OK, I know you aren’t convinced that ebooks and print on demand (POD) will be the downfall of literature, and perhaps there is no convincing you or perhaps I’m wrong. One commenter suggested that the great will rise, like cream, to the top. I hope they do, but I don’t think they will.
As ebooks and POD continue to supplant traditional publishing, the traditional ways of separating literature from nonliterature will also be supplanted. The question is: Supplanted by what? That is the big unknown.
Many commenters point to customer reviews at ebookstores such as Amazon and Barnes & Noble. So here is my first question: Excluding anger and protest reviews (such as the 1-star reviews because of price), for how many ebooks that you have bought and read have you written a review? How many of those reviews were in-depth reviews? In my case, the answer is zero. I counted up my ebook purchases over the past 2.5 years, and discovered I have purchased more than 500 ebooks and of that number have read 283. Yet I haven’t written one review (except for a couple here on An American Editor and on MobileRead). And of the pbooks I purchased and read in that same time frame, the only ones I have reviewed are the ones I reviewed on An American Editor.
Yet if you look at the reviewers on, for example, Amazon and Barnes & Noble, some have written more reviews than books I have read, yet they supposedly (according to their profiles) have numerous other interests that must take some time. I haven’t written reviews for several reasons, not least of which is that I don’t have the time to write an in-depth, thoughtful, and balanced review. I’m not a believer in the “Great book 5 stars” review, but then you probably guessed that from my suggestion that New York Review of Books reviews are the gold standard for book reviews.
I am quite skeptical of the reviews found at the ebookstores. And the 2-paragraph reviews I find at many of the ebook review sites aren’t much better (plus I have no idea who the reviewers are or their competencies). So who will become the new opinion shapers? How will we find them?
The Internet is both a great leveler and a great fragmenter. As a leveler, it makes new audiences available to authors, audiences they would not otherwise be able to easily reach. However, as a fragmenter, the Internet makes it easy for readers to find their niche and not expand out from it. Consequently, ebookers tend to take a narrow look at books rather than the more expansive look readers had to take when the only reviews were in generalist publications.
So how does a consensus get built that XYZ book is literature? You have the problems of sheer volume, Internet fragmentation, and questionable reviews that need to be overcome. Although the advent of ebooks has given everyone who wants to write an outlet for doing so, it has also made the task of finding the next J.D. Salinger or Ernest Hemingway or Ursula Le Guin exponentially more difficult, if not impossible.
The lack of gatekeeping will cause a continual flood of ebooks, and picking and choosing among them will not be easy, perhaps even impossible. The idea that all that matters is that one find a book and enjoy it is OK as far as it goes, but it does nothing to help identify literature for new readers or future readers. The way we learn to appreciate good writing is to be exposed to good writing. But because ebooks make publishing a trivial experience, it is not possible to isolate good writing from poor writing (and pretty soon bad writing becomes the standard).
Just as poor grammar and spelling are commonly seen in ebooks (see On Words & eBooks: Give Me a Brake!), so those ebooks reinforce already poor grammar and spelling skills of readers (readers with good grammar and spelling skills are unlikely to have the patience to wade through the dreck of bad writing, bad grammar, and bad spelling). As writing falls perilously close to the lowest common denominator, the concepts of literature – of correct spelling, of correct grammar, of good writing – diminish until they are meaningless.
The lack of gatekeeping standards, the lack of publication literary standards that ebooks bring to the marketplace, and the sheer volume of ebooks available solely because of a person’s ability to bypass traditional publishing, indicates to me a downfall in literature.
It is not that the next Steinbeck isn’t out there — rather, it is that the next Steinbeck won’t be found.
The debate continues and concludes in round IV…
Editor’s Note: Rich Adin is an editor and owner of Freelance Editorial Services, a provider of editorial and production services to publishers and authors. This is reprinted, with permission, from his An American Editor blog. PB
There are a few billion websites.
How did we find this one?
It must be impossible to find, by this argument.
It isn’t professional, backed by a major corporation, carefully edited over a long period of time, etc., etc.
Also worthless because no-one on tv said it was any good?
I’ve read each Round so far and have found it interesting reading although I have to disagree with the overall thinking. I think there’s a rather sizable group you’re forgetting as the target of your series. The books that my friends, fellow book lovers in my circle and myself read aren’t usually included in the big review magazines: romance and speculative fiction. So that leaves us out in the cold right out the gate.
Thankfully there are a lot of blog reviewers who have filled this gap and there’s a pretty big group that read and review books they recommend. Not only are they prolific, they also review books that don’t get the luxury of big publisher marketing money. The general media considers both genres trash and non-literature right out the gate, but that’s fine. Romance was actually the first to welcome the rise of ebooks long before popular media got a hold of it. Then the sci-fi community picked it up.
