PDA

View Full Version : More Literary vs Genre--Is It Snobbery?



dangerousbill
11-23-2011, 11:58 PM
"Lost in the conversation of the impact of eBooks is the plight of the mainstream novelist, who writes books that fit no genre category but nevertheless represent the crown jewels of the authorial world"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-adler/the-plight-of-the-mainstr_b_1105723.html

It seems to be like the whining of steam engine builders against the encroachment of the internal combustion engine, or sanitarium owners against using new drugs to fight tuberculosis instead of fresh air and rest.

thothguard51
11-24-2011, 12:05 AM
I pay no attention to the man/woman behind the curtain at the Huff...

Now, with that said, both have their places and both have produced many memorable experiences for readers. But when you compare the two, genre fiction is younger than mainstream literary fiction. It would be nice to see the two get equal footing and equal publicity.

CrastersBabies
11-24-2011, 12:07 AM
:chair

Anninyn
11-24-2011, 12:11 AM
You mean I get to break out this Lolcat TWICE today?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v308/kytten/impendingdoom.jpg

I wish people would just sit down and realise it's just books. Genre isn't formulaic shit, Literary isn't irreproachable poetry. IT'S JUST BOOKS and getting butthurt or pretentious about it on either side is stupid.

job
11-24-2011, 12:27 AM
"Lost in the conversation of the impact of eBooks is the plight of the mainstream novelist, who writes books that fit no genre category but nevertheless represent the crown jewels of the authorial world"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-adler/the-plight-of-the-mainstr_b_1105723.html

In re the thread title --

At first glance, this article seems to be discussing the future of general (non-genre) commercial fiction rather than Literary Fiction.

mscelina
11-24-2011, 12:35 AM
Quite frankly, we're building up one heck of a literary line at Musa. YA also, which is another undervalued genre in e-publishing. But now that e-readers are more reasonably priced and gaining in popularity with kids and adults, I think there's a strong market out there for these sorts of e-books.

And so far, based not only upon sales but upon the quality of submissions we're receiving, it looks like I might just be right.

leahzero
11-24-2011, 03:22 AM
This article isn't about literary vs. genre, per se (and thankfully); it's partly about the innate marketing advantage self-published genre titles have over self-pub commercial/mainstream fiction, and partly speculation about the decline of commercial/literary fiction quality in the crowded self-pub marketplace.

I think he has solid points on both accounts. But if things do play out this way, writers of self-published commercial/mainstream fiction won't just sit idly by. They'll carve up new genres and subgenres.

Filigree
11-24-2011, 04:25 AM
Literary fiction has had a marketing advantage for years. If you look in every mainstream news, review site, or magazine, literary fiction automatically gets a nod of respectability. Genre works traditionally have not. Literary fiction gets grants from government, state, and provincial arts authorities. Most MFA programs are built around literary fiction. Even many recent 'genre' award winners carry themes and structures inspired by literary fiction, as a hallmark of their assumed quality.

Is it any wonder that frustrated genre writers saw e-publishing's potential early on?

I, for one, welcome the ever-widening pool of sub-genres and marketing tools. That can only help writers (in any genre) with interesting stories to tell, but a quirky setting or plot that might not be safe, familiar ground.

kuwisdelu
11-24-2011, 04:41 AM
Even many recent 'genre' award winners carry themes and structures inspired by literary fiction, as a hallmark of their assumed quality.

I'm with you for most of your post, but I don't really get this part. There's nothing stopping genre fiction from being literary fiction. An awful lot of literary fiction is genre fiction. It seems natural to me that a lot of the winners of awards in various genres would also be considered literary.

BotByte
11-24-2011, 05:18 AM
This article sounds like it's written by a snob for the less-snobbish.

I see eBooks, not as the future, but as a convenience.

The eBook author (to me) is someone who wishes either to get their story out there without the downfall of publishers and agent. They wish to do away with the excessive pandering of their words and just to push their story out into the world. Whether this be good, or bad, depends on what is placed into the world.

Genre has nothing to take for either the eBook nor the Book authors. True, most people would rather read a book defined to a genre. But there are a lot of authors that label themselves to a genre, only in the spirit of their works. Authors like Mievelle who stretches the ideas and thoughts with works that completely break rules and time periods. His latest work EmbassyTown works at what I would think of as scifi and cyberpunk, but has almost no hold to the genres.

