Unaccountable's reply to my last post is pessimistic even for Unaccountable.
A couple of things (I'm due for bed). Does the publisher's promotional money make much difference? Last I hard, a huge percentage (like 75%) of Americans never even go in a bookstore for themselves. Alarming numbers haven't read a book since high school. So is Dan Brown the product of a marketing campaign? Or is it, as I suspect, 'DaVinci Code' has a strong enough first-hundred-pages to get word of mouth going even from people who don't end up being satisfied?
Because a LOT of people have ranted about that book to me when they started it, who cooled on it when they finished. And I can count on two fingers the number of people who have finished it and still recommend it, and (not naming names), neither are big readers, so maybe they don't have a lot to compare it to...
And what is Word of Mouth, that marketing term 'sneezer,' etc.? Isn't the NYT best-seller list a sort of word of mouth? It's like the McDonald's sign that announces, basically, that billions of people have been rooked into parting with hard-earned money for food that isn't fit for the penitentiary cafeteria. So why shouldn't you?
I really believe 'Haunted' will be a negative for Chuck Palahniuk's career no matter how hard Doubleday whores it. It's not, overall, a good book. What got him to the aforementioned list was books like 'Survivor' and 'Choke' that built audience. More and more people who couldn't wait for his next book. So much so that they (I did this) pre-ordered 'Haunted' as soon as Amazon let them.
The next book? I'm a fan of Chucks, he's even gotten what is probalby the only fan-letter I ever wrote (and he responded in spades). But I won't be pre-ordering his next book, I'll be waiting for it to come to the library. I'll check it out, and if it's worthwhile, I'll buy it.
I think Donald Maas nailed it when he said that people could almost supernaturally tell when the fourth book of a series just sucked. If Sue Grafton gets to 'X is for Xandthoudakis,' and Xandthoudakis turns out to be a bore, good luck with Y and Z. Some fans will buy no matter what, but it'll drop off.
But as far as Dan Brown being a marketing phenomenon, I'm not buying it: his publisher is promoting it because it sold well. If it hadn't, they'd fill the windows of Borders with someone else's book. Ditto for the Harry Potter books. Whatever itch they scratch, so far they seem to be doing the job. Power to them, but sell short on Sony stock if people quit watching as much TV as they used to because they can't quit reading these books. Because some of these super-hits are the only books in a lot of those houses.
Am I wrong? McDonalds is able to sell food unfit for animals though the force of advertising, but I don't see ads for books. I'm a bookish guy, so where are these ads that I'm missing?
The Big Six would love it, LOVE IT, if they could force feed Americans crappy books. They could eventually get rid of writers altogether, hiring Bob Newhart's infinite number of monkeys and the 'Got Milk?' people. But I think people buy shit books for the same reason they go see shit movies.
Remember 'The Gods Must Be Crazy?' It wasn't the gods that were crazy when I was 15, it was the stupid, faux-artsy motherfuckers who kept the local art theater sold out night after night to see a black guy click to subtitles and throw a Coke bottle off a cliff. It was a cute movie, but it didn't deserve fourteen months of run.
I wasn't complaining at the time: bored girls my age were easier to feel up when they were equally bored with seeing the movie 'again.' But there was a tautology to the movie's success. It was a cult favorite because it was a cult favorite. And the older fans were smuggling booze in, I saw this more than once, guilty pints and distinctive Michelob bottles coming out of purses. Just like 'Koyaanisqatsi' is less interesting than your neighbor's vacation slides unless you get ripped on acid first.
So I'll say it the only thing out of balance in 'Koyaanisqatsi' is ticket sales versus artistic merit. I haven't read Dan Brown's phenomenon yet, but I'll bet it's not as dumb as Copolla's slide-show and Phillip Glass's insipid soundtrack...
So does it keep getting worse? Is every day better than the next? I reject that claim, as tempting as it might be. Like Xtians who say they believe because the alternative is too horrible, I refuse to believe that Dan Brown, J.K. Rowlings or Sue Grafton mean the end of literature and literacy. If I'm wrong, I really might as well turn on a 'reality' TV show and drink some Jonestown Kool-Aid.
1 comment:
Does the publisher's promotional money make much difference?
While I would shy away from saying “all the difference in the world” I will not side-step amending it to “all the difference in the major countries”.
Last I hard, a huge percentage (like 75%) of Americans never even go in a bookstore for themselves.
