I think, if it's fun and entertaining, a scene that doesn't advance the plot or characters can be okay, but I'd keep them to a bare minimum unless that's the overall style you want as an author. I read for entertainment, but I also really want to get to the end of the book and see how it ends. If I'm reading a scene that goes nowhere, it had better be short and sweet, or I'll get frustrated. I've read too many books with a lot of filler and scenes that went nowhere and were long and boring (or wouldn't have been boring, except they never ended). Sometimes I actually stopped reading them because I got tired of having to skip so much of the book. On the other hand are scenes that imply they're going to advance the plot or characters, but don't. One example of this is a book I read where quite a few scenes implied that the MC was going to run away from home, and that the running away was going to bring the climax. I loved the anticipation and waited "with bated breath" for the climax. The last chapter came, and the MC chickened out and suddenly "learned his lesson." I remember that book as the most frustrating book I've ever read. I've read other books with scenes that implied they were going somewhere, but didn't, and they always made me want to slap the author. If a scene isn't going to advance the plot or characters, it had better not act like it will! Edited to add: By "advance the plot or characters" I also mean "reveal something about the plot or characters." To me, a reveal is a part of "advancing." Obviously, a bad scene is a bad scene, but a good scene that reveals an important element is, in my opinion, a scene worthy of staying.
A scene doesn't necessarily have to be action-packed and racing with dialogue for it to move the story along, nor does there have to be a monstrous plot twist at every turn. Sometimes the best thing for a plot is something slow to break up the action, or else the most important scenes will seem irrelevant and the reader won't be that shaken up by them because there's already so much action and drama that it's just one of many.
The problem with this approach is that you won't know whether a scene is important UNTIL you've finished the book. Skipping over scenes—assuming they are filler—can be a very bad reading habit to get into. Something may be included in these scenes that is vital to understanding the ending, or may contain some clues you need to pick up. Of course 'boring' writing needs to be livened up with detail and insight. But one of my all-time mantras as a reader is 'trust the author.' If they've included a scene, it's probably important. And reading should never be a race. Some readers do seem to feel that reading is like a road race. Top throttle, no obstacles, nothing that makes you stop and think or enjoy or observe. Just run as fast as possible to break tape at The End. But some of us like to travel that road, rather than race it. That means some parts of what we cover might be more thrilling than others, but it's all part of the journey. And we see a lot more if we travel more slowly. A road racer races on prepared ground, seeing only a wall of spectators and background but not individual faces. They are focused on the next water stop or their timekeeping devices, and their goal is to get to the end as soon as possible. I don't personally find that a fulfilling way to spend my reading time, but others disagree. There are writers out there who do write to please the racers, so you can easily find authors to suit your preferred pace. But a lot of us don't enjoy this kind of experience, and we also buy lots of books. Trust the author. If you find, at the end of the book, that your trust has been misplaced, then simply don't read that author again.
It's really, really hard for me to find a book that's written well enough for me to "trust the author" on a boring, seemingly useless and never-ending scene (or shorter, but more constant seemingly useless scenes). So far I'm right about 90% of the time, and the 10% I was wrong about I go back and reread the "useless scene" to find that I needed one tidbit that was hidden in three pages of boring (exaggeration . . . mostly). I try not to skip scenes, but my dislike of descriptions got me into the habit of skipping the boring parts. Also, the filler scenes I remember reading have been boring and/or repetitive (and thus boring). Obviously, the ones I don't remember were likely interesting enough I didn't notice they were filler. I never was much of a reader--in fact, I only got into reading because of my writing, and I've only enjoyed reading within the last two years or so. Maybe that's why I'm less forgiving in this regard--it's easy for me to get excited about the ending, but the desire to actually read to the ending is more difficult. I don't feel like reading is a race--in fact, I can go days between readings of the same book, and I'm a slow reader as it is. I like to guess the book's ending and imagine why the characters thought or acted a certain way. The surprise of being right or wrong is part of the fun; making up my own story while I'm reading the actual book is another. Filler scenes tend to have nothing for me to guess on or imagine. They're just . . . words. Usually repetitive, slow-moving, and uninteresting. Thus, I prefer scenes that get me to the end of the book or add character depth or information. Maybe my issue is with boring and poorly written scenes rather than filler scenes. That's something for me to think about . . .
Even in a purposely slow-paced literary novel all the elements should advance the story. To have, or even desire, to add something of little pertinence (ie, filler), is, and I'll dare say it, ridiculous.
Fair enough. I'm sorry that you don't seem to enjoy the reading experience very much, and that so many books disappoint you. Do you have a genre or author whom you do really enjoy?
That's okay, I'm just still in the process of overcoming a childhood hate for reading. My favorite genre is probably fantasy, though it's really hard to find books I want to read, as I'm very picky. There are plenty of books I enjoy, and a few authors who are my favorites, but when I constantly hear/read the advice, "Read well-written books, and you'll learn to write better," it can get frustrating when those elusive well-written books aren't something I want to read. The ones I do want to read tend to not be up to the "modern standard" or else have issues even I can identify. I can still (usually) enjoy them as a reader, but as a wannabe writer I find it frustrating. Aaaand I just got off topic. What was the topic again? Oh, yeah, filler scenes. Does complaining about one's difficulty in finding interesting and well-written books count as furthering the plot?
Actually, I'm really impressed that you're working so hard at overcoming a childhood hate for reading. What a shame, because reading brought me more pleasure as a child (and adult) than just about anything else I can think of. But like you, I've read (or tried to read) many books that just didn't do it for me. That's probably everybody's experience, when you think about it. So many books, so many styles. They won't all suit you. Any more than all music suits a music-lover. Trick is to find and identify the stuff you do like, then read as much of it as you can. Read as often as you can, and do it with pleasure, until the craft of storytelling clicks in with you. And then write the kind of book YOU would like to read—not what somebody else thinks you should read and write. Concentrate on what you like, rather than on what you don't.
