Quote:
Originally Posted by i, Podius
The question that I think we should be asking ourselves is - society has survived without rating books (with a few exceptions) for thousands of years; what has changed to suddenly make it necessary? Books, or society?
|
Answer: Money. It's always money.
Ratings are used to "guide" creators into creating products that will receive the most profitable ratings (like PG), or to avoid creating products that will be the least profitable (G). They are also used to avoid litigation ("My daughter was traumatized by this and that, because of a lack of warning!"), to save money on legal fees and insurance.
As the publishing world tightens its collective belt, they are reacting to anything that will cost them more money/less profit. If they feel ratings will make them more money (or cause them to lose less), they'll jump all over it.
But the thing is, publishers already have a ratings system... it's just that it is largely hidden from the public and not centrally mediated, handled by the editors as manuscripts are submitted. They are using the publisher's profit-based submission guidelines for what to accept, advising writers on how to alter books to meet those guidelines, and assigning those books to specific labels under that publisher that specialize in a certain type of book (children's, romance, SF, horror, etc). Those labels are essentially the public "face" of the rating system... instead of "G", "PG", "R", etc, you get "Scholastic," "Baen," "Apex," "Harlequin," and you generally know based on the label what to expect.
This works, I think, because it provides a lot more choices than the simplistic movie rating system, which would only do literature harm if it was adopted as-is. Literature is much more intellectually involved than movies, it evokes its own images, often different from person to person, and a ratings system based on moving pictures and an occasional swear word isn't going to work on words.
So, printed books are essentially already being rated, but in a very covert and decentralized way. And I submit that this is not hurting the publishing industry, though it is certainly causing some authors to "subvert" their work, willingly or otherwise, in order to stay within the system and make their paychecks.
Should e-books be different? Since I don't see the present covert ratings system as hurting the industry, I don't see e-book ratings doing any harm either. However, as the industry adapts to global availability and distribution, and a wider cultural spread, any ratings system must adapt to fit the times. The present system certainly needs updating.