist indirectly by helping you learn what it means to be human and help you come to know yourself as an individual.

“A scholar is a candle which the love and desire of all men will light.”

“One must be an inventor to read well.”

Also an idea inspired by Emerson. This seems like it would contradict the first piece of advice to avoid imposing our wills on the text. However, this is about balance. The best literary critics and readers allow the text to dictate the themes and issues, but are still inventive enough to come to new and personal understandings and insights of works of literature.

At the same time, some people read simply for enjoyment rather than deeper insight into the human experience or both or something in between and that is fine too. There are a lot of different motives to read.

My tbr is over 3000 books on Goodreads so . . . no real system.

The average was 12.6 books per a year on average as of 2022 from a Gallup poll.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/388541/americans-reading-fewer-books-past.aspx

For starters you have typos in your example sentence.

The owner of one scant young nose, gnawed and mumbled by the hungry cold as bones are gnawed by dogs, stooped down at Scrooge’s keyhole to regale him with a Christmas carol: but at the first sound of

“God bless you, merry gentleman! May nothing you dismay!”

Scrooge seized the ruler with such energy of action, that the singer fled in terror, leaving the keyhole to the fog and even more congenial frost.

—————————-

Basically we have an description of a Christmas Caroler’s nose as he peeps into a keyhole and sings him a Christmas Carol, which causes Scrooge to attack him with a ruler, which makes the singer run away and leave the keyhole empty (only the fog and frost).

“Congenial frost” is a particularly interesting word choice since most people wouldn’t find frost pleasant, mimicking Scrooge’s personality at this point and desire to be alone.

My advice is don’t get too caught up in analysis if that is tricky for you or understand every last sentence. Did you understand there was a Christmas Caroler? That Scrooge chased him away? Then that should be sufficient to move forward in the story.