What about the version of the movie where the smoking bowling ball is actually the pod of some benevolent species that’s come to show us a better way?
Writers, editors, publishers, etc., seem collectively paranoid that the eBook represents the first horseman of the apocalypse. Why? The very opposite may prove true. Imagine a person browsing the Web at work, coming across a blurb about some new book, and impulsively downloading said eBook for $9.99. Now, take away that option. The same reader instead plans to make a lunchtime trip to B&N...but winds up dropping his plan to order Chinese with his cubicle neighbor. Sale lost.
eBooks are a trickle right now. But if marketed and distributed properly, they could end up opening a huge new revenue stream. That’s a good thing...as long as we don’t assume that eBooks will end up REPLACE physical ones. And why should we? Have MP3s replaced CDs? No. Most of us own both. Not to mention: 1) how many iTunes songs do you own that you never, EVER would’ve gone to the store to buy? and 2) you can access that technology with a $50 iShuffle; a Kindle costs waaay more — what, $300? — which is going to box out a lot of potential users.
Plus, let’s not forget the most important thing: PEOPLE LOVE BOOKS. They love the feel of them, the look of them, the smell of them. They’re always going to want them. The Kindle is a great toy, but chances are, even the hardcore Kindle user has a bookshelf or two in his house, too.
The eBook is just another product.
-G
P.S. Then again, all of the above could be totally wrong.
jonathan evison
· 2 months ago
. . .great post, greg . . . i think some folks are scared that the ebook will do to publishing what the mp3 has done to the music industry . . . i'm not one of them . . . i feel like there is a sector of the market who are eventually going to buy strictly e-books, or no books at all . . . it would be foolish not to embrace these people . . .
DH
· 2 months ago
A sector of the market that will only buy ebooks? Wow. I wonder who these "pod people" will be? Will they be readers who are giving up the printed book for etexts or will they be new readers? I'd be fascinated if ebooks brought to reading people who didn't read before. Then my pie-in-the-sky hope that ebooks might actually be good for print books (by increasing interest in books overall) might actually turn out to be true. If that happens I may have to give up realism.:)
jonathan evison
· 2 months ago
. . . i think there will be a little of both, DH . . . consider the techno-kids born yesterday, more likely to develop a reading habit with an e-reading device, kids that may not ever be serious readers, otherwise . . . what makes me cringe are "enhanced" e-books which threaten to steal from the power of the written word by adding too many bells and whistles . . .
Jason Rice
· 2 months ago
Greg don't confuse ebooks and CD's, they are different medium's and way different levels of entertainment. People don't read. It's a fact. If someday you told a bunch of fifth graders that they had to read from a computer screen instead of a book, they would, and not blink an eye. If big time publishing doesn't wake up and publish leaner, cheaper and effective titles, they will sink to the bottom. CD's are a dead format. It's because music isn't a tangible object. It's like electricity...you don't see it, you hear it and feel it. Close your eyes and you're transported. Books on the other hand are real and need to be touched and looked at. Which is why the physical book will always be here. But the electronic book, shit yeah, publish all the nonsense that gets published every year as ebooks and save the good books for the shelves. It would expand space, and give priority to titles that have been pushed aside by the Tracey Morgans tell alls of the world. The flip side? You shorten the life span of a hardcover, go into trade after six months. Increase efficiency and thus get in touch with the masses who are distracted by tons of things, but who know the difference between a gallon of gas, the price of a book, and the price of a download.
Patrick T. Kilgallon
· 2 months ago
I disagree with J.E. when he talked about enchanced e-books. They can be used as a medium the way the theater or for those who are artistic, 'cinema' to tell a story. In fact, maybe we might return to oral traditions of narrating a story before books were invented because the oral traditions are more interactive than books. Websites could be the same way, changing the story or adjusting the scenery based on the reader's opinion or suggestion.
