--- In
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, "foxbrick"
<foxbrick@...> wrote:
> Mario, not only that (and that's true of much
simpler novels, as
> well, including the likes of, say, Jackie Susann's
YARGO or, I
> suspect, Alice Sebold's THE LOVELY BONES), but also
you're making
> the mistake of confusing official "bestsellers" with
books that
> customers, as opposed to bookstore chains and
distributors, are
> actually buying.
Yes, I was referring at the bestseller lists that the NY
Times publishes, for example.
>
> And then there's the "weighting" that the compilers
of such lists
> make so as to distort the list in favor of
"worthier" books.
>
> It's a remakably corrupt process, to no compellingly
good end.
>
> And, Nathan, some people might well want complex or
novel
> novels...but not on a beach or in an
airplane.
How do they weight the list in favor of "worthier" books?
Aren't these lists based on reported sales by a sampling of
bookstores?
As to complexity, even Conrad, a popular writer in his day,
seems too complex for many contemporary readers. I've lent
people Conrad novels and have them complain that the stuff
was too hard. And Conrad is nowhere nearly as hard as Gaddis
or Faulkner in full form. Conrad's sentences are pretty
straightforward, though the psychology of his characters is
complex.
Best,
mrt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 30 Jun 2008 EDT