***Disclaimer- This was one I wrote some time ago (thus the reference to Rick Perry), and for some reason never published. The article in question happened a while ago, but I still think it's a good piece on what bookselling is and why it's important. So, here you go.***
It is truth universally acknowledged that an outrageous and daft opinion is in need of someone to speak their minds loud enough to start some shit.
Showing posts with label rants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rants. Show all posts
Friday, May 31, 2013
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Geeks in the Mirror
I would love to say that the inspiration for this piece is not an article written by a more famous person in a more comprehensible manner than I ever could. Sadly, this post is brought to you in part* by Max Barry and his post on Smurfs and Dogs. I swear that it's relevant, and you should probably read it before reading this post. Go ahead, I'll wait.
Right, so we are probably all familiar with the concepts he is talking about in the article. Female protagonists are theoretically not as universally identifiable as male protagonists. This is more or less a fact of life for the early 21st century. While there is a lot of progress being made, you still cannot convince a large part of the American viewing/ reading public to take a female protagonist seriously. I say "American public" not "men" because women go to movies and read books too, and if a large percent of women decided that they are going to do something, they would make it huge. *cough*Twilight*cough* So, it tends to be that if there is a woman in the book or movie, it is usually a side character whose main selling point is that she is female. I don't want to get bogged down in going over this, so watch Nostalgia Chick's video on it, if you really don't believe/ get what I'm saying.
The downsides to this phenomenon are pretty self evident. Not only does it de-value women and their life experience as something that could never be interesting enough to be the main plot, but it also expects that men can't and shouldn't identify with these life experiences. It also means that these characters have to stand for ALL WOMEN EVERYWHERE. Which, lets face it, is impossible. Any character who tries to stand for all of anything is going to fail, because the range of female/human experience is infinite. So they generally go for lowest common denominator, which means that these characters are going to have qualities that most people associate with the word female.
The trouble is, this is not just a problem for teh ladies. This is a problem for every sub-set of mainstream culture who gets "token-ized". I'm not going to talk about ethnic minorities much because well, I'm not super qualified, but if I see one more film where there is only the one non-white character who is EITHER cool or evil, I might go crazy. Again, I shouldn't have to expound on why this is a bad thing. Hollywood has this perception that audiences won't "get it" if they don't present us with these stereotypes. That we would be completely flabbergasted and uncomprehending when presented with anything that isn't a straight white male to identify with as our main protagonist. Again, a lot of progress is being made, but these are exceptions that prove the rule.
My biggest problem with all of this? The fact that geek culture does not seem to be trying to pull itself out of this bias. If we want to talk about straight white males as main characters, think of all the comic book movies that have come out recently. Think about all the video games, with the exception of Portal, where you play a guy as the default. Bioware has been working on the "not-straight" part, and you certainly can play as a girl, but neither of those options have gotten much press in the past. It's like, if we can have a nerdy protagonist we still prefer him to be straight and white.
What I don't understand is why this is still going on. As geeks, shouldn't being counter culture come as second nature? There are women on the Avengers, why did none of them get an origins movie? (Ok, only one in the coming movie, but still) Women are a minority among geeks, but becoming less so all the time. I know I said I wasn't going to talk too much about it, but seriously with no non-white main protagonists. I'll give you that maybe in an urban fantasy or perhaps even a comic book reality, which is still set during our own time, it may be "problematic" to write from the point of view of someone who is not you, i.e. white or male. I qualify this because there are people who are not white or male working in these industries, so I'm not sure it's really all that hard to find a voice for it. However, giving the benefit of the doubt, it is somewhat understandable to not want to offend by "telling it wrong", especially when writing a book rather than working with an actor of color to tell a story honestly.
