After days of frustration nay despair, I finally got my Tickets!!!Yippee! I am leaving on the 21st.... I will reach home on the 22nd. I get to spend a night and a day in Ranipet before I go down to Bangalore! Yay!
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Next on my reading list
Right now, I'm reading Hadrian the VII. I' m done with about half of it. But, the best is still to come. I was shopping in Oxford circus for things to take home to India, when I spied Borders near the station and absolutely had to go in. So, I finished shopping with Manu(my cuz) in a hurry, sent her off ( She had to go to a party anyway, and I bought lunch. So, stop looking at me like that) with a considerable amount of relief and sauntered in to Borders. Once in, I just couldn't let the crowd, the sheer number of people or the huge queue in the cash counter deter me. I was looking for something special. Something I couldn't get in India. Then it struck me. There is no chance I am going to lay my hands on anything by Alexander Theroux. So, I went looking for Darconville's Cat, an Adultery or Laura Warholic. Nothing! I guess we'll have to wait until January to lay my hands on one of those babies. However, I did manage to sight Sot-weed Factor by John Barth (I was looking for 'Letters'). How could I not buy it? I've had an eye on that one for months , now. Oh, I spotted the paperback for 'Against the Day' too. But, I will check that out later. First, I am going fo try and get something by William Gaddis. I was put off intially after glancing at the covers of 'Recognitions' and 'JR' because I confused the former with the movie 'Awakenings' , starring Robin Williams & Robert di Niro (In my defence the book cover looked remarkably like the expression Di Niro wore throughout the movie). I definitely did not want to read another book on the 'indomitability' ( Is that a word?) of the human spirit. I did some reading later and discovered that was not the case. Thank God!So, it is going to be Hadrian the VII first, then the Sot weed Factor, Recognitions, JR and then Against the day/VGoing Home
I'm gonna be back home in about 4 days. The return flight will bring my very first overseas trip to a close. On the whole, was I satisfied with the entire experience? I don't know. what did I do in the last 4 months here in London?
1. I was working a few weekends. I realized that I love working alone, with nobody else in office. Blaring music and a few long distance phone calls on the sly were welcome perks.
2.The trip to Poland was fun in a way. Krakow is a beautiful city. I might go back sometime. That was my first experience with snowstorms. You have to get causght in one to realize how miserable it really is.
3. I did not read much. But, I did watch a lot of movies.Some were really old ones like Easy Rider, All about Eve and Dr. Strange love. I also managed to catch up with a few seasons of Friends, Scrubs and Smallville
4. Downloaded UT2k4. It has been an awesome experience playing it.
5. Did not see much of London or the rest of Europe. Inface I found out that I have no great interest in visiting places
6. I still dont drink, smoke or eat meat. This is an accomplishment for osmeone who has been in Poland for over a week
7. I'm still single.
8.Mom has started talking about marriage. But, she is her usual adorable self in going about this. So, what with the demand for girls, I need not worry about getting married for another 3-4 years
9. I am a misandros. But, somehow, I can empathize/sympathize with women. Why, then, am I still single? I guess the feelings aren't quite mutual.
10. I write a more often. Though most of what I write is junk and unprintable, it is a definite start. I do have a few ideas as well... Lets see how things shape up.
Thats about it, I guess. It will take more time for me to assimilate all this and decide if the trip was worth it. For now, over and out
1. I was working a few weekends. I realized that I love working alone, with nobody else in office. Blaring music and a few long distance phone calls on the sly were welcome perks.
2.The trip to Poland was fun in a way. Krakow is a beautiful city. I might go back sometime. That was my first experience with snowstorms. You have to get causght in one to realize how miserable it really is.
3. I did not read much. But, I did watch a lot of movies.Some were really old ones like Easy Rider, All about Eve and Dr. Strange love. I also managed to catch up with a few seasons of Friends, Scrubs and Smallville
4. Downloaded UT2k4. It has been an awesome experience playing it.
5. Did not see much of London or the rest of Europe. Inface I found out that I have no great interest in visiting places
6. I still dont drink, smoke or eat meat. This is an accomplishment for osmeone who has been in Poland for over a week
7. I'm still single.
8.Mom has started talking about marriage. But, she is her usual adorable self in going about this. So, what with the demand for girls, I need not worry about getting married for another 3-4 years
9. I am a misandros. But, somehow, I can empathize/sympathize with women. Why, then, am I still single? I guess the feelings aren't quite mutual.
