New Years Resolutions

Do folks make reading resolutions for 2010? I pledged to read at least one book from each continent (though it may be tough to find a work by a native Antarctican).

You could always read Antarctica by Kim Stanley Robinson.

Or the Scott diaries.

I've sworn high and low I'm going to read more books this year. Try to ease up the intensity level, free up more leisure time and have FUN, fer Chrissakes. I'm 46, you'd think I would've figured out a way to relax and chill out by now...

>2 iansales:,3 Thanks for those recommendations. I think they would be good for winter. We seem to be having an exceptionally cold and snowy one, even here in Baltimore, and reading about an entire continent of ice would make our weather seem warmer.

Read as many books on my TBR list as possible; I didn't read nearly enough last semester. I'm a fast reader, but it usually takes me a week or two...or three...to finish a book now. Sad, really. And, of course, to accomplish this resolution I'm surfing LibraryThing instead of reading a book. :)

I plan to read as many books on my "to read" bookshelf as possible, and then to fill that bookshelf back up with more books to read.

ReadStreetDave, there's a 50 states group, a Canadian provinces groups, a countries group. Why don't you start a continents group?

Robert

My resolution is to write reviews for at least 50% of the books I read. I've been much too lazy about that.

Not much of a New Year's Resolution person. No plans on quitting anything. But I do have some books I want to read. I would like to completely inventory my books this year. I'm about 90% done.

>7 Mr.Durick: That's an interesting idea. I've never started an LT group; I'm worried that I wouldn't have enough time to curate it -- if that's needed.

>9 kswolff: Inventory -- that's ambitious! If only we could scan the info in bar codes into a computer, I'd have a chance. Like the others, I'm trying to whittle down my TBR pile (while adding new books each week). Not a recipe for success.

My TBR pile is about as tall as the Pentronas Towers.

Dave, LT sells a CueCat barcode reader for just that purpose. Check out the "More" tab.

For 2010, I am reading my way through the Russian greats, starting with Dostoyevsky...it's going to be a busy year!

"Oh, those Russians..."

(Quoting Boney M, "Rasputin")

Oh, what the hell:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvDMlk3kSYg

>12 geneg: I can't believe CueCat lives on. I recall the promise that it would revolutionize newspaper reading. That faded quickly. Glad to see that someone found a new purpose for it. I'll have to see if mine is still around -- most likely buried deep in a desk drawer.

Having read the town paper from both Rochester, MN and Milwaukee, WI, I'd say competition is the key to creating a great paper that people would actually want to read ... and not line their budgie cages and/or wrap around a baked cod. In both those towns, one paper effectively monopolizes local news ... along with the token "indie newspaper." But that's like comparing NBC to cable access. Without competition, regardless of the media distribution system -- newsprint or via the computer -- the quality of journalism will still be sub par. If it's sub par no one will want to buy it.

Print isn't dead, writing quality is. All the HD and BluRay aren't going to make Uwe Boll movies any better. Too bad newspaper moguls, including Journalistic Antichrist, War Criminal, and Child Molester Rupert Murdoch, don't seem to understand that.

>16 kswolff: Yes, many newspapers got complacent in monopoly markets. But other factors have forced such papers as The New York Times to cut the newsroom staff. The industry's revenue model -- especially a reliance on highly profitable classified ads -- has been undercut by Craigslist and other on-line competitors. Meanwhile, consolidation among department stores, and a slump in real estate and auto sales, have further cut into ad revenue. The digital revolution in newspapers is a preview of what book publishers will soon face. I hope they're ready for a rocky ride.

I don't usually do new years resolutions. This year, though, I'm going to try to transition to vegetarianism. It probably won't take me a year (the toughest part will be giving up seafood), but it's something I'm keeping in mind as 2010 starts. I just don't see a way to make eating meat line up with my ethics anymore.

As far as reading goes, I'm aiming to finish at least half of my TBR pile without adding too much. I think it's plausible...

I'm not sure why the newspaper's travails are a preview of what book publishers will face.

Book publishers don't rely on advertising. The only challenges they really face are a decline in reading as people (predominantly young people) turn to other media, and the consolidation of book retailing. Neither of these will spell the end of books in the way that we're now seeing the death throes of the newspaper.

The digital revolution itself is positive for publishers. The rise of the e-book benefits publishers more than anyone -- it eliminates their risks.

Ah, senor, but the publishers have learned little from their colleagues in newspapers and music, whose industries were gutted by the digital onslaught. Publishers are stupid and slow-witted, and the dinosaurs have to be retired, fired or "down-sized" before they'll start realizing how e-books and innovative apporoaches can produce cheaper books, more readers....and, hopefully, better writing...

