Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
But the point was why do you need to use that method at all if you look for really good books? To find the really good books (independent or not) you use other methods.
|
I would argue that it doesn't have to be "other" methods, but rather criteria
in addition to the sample, to find "really good" books (if indeed, people feel the need go to such great lengths to ensure their money is only ever spent on books that they "know" will be out-damn-standing).
I step outside my own reading comfort zone far too often to get overly hung up on only buying/reading books I'm going want to rave about after. I don't think reading a book that didn't
quite turn out as well as I might have liked warrants taking additional steps to ensure it never happens again. I will surely read (or I guess I should say
start) many more "meh" books in my lifetime in pursuit of the "wows!". There's no annual "best book chooser" award given out that I know of (and I'd have no desire to compete for it even if there was).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
So it surprised me here that people thought that samples was a useful method to find books to read and my conclusion was that people that find it useful are happy with just OK books or medicore books.
|
That would be understandable... IF you were under the impression that people were relying
solely on the sample to make their decision about a book. I don't believe that's very likely. In most cases the sample is probably the
last litmus test in a more complex process (genre/subgenre, personal recommendations, mentions by other respected authors/readers) that got a certain book/author to the verge of making a reader's personal TBR list.