10. I write a more often. Though most of what I write is junk and unprintable, it is a definite start. I do have a few ideas as well... Lets see how things shape up.
Thats about it, I guess. It will take more time for me to assimilate all this and decide if the trip was worth it. For now, over and out
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
The Republic- Quotes Part 1
Interesting quotes from the Republic by Plato
no one is willing to govern; because no one likes to take in hand the reformation of evils which are not his concern without remuneration. For, in the execution of his work, and in giving his orders to another, the true artist does not regard his own interest, but always that of his subjects; and therefore in order that rulers may be willing to rule, they must be paid in one of three modes of payment: money, or honour, or a penalty for refusing.-Chapter 1- The republic
he who refuses to rule is liable to be ruled by one who is worse than himself. And the fear of this, as I conceive, induces the good to take office, not because they would, but because they cannot help — not under the idea that they are going to have any benefit or enjoyment themselves, but as a necessity, and because they are not able to commit the task of ruling to any one who is better than themselves, or indeed as good.
-Chapter 1- The republic
Yet is not the power which injustice exercises of such a nature that wherever she takes up her abode, whether in a city, in an army, in a family, or in any other body, that body is, to begin with, rendered incapable of united action by reason of sedition and distraction; and does it not become its own enemy and at variance with all that opposes it, and with the just? Is not this the case?
-Chapter 1- The republic
And is not injustice equally fatal when existing in a single person; in the first place rendering him incapable of action because he is not at unity with himself, and in the second place making him an enemy to himself and the just?
the unjust will be the enemy of the gods, and the just will be their friend?-Chapter 1- The republic
having given both to the just and the unjust power to do what they will, let us watch and see whither desire will lead them; then we shall discover in the very act the just and unjust man to be proceeding along the same road, following their interest,which all natures deem to be their good, and are only diverted into the path of justice by the force of law.
No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a God among men.
let him be clothed in justice only, and have no other covering; and he must be imagined in a state of life the opposite of the former. Let him be the best of men, and let him be thought the worst; then he will have been put to the proof; and we shall see whether he will be affected by the fear of infamy and its consequences.
A State, I said, arises, as I conceive, out of the needs of mankind; no one is self-sufficing, but all of us have many wants. Can any other origin of a State be imagined?Then, as we have many wants, and many persons are needed to supply them, one takes a helper for one purpose and another for another; and when these partners and helpers are gathered together in one habitation the body of inhabitants is termed a State.
your dog is a true philosopher.Why, because he distinguishes the face of a friend and of an enemy only by the criterion of knowing and not knowing. And must not an animal be a lover of learning who determines what he likes and dislikes by the test of knowledge and ignorance?
Then persons of worth, even if only mortal men, must not be represented as overcome by laughter, and still less must such a representation of the gods be allowed.
if any one at all is to have the privilege of lying, the rulers of the State should be the persons
The saddest of fates is to die and meet destiny from hunger?21
I cannot believe that he was guilty, any more than I can allow our citizens to believe that he, the wise Cheiron's pupil, the son of a goddess and of Peleus who was the gentlest of men and third in descent from Zeus, was so disordered in his wits as to be at one time the slave of two seemingly inconsistent passions, meanness, not untainted by avarice, combined with overweening contempt of gods and men.
We will not have them trying to persuade our youth that the gods are the authors of evil, and that heroes are no better than men — sentiments which, as we were saying, are neither pious nor true, for we have already proved that evil cannot come from the gods.
deprives a man of the use of his faculties quite as much as pain.
There complexity engendered license, and here disease; whereas simplicity in music was the parent of temperance in the soul; and simplicity in gymnastic of health in the body.
men fill themselves with waters and winds, as if their bodies were a marsh, compelling the ingenious sons of Asclepius to find more names for diseases, such as flatulence and catarrh; is not this, too, a disgrace?
-Chapter 2- The republic
no one is willing to govern; because no one likes to take in hand the reformation of evils which are not his concern without remuneration. For, in the execution of his work, and in giving his orders to another, the true artist does not regard his own interest, but always that of his subjects; and therefore in order that rulers may be willing to rule, they must be paid in one of three modes of payment: money, or honour, or a penalty for refusing.-Chapter 1- The republic
he who refuses to rule is liable to be ruled by one who is worse than himself. And the fear of this, as I conceive, induces the good to take office, not because they would, but because they cannot help — not under the idea that they are going to have any benefit or enjoyment themselves, but as a necessity, and because they are not able to commit the task of ruling to any one who is better than themselves, or indeed as good.
