SFG75
Well-Known Member
Browsed through some of my favorite columnists and found Andrew Sullivan's posting about a NYT editorial making the contention that yes, Amazon kills literary culture. A powerful counter point was published on Slate and subsequently linked through another blog on writing and publishing.
I find the argument that independent bookstores create a "local" culture to be mistaken, as the above contrarian voice pointed out. The idea that they create some communal, democratic agora is more of a romanticized vision, as opposed to a real one. I could see how that appears to be the case at a Barnes & Nobles, but even then, everyone has their face in a book and drinking a latte, as opposed to avidly discussing books with one another and making suggestions with bated breath. I'm not sure an individual in his/her own mind among many, is doing more for culture than an individual solely purchasing a national bestseller in his/her own home.
Any thoughts?:innocent:
I find the argument that independent bookstores create a "local" culture to be mistaken, as the above contrarian voice pointed out. The idea that they create some communal, democratic agora is more of a romanticized vision, as opposed to a real one. I could see how that appears to be the case at a Barnes & Nobles, but even then, everyone has their face in a book and drinking a latte, as opposed to avidly discussing books with one another and making suggestions with bated breath. I'm not sure an individual in his/her own mind among many, is doing more for culture than an individual solely purchasing a national bestseller in his/her own home.
Any thoughts?:innocent: