On the Interchangeability of Books
Letters of Opinionauthor interests / genre fiction / interchangeability / reader interests18 Comments
Although the interests of readers, authors, and publishers are interconnected, they are not always aligned or even friendly. For example, when an author believes it is in her interest to market her book aggressively on social media, and a reader believes that this marketing is intrusive and off-putting, interests are in conflict. DRM is a good example of how publisher and reader interests are often unfriendly to one another.
For the most part I think readers and authors do not expect or perceive publisher interests to be in perfect alignment with theirs. However, in our good faith efforts to muddle along with each other, especially with so much social media interaction, we may minimize or overlook some natural and/or inevitable points of divergence in author and reader interests, which may lead to secondary, and unnecessary, conflicts.
Case in point: two weeks ago I wrote a post on why book price is not a good measure of value, and one of the issues that came out of the ensuing (and really great) discussion was that of the “widgetization” of books:
@Lynn M:
[W]hy in the world would anyone ever pay $$ for a book when they can get a different one for so much less?
Because books are not interchangeable widgets. If I want the new Author X book, a cheaper book by Author Y isn’t going to cut it. If I want to find a new author to glom, I’m unlikely to make random choices based on price point. I’ll ask for rec’s from friends. I’ll read blurbs. I’ll download samples. And then I’ll pick something and plonk down my money.
@Isobel Carr: But I think that’s actually the problem – some readers DO see books as interchangeable widgets, thus the reason they balk at paying any price over $1.99. There are simply so many books that if one is priced too high, there are plenty of alternatives out there. No, those alternatives may not be the *exact* same book or story, but especially if the writer is not a particular favorite or is outright new to the reader, they don’t see that they’ve given up anything. The sheer glut of books on the market has caused them to become almost a commodity product.
How few authors are there now that have enough name recognition and mass following that they can charge more for their books and know that readers are more than willing to pay the up-cost? When I think about which writers I follow faithfully and am willing to pay top dollar for their latest release, the number is actually pretty low. Not that I think all books should be so cheap, just that there are few writers who can inspire me to cross my own personally set book budget line.
The widget analogy is not new, but it seems to have gotten more play since the petition Authors United sent to Amazon over its dispute with Hachette:
Amazon has every right to refuse to sell consumer goods in response to a pricing disagreement with a wholesaler. But books are not mere consumer goods. Books cannot be written more cheaply, nor can authors be outsourced to another country. Books are not toasters or televisions. Each book is the unique, quirky creation of a lonely, intense, and often expensive struggle on the part of a single individual, a person whose living depends on his or her book finding readers. This is the process Amazon endangers when it uses its tremendous power to separate authors from their readership.
As I’ve argued before, I think the distinction AU is drawing here between consumer goods and books is both artificial and reliant on the conflation of book as creative content and book as a product that is launched into the stream of commerce. But the exchange between Isobel Carr and Lynn M is particularly perceptive because it hits on what may be the most fundamental difference between the way readers and authors relate to books: for an author, their book is a uniquely known quantity and special for that in its own right; for a reader, a book is an unknown quantity until they read and thus know it, and therefore potentially interchangeable with any number of other books.
For the purposes of this discussion, I am referring to “author” and “reader” as roles, because authors are sometimes readers and vice versa. This is also why I’m constructing the dynamic as one between an author and her own book, and that book’s prospective readers, most of whom will be unknown to the author at the point of purchase or reading.
Indeed, when it comes to the sale and purchase (or borrowing) of books, we often overlook the crucial fact that most readers purchase books on speculation, because the reader does not know the book in question, nor whether she will or will not like it. And while books are returnable under certain circumstances, a fully read and disliked book is generally not going back to the store for a refund.
Despite Lynn M’s language above, I don’t think most readers think of books as “interchangeable widgets,” but I do think that there are circumstances under which books are interchangeable to readers, especially given the speculation involved in buying books. And more importantly, I don’t think that reflects a devaluation of books or even a bad or unnatural thing. Rather, I think it reflects the nature of book writing v. book buying and the different ways readers experience books.
