Two of my favourite ways to lose time online are amazon and twitter so it's something of a bonanza when twitter points me to an article about amazon... In this case from The New Yorker. Amongst other things it argues that "amazon has successfully fostered the idea that a book is a thing of minimum value". I'm not sure it's a statement I entirely agree with but it's certainly a question worth considering. The subtitle is "Amazon is good for customers. But is it good for books?" I'm not sure I agree with that either.
I'm old enough to remember the net book agreement in the U.K. It was great for independent bookshops - no one could under sell them, and I suspect better for publishers and accountants too, and as the U.K. is a reasonably cheap place to buy books (no vat on the paper sort) customers probably didn't suffer unduly under the old system either. Now of course the retailer with the greatest buying power, and those able to sell either at cost or at a loss have a definite advantage over there competitors, long term I don't believe that's in anyone's best interest, not even the customer who feels like they're getting a bargain. When margins are squeezed like that all our choices are diminished.
As far as amazon goes I'm basically a fan, although their plans for world domination are undoubtedly a worry, for every bad news story there's generally a positive one as well and I very much like being able to get cut price cookbooks. The thing is when you get away from the big name titles the discounts aren't actually that huge, many, if not most of the fiction paperbacks I look at are within a pound or so of what I would pay on the high street (if I could find them on the high street) and balanced against that saving is the hassle of dealing with couriers. In this country at least I would be tempted to say that supermarkets have done as much to alter the perceived value of a book as amazon has, although I guess it's amazon who now set the benchmark as to price as anyone with a smart phone (and a signal) can check and judge cost accordingly.
What I'm still coming to terms with however is the idea of ebooks. I've only very recently stuck a toe in the water with these. My phone has a kindle app and from time to time I've found it useful. When trying to sell me on e-readers (it's a losing battle people, I'm never going to be a convert) the main argument used is always for the amount of classics available free or at very low cost. I notice there's also a murky underworld of free or very cheap fiction most of which I take to be self published (after ordering a few Viking saga's I was recommended some really odd 'romance' titles).
Free is a seductive sort of price for the hard up but it definitely devalues books as a whole. Another thing I've noticed over the last couple of days are a number of one star reviews for otherwise well received titles based purely on the kindle price. This seems really unfair for a number of reasons, the most obvious being that it clearly has nothing to do with the content of the book. Authors, publishers, and even electronic booksellers have to make a living, and e-books attract vat which does it's bit to push prices up. Part of me feels a little bit smug when I read howls of protest from someone who has just shelled out £100 or more on a shiny new device only to discover that they still have to pay a reasonable amount for content for it. They seem to feel so cheated, but then it's hard to really understand where the money is going, or even why you have to pay it when you don't get an actual object to hold in return.
I don't believe that amazon is responsible for fostering the idea that books are of minimal value anymore than Penguin were in the 1930's when they introduced those orange paperbacks. Paperbacks that can still be picked up for pence in any number of second hand and charity shops. It's a good thing to live in a world where books are basically affordable and easily available, it's a great thing to have a market place in which small independent publishers catering for a niche audience can easily reach that audience. It's an interesting thing to have a retailer so all reaching that they get to set the perceived value of a book but I think that in the end responsibility basically stays with the customer and buying cheap now might not be best for us in the long term.
Showing posts with label Rants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rants. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Qualified to Criticise a Classic or Not?
A week or so ago Savidge Reads and A J Reads reviewed Trollope's 'The Warden' as part of their Classically Challenged project and afterwards Simon (Savidge Reads) wrote more about feeling qualified to criticise classics or not, I've pinched his post title but am sure he won't mind. I had meant to comment, then came down with some disgusting virus and am now feeling almost human again so thought I'd attempt a blog instead because it's something I occasionally consider.
I've never been very comfortable using the term 'Review' to describe my blogging about books, it feels like a loaded term, when I stop to analyse why I think that I come up with no very satisfactory answer, but it is in part tied up with a determination when I started blogging that I would only write about books that I was enthusiastic about. Broadly speaking this is what I've done for the last three years. I haven't absolutely loved every book that's appeared here, and have sometimes even made mild criticisms, but basically if I've put that kind of time into it it's because I thought it was interesting enough to deserve the attention. I would actually be hard pressed to write about books I didn't like having reached a point where I'm not prepared to read something if I'm not enjoying it, or at least finding it rewarding on some level. Beyond that my critical facilities come from studying History of Art (a long time ago) and wine (continuously), I imagine that broadly speaking the same techniques apply to literature, but again criticism as such is not what I consider this blog for as I read mostly for fun - any formal criticism is purely accidental.
When it comes to wine it's my job to sell it, so when I describe it I naturally want it to sound like just what you want so you'll buy it, more importantly I actually want it to be just what you want so you'll come back and buy more - that's why I'm good at my job. Now I know that everything I recommend is good, but I also know that not everyone will like it, when it comes to wine my palate might be more educated than my customers but that doesn't make my opinion more valid than theirs - I'm not going to be drinking the bottle, and education aside there are all sorts of excellent wines that just don't excite me that much (Pinot Noir - it moves some people to poetry, it moves me to a good Cabernet).
