>The puzzle is perhaps not why there are so many more people going to so
>many more science fiction movies, as why so many fewer people are reading
>science fiction. I know sf writers who are really _struggling_ to get
>published now, whose books were snapped up by publishers ten years ago. I
>know that the answer is partly tied up with changes in publishing: but why
>isn't the _market_ for books apparently there?
>
>I have my own answers, but I would be interested in hearing what other
>people think! I ask the question from the UK; but I think it is equally
>applicable to the USA.
>
>Edward James
>
>
I think Edward is right on the mark. SF is more often viewed than read in
the US these days, and since even good sf films tend to simplify the themes
and conflicts prevalent in stories and novels, most people encounter a
severely diluted form of sf.
But of course how many people read Proust or Dante or Austen or Homer these
days compared to how many read less challenging (and less rewarding
narratives)? Come to think of it, how many people today are getting their
principal exposure to Greek mythology from Xena, Warrior Princess (Bad
American TV show) where one week Xena saves Troy from about 25 Greek
soldiers, and the next week has an affair with Julius Caesar.
Reading is harder than watching films/tv/video. I'd argue it's almost
always more rewarding. And reading better books is often more challenging
than reading relatively superficial, formulaic stuff. Again I'd argue the
more challenging material is generally more rewarding. (Please note my
qualifiers before flaming me).
We're probably lucky any good writers can make a living writing and selling
their best stuff.
Kevin
Kevin P. Mulcahy
Alexander Library
Rutgers University
[log in to unmask]
|