If you’ve ever had something you’ve written plagiarized, you know how fundamental, almost primal, the sense of ownership over one’s words can be. The author knows her work, has likely lived with it for some time, and she has a strong proprietary interest over it as creator. Because writing is, at least in part, self-expressive, there is often a very personal connection between an author and her work, and it’s understandable that she perceives it to be unique and valuable – and that she wants others to value it, as well. Even books with similar characters, plots, and tropes will not seem interchangeable to their authors in any substantive sense, because the author’s connection to her work is unique, even perhaps special.
But for the reader, unread books are never a known quantity. Authors can be a known quantity to some extent, but, as every shocked and disappointed reader knows, not every book by every author is going to be a hit for every reader. And until a book is read, its value, uniqueness, specialness, and even character is unknown. The book doesn’t even exist for the reader except as an expectation or desire for a particular reading experience. Our relationship with unread books, even by our favorite authors, is stubbornly unrequited.
What this means is that there is an element of risk in every book choice. Readers are often more willing to speculate – and perhaps at a higher price point – on an author whose other books are known and enjoyed than on an author whose books are an unknown quantity. New authors without established reputations will be unknown on two counts, making the relationship readers have with unread books even more remote. At the point where a reader confronts a slew of new books written by new-to-them authors, the relationship is profoundly impersonal. Contrast this with the fact that authors have the most personal relationship with the books they produce. How easily this mismatch in interests can become conflict, especially when readers articulate the impersonality of this relationship, by, say, talking about books as interchangeable.
But, at this distance, books appear to be pretty interchangeable, simply because the reader has insufficient experience with them to know them in any substantive and substantial way. And let’s face it: not every book read creates a special bond between book and reader. Sometimes the book succeeds for a reader because it provides a certain type of experience: a fun interlude; an escape from the stresses of the day; temporary transportation into another reality; immersion in a romantic fantasy; immersion in a sexual fantasy, etc. In the sense that books may deliver specific experiences, it’s possible that any number of books might fit that bill. Which is yet another level of interchangeability.
This doesn’t mean that readers don’t value books, or even the specific books they choose and read. But it does mean that the speculation involved in buying and reading books means that readers will necessarily have a different relationship to a selection of books than the authors who created those books will have.
I think all of this is natural – even necessary – in terms of how authors and readers relate to books. Unfortunately, I think it can exacerbate the sense of resentment authors may feel when they hear readers speak so casually of the interchangeability of books. And it can exacerbate the sense of frustration readers have when they hear authors speak so passionately about the specialness of books (theirs or others). Authors may feel that readers don’t value the work and creativity that goes into their books, while readers may feel that authors overestimate the value of their own books.
I think these conflicts are unnecessary, arising out of our unwillingness to accept that a certain discordance between reader and author interests is natural, even healthy, both for the market and for maintaining a reasonable distance between authors and readers. I don’t know if this issue is more prevalent in the Romance community, where the fan relationship between reader and author has been so deliberately cultivated (like the way readers routinely refer to authors by their first names), and where self-publishing has placed authors and readers in even closer proximity. But I do think it can set readers and authors against each other over what is essentially a Big Misunderstanding due to a difference in perception.
A more crowded marketplace may exacerbate tensions, especially with suggestions that authors study other authors’ books like this, and the inevitable trends we see when a particular book is successful. Remember all those grey covers after Fifty Shades of said color? Or the tactic of tagging books to bring up ‘similar’ authors and books? There is an extent to which imitation is rewarded in genre fiction, especially within Romance. Does this mean all books are the same? No. But since a reader can’t know a book until she’s read it, and an author cannot un-know a book she’s written, our perspectives will likely always be opposed on this point. Can’t that be okay?
I think this is a very good evaluation of the readers POV. It is particularly pertinent in that I was pondering tonight about my TBR pile which is ever growing yet I’ve just reread some old favourites. Because they are safe. There is an element of trust when you read a book. Books can be like a cake you buy and consume and forget, but they can also effect you emotionally. There are books I’ve read long ago that still impact me today. They changed me in some way. Changed a POV or opened up a new line of thought or simply lived so vividly they can never be forgotten.
