Short measure in books

I don't believe that James Patterson has anything to do with writing the books that appear under his name.

They're always 'co-authored': that is, the co-author ghosts the books written under his name.

And they're always shite, from what I can gather.

Question is, why would you consider buying this dross anyway?

Similar with much of the 'Top 50' in Smiths/Waterstones etc. I fear...

I tend to prefer thinner books anyway. Which is not to say that thicker books are worse, or better for that matter.

Samy goes for albums too.

Give it a few months and they'll be on the bargain shelf. Two for a Fiver or something.

That's what libraries are for, to sort the wheat from crap.

quote:

I don't believe that James Patterson has anything to do with writing the books that appear under his name.

They're always 'co-authored': that is, the co-author ghosts the books written under his name.

And they're always shite, from what I can gather.

Question is, why would you consider buying this dross anyway?

You are on dangerous ground if you criticise something you have not read - a bit like some of the ultra-religious loonies who criticise Richard Dawkins et al. Personally I would think long and hard before I criticised someone else's reading choices, music choices, viewing choices etc. For instance, SWMBO loves soaps, I hate them, but can see that there is some good acting going on, etc etc.

As it happens I read many different types of literature and hate snobbishness about different genres. On the other hand, of those I have read, I find Booker Prize winners are boring in the extreme. It's all down to personal taste.

There is no co-author on the cover of this book, so unless it is "ghost-written", I must assume that James Patterson is the author.

To BigH47 :

Libraries are OK unless you want a specific book, then you usually have to order it and sometimes wait weeks for it to be available. Personally, I like to have a large variety of unread books on my shelf so that I can pick my next book according to whatever takes my fancy. SWMBO says I practice "deficit reading", in that my unread books collection normally numbers about 200 - never seems to get much bigger or smaller. I rarely keep books once
I have read them

The point of my post was not to bemoan a particular book, but the increase in the number of those on the best-sellers list which show the sort of short measure which I describe.

Reading is a beautiful thing. Unfortunately this us a forum dominated by white middle class men and if there is a fault in that it's that allowance of another perspective beyond the majority view is rarely tolerated. That's partly the nature of online interaction and partly the demographic of Naim buyers.

Soo... another perspective. One of rhe largest unaddressed problems we have in the uk is rhe sheer number of people with sight problems. We also have some legislation which strikes a nice balance between the rights of the many and the rights of rhe few called the Disability Discrimination Act, or "more loony nanny stateism" if you're so inclined!

A signifcant number of authors have been targeted by organisations and individuals and asked rightly why large print copies of their, often best-selling, books are not available simultaneosly. A number of high profile authors have made asses if themselves by arguing it's nothing to do with them. Let's hope macular degeneration never hits them eh!

The solution is for publishers to produce books in a larger print with a clearer layout (wider margins, less clutter). It's fed into by the fact that the growth of e-books has in part been driven by their usefulnness to the sight impaired, and, the fact that data fed back from those e-readers shows a huge amount of people reading a point size much bigger than hitherto imagined by publishers.

Thus, faced with the triple whammy of a growth in e-readers; and more people who simply won't buy if the text is too small, and, a potential threat from the DDA, a sensible balance has been achieved.

Now, how about starting from the assumption that not everyone is the same as you!

Mike

quote:

Reading is a beautiful thing. Unfortunately this us a forum dominated by white middle class men and if there is a fault in that it's that allowance of another perspective beyond the majority view is rarely tolerated. That's partly the nature of online interaction and partly the demographic of Naim buyers.

Soo... another perspective. One of rhe largest unaddressed problems we have in the uk is rhe sheer number of people with sight problems. We also have some legislation which strikes a nice balance between the rights of the many and the rights of rhe few called the Disability Discrimination Act, or "more loony nanny stateism" if you're so inclined!

A signifcant number of authors have been targeted by organisations and individuals and asked rightly why large print copies of their, often best-selling, books are not available simultaneosly. A number of high profile authors have made asses if themselves by arguing it's nothing to do with them. Let's hope macular degeneration never hits them eh!

The solution is for publishers to produce books in a larger print with a clearer layout (wider margins, less clutter). It's fed into by the fact that the growth of e-books has in part been driven by their usefulnness to the sight impaired, and, the fact that data fed back from those e-readers shows a huge amount of people reading a point size much bigger than hitherto imagined by publishers.

Thus, faced with the triple whammy of a growth in e-readers; and more people who simply won't buy if the text is too small, and, a potential threat from the DDA, a sensible balance has been achieved.

Now, how about starting from the assumption that not everyone is the same as you!

I actually agree with you.

I would indeed be considered to be a white, middle class male (although I am originally from a working class background).

I too have reached the age where small print is a problem. I am very myopic, and my reading glasses in fact would allow me to pass the DVLC eyesight requirement! SWMBO finds this amusing as I usually take my glasses off to check whether I actually have my varifocals on before I start driving.

However, I find that for small print it is much easier to take my glasses off and read from a very close distance. I gave up my contact lenses when I started to develop presbyopia, as I had no intentions of going down the same route as SWMBO, i.e. contact lenses supplement by reading glasses for the close work. Besides, I could never wear my lenses for more than 8 hours anyway.

I am not saying that large print is a bad thing, just that in the cases I cited, I suspect it has been done to give the impression of "value for money" by creating a big, thick book. Perhaps I should really be ranting about top-selling authors who produce short books and expect full price for them.

Ebooks are useful, and I always have some (usually public domain) on my iPhone for holiday use should I run out of the paper books.

As for the assumption that not everyone is "not the same as you", that is the point I was making to graham55. Personally, I try to live and let live and I try to refrain from giving opinions on books, audio equipment etc which I have not read/heard/viewed.

I suppose you could look at it that way. I tend toward the view that there's enough lengthy books in the world that acquire a reputation of being quality when they're just...long

As for, never commenting on the tastes of others - well I'm an aetheist and I still have Richard Dawkins down as an arse

The books I read these days are often a bit trashy and disposable, as I use them for pure escapism rather than enightenment. As a result I am more than happy to buy them as e-books for my Sony reader to save a few trees, but feel there should be a significant price reduction from the print version. The e-Reader, of course, lets you choose any size of print you like.

quote:

As for, never commenting on the tastes of others - well I'm an aetheist and I still have Richard Dawkins down as an arse

Yup. Some books are long and tedious (Ghormenghast trilogy comes to mind). However, I think short books should cost less.

I'm an atheist too. Richard Dawkins is guilty of writing what is essentially the same book on genetics several times under different titles. I used his name as an example because I thought most would recognise it.

quote:

The books I read these days are often a bit trashy and disposable, as I use them for pure escapism rather than enightenment. As a result I am more than happy to buy them as e-books for my Sony reader to save a few trees, but feel there should be a significant price reduction from the print version. The e-Reader, of course, lets you choose any size of print you like.

Sounds a bit like my reading tastes. My serious reading is usually non-fiction. ebooks are OK, but I agree that they should cost less than the printed item.