Quote:
Originally Posted by rhadin
There is no question that anyone who wants to write and publish should be free to do so IF we have a way to build a consensus as to what newly published work is great literature. As it stands now, in the absence of traditional publishers we have no way to build that consensus. The idea that the Internet community can do it by word of mouth (or word of twittering) is ludicrous -- at least today.
|
I have qualifications in English and Education, am an avid reader and own an eBook store and publishing services firm and
I still struggle to accept that a published work is great literature because the consensus says so. I enjoy Michael Connolly, Shakespeare, Chandler, and Cormac McCarthy in equal measure. I love Military history, thrillers, drama and the odd bit of poetry. Different styles and genres mean different things to me, but all are enjoyed. I will equally put down a great published work if I dislike it or don't "get it."
Why do we have to be so decisive and divisive on these issues?
Take the internet for example - there must be billions of webpages out there, most of which are of no interest or little value to me. I therefore choose and visit regularly the sites that I consider of interest and benefit
to me! ( Take a bow MR
)
It's exactly the same with books and eBooks. We all gravitate to what we enjoy and while the net presents us now with a huge range of choice in a seemingly impersonal wilderness, we are actually forming tighter groups and relationships than anyone realises. Recommendations online count for a huge number of my purchases and I am seldom dissapointed. The cream does rise to the top - just depends on your flavour.
What I'm trying to say I guess is why try and dictate what someone should read or what constitutes a classic? And equally, why argue about it?
Each to their own and let diversity and individuality continue to be one of the biggest benefits the internet has given us.