But there can be books, like cakes, that have ingredients that can give you indigestion. And authors can break the reader’s trust by producing a poor quality product or elements that are disturbing to the reader. Any perusal of reviews will show that readers have expectations of a favourite author and if they are not met, there are only so many chances to redeem themselves. It’s a bit like a romance really.
What a great post! I find myself nodding throughout the post!
“For an author, their book is a uniquely known quantity and special for that in its own right; for a reader, a book is an unknown quantity until they read and thus know it, and therefore potentially interchangeable with any number of other books.” – I wouldn’t say books are interchangeable widget. But, like you said, until I’ve read a book, I do not know it and thus I have no vested interest in or relationship with it. In other words, it’s just like any other book and could be interchangeable. I won’t feel that I’ve lost out if I did not read it simply because I’ve not read it beforehand! I guess this is where debut authors will be at a disadvantage. Established authors already have previous works to prove themselves and have established their brand while most debut authors are not known.
“I think these conflicts are unnecessary, arising out of our unwillingness to accept that a certain discordance between reader and author interests is natural, even healthy, both for the market and for maintaining a reasonable distance between authors and readers.” – I agree that sometimes, we have to agree to disagree (between authors and readers).
That’s so funny – I’ve been on a major reread too. Since this year began, maybe a little before that, most new books are just not hitting the mark. I feel like every new release is there because it hits certain buttons. I don’t want to read the flavor of the month or year. I care about characters. And characters are unique. Until new books hit my button, I won’t be buying them.
I really enjoyed this post – thank you, Janet! How clearly you articulated the speculative aspect of new book readership and, ultimately, risk vs. reward while engaging in book discovery really struck me. Like so many of us here, I have a TBR that would require an off-grid vacation of “Gilligan’s Island” duration to get through, and yet, as I’ve been going through my e-reader recently (past 6 months-ish), I often find myself skipping past those books whose authors I’ve never tried. My free time is limited – whose isn’t? – and while a new book itself might not be known, at least familiarity with the author provides some reassurance that I’ll be more likely to enjoy their unread book than one by an unknown author.
With unknown authors, I let others (bloggers, friends, etc.) take the risk of discovery and decide if I trust their opinions enough to take the risk myself (sometimes finding out that my trust is misplaced – e.g. my sister reco’d FSOG, and thus has never been consulted since). This is definitely unfair to unknown-to-me authors with excellent books, but it seems I’ve subconsciously done a CBA on the issue, and I’m fine with not trying every new author that emerges. My wallet is fine with it, too.
I enjoyed this essay very much. It shares many insightful ideas that I simply hadn’t considered before, but that made a great deal of sense once I did.
Like other commenters, I’ve been doing a lot of re-reading lately. It started during my holiday break in December with re-reading the works of specific authors, but at this my re-reading selections aren’t based on specific authors or titles but rather specific *experiences* as you described with these words:
“Sometimes the book succeeds for a reader because it provides a certain type of experience: a fun interlude; an escape from the stresses of the day; temporary transportation into another reality; immersion in a romantic fantasy; immersion in a sexual fantasy, etc. In the sense that books may deliver specific experiences, it’s possible that any number of books might fit that bill. Which is yet another level of interchangeability.”
So, I feel like I agree with you on two levels: as a reader, I feel what you’ve described both when spending money (on new-to-me books) AND time. :)
Sorry, my comment is missing a word, which is what I get for typing too fast. 2nd paragraph, 3rd line should say “but at this point …”
Also, cayenne, yes! “I’m fine with not trying every new author that emerges. My wallet is fine with it, too.” Haha, I fully agree!
Like others, I’m on a reread too. I’m an avid reader (and author but right now much more of a reader ) and I have my tried and true favorites. These are books I trust to give me a good read because they already have. And while I OFTEN take a chance on a new to me author and have been pretty darn lucky so far, it’s been in a altogether different genre–horror. In romance, my first love, books are interchangeable widgets because so many of them sound just like that–interchangeable.
