My argument isn't that weak. I included authors like Clark Ashton Smith and Dunsany. They're not literary fiction as that term is known today. I used them as examples of pure prose quality. I specifically included those two, and other fantasy authors, because I knew I'd fall into a trap if I only put in a bunch of literary types. I also agree that "literary fiction" can be pretentious waffle.
you probably could have made about 1500 searches on google for high quality self-published fiction in the time you've spent posting in this thread recently, which is particularly ironic since your time is clearly far too valuable to watch trash like Marvel films. Why else does anyone watch films than primarily to be entertained? I'm legitimately curious.
@Teladan all these Artstation success stories are doing art for the entertainment industry, and it's definitely the equivalent of McDonald's. They sure ain't doing anything that compares to Michelangelo or Rembrandt. In fact the kind of work they do requires whoring yourself out bowing to market pressures.
People should be chomping at the bit to prove me wrong. So far I've only got Vandermeer as one good and serious example of a self-published author. As for the entertainment thing? Well, that's an alien mindset if I've ever encountered one, I'm afraid. Have you never in your life watched a sad or serious film that has something to say? Genuinely curious.
The basic problem here is that because you're not a self published writer you're just repeating second hand information from the net of which you have no experience... and that's pretty tedious for those of us who know first hand how wrong it is.
Of course. But things are getting muddled. These are two different subjects. Any reference to Artsation and platforms came about from my original "rate of consumption" and "writing being the r strategist" discussion. The conversation, as I see it, has diverged to different types of media and what we view to be worthwhile art.
I don't think he did. I had just got done saying that authors at that level have no trouble getting traditionally published, so they don't need to self-publish. this place needs a 'banging my head on a brick wall' smiley.
So you don't think Koska's Bande Francais qualifies despite being nominated for the Prix Renaudot ? Also your definition of a good and serious self published author is not the same as mine... personally someone who's made themselves a multimillionaire looks pretty good and serious regardless of whether you (or anyone) likes their writing or not I mean seriously Hugh Howie made mid six figures with wool and got a film deal with 20th Century Fox which is being produced by Ridley Scott ... but we're not supposed to consider him a success because in your opinion hes not comparable to some authors you like better ?
Okay. Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps in the first five minutes the work receives hundreds of views, even with a new writer who has never self-published anything before. I don't know how this can actually be proved. But now I want to ask, what is that book and what is its quality? That's almost more important now.
I agree about the brick wall sentiment because what you're talking about is not even what I'm arguing about... I'm not talking about pre-established authors. When have I been talking about pre-established authors!? This whole thing concerns new writers. Tabula rasa. The different exposure rates and whatnot for different platforms, yadayda.
Do you mean entertainment in the broader senses of catharsis, involvement, deep appreciation, etc? That's fair enough. It's just that most people I've had this conversation with usually mean fun, light-hearted and easy to watch when they talk about "entertainment."
I dare you to find these authors in most high street book shops. If you do find them, look at the customers walking past to check out practically every other section. About the same number will pick up those titles as will look for them on the internet. That doesn't diminish their qualities. Trash and entertainment books are easier to find in prominent positions because any shop that relies on sales of those literary titles will soon re-open as something other than a book shop. This is one of those rare occasions when the internet resembles the real world. The same five people who pick up your book in the shop will probably find you on Amazon. I think your frustration is with the reading habits of fellow humans and not really the means by which they acquire the material. There's only one portion of that you can control.
I missed the Koska one. Admittedly I can't find much about the author, but that looks more like what I wanted to see, if that's self-published. And yes, I think we have very different definitions of what good and serious is. You seem to measure by wealth and popularity.
I can't help feeling there's an irony in how much of this precious time you've just spent arguing about self publishing
I measure success by whether its successful - I don't believe that my personal opinion on its quality is necessarily more or less valid than any one elses... For example my personal opinion of 50 shades was that it was utter trash - but only a fool would argue that Erika Leonard didn't achieve commercial success that most of us can only dream about
Giving me openings like this outside the debate room isn't fair. You've said repeatedly that trad pub is the only platform in writing that matters. How do you think that sounds? Anyhow, it's gone 1AM and as much fun as I'm having with people being wrong on the Internet, I'm done. 'Night all.
(1) The question is irrelevant. "Good for them" (I can only assume) is a question about nutritional benefit, which is only one reason why we consume food and beverages. Wedding cakes aren't generally considered nutritious, yet many folks (me included) don't consider that a strike against them whatsoever. And if you would, so what? It doesn't make whatever point you hope it makes. (2) The comparison between food and fiction is a poor one because it doesn't account for things like price, which by and large doesn't affect fiction consumption, but greatly affects food consumption. The same is true for time (prep time, cook time, cleanup time).
I also measure success by whether it's succsessful... But we're talking about quality now. Seriously, in my view if something is ultra popular but rubbish in terms of quality, it might as well not exist. Call it idealistic or whatever, but that's how I've viewed this topic throughout my entire life. No one drilled it into me. That's just how I feel. I couldn't care less that Fifty Shades of Grey is extremely popular and I don't think its popularity makes it good. I hold the same opinion for Justin Beiber and superhero films.
This looks like it should be it's own topic in it's own thread, but to be honest I'm not sure where the best fit is for this kind of debate...
It would seem that most people here subscribe to the idea that popularity = intrinsically good and that relativism is the be all and end all, i.e. "that person likes this thing so it must be good." Meth addicts like meth. Edit: I see what the problem is. You don't view certain forms of media as being significant to the person once consumed. If you did, then you would have a problem with people reading 50 Shades of Grey. In my mind, in my worldview, reading that book is an active negative influence on a person. Not only is it trash writing, it's just not enriching in any way that is worthwhile. That's the best way I can describe this.
I don't want to personalise this debate but can't you see how both judgemental that is ... Its just your opinion... a great number of people enjoyed reading it, and unlike taking crystal meth it didn't do either them or anyone else any harm... This comes down to a fundamental difference in opinion of what writing/reading is 'for'... i'll give you that if you want to stretch your mental capacity and engage in intellectual debate tolstoy or goethe or dickens or whatever is far more useful than Jack Reacher or 50 shades, or other such... but not everyone who reads wants that... personally after a hard day of dealing with unfiltered humanity what i'm looking for is light escapism. I'd also note that if this judgement on 50 shades is due to its adult content... maybe go read some James Joyce... Erika Leonard had nothing on him when it comes to pure filth
