Quote:
Originally Posted by omk3
 this sounds an awful lot like drm! 
Seriously though. Knowing your love for a certain Mr. Brown, what if he wrote anonymously too? How could you avoid wasting your time on his stories, if you couldn't know they were his before you read at least a few pages? And don't answer that he would never write if he could not take credit in the first place  |
I wouldn't ever support DRM in any form, but I would like a secret decoder ring.. and I hope I haven't given any traditional publishers any ideas about using hardware to decode software.
As to the authorial claim I'm finding that what attracts me to writers is their style and what they have to say and I have to wonder does the name, the person attached really change anything of my interest (apart from being attracted to them through their exposure). Would our decisions on what we read be better informed if it was directly because of what we'd read instead of a name attached, a face, a marketing campaign? Aren't we, when we read an unknown author, doing this to a certain extent?
I like the idea of creating without expectation. Of releasing works without any foreshadowing of their content. This then leads to another question, one that I'm most interested in discovering. Without name, without any indication on first introduction, can we know an author by what they write alone? Would this approach be the most honest to take?
I know a lot of writers see digital freedom as an opportunity to make money, but I do not. I see it as an opportunity to gain freedom from money and the traditional roles of publishing. That might come of as a bit artsy-fartsy, but it really isn't. Writing is something I love, a passion if you will, and I take it seriously on that level, so my decisions must also follow in line with this passion. Besides all that, I can always dash off some pulp stuff if I really want to make money and release it under the name Dick Dickinson.