Jason Chambers
· 2 months ago
JR's right that books are not music, and that the physical book isn't going to disappear completely, but they aren't that far apart. Is the book the cloth bound binding and 300 sheets of paper? Of course not. It's the words and the meaning they impart, which can be done on numerous media.
I also wonder if we're all going to be very disappointed with the books that make it to the shelf rather than the ebook. What I mean is this: Why wouldn't a publisher, if they were only putting a portion of the catalog in print, print those that are the biggest sellers? I fear a bookstore that takes all the risky, low print run stuff out and leaves us with Mary Higgins Clark and James Patterson. Ideally, all the popcorn, throwaway, 10-minute, TMZ books would make the transition to digital where they would be a delete button away from oblivion, but I'm not convinced that is what will happen. Isn't it more likely that the books publishers see as risks will be the one's relegated to ebook status?
I also like what Patrick has to say about enhanced ebooks, but I can also see them as really ugly vehicles for product placement, which I really rather not be witness to.
jonathan evison
· 2 months ago
. . . screw enhanced e-books-- that's just plain apologetic! what, the words aren't enough? there's enough bad writing as it is, why give it the benefit of visual enhancements and distractions . . . i can see how it would make for a cool medium, but i'd much rather let the words stand on their own . . . and yes, JC, i can almost guarantee that these enhancements would be exploited for product placements--eck!
Anonymous
· 2 months ago
Great post.... I have hardback books in my library, ten or more years old, the price below $10. It's hard to think that the average reader will pony up $20+ dollars on most new books, from new writers. Why not the possibility that an ebook will expand the buying public, at least by a double? Instead of cutting up the pie, won't the pie potentially get bigger?
Greg Ippolito
· 2 months ago
"CD's are a dead format. It's because music isn't a tangible object...you don't see it, you hear it and feel it. Close your eyes and you're transported. Books on the other hand are real and need to be touched and looked at. Which is why the physical book will always be here."
Jason, I disagree that CDs are a dead format. A story is just as intangible as an album; it's experienced in your head. But yes, a lot of us love to hold the book in our hand and flip the pages. Just like a lot of us like to look at the album art and read through the liner notes (stuff you don't get with MP3s).
These are merely physical extensions of the thing itself, which is, as you said, intangible. But we kind of NEED that, I think. We need that physical manifestation of the thing that's so important to us. How many times have I tried a new author with a library borrow, and then, having loved it, later purchased the same book at a bookstore -- a book that goes on my bookshelf unopened. Why would I do this? I may tell myself that, hey, years from now I may think about this book and, lucky me, it'll be waiting for me on my shelf. But that's not the real reason; that "reason" doesn't make any sense. The real reason is simply this: When you fall in love with an intangible -- a song, a story, whatever -- you want to give it life.
In last week's MAD MEN, Don Draper claimed that the benefit of the telegram is, "You can't frame a phone call." And look how well that worked out for Western Union.
(Wait, huh?)
-G
Greg Ippolito
· 2 months ago
I should've read JC's post before posting mine. We seem to be on the same (a-hem) page.
Now, as to this:
"Why wouldn't a publisher, if they were only putting a portion of the catalog in print, print those that are the biggest sellers? I fear a bookstore that takes all the risky, low print run stuff out and leaves us with Mary Higgins Clark and James Patterson."
This is the bookstore's problem, no? If B&N can sell nothing but Clark and Patterson and Rachel Ray and make a good profit -- which they probably can -- then it has accomplished its goal. More discerning readers will have to go elsewhere. Luckily, the Internet provides a wealth of direction and opportunity in this regard.
My debut novel will come out next year, and be available for purchase only as an eBook or POD paperback. I'm being lauched by an indie publisher who can't afford much else. And to be fair, why should he risk it? Why should he invest in a print run, warehousing, all that, for an unknown writer who may not sell dick?
The truth is: the onus is on me. In the modern context, new writers, sales-challenged writers, etc., MUST learn how to market. I know, I know -- most writers don't want any part of that shit. Too bad. If you want to play baseball put don't like being in the field, you have two choices: learn to be an effective fielder, or play a different game. That's it. It is what it is; deal with it and win, or bitch and complain and lose.
