You might want to re-read what you wrote, right here.
Because you've just precisely described the process that you're decrying.
Yes, i did.
Yes, this is about writers being given an object and attempting to imbue it with "significance".
What you overlook, in the last few lines of this paragraph, is that something "associated with something already written" means that it had to have something written about it in order to have significance: by your very reasoning, such an object DOESN'T have natural significance, it has significance BECAUSE it is "associated with something [already] written".
Yes, but it's the order of events i was talking about. Book is written, but not written with express purpose of someone famous signing it, but about a subject author is passionate about/enjoys/etc; book is published; later book comes in contact with a person associated with the events described in book; book is signed; book gains value. I can't see any artificial attempts to make the object significant. I can see coincidental actions that increase the significance of the book, and one might say getting a famous person to sign it is artificial, but it's also coincidental.
And what i said about an object that inspired a best seller having significance: that's also (in my mind, at least) a very different form of association than someone being given an object and told to write a tiny story about it. To me the latter form of association is forced, whereas the former (object inspiring best seller) is far more natural.
But hey, you might think differently and that's entirely fine. I have no issue with that. What i took exception to were statements made by a previous poster that implied that anyone who didn't think it was a great idea was 'lacking imagination' (and the statements surrounding that one) which is really a subtle way of saying 'you're either stupid or jealous.' So, stupidly perhaps
, i decided to explain why i felt the way i did.
So the writing to CREATE significance is a conscious action replicating (or parodying, depending on how you choose to look at it) what you have already observed.
Welcome to the game.
Which is pretty much the point i was making, along with the thought that i, personally, think it's a glorified prank.