I hate to say this about a genre I love so much but it’s my reality. With the glut (actually oversaturation) of books, there is little that is different outside the author’s voice which can sometimes hook me over the “same” story. But lately that’s not been enough for me.
For the first time in over 23 years, I’m on my own with one income and it’s been very tough despite the fact I make a good income. So what I spend on books is hugely important which makes me less likely to plunk down anything over $3.99 for a short book or unknown to me. You know how Amazon shows you books related to what you are searching for? There have been many times I’ve stumbled across and interesting blurb or reference to something via social media, go to Amazon, see how long the book is and the cost and go for one of those recommendations that sounds much the same, might be longer for the money or is less money. That makes the books very interchangeable.
It’s sad that I don’t even auto buys in romance but I do in urban fantasy and those handfuls are the only ones where I will pay $9.99 for an ebook. And it is these I reread. The books are in my library or on my kindle and when I don’t, like now, either have the money or desire to risk my money on something that might not work, or something that sounds the same, I reread.
Unfortunately, in this reader AND writer’s opinion, books and authors are much more interchangeable then they used to be. I miss those days were I eagerly waited the next book by an author, when stories were fresh and new, where I could trust that I was getting a book/story properly edited, of great quality and something with a spin on tried and true.
“for a reader, a book is an unknown quantity until they read and thus know it, and therefore potentially interchangeable with any number of other books.”
This really resonates with me. I think at least 90% of the books I buy are books I’ve already read.
Your post makes me wonder about reading library books. Before the advent of e-publishing, I rarely bought a romance novel unless I had first read it from the library, and knew it was a book I wanted for my “keeper” shelf. Now, though, even though my library has started an e-book rental program, I’m not able to find many of the new releases via interlibrary loan, especially self-published books. I’ve been spending more $ on romance e-books because of this; a bonus for authors, but not for a reader…
Do romance readers read library books anymore?
After reading everyone’s responses, I don’t feel so alone. I too, have been on a re-read binge of late. My book buying has been down. I don’t really pre-order books anymore because the next day they lower the price (this includes the 4 author’s that I auto buy) which brings me to, I have broken up with several author’s over the last 12 months.
Someone posted on twitter the other day, I don’t remember who (sorry) that they wished that romantic suspense would stop with the second chance at love trope. I wanted to favorite and retweet that a million times. It’s one of my favorite sub genres, I haven’t read a romantic suspense book in forever. Either it has tropes I loathe, or the romance takes a back seat to the suspense.
2014 wasn’t a great reading year for me at all and 2015 hasn’t started out good either. I am hoping for a better year. I would always give a debut author a chance but I don’t do that anymore. Honestly, I don’t just buy a favorite author’s book either. My time, my likes, and money come first. Instead of being angry over a book I am not happy with, I would rather re-read an oldie but goodie.
Great topic.
@Jackie Horne: I absolutely do, though primarily ebooks these days. I’m lucky enough to have access to numerous libraries, and many have excellent ebook collections.
It is certainly harder to find self-published books, though not impossible. (There’s even an online service specifically for them, called Enki, but the selection never impresses me.)
@Jackie Horne: I grew up primarily reading library books. I didn’t start building my own collection until I was 16 and began working, and even then I was really only purchasing books that I had “screened” by borrowing them from the library first. Actually, the thing that motivated me to get in my driving hours to get a driver’s license at that age was the idea of visiting all the different branches in my local library system. :) I even used my grandma’s address so I could access the Salt Lake City library system in addition to the SL county library system, whose boundaries I lived in. Visiting all the different branches and browsing their collections was a major joy for me during my teenage years.
However, around the time I moved to Illinois and began working at a semi-rural college in my mid-20s, my reading habits shifted. Suddenly I had more access to money (no longer a full-time student on a strict budget) and very limited access to a variety of library books (my local branch is tiny and the system itself is very far-flung and made up of other small branches; even taking interlibrary loan into account, not much is on offer). So I bought a kindle about 4 years ago and before I knew it I had transitioned into a primarily-ebook reader. I’ve grown used to the instant access and rarely buy physical copies (mostly non-fiction, if I do) or bother with library collections (even their ebook collection because of its typical wait-list).
