The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/201...

Rochelle wrote: "http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/201..."

Very interesting, Rochelle. I, for one, am hopelessly bound to the printed page. I certainly utilize on-line literary resources and tools, but can't imagine a digital world for my reading. Even relatively short bits that I find on-line, I typically print to read. I think though that generations following mine are becoming much more comfortable living in the digital world.

But the change is already taking place without us, in the way they're written and distributed.

In 2009, more books were published in Britain than in any previous year in history: over 133,000. And yet just 500 authors, less than half of 1 per cent, were responsible for a third of all sales. The situation is an order of magnitude more extreme than that of 30 years ago, when fewer than 50,000 books appeared. In America, one out of every 17 novels bought since 2006 has been written by the crime novelist James Patterson....

Patterson,... assembles detailed plot and character outlines, then hands these over to one of his stable of regular co-authors, who complete the writing process under his scrutiny. Last year, nine new titles appeared under his name, and he’s bluntly unsentimental about the writing process.

What’s new, however, is the universality with which its axioms—know your audience, give them what they want—are beginning to be applied.

...The business of maximising a publication’s impact is now a battle fought across all media, by all and any means possible. And the most crucial factor in all of this is not the willingness of an author to go on the road and woo readers—potent though this can be—but the suitability of a book for mass discussion and consumption.

I prefer the printed page. There's only very few instances in which I would ever think of an e-book. I can't explain it, but there's just something about a printed book that I like. I've heard other book-lovers say this too.

Depends what I'm reading. I like my ereader for disposable consumption. I actually prefer it to reading a library book. But for things that I want to think about and make comments on/argue with I prefer books. And yes, I write in them. :)

I also adore art books and cookbooks with glossy colored pages.

Perhaps we should throw audiobooks into the mix ... Any thoughts on that?

Rochelle wrote: "Patterson,... assembles detailed plot and character outlines, then hands these over to one of his stable of regular co-authors, who complete the writing process under his scrutiny."

A technique he either borrowed or stole, take your pick, from Edward Stratemeyer. He created such series as the Hardy Boys, Nancy Drew, Rover Boys, Bobbsey Twins, Tim Swift. Early on he wrote some of the book himself, but then he took to just sketching out the plots and characters and turning them over to ghost writers. The difference being that unlike Patterson he didn't publish them under his own name, but invented pseudonyms for each series. But still, same concept.

Christopher wrote: "Very interesting, Rochelle. I, for one, am hopelessly bound to the printed page. I certainly utilize on-line literary resources and tools, but can't imagine a digital world for my reading. "

Like any reader of my generation, I'm addicted to print books. But I also have a good collection, numbering several thousand titles, of mostly free electronic books on my Kindle. Late in the afternoon or evening when my eyes are getting tired, or whenever my floaters get too frisky, I often turn to the Kindle to read even when I have a paper copy of the book because I can enlarge the type to a size that is more comfortable to read than normal book type. And as my eyes continue to weaken, and sadly they will, I will become more and more dependent on my Kindle. Fortunately, of the books I most enjoy, there is a vast collection available totally free through the Gutenberg project and volunteers who have converted those texts for use on e-readers. Bless those volunteers! They will allowe me to keep reading long after normal books become virtually impossible for me to read without a magnifying glass in hand, and try reading a whole book through a magnifying glass. No fun.

I prefer print books too. But the part of the article that concerns me is how writing and distribution are geared now.

Patterson is just one of many. Thousands of cookie-cutter series, vampire, paranormal, romance and sci-fi's come out every year, reducing the number of quality books. The publishing companies "...put as much material as you can in front of an audience, and let them do the selecting for you. Then—when your best hope of a hit appears—maximise it relentlessly."

On GR alone, I came across this list of series, covering 32,812 books.

http://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/s...

You're a purist, Eman, in reading only classics, but many of us still prefer a mix, and the mix is getting smaller. How many books produced after 2000 are worth reading and will become the classics of the future? (That's rhetorical.) And YOUR answer doesn't count, because you don't read anything after 1960 anyway. :-P

Rochelle wrote: "How many books produced after 2000 are worth reading and will become the classics of the future? (That's rhetorical.) And YOUR answer doesn't count, because you don't read anything after 1960 anyway. :-P"

LOL, Rochelle. But that kind of crowding out has always happened. The exciting thing is how many little indie publishers have started up. Some of them are collecting an interesting bunch of writers. And not all of them are focusing on the ebook market, either.

I agree that the last 10 years have been a dead zone in the mainstream press, though. Lots and lots of derivative work. And as one who used to read a lot of sci fi I can tell you that there isn't much new or good coming out there, either.