I see a lot of people that publish eBooks as writers who are either too pretentious of their writing to know that it sucks, or people who are taking on the strong drive to self-publish in this new format. Either way, the buisness of mass publishing (to me) is a way to proof the writing ability (in both technique and story) and to set a standard.

Jamesaritchie
11-24-2011, 06:12 AM
The basic premise, that mainstream books generally fall into no established category, is nonsense. Outside of publishing, no words has more confused meanings than "mainstream". Inside publishing, a mainstream novel is a novel that mainstream readers love, regardless of its genre, and almost all of them do fit neatly into one genre or another. Like many others, Warren Adler seems to be confused by what mainstream really is.

But who cares? Publishing is a business. As such, it gives the reading public whatever the reading public will buy. E-publishing doe snot change either the taste of the mainstream audience, nor what publishers give that audience.

Adler seems to think that branding leads the public around by the nose, but the reverse is true. The reading public creates branding, not the other way around. Publishers publish books. The reading public either buys them or not. If they do, more such books get published. If they do not, fewer such books get published.

When the public loves a book to death, a LOT of copies sell. When the public hates a book, very few copies sell. Print or e-publishing, the public makes the market, not the other way around.

SRHowen
11-25-2011, 05:37 AM
The eBook author (to me) is someone who wishes either to get their story out there without the downfall of publishers and agent. They wish to do away with the excessive pandering of their words and just to push their story out into the world. Whether this be good, or bad, depends on what is placed into the world.

What?? e-book and self publishing are not synonymous. E-book publishers are not self publishing venues, yes some are, but many are not and work the same way as a print publisher as far as submissions, editing cover art etc.

Self publishing is a way around editing, agents and publishers, not e-books.

Amadan
11-25-2011, 06:34 AM
The old filtering processes where book sections and professional book critics held sway are slowly losing their power to influence, while the Net has opened a vast, undisciplined, self-proclaimed array of reviewers who offer opinions about the quality of mainstream books that could be sincere and authoritative but can also be suspect and self-serving. None have the power and prestige once wielded by big city newspapers and magazines.

Oh no! How dare "self-proclaimed" reviewers offer opinions about the quality of books instead of leaving that to the professionals?

MJNL
11-25-2011, 06:55 AM
Yes, on either side, claiming one is better than the other is snobbery. Pure and simple. It's like saying chemistry is better than biology, or heart surgeons are better than neurosurgeons. Both have their place and uses and benefits.

The end.

Phaeal
11-25-2011, 06:52 PM
Oh no! How dare "self-proclaimed" reviewers offer opinions about the quality of books instead of leaving that to the professionals?

I mean. We all know the pro reviewers have advanced degrees in Reviewology and have endured long apprenticeships under elder reviewers wielding bamboo poles and have then had to sit for grueling Review boards, the penalty for failing at which is death by tome-smotheration.

scarletpeaches
11-25-2011, 07:02 PM
The eBook author (to me) is someone who wishes either to get their story out there without the downfall of publishers and agent. They wish to do away with the excessive pandering of their words and just to push their story out into the world. Whether this be good, or bad, depends on what is placed into the world.I beg your pardon? Every single one of my books has been edited. Excessive pandering my arse. I invited one of my editors to tear me a new one; that's how precious I am about my words.
I see a lot of people that publish eBooks as writers who are either too pretentious of their writing to know that it sucks, or people who are taking on the strong drive to self-publish in this new format.WTF?

I've published six ebooks so far. Are you suggesting that my stories likely suck, basing your opinion purely on format?
Either way, the buisness of mass publishing (to me) is a way to proof the writing ability (in both technique and story) and to set a standard.Yes. Maybe mass publishing helps people to spell the word 'business' and cease confusing 'proof' and 'prove'.:rolleyes:
Oh no! How dare "self-proclaimed" reviewers offer opinions about the quality of books instead of leaving that to the professionals?Exactly.

I mean, amateur reviewers are known to five-star friends' books on Goodreads...hell, even their own in some cases.

Hell, I've had my books downgraded by one author in particular who did it to please another writer who doesn't like me. (Long story, but some people are too stupid to use false names and forget about the existence of screenshots, put it that way.)

firedrake
11-25-2011, 07:13 PM
This article sounds like it's written by a snob for the less-snobbish.

I see eBooks, not as the future, but as a convenience.

