Quote:
|
Now it’s a safe bet that Packer and I hate the same books — pop psychology, turgid genre fiction, heart-warming novels with relatable protagonists: “At a hotel in the Swiss alps, a penniless young beauty guards her secrets even while opening her heart…” He and I have been bred to hate that stuff. The difference is that while I disapprove of what other people read, I will defend to the death their right to read it.
|
Nonsense. George Packer never even hints at censorship, or stopping self-publishing. The OP article repels me because of its focus on impugning motives.
I have no sure way to know, but suppose it is true that most big publishing executives have a snobbish attitude towards books with the phrase "a penniless young beauty," and that Jeff Bezos has a tolerant one. So what? Objectively, Amazon is trying to suck the oxygen out of the market for lower-priced literature by pushing down the prices of brand name imprints so they will more often compete with the indie product. It doesn't matter whether or not Amazon executives are looking down on someone while harming them.
As for the OP talk about letting into the conversation those who can't afford the high price of brand new books, the big missing piece is the role of libraries. Random House, Harper Collins, Hachette -- eBooks mostly in the library. Thomas & Mercer -- I've never found one library eBook. Amazon won't let Overdrive touch the James Bond titles for which it owns American rights. Aren't they part of said conversation?
Amazon is no friend of the poor. Not in its treatment of warehouse workers, and not in its eBook distribution.