-G
James P. Othmer
· 2 months ago
Great discussion. The NY Times today mentions a study that says people who own Kindles are now reading considerably more books. So not necessarily new readers, but more voracious? Wonder if it's a short-term spike fueled by new product techie love, or a genuine glimpse of something that doesn't depress me.
Also, JE, on a semi-related note, I'd love to hear what our pal Dan thinks about what all of this portends for the future of the library. Special guest post from the stacks of the future?
DH
· 2 months ago
Along with what Greg has said (and I'm curious to see his book)and despite the fear of pissing off Jonathan, I think, along with Patrick, that enhanced ebooks may have significant future.
It's along the lines of what I said in the post about the writer being the enterprise and not the book.
So a reader might purchase the "Jonathan Evison Experience". Read West of Here, have an attached video interview and a tour of the NW terrain of the book narrated by JE. Maps and historical documents for further reading as back up...maybe even short video clips based on the book.
As for the "pure reading" that JE espouses. Hey, I love string quartets which is as pure as music performance gets but I recognize that most people would consider that a dull musical form. Maybe we are heading into different forms of mass market.
As for what Anonymous said about ten dollar books. That book that I mentioned in the post: The Odyssey A Modern Sequel. At 700 plus pages in cloth and with a gold embossed paper cover, it still retailed for 10 dollars, new.
Maybe we are moving ahead into an era of cheap, easily accessible texts. That's got to be good for reading, yes? Or do you only appreciate something if its expensive?
jonathan evison
· 2 months ago
DH, when i say enhancements, i'm not referring to "extras"--inteviews, etc . . . that stuff is great . . . i'm talking about video images, product placements and the like running concurrent with the text in an effort to "pump it up" . . . JP, as for libraries, i'll see if i can't get a few librarian friends to sound in . . .
Patrick T. Kilgallon
· 2 months ago
E-books probably shouldn't be dismissed so easily. There is a lot of interesting ways to play with that medium, based only on the text alone. Unlike a book which is static, the e-book or a website novel can be changed and be adjusted to the writer's whim or purpose. Like for example if a person was writing a Kakfaque story about a paranoid man who thinks the government is conspiring to invade his mind, the writer can go back and change the beginning of the book to concide with the paranoia of the character which would add a huge degree of subtly to the act of writing a novel, not to mention the reader's own paranoia.
If the writer uses product placements or sells out, then the reader has the option of spurning his work or criticizing him or her for it. Or simply give the writer crap about it on various group internets.
All Comments
Writers, editors, publishers, etc., seem collectively paranoid that the eBook represents the first horseman of the apocalypse. Why? The very opposite may prove true. Imagine a person browsing the Web at work, coming across a blurb about some new book, and impulsively downloading said eBook for $9.99. Now, take away that option. The same reader instead plans to make a lunchtime trip to B&N...but winds up dropping his plan to order Chinese with his cubicle neighbor. Sale lost.
eBooks are a trickle right now. But if marketed and distributed properly, they could end up opening a huge new revenue stream. That’s a good thing...as long as we don’t assume that eBooks will end up REPLACE physical ones. And why should we? Have MP3s replaced CDs? No. Most of us own both. Not to mention: 1) how many iTunes songs do you own that you never, EVER would’ve gone to the store to buy? and 2) you can access that technology with a $50 iShuffle; a Kindle costs waaay more — what, $300? — which is going to box out a lot of potential users.
Plus, let’s not forget the most important thing: PEOPLE LOVE BOOKS. They love the feel of them, the look of them, the smell of them. They’re always going to want them. The Kindle is a great toy, but chances are, even the hardcore Kindle user has a bookshelf or two in his house, too.
The eBook is just another product.
-G
P.S. Then again, all of the above could be totally wrong.