The eBook author (to me) is someone who wishes either to get their story out there without the downfall of publishers and agent. They wish to do away with the excessive pandering of their words and just to push their story out into the world. Whether this be good, or bad, depends on what is placed into the world.

I see a lot of people that publish eBooks as writers who are either too pretentious of their writing to know that it sucks, or people who are taking on the strong drive to self-publish in this new format. Either way, the buisness of mass publishing (to me) is a way to proof the writing ability (in both technique and story) and to set a standard.

Firstly, if you're going to insult e-book authors, at least get your English right. I believe the word you were looking for is 'precious.

Secondly, I write m/m romance and, last time I looked, there wasn't so much as a shelf devoted to that in my local book shops so, as fortune would have it, there are e-pubs out there who cannot publish enough books in my sub-genre so it made a lot of sense.

Thirdly, I don't see many agents out there looking to rep my sub-genre. I can think of one or two, and of those, I wouldn't touch one of them with a fifty foot pole.

Fourthly, and most importantly, in case you haven't been paying attention, there are a hell of a lot of writers on this board who've had their books published in an e-format. So you've insulted a whole lot of good writers with your sweeping and pretentious (the word does fit here) generalisation. One of the fundamental principles on AW is 'Respect your fellow Writer'. It might be a good idea for you to remember that.

skylark
11-25-2011, 08:29 PM
There are an awful lot of people who assume that what they do/enjoy is intrinsically better than what other people do/enjoy. I'm not sure it's snobbery, and it certainly isn't restricted to literary vs genre fiction-writing. Try any forum about parenting for evidence of that.

Ken
11-26-2011, 12:04 AM
@ SP

... my guess is that your genre attracts better writers to ebook publishers due to there being less opportunity to publish elsewhere. Standards are also higher and audiences, more demanding.

With other genres there is probably a difference in quality, as far as I've noticed at least. That difference is diminishing, but it's still there. Some ebooks really do rot and wouldn't stand a chance of making it into ordinary bookstores.

That's not to say that there aren't some swell ebooks out there in all genres. I've read some dandies.

scarletpeaches
11-26-2011, 12:06 AM
I'm getting more than a little tired of people thinking epublishing and self-publishing are the same thing.

Mr Flibble
11-26-2011, 12:14 AM
I'm getting more than a little tired of people thinking epublishing and self-publishing are the same thing.


Word.

e-pub does not always = self pub and vice versa. If you're going to trash a whole section of the industry, at least get your terminology right. Thank you


The old filtering processes where book sections and professional book critics held sway are slowly losing their power to influence Oh yes, gods forbid that a reader might weigh in with an opinion that is accessible to other readers...Obviously only properly qualified people are allowed an opinion.


Seriously. Tis a silly article.

kuwisdelu
11-26-2011, 12:25 AM
I'm getting more than a little tired of people thinking epublishing and self-publishing are the same thing.

Not only does ignore the many good and reputable e-publishing houses, but it also ignores that all of the big traditional print publishers also put out ebooks these days...

SRHowen
11-26-2011, 12:30 AM
I'm getting more than a little tired of people thinking epublishing and self-publishing are the same thing.

Yup, said the same thing.

Just freaking stop it-- e-publishing is not self pubing.

Christyp
11-26-2011, 01:42 AM
You mean I get to break out this Lolcat TWICE today?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v308/kytten/impendingdoom.jpg

I wish people would just sit down and realise it's just books. Genre isn't formulaic shit, Literary isn't irreproachable poetry. IT'S JUST BOOKS and getting butthurt or pretentious about it on either side is stupid.

And you have officially coined the phrase of the day. "Getting butthurt!"

Mr Flibble
11-26-2011, 01:57 AM
Some will always get butt hurt about it. Makes no damn sense to me, but there you are, You could maybe mollify some (most) people by mentioning that literary is just another genre. Which it is, with its own tropes and conventions etc.

Ofc the people who think literary automatically = OMG brilliance wwill be butt hurt. But if you can't accept that every genre has its stinkers....

Is there snobbery? Yes, Is it from people who you want to listen to? Possibly not. You decide.

Literary =/= better. It = literary. That's all.

LindaJeanne
11-26-2011, 03:00 AM
If you're going to criticize the abilities of large numbers of authors, please try to write clearly as you do so.


The eBook author (to me) is someone who wishes either to get their story out there without the downfall of publishers and agent.
What does this mean?


