So it's always the means, but sometimes it's also the end. I see what you mean.
If I were truly ranting, I would call that masturbation or a circle-jerk, but A. I don't believe it is that, and B. I don't want to stigmatize those activities either. :)
I don't want authors to change what they write, although I do want to let polymath authors know they have just as much cause to be proud. For instance, I'm happy when authors attempt completely different things in different works. That results in a problem for me when my recommendation list consists of "read anything by this author", but that's not the fault of authors, it's a defect in our current search methods.
My rant is for editors, about how they conceive of what readers need from them. We need different forms of recommendation when it comes to fiction. Currently magazines serve as a pre-internet equivalent of feed subscriptions, and publishers serve as a "does this novel get published? yes/no" filter, and I think that's pretty much it.
Recommendation needs to move somehow from a folder model to a tag model, in which a single work can receive multiple tags of reader rewards rather than being included in precisely one category. The tags should also be leveled based on individual rewards. A work can be strong in prose, medium emotional depth, and low on intellectual stimulation for instance. If some people want to read certain types of worlds rather than mental experiences, works can still be tagged that way. "Slipstream" settings and magical realism can receive multiple setting tags simultaneously, which is one of the virtues of tagging.
If I were truly ranting, I would call that masturbation or a circle-jerk, but A. I don't believe it is that, and B. I don't want to stigmatize those activities either. :)
I don't want authors to change what they write, although I do want to let polymath authors know they have just as much cause to be proud. For instance, I'm happy when authors attempt completely different things in different works. That results in a problem for me when my recommendation list consists of "read anything by this author", but that's not the fault of authors, it's a defect in our current search methods.
My rant is for editors, about how they conceive of what readers need from them. We need different forms of recommendation when it comes to fiction. Currently magazines serve as a pre-internet equivalent of feed subscriptions, and publishers serve as a "does this novel get published? yes/no" filter, and I think that's pretty much it.
Recommendation needs to move somehow from a folder model to a tag model, in which a single work can receive multiple tags of reader rewards rather than being included in precisely one category. The tags should also be leveled based on individual rewards. A work can be strong in prose, medium emotional depth, and low on intellectual stimulation for instance. If some people want to read certain types of worlds rather than mental experiences, works can still be tagged that way. "Slipstream" settings and magical realism can receive multiple setting tags simultaneously, which is one of the virtues of tagging.
Reply
Leave a comment