Based on the first 25 years of myself life, I never would have guessed that the library would lose its so-vital place in my life, … but it has. I have a lot of nostalgia for libraries, but I’ve gone from visiting a branch on a weekly basis (I really did that as a teenager) to visiting my local library once or twice a year (and it’s literally within a few blocks from my home … so sad when I think about it).
@Jackie Horne: Oh yes, if weren’t for the library, I’d rarely try new authors, particularly those published by the Big 5. At $10 or more for an ebook published by the Big 5, I tend to only buy books by my autobuy authors unless they come on sale. For new authors, I hope that eventually my library will get the books that I am interested in. If I discover a book that interests me by a new-to-me author and my library doesn’t have it, I might buy it if it comes on sale or if it is less than $5 or $6. I have been burned too many times by books for which I have paid a high price and which have turned out to be DNFs.
I am fortunate that my county library’s collection is vast, and most books, but not all, that I request the library to purchase, are bought.
I love reading e-books because while I love reading, I have long suffered from severe headaches as a result of my over-the-top reading habit. Somehow, the way I hold an e-reader is not the same way I hold a print book, and I get less headaches from reading e-books as a result.
However, I have long resented the pricing of e-books. Since there is no paper, ink or transportation costs involved, I cannot come to terms with their pricing being on par with print books. It really grates on me, and I there are very few e-books that I am willing to pay print prices for.
I have a select few auto-buy authors whose work I will pay over that self-imposed mark, and even when the price inevitably falls after a few months, I do not regret having shelled out the higher price. However, these auto-buys are few and very far between. Most authors, even if I like and enjoy their work, I will not cross my price-cap for, and will wait until the price falls. In the meantime, I borrow them from the library, patiently waiting my turn.
That being said, I own a huge number of e-books, and I if I really enjoy a library book, and know I will want to re-read it, I will buy my own e-copy, once the price is acceptable to me. The library really helps with the speculation risk that you speak of in this article. I wonder if authors and publishers understand that if their book is a hit with a reader, the reader will most likely buy it after having read a borrowed copy,
That is why I think DRM on e-books is such a bad idea. In the past, when a friend lent me a book in print, and I loved it, I would buy it because I wanted to re-read it but needed to return the copy I read to its owner. Now, if a friend tells me about a book they loved, but can’t lend it to me because of DRM, and my library doesn’t have a copy, and I find the price to be over my limit, I am just not going to buy it. There are other books out there in my price limit, and I own a ton of e-books as it is that I enjoy re-reading.
It comes down to which friend has recommended it, and how well they are able to articulate why they liked it and why they think I will like it, and how well their previous recs have panned out for me. This is a lot to expect from someone who will not in anyway profit from my buying that book. And authors and publishers need to be aware of this dynamic, if they aren’t already. I would read it much sooner and most likely buy my own copy, if my friend was able to let me borrow said e-book as easily as they could with a print copy.
“Now, if a friend tells me about a book they loved, but can’t lend it to me because of DRM, and my library doesn’t have a copy, and I find the price to be over my limit, I am just not going to buy it.”
Yes, this! How many sales are authors losing because of DRM? I would wager that it is probably a lot more than the number of sales they lose to piracy.
Sorry, that last one should have referenced @AJ
@AJ: Yes indeed. When people have been generous enough to use their ONE LOAN on me, I often wind up buying the book.
If you’re interested in the whole DRM issue, I highly recommend Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free by Cory Docotorow. It’s all about how DRM methods screw both the creator and the consumer, only benefiting the middlemen.
This article is exactly how i feel! And sadly, most Romance books are pretty interchangeable to me. The blurbs are all the same, the characterizations are all the same, etc. It’s almost like playing BINGO.
I’ve been on a re-reading binge, too. 2014 was a bad reading year for me (but I spent quite a lot) so 2015 is the year of reining in the budget.