They wish to do away with the excessive pandering of their words and just to push their story out into the world. Whether this be good, or bad, depends on what is placed into the world.
What does this mean?


Genre has nothing to take for either the eBook nor the Book authors. True, most people would rather read a book defined to a genre. But there are a lot of authors that label themselves to a genre, only in the spirit of their works.
Huh?


Authors like Mievelle who stretches the ideas and thoughts with works that completely break rules and time periods.
Um, read that again. It's not a sentence.


His latest work EmbassyTown works at what I would think of as scifi and cyberpunk, but has almost no hold to the genres.
I have no idea what your point is.


I see a lot of people that publish eBooks as writers who are either too pretentious of their writing to know that it sucks, or people who are taking on the strong drive to self-publish in this new format.
First, you are ascribing identical motives to everyone who self-publishes, which is silly. There are many reasons to self publish (and many reasons not to).

Second, you make your brush even broader by including the e-book releases of commercially published authors in your harsh assessment of the self-published.

Commercially published books can be released as e-books, paper books, or both.

Self-published books can be released as e-books, paper books or both.

Conflating the two terms makes your argument incredibly confusing to me.


Either way, the buisness of mass publishing (to me) is a way to proof the writing ability (in both technique and story) and to set a standard.

Yes, good thing we have the "buisness" of "mass publishing" to "proof the writing ability" of those silly authors who are "too pretentious of their writing"! :rolleyes

Karen Junker
11-26-2011, 06:45 AM
This may be a derail, but I can understand why some people might think that epubs and self-pubs are sort of the same thing--the reason being that many of the early epubs were started by authors who published their own works (whether by their real name or by using a pen name). In fact, I think it would be helpful to me (in deciding whether or not I would like to submit my work to an epub) to know whether or not the owners are also authors with the company. Some of them are very clever at hiding their identities and some don't even bother to try.

/end derail

Libbie
11-26-2011, 06:48 AM
"Lost in the conversation of the impact of eBooks is the plight of the mainstream novelist, who writes books that fit no genre category but nevertheless represent the crown jewels of the authorial world"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-adler/the-plight-of-the-mainstr_b_1105723.html

It seems to be like the whining of steam engine builders against the encroachment of the internal combustion engine, or sanitarium owners against using new drugs to fight tuberculosis instead of fresh air and rest.

Do you still have a bug up your ass over literary fiction, Bill?

Libbie
11-26-2011, 06:50 AM
I pay no attention to the man/woman behind the curtain at the Huff...

Now, with that said, both have their places and both have produced many memorable experiences for readers. But when you compare the two, genre fiction is younger than mainstream literary fiction. It would be nice to see the two get equal footing and equal publicity.

Thank you. Especially for the first bit. Huffington Post may be popular, but it's about as representative of mainstream opinion as is Fox News. Taking anything HuffPo publishes as some kind of message from on high is ridiculous.

Libbie
11-26-2011, 07:00 AM
Just freaking stop it-- e-publishing is not self pubing.

Best typo of this thread.

Carry on.

SRHowen
11-26-2011, 07:16 AM
Best typo of this thread.

Carry on.

wasn't meant to be a typo, but looking at it pretty funny.

ChaosTitan
11-26-2011, 06:11 PM
This may be a derail, but I can understand why some people might think that epubs and self-pubs are sort of the same thing--the reason being that many of the early epubs were started by authors who published their own works (whether by their real name or by using a pen name). In fact, I think it would be helpful to me (in deciding whether or not I would like to submit my work to an epub) to know whether or not the owners are also authors with the company. Some of them are very clever at hiding their identities and some don't even bother to try.

/end derail

Whether or not the mistake is understandable, it benefits every writer to know the difference. Nothing screams amateur louder than misusing common terms.

seun
11-26-2011, 06:53 PM
The eBook author (to me) is someone who wishes either to get their story out there without the downfall of publishers and agent.
I see a lot of people that publish eBooks as writers who are either too pretentious of their writing to know that it sucks

Congratulations. You win seun's award for biggest pile of crap I've read in a while.



Just freaking stop it-- e-publishing is not self pubing.

Self pubing? :roll:

LindaJeanne
11-26-2011, 07:32 PM
self pubing.
Hey! :rulezYou can't do that in here! This is an all-ages forum! (whistles) Security!:e2fight:


:ROFL::ROFL::ROFL:

SRHowen
11-26-2011, 08:43 PM
Ok, already, got it. *headdesk* Slinks out on belly.