Publishers are already behind e-books, Cliff. They want e-books. They just don't want Amazon to be in control of the e-book market -- for obvious reasons. They've seen what Apple did to the music industry, and they don't want it to happen to them. This is why they delay e-book releases -- it's a fight against Amazon dictating terms, not a reactionary attempt to keep paper alive.

Resolution: well, I started writing a book. My first attempt. My resolution is to write 3 days a week (even if it's just a paragraph). But I also want to read 5 days/week and watch a film 1 day/week, so I'm already out of days.

Trying to control the digitization of media, file-sharing, is like Canute holding back the tide, mate. Publishers are increasingly obsolete--folks can choose what authors they want and download their work directly to their computer or mobile device or (very soon) have to printed and bound and in their hands in an hour ("espresso machine" printing), or 3 days (print on demand and Fed Ex-ed directly to your door).

The publishers have lost the readers' hearts and minds and now technology has moved into the gap between writers and their intended audience. The big boys will never win back their predominance and lofty heights again. They are the horse and carriage parked outside Henry Ford's first Dearborn Model T factory...

I think you're far too optimistic, Cliff.

The challenge in the digital era is signal-to-noise ratio. Folks can't choose what authors they want if they can't find a good author in the sea of junk -- they'll continue to rely on third parties to sift through it all and show them the good stuff. Publishers will continue to fill that niche -- and they will continue to miss good books while promoting commercial drek.

In short, I don't think the world will change much. Despite the death of the CD and a massive decline in sales and profits, the record companies still control the lion's share of the music industry.

The big question is whether Amazon will become the 800 lb gorilla that iTunes has become, and dictate terms on the entire industry.

But the internet is the ultimate word-of-mouth, the global square where people are going "Have you read/hard/seen ______________, it's brilliant!" Or, the alternative: "Don't bother, _________is complete shit, not worth your time". No geographical boundaries--someone in Timbuktu can download and read a short story or novel posted in Medicine Hat, Alberta. And then forward it to a friend, recommend/review it on his/her blog, etc.

Cyberspace is a great place to talent spot: movie deals have been signed based on YouTube shorts and book contracts have been offered to people like David Wellington and Terry Fallis who were, initially, self-publishers and podcasters. As an author, I like the notion of creating my own audience, releasing my work without interference, controlling every aspect of my craft. Beholden to none. I can choose to release my work on-line for free or produce a print-on-demand volume...and all without enduring a two-year wait before an editor gets to my manuscript, skims the first page and returns it with a form rejection note. The old regime was humiliating; the new technologies are empowering.

Blogs and specialty sites have replaced book review pages--yeah, there's a whole lotta shite spewed out by the amateurs and self-publishers, people posting poems about a beloved pet...but word spreads re: the quality stuff. People link blogs, add each other to their rolls, engage in a conversation that is global in reach. Readers disaffected by the poor fare churned out by the publishing conglomerates have another venue offering them more choice AND a chance to network with a community of like-minded people, near and far.

Cyberspace is my "field of dreams". I've built a site, turned on the lights, mowed and painted the grass, provided the entertainment...people will come. I read this week that currently only a quarter of the Earth's population has regular access to the internet. That leaves billions who have yet to discover the many worlds it proposes, the diversity of visions it boasts.

Billions of potential readers. And I want my share...

I guess what I'm saying, Cliff, is that word of mouth becomes useless when 25 million mouths say that 13 million separate things are all brilliant -- especially when only six of them truly are.

The irony of the age of mass electronic distribution is that it becomes well-nigh impossible to reach a mass audience.

And an endorsement by Oprah will still boost a book's sales like few other things. Will she still pick books when her show goes off the air?

My resolutions range from the mundane to the fantastic: meet my 75-book challenge this year; give up cable TV and see if it makes me more selective/productive; finish my book and get it into the hands of the agent; make real progress in getting out of debt.

Apropos this discussion re: the future of publishing/books, here's an article I just came across that might add some fodder to the debate:

http://theharperstudio.com/2009/12/it-was-the-best-of-times-it-was-the-worst-of-...

27: I have "make real progress in getting out of debt" on my list too. As for reading, I have not made any new years resolutions besides keeping up with the reading group on LT that I've been involved in. I'm sort of bogged down on Les Miserables and have committed to reading several other books over the course of the next few months, including Infinite Jest and Paradise Lost.

