[QUOTE=stonetools;2016660]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
John Locke's first million sales say you're wrong.
I think you have a skewed concept of "the general public." In my mind, that includes the several-million people who spend time reading blogs and hanging out at Reddit and Fark and Livejournal, who are entirely aware that the internet is *clogged* with interesting free stuff. They may default to gatekeeper-selected reading materials most of the time, because it's worth paying someone else to winnow through the selection of what's available... but they aren't averse to other sources, and are actively involved in telling other people that you can find endless free-and-cheap entertainment online.[/]
With respect , the general public has never even heard of Fark or Livejournal, much less hung out there. Dont confuse the habits of the " technologists" with those of the general public. Remember that 80 per cent of all book purchases are print and that most people don't have ebook readers. For those people, there really is no " abundance".
Another point is that all this applies to genre fiction. For literary fiction and non fiction, there is no huge outflow of interesting new stuff.
|
General public doesn't include "technologists"? Interesting viewpoint, but factual inaccurate. General public includes "technologists" as well as illiterates...
Also, define "new stuff". There is much "old stuff" that is perfectly valid, in both categories. Are William James, Willa Cather, Joseph Hergesheimer, Booth Tarkenton, Pearl Buck,
et al suddenly worthless because they are not part of this year's publisher cycle? Go look at the bestsellers since 1920. Are they all trash? (Some you may consider trash, such as Zane Grey, but all?) I could say that there is not a large amount of "interesting new literary fiction" because there is a very small market for it. 15 Years ago, I read where a fantasy writer (who was successful in her niche), listened to all her literary friends and wrote a very literary historical novel, set in the 12th century. It was well reviewed in top literary sources. It sold 700 copies. Her comment was, "I spend 2 years of my life to sell 700 books? Never again. I'll go back to writing fantasy."
Non-fiction is not so clear cut, as certain area are in continual flux, requiring new books. But even there, there are large swatches of information that don't require continual rewriting. I learned comparative vertebrate anatomy from a book first published in 1942. It's still perfectly valid and usable, if you need to learn vertebrate anatomy. Same for learning lots of mathematics. Calculus, Linear Algebra, Differential Equations, and lots of other branches haven't changed in a hundred years. Of course, Physics, Cosmology, Molecular Biology, and lots of other branches change every 5 minutes. They always need new books. Or is your idea of non-fiction novel-length People Magazine books?
Stonetools, the world is leaving you behind. In the world today, as opposed to even three years ago, brick-and-mortar bookstores are steadily going broke, and the largest bookseller in the US (Amazon) sell more e-books than it does print book, (they inverted about a year ago). How many people do you see with iphones? Are they all "technologists"? They can, (and more and more do) read books on their iPhone in their spare time. (Or android phones). The world has changed, and it isn't going back.