Toothpaste
11-26-2011, 09:31 PM
This may be a derail, but I can understand why some people might think that epubs and self-pubs are sort of the same thing--the reason being that many of the early epubs were started by authors who published their own works (whether by their real name or by using a pen name). In fact, I think it would be helpful to me (in deciding whether or not I would like to submit my work to an epub) to know whether or not the owners are also authors with the company. Some of them are very clever at hiding their identities and some don't even bother to try.

/end derail

It also doesn't help when you have the certain self publishing gurus conflating the two so they don't come across as hypocrites signing book deals with Amazon.

cwfgal
11-26-2011, 11:03 PM
And you have officially coined the phrase of the day. "Getting butthurt!"

I rather like JAR's typo: "E-publishing doe snot"

Beth

ETA: Self pubing ranks right up there, too.

mscelina
11-26-2011, 11:09 PM
This article sounds like it's written by a snob for the less-snobbish.

I see eBooks, not as the future, but as a convenience.

The eBook author (to me) is someone who wishes either to get their story out there without the downfall of publishers and agent. They wish to do away with the excessive pandering of their words and just to push their story out into the world. Whether this be good, or bad, depends on what is placed into the world.

Genre has nothing to take for either the eBook nor the Book authors. True, most people would rather read a book defined to a genre. But there are a lot of authors that label themselves to a genre, only in the spirit of their works. Authors like Mievelle who stretches the ideas and thoughts with works that completely break rules and time periods. His latest work EmbassyTown works at what I would think of as scifi and cyberpunk, but has almost no hold to the genres.

I see a lot of people that publish eBooks as writers who are either too pretentious of their writing to know that it sucks, or people who are taking on the strong drive to self-publish in this new format. Either way, the buisness of mass publishing (to me) is a way to proof the writing ability (in both technique and story) and to set a standard.

After pondering this...opinion for a few minutes I've come to the conclusion that you really don't have a clue what you're talking about. Not in the slightest.

scarletpeaches
11-27-2011, 12:18 AM
mscelina's restraint is why she publishes filth and I just write it. :D

AVS
11-27-2011, 01:23 AM
I wonder if BB's intent might have been misinterpreted slightly. Is he/she is writing almost perfectly in their second language? If not then it seems willfully aggressive.

Medievalist
11-27-2011, 01:24 AM
Pu-leeeze people. If it's not in an archaic language it's crap.




Ye knowe ek, that in forme of speche is chaunge
Withinne a thousand yere, and wordes tho
That hadden pris, now wonder nyce and straunge
Us thinketh hem, and yit they spake hem so.
óChaucer Troilus and Criseyde Book II ll. 22-25

Phaeal
11-27-2011, 05:35 PM
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:

Both self-pubing and doe snot are illegal in many states and punishable by death in certain theocracies. In combination, they have been known to cause spontaneous combustion and/or hives.

END PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

Libbie
11-27-2011, 09:08 PM
It also doesn't help when you have the certain self publishing gurus conflating the two so they don't come across as hypocrites signing book deals with Amazon.

Why does that make them come across as hypocrites? (When they sign with traditional publishers, I mean.) Did they spend a bunch of time saying they'd never ever traditionally publish? I confess I don't follow any self-publishing gurus, which might be kind of funny, considering I do have one self-published book.

Toothpaste
11-27-2011, 11:05 PM
Yes, basically. In fact one of them has a blog post entitled "Are You Dense" which is in reference to the fact that since he has proven how profitable it is to self publish why on earth would anyone choose to go with a traditional publisher anymore.

I have absolutely no qualms with people self publishing some work, publishing others with houses etc and anything you can do in between. In fact in my ideal world, the author gets to choose from all of these options as they suit the individual works. It's when the person in question speaks his self publishing views as dogma, insults everyone else who might publish traditionally as well as that industry itself, and then when he finally does make a deal with a publisher, sort of tried to sweep it under the rug that he is being paid an advance by a royalty paying publisher by pointing to all the unique qualities of Amazon.

It's one thing to say that Amazon's new publishing division is revolutionising publishing. But to not actually ever confess that "Uh, okay, so when I said I would never publish with a house again, and you shouldn't either, what I meant was until the publishing model was fixed", but rather to sort of skirt around the issue quickly and place the lion's share of your focus on how awesome ebooks are as if somehow you are still talking about self publishing when you aren't? Yeah, that's manipulative and hypocritical.