-Chapter 1- The republic
Yet is not the power which injustice exercises of such a nature that wherever she takes up her abode, whether in a city, in an army, in a family, or in any other body, that body is, to begin with, rendered incapable of united action by reason of sedition and distraction; and does it not become its own enemy and at variance with all that opposes it, and with the just? Is not this the case?
-Chapter 1- The republic
And is not injustice equally fatal when existing in a single person; in the first place rendering him incapable of action because he is not at unity with himself, and in the second place making him an enemy to himself and the just?
the unjust will be the enemy of the gods, and the just will be their friend?-Chapter 1- The republic
having given both to the just and the unjust power to do what they will, let us watch and see whither desire will lead them; then we shall discover in the very act the just and unjust man to be proceeding along the same road, following their interest,which all natures deem to be their good, and are only diverted into the path of justice by the force of law.
No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a God among men.
let him be clothed in justice only, and have no other covering; and he must be imagined in a state of life the opposite of the former. Let him be the best of men, and let him be thought the worst; then he will have been put to the proof; and we shall see whether he will be affected by the fear of infamy and its consequences.
A State, I said, arises, as I conceive, out of the needs of mankind; no one is self-sufficing, but all of us have many wants. Can any other origin of a State be imagined?Then, as we have many wants, and many persons are needed to supply them, one takes a helper for one purpose and another for another; and when these partners and helpers are gathered together in one habitation the body of inhabitants is termed a State.
your dog is a true philosopher.Why, because he distinguishes the face of a friend and of an enemy only by the criterion of knowing and not knowing. And must not an animal be a lover of learning who determines what he likes and dislikes by the test of knowledge and ignorance?
Then persons of worth, even if only mortal men, must not be represented as overcome by laughter, and still less must such a representation of the gods be allowed.
if any one at all is to have the privilege of lying, the rulers of the State should be the persons
The saddest of fates is to die and meet destiny from hunger?21
I cannot believe that he was guilty, any more than I can allow our citizens to believe that he, the wise Cheiron's pupil, the son of a goddess and of Peleus who was the gentlest of men and third in descent from Zeus, was so disordered in his wits as to be at one time the slave of two seemingly inconsistent passions, meanness, not untainted by avarice, combined with overweening contempt of gods and men.
We will not have them trying to persuade our youth that the gods are the authors of evil, and that heroes are no better than men — sentiments which, as we were saying, are neither pious nor true, for we have already proved that evil cannot come from the gods.
deprives a man of the use of his faculties quite as much as pain.
There complexity engendered license, and here disease; whereas simplicity in music was the parent of temperance in the soul; and simplicity in gymnastic of health in the body.
men fill themselves with waters and winds, as if their bodies were a marsh, compelling the ingenious sons of Asclepius to find more names for diseases, such as flatulence and catarrh; is not this, too, a disgrace?
-Chapter 2- The republic
Monday, December 10, 2007
Wish List
Hmmm... one in six isn't too bad...... To think I had two of the three( Both the William Gaddis ones) within reach...... Well..... Soon...
http://www.catalog-of-cool.com/longwriters.html
More stuff
Hadrian the Seventh- Ordered at Amazon
Ulysses- I will finish it sometime
The Apes of God
At Swim-Two-Birds
Pale Fire- Halfway through- I will finish it as soon as possible
Gravity's Rainbow- Completed
Mulligan Stew.
http://www.catalog-of-cool.com/longwriters.html
More stuff
Hadrian the Seventh- Ordered at Amazon
Ulysses- I will finish it sometime
The Apes of God
At Swim-Two-Birds
Pale Fire- Halfway through- I will finish it as soon as possible
Gravity's Rainbow- Completed
Mulligan Stew.
Extracts from an Interview with Alexander Theroux
Here are extracts from the interview with Alexander Theroux by Steven Moore from Center of Book Culture.org
http://www.centerforbookculture.org/interviews/interview_theroux.html
I really respect this man's ideas ideas. Compare and conrtrast this with my previous entry onJames Patterson.
AT: I put the writers of bumphable, ready-to-wear prose, calculated to sell, guaranteed not to shock, in the same category as artists who can't draw. There is a lack of bravery and a lot of fraud in them. I have tried never to write a book that didn't attempt something new in the way of narrative technique. Writing is an assault on cliche. I find little to admire in writers who make no attempt at originality. (I remember, among other things, effortfully working to make the perambulations in London of Roland McGuffey recapitulate the lines of the Union Jack.) It's death commercially, of course, but I knew from the beginning that I was too opinionated, literate, and unconventional to enjoy a widespread reputation. It doesn't bother me in the least. I've always been too busy to make money. I'm among the freest people I know.
