However, I’ve realized that not everyone is happy with the event. Those against it believe that giving away free books devalues them and erodes the already troubled publishing industry. Some have even compared it to mass piracy.
 |
| (And every reason is "Because it's free?") |
The latter perspective surprised me. As a librarian I am very aware of the potential benefits of getting to read a book for free. It does inspire people to read more, to get enthusiastic about an author and maybe buy all their books, then move on to similar authors, and so forth. But then I came across this comment on a blog on the subject:
“Speaking as a reader not a writer, not everyone can afford to buy books because not everyone has a job. Yet it is not fair to say that those people shouldn't have access to a good book or a book that is reasonably new.”
Fair? Hmm. The assumption that the publishing industry should be based on “fair” is... odd.
Whereas the publishing industry might seem like a corporation sometimes, a faceless machine, be assured that the writers are not. Not a corporation, not faceless, and definitely not machines. So writers’ work is being given away for free, and all these negotiations about the agency versus traditional model of pricing books never mention the writer’s cut, and Amazon reported a “disappointing” 200 million dollar income last quarter while it seems necessary for midlist writers to have both a second job and a well employed spouse—Well, none of that is exactly fair, is it?
To clarify: I believe it is absolutely essential to have services available for every person to access books and information. They’re usually called public libraries, and it boggles my mind that they’re also in trouble, but there you go.
But to suggest that books need to be given away for free, because otherwise it isn’t fair for people who can’t afford to support the industry? I don't buy it. It is an industry, after all, not a public service like libraries. It goes reader, layer, layer, layer, layer**, writer, and all those layers want cash or they'll quit or starve. Where do you suppose it’s going to come from in the "fair" model?
** Unless you’re talking about self-publishing, which Margaret Atwood recently stated is “delusional.” A debate for another day.
I am all for public libraries and it makes me want to weep (or worse, start a rebellion!) that they are having funding cut and struggling to make it.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how I feel about offering books for free at book fairs . . . At first I would've said that I agree it can help authors by getting them exposure (hopefully garnering them fans that will then buy books), but I see the side that says it actually does the opposite and devalues both books and authors . . . I've long been sceptical of book giveaways on blogs . . . (which doesn't mean I won't necessarily do it . . . just that I don't know if it really is a practical boon to writers).
I wished Margaret Atwood had elaborated on her comment about self-publishing . . . I tend to agree with her, because I think it's soooo incredibly difficult for writers not to self-publish into obscurity--but then, perhaps, it's a failing to market rather self-publishing that's really to be avoided.
Lots to think about, maybe even feel a bit discouraged by . . . Thank heavens writing is wonderful and there will always be (I believe) people who love to read! It means there's always hope for the publishing industry.
I understand completely Ev, but don't feel discouraged! The fact that there are people waking up to the value of books is a great thing, too. Maybe it'll catch on.
ReplyDeleteI'm still not sure how I feel about the free books, either. There's some suggestion that some of the authors involved in this promotion felt pressured, but of course no first hand account of that, so impossible to say. If so, it's awful. If not, well, everyone can promote in their own way I suppose.
I know I have a vested interest, but honestly I just wish authors were brought up more when these discussions happen. Particularly during the agency/traditional debate.