Plus there are a group of dedicated editors in many of the small presses who work hard to clean up books before releasing them. If the book has errors in it, believe me, readers will definitely point it out to warn other readers because they’ve spent their hard earned money on these books.
Unless the author is Nora Roberts or another big author, they don’t get reviewed in the big journals and magazines with each release. In fact, many of the books on my shelf have been ignored but I never listened to the big critics, not for what I read or watch. (Most of the time my taste is completely different or opposite of theirs).
I receive recommendations from friends off Goodreads where I notice what they put on shelves and what they recommend to me in our mutual groups. Goodreads is a growing segment of readers where publishers and authors are already climbing aboard to offer ARCs, galleys and online fiction direct to readers. Many bloggers post reviews well ahead of a book’s release so readers know what to expect when they pick up the book and whether it’s something they will enjoy. These aren’t run of the mill Amazon reviews either. These are in depth reviews that give more than just a rehash of the book blurb but a well informed opinion and how it adds to the genre. I can’t find that at the big critic journals because most of them cater to the marketing of big publisher money. Or they have some agenda to push certain books into the public eye.
You asked: Excluding anger and protest reviews (such as the 1-star reviews because of price), for how many ebooks that you have bought and read have you written a review? How many of those reviews were in-depth reviews?
My answer: Too many to count. I read a lot of small press and digitally published because because there are many wonderfully original voices out there that aren’t cookie cutter like most of the corporate published books. When I come across a great read, I publish it everywhere because I want to share the joy and great experience I had reading it. My TBR pike continues to grow because I keep coming across great reads that I see my friends adding to their virtual shelves. I’ve written and posted many reviews and often I help influence readers who may have never heard of the book in the first place.
You also asked: I am quite skeptical of the reviews found at the ebookstores. And the 2-paragraph reviews I find at many of the ebook review sites aren’t much better (plus I have no idea who the reviewers are or their competencies). So who will become the new opinion shapers? How will we find them?
My answer: Honestly? I would trust those reviews more than I would trust the big journals because these people put out their hard earned money for the book and expected a certain experience. If they didn’t get it, they would tell you why. It’s not that hard to separate the true reviews from the angered ones who give low stars for something trivial. Unless the reviewers are book bloggers who received ARCs for free, they have a vested interest in that they are a reader who had an interest in this book when they picked it up.
You don’t frequent many book blogs but the readers, the real hardcore book lovers, know what sites to go to for reviewers who share their taste in books. And they’ve been doing this longer than mainstream media finally woke up and realized ebooks exist. Most bloggers even leave their blogger name linked on Amazon reviews and usually these are the ones that are pretty substantial. The book club isn’t dead. It just took on a new form online and in small groups that don’t get big media attention.
I think there’s always going to be a committee who wants to call certain books literature. Honestly, those people never spoke to me or my taste. And I’m sure they never spoke for my friend’s tastes. Most “classics” have already have a “Western” bent, most of the time ignoring wonderful multicultural and world reads that aren’t seen as “the consensus” or profitable. Or the publishing houses just didn’t agree with their point of view. Big critics only focus on what’s popular at the moment (ironic considering they look down on what’s popular) or what other journals are reviewing so they can get in on the readership. I don’t think it’s as unbiased or general as you describe it.
As a reader, I trust my fellow book lovers whose taste I know is similar to mine rather than some anonymous gatekeepers who are more interested in showing how intellectual they are by the books they read and brag about. Besides, they could be touting Steinbeck in public while reading and enjoying Harlequin at home and know one would know it!
I wouldn’t worry about the influx of POD and ebooks. Considering the genre of most of the books (romance, sci-fi, etc), it wasn’t considered literature by mainstream media in the first place. And with sites like Goodreads where readers warn each other about potentially bad reads and recommend really good ones, us little people are doing just fine governing what goes on our bookshelves.
In the end, reading isn’t dead and literature isn’t going downhill (anymore than usual, at least ;-)). There are wonderful reads out there depending on what you love to read and there are also people who have similar taste and will spread the good word on the books that really stand out. Readers have, in a way, already become their own gatekeepers and critics. It’s a community, but like any community you only get what you give.
(Apologies for the long winded reply!)
A couple of thoughts re gatekeepers. Sorry if I am not quite eloquent enough but I am coming off working more than 24 hours straight.