AT: Write the books you should, be the person you are. I wanted to write a "roman d'analyse," for example, with "An Adultery." A new genre. Plot didn't interest me in the least. Character is plot, anyway. Start delineating a figure--merely describe a person--and he or she will begin to act, do things, go in a particular direction. I set the novel up as a syllogism and purposely wrote balancing rhythmic and arhythmic sentences. I think its rewards come only if you're willing to think, to come to terms with what I set out to question, sort through, analyze. (pause) Nothing there for the Leon Uris crowd--beach readers, military minds, people who flip pages to pass time. I wanted the book to be what it was, no self-promotion, no hook for a publishing scheme. There's a mystical passivity in refusing the entrepreneurial.
AT: Someone said there are only 2400 people in the world worth writing for, anyway. I wonder if that's true. But readers are so lazy. The several books I've written have won me no fame. I do not complain of this, any more than I boast of it. I feel the same distaste for the "popular author" genre as for that of the "neglected poet." I marvel at writers who write a book a year, approaching mass production. I apologize for not being terribly impressed
AT: All is never said. Knowledge is involved everywhere. You have to shape the truth. " Everyone applauded, and I'm glad he did," is ugly, but grammatically correct, while "I don't think anybody knows what they are" is the opposite. I'm only saying that we have to try to contest what we want to come to terms with, whether readers or writers. It depends on how much intensity a person has, how curious he is, and whether he or she wants to live a life of meaning. I have always tried to tell my students, especially those who every June apply to law school or business school in such a perfunctory way, as if, you know, those were the only alternatives -a condition abetted in the Ivy League by the army of secular and soulless mechano-moronic professors and deans who view education solely as a means of entering the labor force--that the point of living is trying to figure it out. My ideal reader burns with what Walter Pater described as a "hard gem-like flame." (pause) In any case, Tolstoi somewhere speaks of the psychological law which compels a man who commits actions under the greatest compulsion to supply in his imagination a whole series of retrospective reflections to prove his freedom to himself. It sounds a bit didactic, but it explains one aspect of writing.
http://www.centerforbookculture.org/interviews/interview_theroux.html
I really respect this man's ideas ideas. Compare and conrtrast this with my previous entry onJames Patterson.
AT: I put the writers of bumphable, ready-to-wear prose, calculated to sell, guaranteed not to shock, in the same category as artists who can't draw. There is a lack of bravery and a lot of fraud in them. I have tried never to write a book that didn't attempt something new in the way of narrative technique. Writing is an assault on cliche. I find little to admire in writers who make no attempt at originality. (I remember, among other things, effortfully working to make the perambulations in London of Roland McGuffey recapitulate the lines of the Union Jack.) It's death commercially, of course, but I knew from the beginning that I was too opinionated, literate, and unconventional to enjoy a widespread reputation. It doesn't bother me in the least. I've always been too busy to make money. I'm among the freest people I know.
AT: Write the books you should, be the person you are. I wanted to write a "roman d'analyse," for example, with "An Adultery." A new genre. Plot didn't interest me in the least. Character is plot, anyway. Start delineating a figure--merely describe a person--and he or she will begin to act, do things, go in a particular direction. I set the novel up as a syllogism and purposely wrote balancing rhythmic and arhythmic sentences. I think its rewards come only if you're willing to think, to come to terms with what I set out to question, sort through, analyze. (pause) Nothing there for the Leon Uris crowd--beach readers, military minds, people who flip pages to pass time. I wanted the book to be what it was, no self-promotion, no hook for a publishing scheme. There's a mystical passivity in refusing the entrepreneurial.
AT: Someone said there are only 2400 people in the world worth writing for, anyway. I wonder if that's true. But readers are so lazy. The several books I've written have won me no fame. I do not complain of this, any more than I boast of it. I feel the same distaste for the "popular author" genre as for that of the "neglected poet." I marvel at writers who write a book a year, approaching mass production. I apologize for not being terribly impressed
AT: All is never said. Knowledge is involved everywhere. You have to shape the truth. " Everyone applauded, and I'm glad he did," is ugly, but grammatically correct, while "I don't think anybody knows what they are" is the opposite. I'm only saying that we have to try to contest what we want to come to terms with, whether readers or writers. It depends on how much intensity a person has, how curious he is, and whether he or she wants to live a life of meaning. I have always tried to tell my students, especially those who every June apply to law school or business school in such a perfunctory way, as if, you know, those were the only alternatives -a condition abetted in the Ivy League by the army of secular and soulless mechano-moronic professors and deans who view education solely as a means of entering the labor force--that the point of living is trying to figure it out. My ideal reader burns with what Walter Pater described as a "hard gem-like flame." (pause) In any case, Tolstoi somewhere speaks of the psychological law which compels a man who commits actions under the greatest compulsion to supply in his imagination a whole series of retrospective reflections to prove his freedom to himself. It sounds a bit didactic, but it explains one aspect of writing.
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Love Song of Alfred J Prufrock
You know there are times when you are reading a book or watching a movie when, in a moment of epiphany, you realize that one of the characters is, uh, You.
Sometimes it's good... Sometimes it isn't exactly an edifying thing to find out about yourself. I had one yesterday. This would have been a blog entry if I had T.S. Elliot's gifts as a poet. Does everybody feel the same way when reading the poem or is it just me?
In one of the numerous analyses of this poem online, these verses were described as unfeeling. I couldn't disagree to anything more. This poem is the core of my being and describes my emotional state to the period and the comma.
http://www.bartleby.com/198/1.html
Sometimes it's good... Sometimes it isn't exactly an edifying thing to find out about yourself. I had one yesterday. This would have been a blog entry if I had T.S. Elliot's gifts as a poet. Does everybody feel the same way when reading the poem or is it just me?
In one of the numerous analyses of this poem online, these verses were described as unfeeling. I couldn't disagree to anything more. This poem is the core of my being and describes my emotional state to the period and the comma.
http://www.bartleby.com/198/1.html
Friday, December 7, 2007
Melody????? What the heck are you talkin about???
In music, a melody, also tune, voice, or line, is a series of linear events or a succession, not a simultaneity as in a chord (see harmony). However, this succession must contain change of some kind and be perceived as a single entity (possibly Gestalt) to be called a melody
Thank you wikipedia.
To all the Indians out there, your definition of melodious music is, to put it mildly, bull!. It does not mean the mellow, mawkish and weepy tunes you love and approve of. I can picture most of my friends, including the self proclaimed 'Intellectuals' claiming that they prefer melodious music to the shouting and screaming of Rock(Sic). What these smug know-it-alls don't seem to realize is that Music, like all art will echo the human emotional range. The only limiting factor being the the artist's talent rather than the plasticity of the medium. The different genre, atleast in music, can be mapped to specific emotions. Frankly speaking, I prefer the complications of fury, rebellion, passion and freedom that Rock represents to the shallow, wimpy 'melodies' which proliferate in the Indian music scene. If they want to emulate somebody, why cant they emulate stuff like Greenday? Why do you have to go and emulate people like Britney Spears and Jennifer Lopez. To all those who disagree, well, I think you either don't know what you're talking about or well, you are just full of shit! The next time I hear somebody saying'I prefer Melodies', I am going to punch that person in the mouth
Thank you wikipedia.
To all the Indians out there, your definition of melodious music is, to put it mildly, bull!. It does not mean the mellow, mawkish and weepy tunes you love and approve of. I can picture most of my friends, including the self proclaimed 'Intellectuals' claiming that they prefer melodious music to the shouting and screaming of Rock(Sic). What these smug know-it-alls don't seem to realize is that Music, like all art will echo the human emotional range. The only limiting factor being the the artist's talent rather than the plasticity of the medium. The different genre, atleast in music, can be mapped to specific emotions. Frankly speaking, I prefer the complications of fury, rebellion, passion and freedom that Rock represents to the shallow, wimpy 'melodies' which proliferate in the Indian music scene. If they want to emulate somebody, why cant they emulate stuff like Greenday? Why do you have to go and emulate people like Britney Spears and Jennifer Lopez. To all those who disagree, well, I think you either don't know what you're talking about or well, you are just full of shit! The next time I hear somebody saying'I prefer Melodies', I am going to punch that person in the mouth
Kindle rekindled
I am not getting lazy.... But I came across something really disturbing in this article
http://www.litkicks.com/KindleLoser
Nope, its not the material on the publisher's covetous pricing strategy or the author's reservations about the reading fraternity being reluctant. I am sure the war generation felt the same about telephones and TVs.