That's basically my approach to the classics as well. If you've read it than your opinion is valid, and part of that is going to be whether you liked it or not, though what I'm interested in is why. I also like spoilers. Now neither AJ or Simon enjoyed 'The Warden' which is a shame - I think it a wonderful book and Trollope a marvellous writer (though I recognise he has his faults), I do take exception to Simon's comparison between 'The Warden' and Fifty Shades (How Very Dare He) but accept the point he's making. I can also understand why he didn't like the book - not everybody will care for knotty moral issues centred around obscure church practices (I happen to love that kind of thing... and it's occurring to me about now that Simon probably has a much better social life than I do).
To answer Simon's question I really do believe that the only qualification you need to critique a classic, or any other book, is to have read it, to be able to maintain an open mind, and to be able to explain why you feel the way you do about it. Everything else is gravy.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Pirates.
There was an interesting article in one of the weekend papers about pirating ebooks - something I've never given any thought to before but I keep coming back to it now, not least because it chimed with an earlier piece, and my own experience, of shop lifting in bookshops. The gist of the article was that an author had seen somewhere on line somebody offering a reward to anyone who would pirate his new (and I think début) novel. He wasn't best pleased but attempted to engage in conversation with the would be thief.
The initial explanation boiled down to this: I want the book, I don't want to pay for it, I don't have to, and what can you do about it? Other justifications include 'I've already bought the book in another format why should I pay again', 'it's not available as a paid for ebook in my region', 'it's more expensive than a paper book (which I don't want) and that's not fair', 'I don't know if I'll like it and don't want to spend my money until I know I will', and the one that makes me want to slap whoever says it - 'knowledge should be free'. This is the sort of reasoning that makes me yell at the screen/radio/paper -"What about a LIBRARY you cretin".
The dishonesty involved in pinching something is one thing, but it's also something I imagine we've all done in some form - stationary from work, the thing you borrowed... The souvenir peat from Laphroaig distillery (that might just be me). What I struggle with is how people will try and justify stealing an authors work - there's really no argument against the 'I can and I will' attitude but if you're going so far as to make an excuse you know you're wrong - don't you?
Frankly if you can afford an e-reader (and all the free stuff out there isn't enough for you) you can sure as dammit afford to pay for the books of living authors trying to make ends meet - and if you don't want to do that do without - or go to a library, show there's a need for them and help keep them open.
I know the genie is out the bottle on this one, there's no going back to a more civilised way of doing business - you know, when we bought actual things with actual cash money (and probably spent time balancing cheque books too) but as someone who works in retail the way people steal things bothers me - it's frightening if people don't admit they're doing it. There's no such thing as a victimless crime, we all pay one way or another, and the more things taken without payment the more those who do pay have to cough up - and that's not fair either. In my own little world, where books are still strictly the paper sort, most of my purchases are second hand - which isn't great for authors incomes either, but then most the writers I favour are dead so I don't suppose they mind so much (it could be better news for the publishers though) but if this rant had a purpose (and I admit it might not) it's that this has been another reminder to think about how I spend my money.
Monday, July 11, 2011
The Maid – Kimberly Cutter
A few days ago there was a discussion in my on line reading
group about how we responded to people who slated books we loved (and rather
worse than a simple slating then proceed to poor scorn on anyone who liked the
poor book in the first place - which I consider appalling bad manners). I spent
some time saying that all that mattered to me is if a story entertained me
enough or not – I don’t consider myself a terribly critical reader unless something
really annoys me to the point that I can’t engage with what’s going on.
Sometimes that’s down to bad writing but more often its inconsistent details or
poor storytelling that do for me. I read primarily for entertainment and after
that information and atmosphere, I like to think I’m reasonably discerning but
I also hope I’m reasonably open minded about where I might find my
entertainment.
In truth I’m probably too much of a snob about books to be
really open minded but after that particular conversation, and coming out of a
book as utterly absorbing as ‘A Rage To Live’ I was a little bit stuck as to
what to go for next. I settled on ‘The Maid’ because it was sent to me from Bloomsbury
and I’ve been giving it sideways looks ever since it arrived. It’s not generally
the sort of book I get enthusiastic about (historical fiction, especially when
it’s about real people, and it’s a hardback...) but when asked I said yes please to the book so it would be churlish to ignore it.
It turns out that Kimberly Cutter is a good story teller,
good enough to stop me getting totally obsessed about the little things
(although I still don’t think Joan of Arc would have been anywhere near a baked
potato) which is saying something, good enough to keep me reading late into the
night so that I got through this book in a day as well. I think it helps that
the language is basically modern – one less thing to pick holes in or distract
from the action.
Joan’s fate is both well known and grim so it also came as a
surprise that the best bit of the book was the section that dealt with imprisonment
and death - when she’s questioning if what she did was her will or God’s will
and realises that she isn’t yet ready or willing to die. It could have come across
as pompous and heavy handed but I think Cutter carries off the philosophy and
theology with commendable skill. It humanises Joan, knocking the fanatic edge
off her and brings the book together nicely.
Reading the reviews of ‘The Maid’ on amazon I see it’s
described as a great summer read, and although I think it would be a better
autumn/winter number I broadly agree. It satisfies on the entertainment front,
is informative enough to make me want to know more, and has some interesting
ideas lurking in the background. It’s also gone from being a book I was deeply suspicious
of to one that I would happily recommend all of which makes me very smugly
believe that I do indeed practice what I preach.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)