1. Using reviews by the web population (ie amazon or starred) are just as reliable as some prima dona newspaper reviewer. Both types are subject to bias and lobbying from various sources. For web reviews, things to evaluate are:
– history of the reviewer (ie: AAR’s reviewers have been reviewing romance books for about 15 years now. They certainly are able to write good reviews that direct readers appropriately)
– the volume of reviews (ie: Amazon’s system works well as you can see how many people rate a book and even how many people find a review useful – this is equivalent to word of mouth which is quite useful in directing readers)
2. When people go to a bookstore, they read the jacket or back of the book to get a sense of the book. Online books often have excerpts now which allow you to evaluate for yourself whether the book will hold your attention. Alternatively, google books has large segments of books online so you can evaluate the book’s appeal or usefulness.
3. Grammar is an interesting concept. Language is fluid and this changes both spellings and grammar. While poor editing/formatting is definitely an issue, I don’t think it is so black and white as you have portrayed here and in previous posts. If you look at many older great literature books, the grammar and spelling used in them is completely different from today’s use of spelling and grammar. I expect that grammar and spelling will continue to evolve so I am not as worried as you are.
4. Literature is an interesting concept. It is very subjective. To me, it often has the connotation of “the hubris of writing”. I have read or been forced to read a large amount of literature through my many years of schooling (including three degrees/doctorates) and I would have to say that at least 75% of literature is really garbage. Unengaging. Useless. Unworthy. This is honestly what many think when they think of literature. I do hope that I haven’t given you a myocardial infarction by saying this ;-] Clearly, the gatekeepers that chose those pieces of literature weren’t very good in my opinion.
5. Historically, publishers acted as gatekeepers and still try and claim that title. They are biased in that they need to make money. Thus, their gatekeeping has become extremely useless and frankly, downright crappy. I mean, really, let’s publish books by/or about Palin, Bidden, Glen Beck, and the multitude of other useless topics. To me, those aren’t gatekeepers of literature, instead, they are gatekeepers of stupidity. Online self publishing, of which you are afraid of, can’t do worse in my opinion.
6. You wrote that you bought 500 or so books last year and read 283. That’s alot of unread books. How is it that you have so many unread? Is it your reliance on other “gatekeepers”? If so, then just over 56% isn’t a good indicator of gatekeeping reliability. If it isn’t because of the gatekeeping ability of others, then you are pretty safe in the future. By the time the gatekeepers you rely on have failed utterly, you should have a TBR pile that will last you a long, long, time. (Please don’t get too upset with me, this last point is more tongue-in-cheek, er, maybe foot-in-mouth, than serious criticism)
For a brief moment in time, technology did allow mass media to be highly concentrated and refereed by a small number of “gatekeepers.” This was an historically anomalous period. That power is now flowing back to the unwashed masses from whence it sprang.
Hence the “mass” in mass media.
Prior to the printing press, the preservation of “high culture” depended largely on the tastes and predilections of the elites. “Low culture” depended entirely on the great mass of commoners liking it enough to keep it around in the collective memory.
Over time, what humans have painstakingly created has largely vanished from both ends of the spectrum. The citizens of 18th century Vienna spent most of their free time not being entertained by Mozart, Hayden and Salieri, but by musicians already lost to history.
As he identifies so strongly with the privileges of high culture, Adin is understandably upset over the demise of a cultural aristocracy, perhaps best exemplified in Henry V: “You and I cannot be confined within the weak list of a country’s fashion: we are the makers of manners.”
Alas, democracy has arrived. Let them eat peer-reviewed cake, I suppose.
I wouldn’t worry about it, though. Adin is really just rediscovering the dichotomy paradox. It’s been around for at least 2500 years. I suggest he study the Pareto principle and power law distributions and update his mathematical logic.
Over time, almost everything regresses to the mean. At any given moment, we are truly lousy at predicting what won’t. Art and literature are no exception.
I think Rich Adin is prety much right on the money. eBooks and PODing has led to a gusher of rubbish and sloppy writing.
In my personal publishing experience a good detail oriented copyeditor and proofreaders are invaluable. Well worth the price.
Working with an editor helped challenge me and made me a better writer because I learned not to be so enamored with myself.
And as I am getting my novels back in print myself as eBooks, I am using a copyeditor to make sure they are the same digitally as on paper. Yes, it costs money, but I wouldn’t want my name on something that was sloppy.
There is no reason eBooks can’t be quality reads.
“I think there’s always going to be a committee who wants to call certain books literature. Honestly, those people never spoke to me or my taste. And I’m sure they never spoke for my friend’s tastes. Most “classics” have already have a “Western” bent, most of the time ignoring wonderful multicultural and world reads that aren’t seen as “the consensus” or profitable. Or the publishing houses just didn’t agree with their point of view. Big critics only focus on what’s popular at the moment (ironic considering they look down on what’s popular) or what other journals are reviewing so they can get in on the readership. I don’t think it’s as unbiased or general as you describe it.”
This, exactly. Although I’m pretty certain these words of wisdom are falling on deaf ears.