I'm getting a kind of kick out of this "my crap is better than your crap" argument.
My take: Publishers chasing after the latest blockbuster are quite likely to produce crap. Highly polished crap, maybe, but still crap. Catering to the broadest possible public taste is not the way to produce good books.
I'm not so sure that the complete amateur route is the way to go, either, but I do think we're on the brink of some profound change in publishing - we're almost at the same place with the Internet that publishing was in the 18th century when anyone with a little money and access to a printing press could publish anything. Will 'the crowd' produce better books? Maybe. Could be. I think the idea of doing away with the gatekeepers to be quite exciting. Sure, lots of crap will be produced, but lots of crap gets published every year anyway. <shrug>
The cream should still rise to the top - word of mouth has always been the best advertising anyway.
|