So what's your excuse, high fantasy? Theoretically, you should have the same freedoms of science fiction, since racial tensions are a thing of the present and not necessarily of the Ages Ago or Future. And don't give me the whole, "But we're in England past!" argument, because ELVES. I'm pretty sure it won't strain anybody's disbelief, especially if handled with the same aplomb Star Trek has always handled it, i.e."This character is not white. It does not in any way effect the story or his ability to tell it, so we are MOVING ON." Also with the no women! I mean, when was the last time since Xena that we saw some ancient fantasy past woman as the actual main character? Shouldn't magic be the great equalizer? Science Fiction has more, but still not a lot. I'm starting to feel like even the kick-ass girl side-characters aren't enough, because despite being better role models it still creates the illusion that there is only one Girl, and she is only THIS WAY. Being weak or kick-ass is not inherent to a gender, and sometimes being strong doesn't mean you aren't objectified needlessly.
What I love about being a geek is that on the internet, your visual self matters far less that your actual self. The whole "it's what's on the inside that counts" means a whole lot more when the people you are interacting with literally cannot see you. It's more important that you like David Tennant when you get on a chat about Dr. Who, because no one can tell and therefore can't care. You could literally be that dinosaur from Toy Story Three for all anyone would know. I enjoy that and I enjoy the message that it sends. That we don't care about all of that bullshit that keeps us apart IRL, but we can come together around the things we enjoy. So...wtf? Why in our biggest contributions to culture are we confined by the same nonsense that keeps Hollywood from hiring Asian actors for Akira? Why do geek girls constantly feel like they have something to prove, and why can't Green Lantern be African-American in the movies too?
I know what all of the easy answers are, but I want the answer that explains how the people who routinely reject reality continue to accept it. If you don't have that answer, then maybe you should start asking the question yourself, and finding ways to help change things.
* Max Barry does not actually endorse this post. Nor do any of the other thousands of things I've linked to in this post. At least...I don't think so *peers into internet*.
Right, so we are probably all familiar with the concepts he is talking about in the article. Female protagonists are theoretically not as universally identifiable as male protagonists. This is more or less a fact of life for the early 21st century. While there is a lot of progress being made, you still cannot convince a large part of the American viewing/ reading public to take a female protagonist seriously. I say "American public" not "men" because women go to movies and read books too, and if a large percent of women decided that they are going to do something, they would make it huge. *cough*Twilight*cough* So, it tends to be that if there is a woman in the book or movie, it is usually a side character whose main selling point is that she is female. I don't want to get bogged down in going over this, so watch Nostalgia Chick's video on it, if you really don't believe/ get what I'm saying.
The downsides to this phenomenon are pretty self evident. Not only does it de-value women and their life experience as something that could never be interesting enough to be the main plot, but it also expects that men can't and shouldn't identify with these life experiences. It also means that these characters have to stand for ALL WOMEN EVERYWHERE. Which, lets face it, is impossible. Any character who tries to stand for all of anything is going to fail, because the range of female/human experience is infinite. So they generally go for lowest common denominator, which means that these characters are going to have qualities that most people associate with the word female.
The trouble is, this is not just a problem for teh ladies. This is a problem for every sub-set of mainstream culture who gets "token-ized". I'm not going to talk about ethnic minorities much because well, I'm not super qualified, but if I see one more film where there is only the one non-white character who is EITHER cool or evil, I might go crazy. Again, I shouldn't have to expound on why this is a bad thing. Hollywood has this perception that audiences won't "get it" if they don't present us with these stereotypes. That we would be completely flabbergasted and uncomprehending when presented with anything that isn't a straight white male to identify with as our main protagonist. Again, a lot of progress is being made, but these are exceptions that prove the rule.
My biggest problem with all of this? The fact that geek culture does not seem to be trying to pull itself out of this bias. If we want to talk about straight white males as main characters, think of all the comic book movies that have come out recently. Think about all the video games, with the exception of Portal, where you play a guy as the default. Bioware has been working on the "not-straight" part, and you certainly can play as a girl, but neither of those options have gotten much press in the past. It's like, if we can have a nerdy protagonist we still prefer him to be straight and white.
