You don't have to read original texts from the 19th century to be a good communist. Not that you shouldn't ever read theory, but that isn't the only way to do it.

Like if I wanted to learn physics my first step wouldn't be Newton's Principia. I would do much better to learn from the efforts of all the talented authors of books intended to teach the salient lessons from Principia to everyday people.

Marx was a great thinker but not always the most clear writer (Engels was the better of the two at clear expression IMO). For instance, a comrade recommended The People's Marx to me, it's an abridged version of Capital that is 300 pages, by Julian Borchardt. In his intro he argues the Capital is fundamentally unreadable for most regular humans:

In the first place there is the enormous size of the work – not less than 2200 large printed pages filling three volumes. Who can be expected to read this, if he be not a specialist in political economy, and if he have professional business to attend to? Secondly, there is Marx’s manner of expressing himself, which is uncommonly, difficult to grasp. Sycophants, anxious to praise everything done by a great man, have maintained that Marx’s style is clear, precise, and easy of comprehension. This does not even hold good of his short essays destined for newspapers. And when such assertions are put forward in regard to his books on political economy, these assertions are absolutely false.

You can also just read modern theory. Read David Graeber, read Michael Parenti, read Andreas Malm - you might find them easier to read.

But you should probably try reading State and Revolution by Lenin - Lenin is easy to read and an electrifying writer.