Amadan
11-28-2011, 01:31 AM
There's also a certain author who compares print-published authors with "house slaves" and accuses anyone sticking with traditional publishing houses of having "Stockholm Syndrome," and yet carves out little exceptions for himself: "Unless it makes financial sense for me." Oh, well, okay then. But obviously no one else can make a rational financial decision for themselves and conclude that print publishing is still the best option.

SRHowen
11-28-2011, 02:32 AM
The problem is the idea that somehow e-books are sub par, that they circumvent the process of submissions and editing, of agents.

Again e-books and self publication are not the same thing.

My question to anyone making that assumption, or pushing that as fact, have you ever heard of an e-reader? Kindle, Nook, what have you?

So by that thought process and belief then if i buy the latest King for my Kindle he then self published that book because it is an e-book? Is the e-book then sub par compared to the print edition simply because of the form it comes in? The Dome doesn't fit in my laptop case, but my e-reader does, so then to me the e-book is better simply due to its size.

The entire literary vs genre drives me bonkers. The only thing that sends me around the bend even further is the e-book = bad book = self published book.

Some definitions,

Literary fiction =Work of great sensibility and refinement, where it can take up to 500 pages for nothing to happen. From Frank Baron . com

Literary Fiction is considered to have ‘literary merit’ as opposed to wide commercial appeal. Generally focused more on the writing style or ideology than the content. Often the prose is admired for its lyrical quality. This from a romance publisher

Genre fiction = Genre fiction, also known as popular fiction, is a term for fictional works (novels, short stories) written with the intent of fitting into a specific literary genre in order to appeal to readers and fans already familiar with that genre.

hmmmm . . . . .

artemis31386
11-28-2011, 02:49 AM
These constant discussions about literary v. genre fiction are like beating a dead horse. They both have their place, fans, detractors, etc. There are snobs on both sides of the fence.

joeyc
11-28-2011, 03:09 AM
I don't even understand the argument, because "literary fiction" is just another genre anyway.

A point I got in trouble for bringing up in one of my writing classes.

The Lonely One
11-28-2011, 09:18 AM
I don't even know what to say. First you title the post in a way that has me rolling my eyes into the back of my head, ready to tell everyone on both sides of the lit v. genre debate that they're absolutely full of shit and no one cares about their silly little war. That they should blow each other off the face of the planet so the rest of us writers who don't have time to worry about such idiotic nonsense have room to set up our desks in the craters and get to our work in silence.

But this article, after all, seems to have nothing to do with said debate. Which is a relief because for the love of Allah I'm sick of this getting drummed up more than the appropriate use of adverbs and adjectives, or a nice little chat on headhopping. No one cares, for those of you wanting to have those debates. There's a search function in the forum.

Sorry I had to rant a little bit, you had me ready for action and then dropped the thread out from under me ;)

As per the article, I get that non-genrized stories are difficult to bring into the lime light (NOT literary, necessarily, which if I am correct focuses more on internalized character and experimentation of language, and has its own niche, with a looser idea of plot, in general, whereas "mainstream" fiction is still as plot heavy as genre, but without a very specific niche). <---Please correct me if my view is wrong or an exaggeration.

But I don't care. I think mainstream publishers need to learn how to better market their books in the emerging e-book world. Writers only have one job they have to do well and that's tell a damn good story.


I don't even understand the argument, because "literary fiction" is just another genre anyway.

A point I got in trouble for bringing up in one of my writing classes.

While your teacher is subbing for the Oracle of Delphi, the rest of us are writing. You should tell him/her "It doesn't matter."

RE:e-books--I have bought several e-books by well-sold and respected mainstream authors, have downloaded a ton that have fallen into the public domain, and I find the "paper is more legitimate" view quite troubling.


Pu-leeeze people. If it's not in an archaic language it's crap.




Ye knowe ek, that in forme of speche is chaunge
Withinne a thousand yere, and wordes tho
That hadden pris, now wonder nyce and straunge
Us thinketh hem, and yit they spake hem so.
—Chaucer Troilus and Criseyde Book II ll. 22-25

I believe this is tongue-in-cheek but the funny thing is I don't know anyone in real life who has the time to be a working writer and at the same time believe crap like "certain genres are bad! screw those authors!"