What I don't understand is why this is still going on. As geeks, shouldn't being counter culture come as second nature? There are women on the Avengers, why did none of them get an origins movie? (Ok, only one in the coming movie, but still) Women are a minority among geeks, but becoming less so all the time. I know I said I wasn't going to talk too much about it, but seriously with no non-white main protagonists. I'll give you that maybe in an urban fantasy or perhaps even a comic book reality, which is still set during our own time, it may be "problematic" to write from the point of view of someone who is not you, i.e. white or male. I qualify this because there are people who are not white or male working in these industries, so I'm not sure it's really all that hard to find a voice for it. However, giving the benefit of the doubt, it is somewhat understandable to not want to offend by "telling it wrong", especially when writing a book rather than working with an actor of color to tell a story honestly.
So what's your excuse, high fantasy? Theoretically, you should have the same freedoms of science fiction, since racial tensions are a thing of the present and not necessarily of the Ages Ago or Future. And don't give me the whole, "But we're in England past!" argument, because ELVES. I'm pretty sure it won't strain anybody's disbelief, especially if handled with the same aplomb Star Trek has always handled it, i.e."This character is not white. It does not in any way effect the story or his ability to tell it, so we are MOVING ON." Also with the no women! I mean, when was the last time since Xena that we saw some ancient fantasy past woman as the actual main character? Shouldn't magic be the great equalizer? Science Fiction has more, but still not a lot. I'm starting to feel like even the kick-ass girl side-characters aren't enough, because despite being better role models it still creates the illusion that there is only one Girl, and she is only THIS WAY. Being weak or kick-ass is not inherent to a gender, and sometimes being strong doesn't mean you aren't objectified needlessly.
What I love about being a geek is that on the internet, your visual self matters far less that your actual self. The whole "it's what's on the inside that counts" means a whole lot more when the people you are interacting with literally cannot see you. It's more important that you like David Tennant when you get on a chat about Dr. Who, because no one can tell and therefore can't care. You could literally be that dinosaur from Toy Story Three for all anyone would know. I enjoy that and I enjoy the message that it sends. That we don't care about all of that bullshit that keeps us apart IRL, but we can come together around the things we enjoy. So...wtf? Why in our biggest contributions to culture are we confined by the same nonsense that keeps Hollywood from hiring Asian actors for Akira? Why do geek girls constantly feel like they have something to prove, and why can't Green Lantern be African-American in the movies too?
I know what all of the easy answers are, but I want the answer that explains how the people who routinely reject reality continue to accept it. If you don't have that answer, then maybe you should start asking the question yourself, and finding ways to help change things.
* Max Barry does not actually endorse this post. Nor do any of the other thousands of things I've linked to in this post. At least...I don't think so *peers into internet*.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
e-Death of Bookstores
Since I'm ranting about book type things, I thought I'd take this opportunity to clear up some misconceptions about the relationship between brick-and-mortar book stores and online book retailers*.
Yesterday I had a customer come into the store, who said he had come in to pick up his copy of A Dance with Dragons . This wasn't out of the ordinary, we had quite a few people reserve their copies with us, so I smiled and said sure, and asked what his name was. I couldn't find a slip with his name on it, so I asked when he had reserved it. He said he had paid for it already. "Oh," I said. "You pre-ordered it. That means that it will ship today, and it will come here in a few days."
The customer then proceeded to rant at me for the next ten minutes or so about how ridiculous it was that he had pre-ordered something and then didn't get it on the day it came out. Now, I can understand the need to have a book on the day it comes out, so part of me sympathized. But the other, stronger part of me reacted the same way I do when people complain that books are so much cheaper to buy online: with anger and frustration at the way some people not involved in the industry misunderstand the system.
Let's be clear here. The customer who pre-ordered got the book at 46% off at our online store. I have no idea what the pre-order price was at Amazon or other retailers, but I'm sure it was comparable.Why such savings? Well, partly because in order to run an online site, you need quite a few people, but nowhere near the man-power you need to run a physical store, and you sell to so many more people because you are not limited by geography. As the foreman says in "Jayne's Town" (Firefly) "We can then pass on the savings directly on to you, the customer." It's so much cheaper because it CAN be. They don't have to charge as much to make a profit.