I also wonder if we're all going to be very disappointed with the books that make it to the shelf rather than the ebook. What I mean is this: Why wouldn't a publisher, if they were only putting a portion of the catalog in print, print those that are the biggest sellers? I fear a bookstore that takes all the risky, low print run stuff out and leaves us with Mary Higgins Clark and James Patterson. Ideally, all the popcorn, throwaway, 10-minute, TMZ books would make the transition to digital where they would be a delete button away from oblivion, but I'm not convinced that is what will happen. Isn't it more likely that the books publishers see as risks will be the one's relegated to ebook status?
I also like what Patrick has to say about enhanced ebooks, but I can also see them as really ugly vehicles for product placement, which I really rather not be witness to.
Jason, I disagree that CDs are a dead format. A story is just as intangible as an album; it's experienced in your head. But yes, a lot of us love to hold the book in our hand and flip the pages. Just like a lot of us like to look at the album art and read through the liner notes (stuff you don't get with MP3s).
These are merely physical extensions of the thing itself, which is, as you said, intangible. But we kind of NEED that, I think. We need that physical manifestation of the thing that's so important to us. How many times have I tried a new author with a library borrow, and then, having loved it, later purchased the same book at a bookstore -- a book that goes on my bookshelf unopened. Why would I do this? I may tell myself that, hey, years from now I may think about this book and, lucky me, it'll be waiting for me on my shelf. But that's not the real reason; that "reason" doesn't make any sense. The real reason is simply this: When you fall in love with an intangible -- a song, a story, whatever -- you want to give it life.
In last week's MAD MEN, Don Draper claimed that the benefit of the telegram is, "You can't frame a phone call." And look how well that worked out for Western Union.
(Wait, huh?)
-G
Now, as to this:
"Why wouldn't a publisher, if they were only putting a portion of the catalog in print, print those that are the biggest sellers? I fear a bookstore that takes all the risky, low print run stuff out and leaves us with Mary Higgins Clark and James Patterson."
This is the bookstore's problem, no? If B&N can sell nothing but Clark and Patterson and Rachel Ray and make a good profit -- which they probably can -- then it has accomplished its goal. More discerning readers will have to go elsewhere. Luckily, the Internet provides a wealth of direction and opportunity in this regard.
My debut novel will come out next year, and be available for purchase only as an eBook or POD paperback. I'm being lauched by an indie publisher who can't afford much else. And to be fair, why should he risk it? Why should he invest in a print run, warehousing, all that, for an unknown writer who may not sell dick?
The truth is: the onus is on me. In the modern context, new writers, sales-challenged writers, etc., MUST learn how to market. I know, I know -- most writers don't want any part of that shit. Too bad. If you want to play baseball put don't like being in the field, you have two choices: learn to be an effective fielder, or play a different game. That's it. It is what it is; deal with it and win, or bitch and complain and lose.
-G
Also, JE, on a semi-related note, I'd love to hear what our pal Dan thinks about what all of this portends for the future of the library. Special guest post from the stacks of the future?
It's along the lines of what I said in the post about the writer being the enterprise and not the book.
So a reader might purchase the "Jonathan Evison Experience". Read West of Here, have an attached video interview and a tour of the NW terrain of the book narrated by JE. Maps and historical documents for further reading as back up...maybe even short video clips based on the book.
As for the "pure reading" that JE espouses. Hey, I love string quartets which is as pure as music performance gets but I recognize that most people would consider that a dull musical form. Maybe we are heading into different forms of mass market.
As for what Anonymous said about ten dollar books. That book that I mentioned in the post: The Odyssey A Modern Sequel. At 700 plus pages in cloth and with a gold embossed paper cover, it still retailed for 10 dollars, new.
Maybe we are moving ahead into an era of cheap, easily accessible texts. That's got to be good for reading, yes? Or do you only appreciate something if its expensive?
If the writer uses product placements or sells out, then the reader has the option of spurning his work or criticizing him or her for it. Or simply give the writer crap about it on various group internets.