So, I started reading A Thousand Plateaus recently. Which is an infamously long, dense, free-associative book. It is A Lot.
I certainly wouldn’t claim that it’s particularly easy to read (certainly not compared to philosophers who are really great stylists like Benjamin) and I imagine if you come into it without any previous experience with this sort of French poststructuralist stuff it might be a struggle to parse the concepts.
That said, I think often times how we read and what we expect can really amp up this difficulty. Poststructuralist philosophy is concerned with escaping formal structures of knowledge and embracing something blurrier and unordered and the writing tends to echo this. Through their writing itself folks like Derrida and Deleuze are experimenting with their metaphysical concepts of freeform, fuzzy knowledge.
This means that often if you try to read these works in a very rigid and analytic way they can seem at best confusing and at worst nonsensical. They are not trying to present an idea and then provide evidence to convince you. Neither are they trying to provide concrete logic behind their statements. They are writing through and across concepts, making connections and disassembling structures in the hopes that something Else will arise. In this way, this style of writing has much in common with the more mystic side of theology.
This all sounds very high-minded, but it isn’t necessarily! All it really means is: just go with it! Understand that when you read something like this, the author is less interested in convincing you with specific points and more interested in taking you for a ride and playing with concepts. Just ride along, let it wash over you, don’t stress about not understanding things (maybe it will make sense later, maybe it won’t, it’s all fine), and let whatever happens through the process of reading happen. Whatever you get out of it, even if it’s just a few significant lines, is what you get out of it. If you get partway through and feel like it’s all bullshit and don’t care, that also is fine! There’s no right or wrong interpretive act here.