Back in the mid-2000s, I ran a website where I posted news about literary prizes. It was primarily an exercise to keep myself up-to-date about the biggest awards and to learn about contemporary...
Back in the mid-2000s, I ran a website where I posted news about literary prizes. It was primarily an exercise to keep myself up-to-date about the biggest awards and to learn about contemporary literature that might be worth checking out. It wasn't a hugely popular website, but still attracted around 200-300 daily visitors and a handful of comments from random individuals.
After a few years, I decided that it was taking too much of my time and effort in comparison to what I was getting out of it, so I decided to shut it down.
After I announced the closing, I was quite surprised about the number of emails that I received from pretty pissed off librarians. Apparently, the website had been a useful tool for many of them.
So, to answer the title's rhetorical question: librarians really care. Or at least cared, back in the day.
After all, one follows its protagonist through a ruthless, winner-take-all competition in a world that values crude and violent entertainments over social justice; the other is about Katniss Everdeen.
I don't know, maybe I'm misreading the tone of the author but it just comes off to me as someone being bitter that a book they like and has a similar plot to a famous book didn't get famous.
I don't know, maybe I'm misreading the tone of the author but it just comes off to me as someone being bitter that a book they like and has a similar plot to a famous book didn't get famous.
I read it as a little jab to the publishing industry. In context:
I read it as a little jab to the publishing industry.
In context:
Conversely, The Hunger Games is orders of magnitude more popular than Erasure—Percival Everett’s novel about an esoteric writer who trades his artistic integrity for a National Book Award—yet both have garnered comparable interest from literary critics. Perhaps the discrepancy in readerly enthusiasm, then, has to do with the two books’ vastly different plots. After all, one follows its protagonist through a ruthless, winner-take-all competition in a world that values crude and violent entertainments over social justice; the other is about Katniss Everdeen.
Yeah and I just don’t get it? Like, he’s mad that a book that out of two books that he draws comparisons to plot-wise, the one that was written for young adults while still being written such that...
Yeah and I just don’t get it? Like, he’s mad that a book that out of two books that he draws comparisons to plot-wise, the one that was written for young adults while still being written such that adults could enjoy it and thus had an significantly larger target audience gathered a larger following? Like, yeah dude. erasure is an insanely well written and great book that tackles a lot of issues. But you can’t hand it to a 12 year old and expect them to understand and enjoy it. Like. What?
No, I don't think you do. It's just classic "red herring" humor. You're supposed to think the first part of the sentence is referring to The Hunger Games and then get hit with the "gotcha!"...
No, I don't think you do. It's just classic "red herring" humor. You're supposed to think the first part of the sentence is referring to The Hunger Games and then get hit with the "gotcha!" There's no ill-will towards The Hunger Games. It was just a fun way to frame the publishing industry as being "a ruthless, winner-take-all competition in a world that values crude and violent entertainments over social justice."
Ok. I can see that in the writing but that’s not how would have taken it (obviously). However, I interpret things wrong all the time ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ under the interpretation you gave it makes sense and...
Ok. I can see that in the writing but that’s not how would have taken it (obviously). However, I interpret things wrong all the time ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ under the interpretation you gave it makes sense and is a decent quip
Back in the mid-2000s, I ran a website where I posted news about literary prizes. It was primarily an exercise to keep myself up-to-date about the biggest awards and to learn about contemporary literature that might be worth checking out. It wasn't a hugely popular website, but still attracted around 200-300 daily visitors and a handful of comments from random individuals.
After a few years, I decided that it was taking too much of my time and effort in comparison to what I was getting out of it, so I decided to shut it down.
After I announced the closing, I was quite surprised about the number of emails that I received from pretty pissed off librarians. Apparently, the website had been a useful tool for many of them.
So, to answer the title's rhetorical question: librarians really care. Or at least cared, back in the day.
Such a cute entry:
I don't know, maybe I'm misreading the tone of the author but it just comes off to me as someone being bitter that a book they like and has a similar plot to a famous book didn't get famous.
I read it as a little jab to the publishing industry.
In context:
Yeah and I just don’t get it? Like, he’s mad that a book that out of two books that he draws comparisons to plot-wise, the one that was written for young adults while still being written such that adults could enjoy it and thus had an significantly larger target audience gathered a larger following? Like, yeah dude. erasure is an insanely well written and great book that tackles a lot of issues. But you can’t hand it to a 12 year old and expect them to understand and enjoy it. Like. What?
No, I don't think you do. It's just classic "red herring" humor. You're supposed to think the first part of the sentence is referring to The Hunger Games and then get hit with the "gotcha!" There's no ill-will towards The Hunger Games. It was just a fun way to frame the publishing industry as being "a ruthless, winner-take-all competition in a world that values crude and violent entertainments over social justice."
Ok. I can see that in the writing but that’s not how would have taken it (obviously). However, I interpret things wrong all the time ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ under the interpretation you gave it makes sense and is a decent quip