Setting Books Free: Surviving Emancipation in a Content-Focused Landscape
Huh? Emancipation?! I don’t know nuthin bout no emancipatin. Speak English, fool!
Sorry, my bad. How about a video? Who doesn’t like video?
Books: effective vessels for transmitting ideas, aren’t they? Objects lovingly formed between front and back covers with turnable pages of paper bound together and covered in organized symbols of black ink, testifying to their timelessness of content. Books have acquired a mystique; an aura of significance not shared by media of similar form such as magazines or journals. Why is that? The medium of the paper book has transitioned through cosmetic changes in both eBook and audio book form, but despite that it has managed to maintain its original prestige. Be they short stories, poetry, novels or tech manuals, survey says anything’s better in a book.
If that’s true, then why would something like a wiki be replacing encyclopedias or dictionaries? An obvious draw is that wikis are free to use and travel with you and your internet connection. More important though is that the information contained on these sites is dynamic: it’s updated constantly unlike what you would expect from traditional reference materials. It’s also social which people really seem to like.
While it makes sense that readers of non-fiction would support the cut and paste method of content distribution as seen here, is this something that fiction fans would embrace as well? Are we, as fiction authors, exempt from the business of repackaging or do we too need to roll with the times?
How can you even ask such an ignorant question? A story is a story. Period. End of.… Anyway, people have a personal relationship with novels that you don’t get with non-fiction. You don’t mess with that. There’s a beginning, middle and an end to fiction and it’s a format that’s worked longer than you’ve been alive. Don’t you go tampering with what ain’t broke, if you get my meaning.
(a basket of ripe produce has just appeared and an artichoke is now being tossed casually into the air in what may or may not be a threatening fashion)
Hey, I think it’s great that you’re so passionate about your books, and by the way if you’ve got any hydroponic tomatoes in that basket they’re great in salads, but you’re missing the big picture. There are certain standards that should always exist in fiction; for example, having a logical flow of events is a good rule to follow, but there’s also room to play which is what some of the kids like to do to keep things interesting.
Let’s delve into the music industry for a bit. Back in the day the only way to get your hands on a killer song was to accept the industry’s packaging (the album) and buy nine additional songs you might not have wanted in order to get the one song you did. Did that arrangement satisfy most people? No, which is why we’re now able to download music on a per song basis. People are less and less content in the technology age to just sit around and accept what is being offered. They want flexibility, they want things that are interactive; they want things that are meaningful to them. This may be hard to hear, but they’re starting to expect that from books too.
The hell you say! My fans love my work. They would never want to change anything I write because I am the voice and personality that creates what they love. Without me there would be no story because I am the expert!
Wait, we seem to be debating two different points. You’re arguing the content while I’m disputing the container. Content dispersion isn’t new to the publishing industry, it’s pretty common actually. Authors are encouraged to cut their books into palatable chunks to be used in magazine articles or turn excerpts into short stories because it generates additional revenue for the author and increases visibility for the book. Not many object to this practice, right? Okay, with this in mind, can it not be argued then that the novel, at its essence, is primarily a collection of chapters? Is that really a blasphemy? Yes, the full content is the true representation of an author’s vision and will definitely brand the material, but is that the be all, end all of its existence?
Not if Penguin has anything to say about it. They did, after all, win the SXSW web award for experimentation in digital storytelling last March for their We Tell Stories project. Six authors, using classic stories by icons like Charles Dickens and Emile Zola as inspiration, created their own short stories using the internet as a vehicle, rather than the traditional paper book format. That, my friends, is pretty damn cool. They’ve shown us that reading doesn’t have to be a passive activity between you and your book; it can be a shared social pursuit with the potential to expand like a video game’s alternate reality.
There are purists of course who don’t share the joy of such progress, which is a shame because technology really is the author’s friend. Technology expands minds and thus opportunities. The trick is to recognize those opportunities and exploit them whenever possible in order to make the big bucks. To do this, however, authors may need to be flexible with what they have to offer (the content of their books) in order to fit the recipients’ needs (the container). Because of technology, authors have the ability to get more face time for their books when they do choose to repackage their work into magazines, short stories, movies, television specials, video games and eventually virtual reality vacation adventures like those seen on the Enterprise’s holodeck. If you’re an author hoping to one day earn enough money to buy your own country, this is your dream come true. If you’re an “artist,” however, seething in outrage over the mere suggestion of selling your soul for a few ducats, this is your reality check.
Distributing your work in multiple formats does not have to be a soul killing proposition. Of course an author should be comfortable in all of his/her business dealings, but in order to do that you must first know what it is you want. Do you care about making money or not? Do you want your story to have a wide audience or not? What about those who don’t read books, but do enjoy other forms of media: should they have the opportunity to experience your story in a way that they like, even if it isn’t the way you originally envisioned it? That’s where the war usually begins: expectations. Do yourself a favor and figure this out before you sell the book because being able to sleep at night is far more important than pleasing other people.
For anyone tempted to dismiss this post on the grounds that the author doesn’t have a clue why society needs unabridged books more than bits and pieces of mashed up content, please don’t. I get that reading builds concentration and focus, sharpens our analytic skills and inspires us to take time out to enjoy simple pleasures like using our imaginations. I love books: always have, always will. The benefits of reading are great and wonderful things that every individual should cherish, but collectively, we don’t. The reason is not because we as a society are being distracted by technology, but because we as individuals may choose something other than books every day. Parents can teach their children, teachers can instruct their students and we can all encourage our family and friends to read until the cows come home, but the choice to open the book is always up to the individual. This is why flexibility is presentation is so important. If someone is intimidated by the volume of a paper package of WAR AND PEACE and can’t see past its potential as a doorstop or coaster, the door to opportunity remains closed. However let that person play out the story in a game or watch a movie version and perhaps information will begin to penetrate. Maybe little by little he/she will begin to appreciate stories and want to read the original, or maybe not. Again, we can only choose for ourselves, but the savvy author should always be willing to facilitate the opportunity.
