The beginning of the end of the traditional publisher? Here's a quote from an enabler of this, -- i.e., an Amazon.com executive: "The only really necessary people … are the writer and the reader." The future seems set to include more writers and readers than ever. I find it pretty exciting and liberating. (By the way, I love Amazon. By reducing the cost and therefore increasing the availability of books, it has enabled me to acquire more books than ever before -- and it's poised to do this on an even grander scale.)
Now the whole idea of new publishing also calls for more autodidacts in terms of all this, but that's no bad thing if "traditional" sources of writing instruction aren't doing their job. Here's some commentary on "creative destruction." I suppose some folks will complain that this will mean that a lot of "bad" books will hit the open market. Of course, what does this mean, "bad"? I think there's a whiff of snobbery in this complaint. There's also no accounting for taste. Some of the books and authors that I love best were repeatedly rejected by publishers before finally hitting the market and becoming beloved by millions (see J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter" and Jasper Fforde's "Thursday Next" series). At the same time, some truly nauseatingly dreadful books have been accepted by publishers (some of which have flopped while others have been successful and successfully lampooned to great enjoyment).
You know what? Let' em all publish and hit the open market of readers who will pick and choose what they want. The ultimate winners are the readers. Here's a related thought. So, La Parisienne, get writing!
No comments:
Post a Comment