This quote confronts a provocative perspective on altruism and moral goodness. It challenges the common social reverence for people who are considered 'gooders'—those who consistently do good deeds or act with high moral virtues. The assertion that such individuals are the "least interesting people on the planet" pushes us to grapple with the complexity of human character and what makes a person truly captivating or compelling.

In many narratives, 'do gooders' are often depicted heroically; they are paragons of virtue and moral clarity. However, this quote suggests that there may be a perception that consistent goodness is predictable or lacks the depth of complexity found in those who struggle, err, or exhibit a broader range of human emotions and flaws. The idea is that unyielding morality might come across as dull or one-dimensional because it leaves little room for internal conflict, growth through mistakes, or conflicting motivations.

At the same time, this quote could inspire us to reconsider how we understand and appreciate the qualities in others. It asks whether we value people solely for their righteousness or if we seek the rich, sometimes messy, nuances that make someone authentically interesting. Perhaps it reflects a longing to explore the full spectrum of human experience beyond moral simplicity.

It is important to consider the deeper context in Kate DiCamillo's "Raymie Nightingale," where characters often grow through personal struggle and imperfection. This quote, therefore, may be a critique or a character’s cynical perspective rather than an absolute judgment. It encourages reflection on the balance between admiration for goodness and recognizing the depth in complexity and imperfection.