"New York Times best-selling author"

[Luffy]

Yes I in fact agree with your original point. Totally. People need to have enough patience to allow art to stand the test of time.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

I believe that back in the '30s, the best sellers were genuinely talented authors like Falkner and Hemingway.

Well, yes, but there also was Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People AKA a guide to flattery.

Indie writers may like that idea that two years in a row, 1931 and 1932, the number one US fiction bestseller was The Good Earth by Pearl S. Buck. The imprint on the title page, "The John Day Company," apparently amounted to little more than Buck's husband helping to get her books printed and distributed.

Despite Luffy's pet theory in #29 about Nobel prize winners being poor writers, The Good Earth is truly unforgettable.

Last night I finished Factory Girls: From Village to City in a Changing China, which, although nonfiction, feels like an update on what life is like for the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the villagers Buck described so poignantly.

[ereadingdotcom]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Does this have any meaning nowadays?

Thinking about it, I see it on about every English book in (e)stores. It could even be the case that I *DON'T* have any books *WITHOUT* this recommendation, apart from non-English books and classics.

I have edited many New York Times bestselling authors in my anthologies, and I've read more than my share of them, too. But to me, that tag is not necessarily a litmus test for quality. Maybe 10% of it is. The rest is, to me, simply a sign that the writer is popular among some people.

That's about it.

Or, that it made Oprah's list or something

Richard Dean Starr
[Promotional link deleted - MODERATOR]

[crich70]

Originally Posted by ereadingdotcom

I have edited many New York Times bestselling authors in my anthologies, and I've read more than my share of them, too. But to me, that tag is not necessarily a litmus test for quality. Maybe 10% of it is. The rest is, to me, simply a sign that the writer is popular among some people.

That's about it.

Or, that it made Oprah's list or something

Richard Dean Starr
Co-Founder & CEO,
eRead Technologies, Inc.
www.Ereading.com

So in other words it comes down to personal bias (i.e whether a given person or group likes a particular author/ book), right? Not that there is anything wrong with that I think as we all have our preferences whether it's in music, food, reading, etc. All a part of being human.

[Luffy]

Personal bias can be very useful. Imagine finding one film critic with whom you agree all the time, and a book critic as well and one for music... you'd be reading books you know you'll adore beforehand. It's an invaluable help that can be got by virtually anyone who pays attention.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Luffy

Personal bias can be very useful. Imagine finding one film critic with whom you agree all the time, and a book critic as well and one for music... you'd be reading books you know you'll adore beforehand. It's an invaluable help that can be got by virtually anyone who pays attention.

Yeah, but it could also be limiting. If you had someone you always agreed with you might not look round to see what's new as far as books etc. and would miss out.

[DrNefario]

"Not everyone hates this" is still slightly more assurance of quality than nothing at all.

In my eyes it's all about triage: genres, recommendations, bestseller lists, the lot. I can't possibly read every book to decide whether I like it. How can I filter this massive mountain of stuff down to something I might be able to deal with? OK, this is in a genre I like, and not everyone hates it, maybe I should look at it.

[Luffy]

Originally Posted by crich70

Yeah, but it could also be limiting. If you had someone you always agreed with you might not look round to see what's new as far as books etc. and would miss out.

Interesting way of looking at things. A compatible critic is an animal I've yet to meet though, so what I said might be very unlikely.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Luffy

Interesting way of looking at things. A compatible critic is an animal I've yet to meet though, so what I said might be very unlikely.

I realize that that is not likely to ever happen of course. But think about it for a moment if everyone was content with how things were those men who contributed to the idea of electric light wouldn't have done so because gas lighting was good enough, which means that Tom Edison wouldn't have worked to make it practical either, and the same can be applied to book criticism I think. If everyone liked what was already out there and saw no need to look for new authors to read because the books already published were 'good enough' to fulfill everyone's reading desires there wouldn't be new books because no one would be reviewing the new authors and no publisher would be printing a new author's books either.

[Smartie]

only Washington post and wall street journal review might impact my decision

[Luffy]

It's not a surprise that not many people want to talk about the NYT list. That says a lot about the current situation.

[DuckieTigger]

I am more interested in "now a major motion picture" - more meaningful to me. Someone thought it was a good enough book to risk a lot of money adopting it to a movie. If it turns out a successful movie, the book can't be that bad. Usually the books are better than the movie - not always.

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

I am more interested in "now a major motion picture" - more meaningful to me. Someone thought it was a good enough book to risk a lot of money adopting it to a movie. If it turns out a successful movie, the book can't be that bad. Usually the books are better than the movie - not always.

Duckie, I have long felt very much the same way.

[BuyMore]

Originally Posted by Catlady

It doesn't determine what I buy or read, but it means something when I'm browsing through hundreds of book titles, especially when the author is unknown to me.

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

I am more interested in "now a major motion picture" - more meaningful to me. Someone thought it was a good enough book to risk a lot of money adopting it to a movie. If it turns out a successful movie, the book can't be that bad. Usually the books are better than the movie - not always.

too. That always manages to pique my interest.

[DrNefario]

I always used to like to get the non-movie version of the cover if I could. Covers with the actors on are just not right.