/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11345956]

Do you rent or buy your books, /lit/? Physical or digital?

[Anonymous No.11347837]

>>11345956
buying books physical is only ever worth it if you are buying it used for a couple cents or buying a nice hard cover of a great book. Other than that there is absolutely no reason; most of the greatest authors are dead, so the money you spend buying a book is only going publishers and his family.

[Anonymous No.11347852]

>>11345956
I used to own a kindle when I was younger, but now I buy almost all of my books secondhand in physical form.

>>11347837
Supporting publishers and bookstores is important, anon. inb4 some response claiming that the internet age has made the own publishing system obsolete and even a hindrance

[Anonymous No.11347889]

>>11347852
>The internet age has made the own publishing system obsolete and even a hindrance
you answered why it isn't important for supporting publishers. Publishers tear apart authors; forcing them to write things in there book's that they never had intentions of ever putting in there, or even cutting out parts. It's embarrassing that people support publishers whom censor the works of writers, and in this age of the internet writing should be more free then ever before.

[Anonymous No.11347900]

>>11347837
Where am I supposed to buy the classics for a few cents? All the libraries and thrift stores sell shit that I'm not yet interested in or just garbage.

[Anonymous No.11347919]

Physical. I almost find it pointless to read digital copies because retention is worse .

There are a lot of used book stores in my city and I get by. Usual $5-7 a book - not bad imo.

There's also something about being surrounded by books that feels good to me. I just feel like I have "easier" access.

[Anonymous No.11347923]

I pirate book and read it on my kindle

[Anonymous No.11347924]

>>11347900
sorry my good friend but to be frank I rarely find the books that I really want for a few cents; I usually read classics or ones that i really want to read electronically. You can buy classics for a couple of dollars though, but I see no reason for myself to spend a single dollar if I can read it on my phone or ebook for free.

[Anonymous No.11347930]

>>11347837
>most of the money is going to the people who have to expend their time managing the logistical operations of manufacturing a piece of physical merchandise
Wow how did i never realise this

[Anonymous No.11347936]

>>11347889
Editors are important. While I can agree the publishing house can often require changes solely for the purposes of accessibility and sales, sometimes these changes are actually good.

It's an interesting discussion though, but unfortunately I've got to go, so I'll just end with agreeing the internet has unlocked newfound potentials for freedom, but I'm not so sure this is always a good thing.

[Anonymous No.11347958]

>>11345956
Sometimes I go to the library, but only if I can't buy the book. And I almost always buy used, unless it's a new release, obviously.

The best part of the buying used, is the bookstore. The bookstore in my old town was simply the best. The old guy who ran it was so nice, he had everything, he would always tell me stories, and recommend books he didn't have in stock.

And he gave me sooooo many free books, too. I miss him.

also, I love Lain.

[Anonymous No.11347976]

>>11347936
Why don't you think it isn't always a good thing?

[Anonymous No.11348181]

I prefer physical but pirate digital out of necessity.

[Anonymous No.11348732]

>>11347976
Because mass accessibility for production of any kind of media without some form of process of approval leads to the collapse of standards. Of course I'm not saying works of quality cannot be created under this model of unfettered publishing, I'm just worried this insidious problem could be worse than the problems of the old ways.

For example, compare the quality of underground literary e-magazines, especially ones created by and for /lit,/ to those publications of the traditional model. I think there are many creative people here with plenty of potential, but if they aren't having to meet the standards and criticism of, say, the head editor of The New Criterion, there's less concrete incentive and influence to produce good stuff. Or how are authors suppose to make a living without the support and power of these giant publishing houses? Look at the music industry. A lot of good stuff is produced by bedroom musicians releasing on bandcamp or youtube, but when they want to realize their potential they sign with an established record label.

Again, there are many benefits to this newer model -- like what happens when, a concern shared by most users here, almost all of the gatekeepers of these traditional literary magazines themselves have subpar taste? I'm simply skeptical of it all, and I'm naturally inclined to defer to the system that works.

[Anonymous No.11348838]

>>11348732
Thanks for responding, and you are right.