And I wasn't so aware of it until I started browsing Listopia, as I haven't read much the past few years due to illness. I was aware of all the romance books, but to me sci-fi has always meant Bradbury, Asimov, LeGuin, etc, the better writers, and vampire meant Dracula.

Are the indie presses the ones producing trade paperbacks?

Yes, they usually publish in trade paperback.

I've noticed that lots of the big publishers are also offering trade paperbacks now as a cheaper alternative to hardbacks.

I have a close friend in the north of England who runs the largest second-hand bookshop in the UK and he says that his business is thriving and shows no sign of being affected by electronic books.

Everyman: Good stationers sell A5/A4 magnifiying sheets which are far better than a glass:-

http://www.amazon.com/Hawk-Magnifying...

Three years ago, when the very first Kindle was announced, I realized that I needed to either get a Kindle or get a bigger house. I couldn't afford the house so I immediately ordered a Kindle. I now have the second generation Kindle and am exhibiting some lust for the third. Now that I have an iPod Touch I am doing some Kindle reading on that, too, as well as listening to all my Audible audiobooks on it. wherever I go, my books go with me. And I'm just a sweet old-fashioned girl.
EDIT: I still keep buying dead-tree-books, too. Oh me!

Kate wrote: "Yes, they usually publish in trade paperback.

I've noticed that lots of the big publishers are also offering trade paperbacks now as a cheaper alternative to hardbacks."
Cheaper, but not cheap, at about $16. I still buy all my books used.

Laurele wrote: "Three years ago, when the very first Kindle was announced, I realized that I needed to either get a Kindle or get a bigger house. I couldn't afford the house so I immediately ordered a Kindle. I no..."

I'm eyeing that Kindle3 with the lighted cover. It's very tempting.

Kate wrote: "Laurele wrote: "Three years ago, when the very first Kindle was announced, ...

I'm eyeing that Kindle3 with the lighted cover. It's very tempting. "

My Kindle 1 is still working for me, but I'm thinking of upgrading anyhow. Not sure whether to go Kindle or try one of the tablets as they get lighter.

by the way, is the current Kindle the Kindle3, or is a new one coming out?

I was afraid a tablet would glare too much, but my iPod doesn't except in sunlight It's much smaller than a tablet, though.

Everyman wrote: "Kate wrote: "Laurele wrote: "Three years ago, when the very first Kindle was announced, ...

I'm eyeing that Kindle3 with the lighted cover. It's very tempting. "

My Kindle 1 is still working for ..."

The Kindle 3 is their most recent version. It came out several months ago.

Several of my GR friends have iPads and say they are wonderful for reading PDF's and professional journals, but that they are very tiring on their eyes when reading for any length of time. All 3 of them use e-ink ereaders for most of their electronic reading.

Kate wrote: Several of my GR friends have iPads and say they are wonderful for reading PDF's and professional journals, but that they are very tiring on their eyes when reading for any length of time. All 3 of them use e-ink ereaders for most of their electronic reading.

That makes sense.

Laurele wrote: "Three years ago, when the very first Kindle was announced, I realized that I needed to either get a Kindle or get a bigger house. I couldn't afford the house so I immediately ordered a Kindle. I no..."

Laurele, do you subscribe to any literary podcasts with your iPod? One you may be interested in is called The Classic Tales Podcast. It's extremely well done by a man who is a wonderful reader of great literature--accents and all.

Historybuff93 wrote: Laurele, do you subscribe to any literary podcasts with your iPod? One you may be interested in is called The Classic Tales Podcast. It's extremely well done by a man who is a wonderful reader of great literature--accents and all.

Thanks, HB. I'll check it out.

I am hoping to get the new Kindle for Xmas - does it do colour as I notice that the new B&N Nook does (although I can;t get the Nooki in the UK).

I have looked at the Ipad but I think it is too large to carry around in a pocket as you do a book. I will buy a nice leather cover for my Kindle when I get it and pretend that it is a book:). I rather like the look of this one:-

http://www.mobilefun.co.uk/tuff-luv-a...

Do you have a cover Laurel?

MadgeUK wrote: "I am hoping to get the new Kindle for Xmas - does it do colour as I notice that the new B&N Nook does (although I can;t get the Nooki in the UK).

I have looked at the Ipad but I think it is too ..."

The new color Nook isn't e-ink, it has an LCD screen. It sounds like maybe sony will release a color e-ink reader next year, but I'm not sure where I saw that. If they do I am sure that Kindle won't be far behind.

Nice cover! If you want to be able to throw your Kindle in your handbag and haul it around with you, a cover is really necessary. If you're just using it at home then I wouldn't bother with one.

