Tuesday News: Re-reading, crowdfunding library books, copyright targets camera thief, and SmartSpecs glasses
Publishing Newscopyright / crowdfunding / genre fiction / intellectual property / LGBT books / Literary fiction / reading / vision technology9 Comments
The Key to Rereading – An interesting piece on re-reading that raises a lot of interesting issues related to the way the mind engages and re-engages with text. Until the article’s author, Tim Parks, falls right into the trap of distinguishing genre fiction as basically non-intellectual, in that he leaves no space in which genre fiction can be re-read for precisely the same pleasures he attributes to literary fiction – like gaining a new perspective or solving a new problem presented in the text or seeing the language anew. It seems to me that the lack doesn’t lie with genre fiction, but rather in the failure to engage its pleasures more thoughtfully.
This prompts a second reflection. With a certain kind of reading the pleasure lies in the lock-making process, the progressive meshing of mind and text. Once we are familiar with the kind of experience the text opens up in our minds, we will be less excited. Or at least, the pleasure will be of a different kind, offering the reassurance of the known, or simply a happy reminder of that more strenuous lock-making period. Such a distinction might help us tackle the old chestnut of the difference between genre fiction and literary work. There is no continuing learning process with genre fiction. We know how to read a Maigret and would never dream of rereading one. It always prompts the same reactions. But with a literary novel, we would expect the pleasure of an effort of adjustment, of new vistas being opened in the mind. –New York Review of Books
Writers’ Inspiring New Project Will Send LGBT YA Books to Libraries and Shelters -A new crowdfunded project that seeks to match “Rainbow Boxes” of books with libraries and LGBT shelters, and to have the books shelved in general fiction (or non-fiction), so that they foster inclusivity and hopefully promote more book sales and ultimately increased publisher interest in acquiring more LGBT books.
While culling the book boxes, they’ve also been carefully researching to discover which libraries and LGBT homeless shelters should be candidates to receive Rainbow Boxes, waiting to publicly name the recipients until they’re completely sure the boxes would be able to find their way to shelves. They’re also pushing for libraries to shelve the books in their more general categories, not separately. “We want to push back against the notion that these are niche books,” says Capetta. “Inclusive fiction is for everybody.” –Flavorwire
‘Spiderman’-like photographer caught using $11,000 in stolen camera gear – Australian photographer Bryce Wilson was arrested for burglary and handling stolen camera equipment, which isn’t, by itself, much of a story. Except that Wilson stole the equipment from another photographer, Jon Grundy, and while he was using it, he apparently failed to realize that the legal owner’s copyright info was attached to the equipment and the photos produced with it. In any case, he didn’t remove Grundy’s name and info, and when yet another photographer noticed Grundy’s info on Wilson’s photos (listed for sale), he contacted Grundy, who went to the police. Whoops.
The connection was made because of the photo’s EXIF data, which is assigned to each photo by the camera and contains information like the photographer’s name, the make and model of the camera and lens, and other identifiers. Most widely used photo editors (like Adobe’s Lightroom) will give you access to the EXIF data.–Mashable
These Glasses Could Help the Blind See – For those who cannot read text due to limited vision, the technology used to make this new pair of glasses might eventually provide the opportunity to be able to perceive relatively small text on a page or screen. A substantial technological step forward in addressing some of the diverse issues faced by those designated as legally blind, although it will not be appropriate for all types of vision impairment.
SmartSpecs, developed by a research team at a University of Oxford lab, use 3D cameras originally developed for the Xbox to capture real time images. The images are then put into high contrast and displayed on a screen in front of the user’s eyes. Dark things become black, while bright things become white. Far away objects are simply erased to reduce visual clutter.
Many visually impaired users find the high contrast allows them to see things they normally couldn’t. Furniture that might ordinarily blend in with a same-colored floor, turning it into a tripping hazard, becomes bright white. Doorways are enhanced. Even faces, which might normally appear as a blur, turn into crisp black and white cartoons. Smiles that might go unseen can be appreciated. –Smithsonian Magazine
I think the most interesting thing about the rereading article is near the end he admits he doesn’t actually reread these books, just dips in for a page or two. I guess he just needs to remind himself he’s too good for grubby genre fiction, but doesn’t get much pleasure from the stories he’s reading in the first place.
The re-reading article made me laugh, because I’m right in the middle of my umpteenth annual re-read of Megan Whalen Turner’s Queen’s Thief series — not only genre books, but technically “juvenile”.
I not only have the pleasure of “re-living” the cleverness, the mystery, the excitement, the anguish, and the heart-melting romance of each story, but each time I discover new echoes and reflections and amplifications of the themes that run through the series as a whole.
” … no continuing learning process with genre fiction.” Of course, what else would someone who thinks of himself as a literary writer say? Sheesh.
@Darlynne: The first person I thought of when I read that section of Parks’s essay was Michael Chabon, who has been working very hard to push down the largely artificial boundary between literary and genre fictions (his book, Maps and Legends: Reading and Writing Along the Borderlands, is great on this). As someone raised on literary fiction, one of my biggest frustrations is the dual repulsion I see from both genre and literary fiction readers, in part because I don’t think the categories are mutually exclusive, nor should they be hierarchically valued (and we see this from both “sides”).
It’s really too bad, because Parks has a lot of really interesting things to say about how readers engage and re-engage with texts over time. That, more than anything, made me extra mad when he made what I think is a really unthoughtful comment about genre fiction, especially because the category is itself very broad, both historically and categorically. And I agree with him that books can be read differently, and may even lend themselves to different types of readings. Where he lost me is in what I see as a precluding approach to genre fiction, rather than one that allows for a variety of reading experiences, as he allows for literary fiction — that it’s not self-evident that certain books would never invite a re-read, for example.
Still, I think his essay is worth reading for the insights he has about how many different reading registers there are, especially in light of Jane’s op-ed today on taste and reader experience.
@Lostshadows: Actually, I often re-read precisely the same way, and I don’t think it has to do with a sense of superiority, but with any number of things one seeks from a text. For example: sometimes I puzzle over a passage and am seeking new clarity; sometimes I want to re-live an experience I had while reading a certain section of a book; sometimes I just want to indulge in a familiar textual moment; or sometimes I want to enjoy a certain bit of language or imagery.
I think a lot of literary fiction is just genre fiction where the genre is pretentious.
@Janet: I came away with the impression he never rereads whole books. That’s the part that makes it seem elitist to me. (I’ve gone back and reread favorite passages too.)
I get that some people don’t reread, but it seems like a poor choice of person to write this kind of article.
@hapax: Nothing wrong with a re-read of an old favourite. Starting on this year’s Tamora Pierce re-read tonight with Alanna: The First Adventure.
It’s really too bad, because Parks has a lot of really interesting things to say about how readers engage and re-engage with texts over time.
I puzzle over a passage and am seeking new clarity.