What is really disturbing is the author James Patterson's take on royalities. Come on, this guy should be filthy rich by now and the totally mercenary attitude is totally unbecoming. I know every penny matters, but there are surely more important things than just the money. Writers, who are supposed to be the conscience of their generation, should definitely go beyond moot pecuniary considerations. Well, this guy is no Keats, so, well, no geat loss.
But, I find the comment in really bad taste and the fact that none else agrees is a sad reflection of the pervasive American Consumerism that is the Zeitgeist of this generation.
Anyway, I thought this one was funny. For the record I do love Pynchon and like Philip Roth and Franzen....
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=449302
http://www.litkicks.com/KindleLoser
Nope, its not the material on the publisher's covetous pricing strategy or the author's reservations about the reading fraternity being reluctant. I am sure the war generation felt the same about telephones and TVs.
What is really disturbing is the author James Patterson's take on royalities. Come on, this guy should be filthy rich by now and the totally mercenary attitude is totally unbecoming. I know every penny matters, but there are surely more important things than just the money. Writers, who are supposed to be the conscience of their generation, should definitely go beyond moot pecuniary considerations. Well, this guy is no Keats, so, well, no geat loss.
But, I find the comment in really bad taste and the fact that none else agrees is a sad reflection of the pervasive American Consumerism that is the Zeitgeist of this generation.
Anyway, I thought this one was funny. For the record I do love Pynchon and like Philip Roth and Franzen....
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=449302
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Amazon's Kindle
http://contemporarylit.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=contemporarylit&cdn=entertainment&tm=86&gps=133_133_1011_531&f=11&su=p284.8.150.ip_&tt=2&bt=1&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.amazon.com/
This is interesting. A portable reader should be fun. One can lug it around wherever and the choice available would be huge, not to mention the wonders it will do for the Rain forests and the book pirates. I believe that the future of books and reading is electronic and that a serious reading device is just around the corner.
However, I do forsee major challenges in the adoption of this technology. The greatest of all is the piracy issue. The publishing industry would rather choke to death than open their flanks to the book pirates. Secondly, the chances of a single format appearing for all ebooks are shot to hell. Why? because Microsoft is in the game. It has invested a lot of time and money on its pathetic microsoft reader and as likely to give it up as the devil is to give up Bush. Thirdly, Reading is a snob's pastime. Most book lovers are snobs. The common refrain is going to be either 'They don't feel the same as a physical book'( Obviously not!!! Isn't that like the whole point?) or ' I am not really a technology friendly person!(mostly housewives, pansies and idiots. Who cares about them anyway?). Oh yes, finally, the greedy publishers are going to be shortsighted as usual and overprice the e-books and are going to try and kill off the market. Why? Simply because the margins out of the traditional book business is definitely higher than what the ebook business can be. They cannot have different the formats(hardcover, paperback etc) either. We all know that the bulk of the revenues from a best seller comes from hardcover sales to Libraries and other institutions. Like they are going to kill a cash cow willingly! They will destroy the market by overpricing the e-books. But, the good news is that the number of devices for books in the market has definitely increased. That has to be a good thing, right?
This is interesting. A portable reader should be fun. One can lug it around wherever and the choice available would be huge, not to mention the wonders it will do for the Rain forests and the book pirates. I believe that the future of books and reading is electronic and that a serious reading device is just around the corner.
However, I do forsee major challenges in the adoption of this technology. The greatest of all is the piracy issue. The publishing industry would rather choke to death than open their flanks to the book pirates. Secondly, the chances of a single format appearing for all ebooks are shot to hell. Why? because Microsoft is in the game. It has invested a lot of time and money on its pathetic microsoft reader and as likely to give it up as the devil is to give up Bush. Thirdly, Reading is a snob's pastime. Most book lovers are snobs. The common refrain is going to be either 'They don't feel the same as a physical book'( Obviously not!!! Isn't that like the whole point?) or ' I am not really a technology friendly person!(mostly housewives, pansies and idiots. Who cares about them anyway?). Oh yes, finally, the greedy publishers are going to be shortsighted as usual and overprice the e-books and are going to try and kill off the market. Why? Simply because the margins out of the traditional book business is definitely higher than what the ebook business can be. They cannot have different the formats(hardcover, paperback etc) either. We all know that the bulk of the revenues from a best seller comes from hardcover sales to Libraries and other institutions. Like they are going to kill a cash cow willingly! They will destroy the market by overpricing the e-books. But, the good news is that the number of devices for books in the market has definitely increased. That has to be a good thing, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Maps