MadgeUK wrote: Do you have a cover Laurel?

The Tuff-Luv cover looks beautiful, Madge. Tolstoy travels naked in my handbag. If I use a bag that doesn't have a suitable slot, I put him in a Belkin envelope. I have to be careful about not adding any extra weight. (I know--eat less ice cream.)

I just like the idea of the Kindle at least feeling like a book. I tried the Sony out with a leather cover and it felt much nicer.

I've never bought a Kindle or Nook and don't plan to. It feels better to actually flip pages in a physical book; I just don't like the idea of looking at a screen to read a story.

I'm with you, Krista. But the other thing that disturbed me in the article was the way many books are produced on an assembly line today, the so-called genre books that are produced in endless series. The number of significant books has been decreasing.

Yeah, that's also pretty disturbing. I volunteer at my local library sometimes and I shelve more Nora Roberts and James Patterson than anything else.

Rochelle wrote: "The number of significant books has been decreasing. "

Make that significant new books. We still have just as many significant classics to read!

I prefer books and like the other contributor if I come across something online I prefer to print it off.

When it comes to classics I prefer Penguin, Oxford z
University Press or Norton's etc, for the annotated notes they provide.

Everyman wrote: "Rochelle wrote: "The number of significant books has been decreasing. "

Make that significant new books. We still have just as many significant classics to read!"

I meant new books, if you read that in context.

Bump.

I thought, "Oh, I'll just peruse this old thread and read what folks said, and not revive an old conversation!" Wrong.

A few folks implied that the digital/print divide was a generational one, and I just wanted to chip in that I don't think it is necessarily.

I think young folks are more likely to be comfortable with new technology, but so much of a print book is the way it can become almost a relationship, especially when it is read over and over. The extent to which one cultivates these relationships is personal preference. I almost wept when my husband and I combined books and I decided to get rid of my dog-eared Shakespeare, with all the passages I'd memorized underlined and emotional teenage marginalia and the spine all duct-tape. An e-book cannot achieve that.

I'm 26. I have a laptop, a Kindle 2 and an iPhone, all of which I read on. None of these replace print; I use my Kindle primarily for books which I don't care to buy in print. I have a taste for about one trashy romance or mystery novel a month, and I read these on my Kindle. Any book which I want to build a relationship with (I re-read, write in, highlight, and break the spines of my favorites) I buy in print.

My father, however, is 58 and an equally avid reader. However, he almost never re-reads and has no problem reading almost exclusively on his Kindle 3.

Many of the folks on my train who use the e-readers are 'oldsters', my age or even older. Actually, I can really see the advantage to having one. I travel a lot for business and this would certainly lighten the load in the brief case. And with memory for the devices being relatively inexpensive, one can store nearly the entire Library of Congress on one of these things (I'm just kidding, of course). I think the real advantage for elderly readers is that they are light to hold, and the font size can be increased to help those with decreasing vision abilities. While I've not purchased one yet, I am thinking that I probably will relatively soon.

Rosemary, I agree completely. I'm 29, and will never give up my print books with their tabs for quotes I particularly loved (and my odd little habit of inscribing the date I read them on the inside cover.... you can pretty much track my life in the books I've read). My personal library is well-loved, and even when I don't reread, I frequently pull down favorites to skim.

BUT, I have a Nook and use it for similar purposes as you--it makes using the library so much easier, taking books out right from my desk rather than trying to fit in a trip, as library hours tend to overlap with working hours.

I think I prefer printed books, but ebooks would be nice for travel and don't take space. I wouldn't like ebooks as much though because reading many words in one spot on a lighted screen hurt my eyes.

I'm hoping that ebooks will make the annotation and bookmarking process more functional -- I would love to be able to have notes interlined (in some different font) in the "margins" or within the text somehow. As it is, I can make notes on my Kindle, but they're harder to access than marginal notes in a book.

Everyman wrote: "I'm hoping that ebooks will make the annotation and bookmarking process more functional -- I would love to be able to have notes interlined (in some different font) in the "margins" or within the t..."

I think, for now, that is the limiting factor for me. I am an inveterate scribbler in all of my books. When I write reviews and even when I go back and re-read a novel I depend a good bit on my marginalia. I realize that I can do that with the Kindle/Nook, but it seems to me (now) that it is easier if I am able to flip through the novel and read my notes. Again, I can see that both formats are of significant use.

Everyman: I have thought the same thing several times about my Nook. Also, I haven't yet figured out if there's a way to get a "digest" of some sort where I can see just the notes I've taken or the passages I've highlighted. I don't think this is possible, and that would also be a huge improvement.