This is because they can now buy their ‘if you don’t read this you’re an outcast from society’ books at Walgreen’s, Toys R Us, supermarkets and probably even gas stations.
So not only if literacy going Dodo, so are books stores.
(the former may be a theory, the later is a fact)
So is Dan Brown the product of a marketing campaign?
How many other books do you see getting ink on CNN and getting cover-spots on such beloved, er, um, “news” periodicals as Time?
Window space and “endcap” positioning in bookstores are PAID for. “Barnes and Noble Recommends” is PAID for.
Very rarely is a book, Potter bullshit aside, a rapid suck-sess right out of the gate. Sure, Brown’s been around for a bit and he has his fan base, but –and I don’t honestly know how I found out about this, somewhere on the internet- when ‘The Code’ first came out, as I have a da Vinci fetish, I ordered a 1st edition hardcover, signed, for like $20. I’m not sure what they are selling for now, but I’m hoping for early retirement AND a contribution to the Lobster Children Seeking “Higher Education” Foundation.
Potter is a fluke. I’m sincerely doubting 95% of Dan Brown of S. King fans know the release date for the next volumes of shite that will come forth.
And while it _should_ be cool kids are excited about a book, children’s book sale have shown NO increase (sans Potter), so the ‘gateway to reading’ theory is pure bullshit, and it’s all the more telling that an “adult” audience is enjoying this.
I really believe 'Haunted' will be a negative for Chuck Palahniuk's career no matter how hard Doubleday whores it. It's not, overall, a good book.
Since people don’t know what the hell “good” is, I can’t see this as being a factor at all. The book was really, really bad. But it *totally* is aimed for a Palahniuk audience, so I see it just being a further stepping stone to a career of juvenile fiction. (lest us not forget his next book is car-themed cuz ‘there hasn’t been a good car book since King’s _Christine_...)
but I don't see ads for books. I'm a bookish guy, so where are these ads that I'm missing?
I’m way out of the loop on most US periodicals but New Yorker, Harper’s, Atlantic all DO run ads, but I can’t be certain they pimped ‘Da Code’. I _do_ have a feeling that Doubleday did newspapers ads. I recall seeing some astronomical figure for advertising.
When CNN and Time are doing the pushing, that’s a different kind of drug.
(As for McDonalds, that’s just because people are fucking lazy.)
So back to your original computer-generated, on-demand theme: Marvel Comics tried it with comic books and it panned big-time. Granted much of comics is aimed at a teen’ish audience, but that’s probably a good (if not great) percentage of internet users.
Online “newspapers” haven’t, nor will not, stop the actual presses.
I just don’t see it happening anytime soon.
The Big Six would love it, LOVE IT, if they could force feed Americans crappy books.
LIFEGUARD, by James Patterson and Andrew Gross. (Little, Brown)
THE HISTORIAN, by Elizabeth Kostova. (Little, Brown) was 3 now 2
THE DA VINCI CODE, by Dan Brown. (Doubleday)
THE INTERRUPTION OF EVERYTHING, by Terry McMillan. (Viking)
UNTIL I FIND YOU, by John Irving. (Random House)
DOUBLE TAP, by Steve Martini. (Putnam)
THE UNDOMESTIC GODDESS, by Sophie Kinsella. (Dial)
THE MERMAID CHAIR, by Sue Monk Kidd. (Viking)
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, by Cormac McCarthy. (Knopf)
LONG TIME GONE, by J. A. Jance. (Morrow)
[NYTimes 14 August]
Wha-la! Here is your picture of the Big Six wriggling with sticky pleasure.
I see _The Historian_ is now moving up; 7 weeks on the list and it’s climbing: thank you paid-for advertising!
While I’m not familiar with Dial, these are all the Big Guns in publishing. If not for the Cormac McCarthy listing (which will get bumped next week as its only previous entry was 8th) I’d say this, if printed on fairly soft paper, would make a lovely toilet paper.
But I think people buy shit books for the same reason they go see shit movies.
And it’s no surprise that the “quality” of movies is just…there isn’t a word for it.
So does it keep getting worse? Is every day better than the next?
I can’t think of anything, on the big scale, that doesn’t get worse day to day.
Literacy will certainly fall to the wayside. If it aint already there.
I refuse to believe that Dan Brown, J.K. Rowlings or Sue Grafton mean the end of literature and literacy.
Well, some have to “keep hope alive”…
Anyway, this is an area where I wouldn’t at all mind being proved wrong. But, methinks, it’s farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr too late.
Post a Comment