They also have to charge shipping, so they make it cheaper so you still want to buy it with them instead of going into the store. This is where most of the difference is made up. If a $7.99 book is 30% off it makes it $5.59, which means you saved about $2.40. Shipping and handling is $3-$4, sometimes more depending how much you ordered. So, in reality. you paid $8.59 for the book, WHICH IS THE SAME AMOUNT AS IN THE STORE. So, you have saved nothing other then getting to avoid talking to a human being while buying your book.
Time. That is the other commodity you "pay" by buying online. Since it isn't gaining you money, it's pretty worthless to you, until you want a book RIGHT NOW. Then, that's a pretty precious commodity. When you buy online you have to wait at least a day before you can start reading the latest by your favorite author. Which is why most book stores get their sales by selling big-name-author-series books. Because then you are willing to sacrifice your hard earned money to save time.
This brings me to my final point: space. Book stores have finite space. Because we are only so many square feet, we can only stock so many books. While every single bookstore in the world would LOVE to carry all the little known authors, we can realistically only afford to keep those titles that will sell. Online stores keep everything in a giant warehouse where no one needs to browse, a giant claw picks the book out of a box like one of those arcade games. Again, they stock it because they can, and if the only one buying the book lives in Ohio they don't need to worry about keeping it in a store in California. So yes, it is possible to get that obscure book for a discount online, but book stores must charge full price so that they can justify having it in their store. Most brick and mortar stores have ways of ordering the obscure titles for you, and they often don't charge you shipping. Again, the only price is time, which for some reason people seem less willing to pay once they've driven all the way there. It's not going to come faster just because you order it from home, folks.
All of these things combine in such a way that if you didn't know the WHY of all of these things, you would wonder what the hell brick-and-mortar stores are doing with themselves. You'd wonder why they charge so much when Amazon is so cheap, and you'd wonder why a book from the same company would cost more at it's physical location as opposed to their website. So please, remember that all of these factors are far beyond the control of the actual person who is selling you the book. He/She loves working at their store, and it drives them a little crazy when people come in complaining about online issues especially because they have no control over it.
This is to say nothing about the competition of e-books, that are so cheap because they don't even have to send you a physical copy. But for every e-book that is sold, that's a paper copy that goes unsold, which hurts the real stores. I'm not saying you shouldn't buy e-books, mostly because that's a futile battle. Book stores are going to have to drastically change their business model in order to be successful, and that goes for Mom and Pop stores as well as the big chains.
As I'm writing this a major book retailer is looking like it's about to go out of business. People feel a lot of different things about Borders, but no one can deny that a lot of towns will lose their only local brick and mortar stores if they close. Libraries are coming under fire as well, as they lose funding all over the country. Instead of being able to browse the stacks, customers will be forced to rely on Best Seller lists or computer generated lists of similar titles, as is touched on by this article by Michael Dirda. Now there will no longer be the possibility of getting a staff recommendation to go along with your Tom Clancy or Patricia Briggs. Books like The Hunger Games, which at least at my store was sold purely by booksellers who loved it, would get forgotten and passed over.
I don't know what the solution to all of this is. But if you, or someone you know, decides to start gripping at the actual booksellers for the way things are going, stop. Take a moment to remind yourself of all the factors beyond their control, that are actually controlled by consumers like you. Are you taking responsibility for your local bookstore closing down? Or are you rejoicing at save $2.50 on a paperback you could have just as easily picked up at your local store for the exact same price?
*When I say bookstore, I mean observations and realities as pertains to my bookstore, and ones like it in my town. Perhaps your book store has a different situation, and if so I'd love to discuss how it is effecting your store in the comments, but just saying OMG YOU'RE WRONG isn't helpful.
Yesterday I had a customer come into the store, who said he had come in to pick up his copy of A Dance with Dragons . This wasn't out of the ordinary, we had quite a few people reserve their copies with us, so I smiled and said sure, and asked what his name was. I couldn't find a slip with his name on it, so I asked when he had reserved it. He said he had paid for it already. "Oh," I said. "You pre-ordered it. That means that it will ship today, and it will come here in a few days."