Loretta wrote: "Everyman: I have thought the same thing several times about my Nook. Also, I haven't yet figured out if there's a way to get a "digest" of some sort where I can see just the notes I've taken or the..."

I know you can get a digest like that with the Kindle so there must be someway to do it with the Nook. I'll be really glad when they improve the note taking functionality. I like Eman's idea. That would be ideal for me.

I wonder whether anyone else is experiencing the teething problems I am having with the plethora of technology? It is not really a complaint, more an observation. I am not working at the moment, so I am fortunate to have a lot of time to read. As a consequence, I listen to audiobooks downloaded from Audible, as well as reading print books. I also have a Kindle, which I love. The consequence of these riches has meant I flit between one book and another more frequently than I used to. This is compounded by my reading of the discussions on GR-often someone will mention an intriguing book and I will immediately download it. Because I read a lot of out-of-copyright works, I can do this instantly, for free.

As I said, I am not complaining, I am still in a state of wonder at being able to access so many great works so easily! It's amazingly wonderful!

I hope I will soon find a balance and once again read more deeply, rather than hop frantically from one exciting discovery to another.

I would be interested if anyone else is experiencing the same thing?

Attention Deficit Disorder? :D

Sasha wrote: "I would be interested if anyone else is experiencing the same thing?"

Sort of. I'm reading serious works at the same rate I ever was- the main consequence of my Kindle is that I also read an enormously increased amount of utter trash.

I have a friend who collects period romance novels, especially Georgette Heyer. I used to borrow one every time I visited her, maybe once every six months. Now I read one or two a month, because I have a Kindle . . .

Rochelle wrote: "Attention Deficit Disorder? :D"

Yes! They're the words I was looking for.

S.Rosemary, I had never read Heyer and recently tried to read "Frederica" and had to put it down-I know so many people adore her, perhaps I am missing something? What is your favourite Heyer novel?

Sasha wrote: "
I would be interested if anyone else is experiencing the same thing? "

Yes and no. I definitely do hop in and out of books on the Kindle -- just looking at the first page I see that within the past week I have read in 10 books. (Which ones, you ask? Well, Canterbury Tales of course, actually two versions, one modern, one ME; Little Dorrit; the Psalms; Moby Dick; Gaskell's North and South; Crime and Punishment; Plato's Republic; The Mill on the Floss; and Hardy's Two on a Tower. I have the original Kindle in which I put a large supplementary memory chip; I have well over 3,000 works on it (including several complete collections of various authors).

But then, I do this with dead tree books, too. I have always had several books going at a time. Fewer now that my eyes are failing, but still several. So the Kindle just makes it easier to hop from book to book, but it didn't create that for me.

Sasha wrote: "S.Rosemary, I had never read Heyer and recently tried to read "Frederica" and had to put it down-I know so many people adore her, perhaps I am missing something? "

Somebody recommended her mysteries to me, and I have enjoyed several of them. They are in the classic mystery mode, which I enjoy. She does a good job with creating characters. I don't know about her other genres.

Sasha wrote: "Rochelle wrote: "Attention Deficit Disorder? :D"

Yes! They're the words I was looking for.

S.Rosemary, I had never read Heyer and recently tried to read "Frederica" and had to put it down-I kno..."

They're fun and frothy, but most of them contain very little substantive plot. Her research is thorough and I find her characters humorous. I think Heyer's humor is what draws me to her books. Well that plus a lack of melodrama. But I know quite a few people who are just bored by her so it's really just a matter of taste.

Thanks Kate and Everyman. It's interesting to learn about other readers' habits. I will give Frederika another go.

Sasha wrote: "Rochelle wrote: "Attention Deficit Disorder? :D"

Yes! They're the words I was looking for.

S.Rosemary, I had never read Heyer and recently tried to read "Frederica" and had to put it down-I kno..."

I really like The Talisman Ring because it is SO over-the-top RIDICULOUS in its tongue-in-cheek melodramatic plot. At the same time, she writes very witty dialogue. I remember also liking Sylvester, The Corinthian, The Nonesuch, and also Venetia (probably my second favorite).

I don't know that I've read Frederica.

PS: here is an excerpt from The Talisman Ring.

S. Rosemary wrote: "Sasha wrote: "Rochelle wrote: "Attention Deficit Disorder? :D"

Yes! They're the words I was looking for.

S.Rosemary, I had never read Heyer and recently tried to read "Frederica" and had to put..."

I think my favorite is "An Unknown Ajax", but I'd second "The Talisman Ring" or "Venetia". "Frederica" is a bit more low key, although it has some of her trademark outrageous characters and subplots in it.