Sorry, another good article on the future of book publishing, this one an interview with super-agent Richard Curtis:

http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/publishing/richard_curtis_book_publishing_1...

He mentions espresso machine printing, etc.

#29> How funny, I haven't made an official resolution, but I have thought maybe I should participate in fewer group reads, as it just makes Mt Must-Be-Read higher, as I tend towards impulsive reads, leaving all those worthy group reads to gather dust.

It's a shame, as the group reads are often excellent choices, but I don't deal very well with structure in my reading (which I do for pleasure).

>30 CliffBurns: Cliff, thanks for that link. I like his vision of the future and think that it's less bleak for authors and hopeful authors than many articles I've read.

>31 wookiebender: Unless you are reading for your job or you are in school, anything that makes reading less pleasurable should be ruthlessly dismissed from your life!

I made pretty good progress last year in not reading books for book club that I was sure I wouldn't like, and I plan to continue on that path. I'm too old, life is too short, etc.

>14 CliffBurns:: Good ref, Cliff. That song's a favorite.

All I'm hoping to get through is 52. That was my goal last year as well...

Unfortunately, a lot of review blogs are far from discriminating and think everything they read is worth "five stars". The publishers are taking advantage of this by sending them review copies. Some books have done well because of the buzz created by forums and review blogs, despite not actually being that good.

The biggest enemy of any writer is obscurity. So many use the Web for self-promotion. Some are better at it than others - Jeff Vandermeer and John Scalzi are clearly masters. I've not read anything by either of them, however.

It doesn't even have to be self-promotion. Peter Watts' recent incident at the US-Canada border - disgusting though his treatment was - seems to have helped his writing career. He has a new story in Clarkesworld and it's just "The Thing" fanfic. I can't see the point of it. Or why it was published.

Ian: you've never read a bad book that was well-reviewed by the mainstream press? True, bloggers aren't always the most discerning folk--but some of them are pretty smart cookies. AND some of them are ex-pros who lost their position after newspapers shit-canned their book review sections.

I agree, scribblers who are tireless self-promoters have the advantage on the internet--then again, I admire hustle and initiative. I still see the internet/print-on-demand as a great way to escape the tyranny of the traditional publishing system, with its in-breeding and homogeneity. After twenty years, I got tired of playing the game. Now I've built my own ball diamond. And lots of other people--disaffected, bored, looking for something different--are showing up to join in...

Thing is, people don't get to be reviewers for the mainstream or genre press without some editorial control -- i.e., they generally know what they're talking about. But review bloggers are not the same. Not all of them, I agree.

The success of the internet as a tool for self-promotion means the commercial publishers now expect their authors to take on the lion's share of the promotion. Which means the best self-promoters, not the best writers, get rewarded. Seems to me, it's the words that should come first.

Your points are good ones. Too-shay!

It certainly saves time in the long run to ferret out a reviewer or two you can trust. By reading reviews of books you have already read, find those whose tastes and interests are similar, read those reviews and forget the rest. It doesn't matter if they were professionals or not. There are some very cogent reviewers right here on librarything.

>35 CliffBurns: Cliff says "scribblers who are tireless self-promoters have the advantage on the internet." And this reminds me of a certain despicable person I knew, so that I might amend his words to say, "people who are tireless self-promoters have the advantage."

I guess I'm just hoping karma will kick in eventually--this person was the best self-promoting media whore and corporate networker I've ever seen, and she has won success thereby. But there are still some people who know her work is crap. Eventually, maybe enough people will see that the empress has no clothes.

Suze Orman?

Nancy Grace?

Laura Bush?

Heidi Fleiss?

I'm guessing Sarah Palin.

All worthy guesses, but I'm going to take the fifth. The witch is still alive.

(Maybe a house will fall on her?)

Come on, I know some of you thought it...

Reminds me of the dialog in one of my favorite movies, "Bell Book and Candle": Jimmy Stewart tells his former fiance that the girl he's been seeing is a witch. She responds, "Oh, Shep, you just don't know how to spell."

I think that in the long run the spate of positive reviews online will do itself in -- people stop paying attention to things they can't trust. We'll end up with new, trusted sources for online reviews. This is already happening.

I look at bloggers like neighbors. Once I get to know them, I may trust the advice of a few and discard the advice of others. That goes for recommendations of books as well as plumbers, TV shows and restaurants.

Readers do figure these things out, don't they? Even among the members of my book club, I know at least half of them recommend things I might like, and one member in particular has a knack for recommending books I loathe. So I don't read most of the stuff she recommends.