The customer then proceeded to rant at me for the next ten minutes or so about how ridiculous it was that he had pre-ordered something and then didn't get it on the day it came out. Now, I can understand the need to have a book on the day it comes out, so part of me sympathized. But the other, stronger part of me reacted the same way I do when people complain that books are so much cheaper to buy online: with anger and frustration at the way some people not involved in the industry misunderstand the system.
Let's be clear here. The customer who pre-ordered got the book at 46% off at our online store. I have no idea what the pre-order price was at Amazon or other retailers, but I'm sure it was comparable.Why such savings? Well, partly because in order to run an online site, you need quite a few people, but nowhere near the man-power you need to run a physical store, and you sell to so many more people because you are not limited by geography. As the foreman says in "Jayne's Town" (Firefly) "We can then pass on the savings directly on to you, the customer." It's so much cheaper because it CAN be. They don't have to charge as much to make a profit.
They also have to charge shipping, so they make it cheaper so you still want to buy it with them instead of going into the store. This is where most of the difference is made up. If a $7.99 book is 30% off it makes it $5.59, which means you saved about $2.40. Shipping and handling is $3-$4, sometimes more depending how much you ordered. So, in reality. you paid $8.59 for the book, WHICH IS THE SAME AMOUNT AS IN THE STORE. So, you have saved nothing other then getting to avoid talking to a human being while buying your book.
Time. That is the other commodity you "pay" by buying online. Since it isn't gaining you money, it's pretty worthless to you, until you want a book RIGHT NOW. Then, that's a pretty precious commodity. When you buy online you have to wait at least a day before you can start reading the latest by your favorite author. Which is why most book stores get their sales by selling big-name-author-series books. Because then you are willing to sacrifice your hard earned money to save time.
This brings me to my final point: space. Book stores have finite space. Because we are only so many square feet, we can only stock so many books. While every single bookstore in the world would LOVE to carry all the little known authors, we can realistically only afford to keep those titles that will sell. Online stores keep everything in a giant warehouse where no one needs to browse, a giant claw picks the book out of a box like one of those arcade games. Again, they stock it because they can, and if the only one buying the book lives in Ohio they don't need to worry about keeping it in a store in California. So yes, it is possible to get that obscure book for a discount online, but book stores must charge full price so that they can justify having it in their store. Most brick and mortar stores have ways of ordering the obscure titles for you, and they often don't charge you shipping. Again, the only price is time, which for some reason people seem less willing to pay once they've driven all the way there. It's not going to come faster just because you order it from home, folks.
All of these things combine in such a way that if you didn't know the WHY of all of these things, you would wonder what the hell brick-and-mortar stores are doing with themselves. You'd wonder why they charge so much when Amazon is so cheap, and you'd wonder why a book from the same company would cost more at it's physical location as opposed to their website. So please, remember that all of these factors are far beyond the control of the actual person who is selling you the book. He/She loves working at their store, and it drives them a little crazy when people come in complaining about online issues especially because they have no control over it.
This is to say nothing about the competition of e-books, that are so cheap because they don't even have to send you a physical copy. But for every e-book that is sold, that's a paper copy that goes unsold, which hurts the real stores. I'm not saying you shouldn't buy e-books, mostly because that's a futile battle. Book stores are going to have to drastically change their business model in order to be successful, and that goes for Mom and Pop stores as well as the big chains.
As I'm writing this a major book retailer is looking like it's about to go out of business. People feel a lot of different things about Borders, but no one can deny that a lot of towns will lose their only local brick and mortar stores if they close. Libraries are coming under fire as well, as they lose funding all over the country. Instead of being able to browse the stacks, customers will be forced to rely on Best Seller lists or computer generated lists of similar titles, as is touched on by this article by Michael Dirda. Now there will no longer be the possibility of getting a staff recommendation to go along with your Tom Clancy or Patricia Briggs. Books like The Hunger Games, which at least at my store was sold purely by booksellers who loved it, would get forgotten and passed over.
I don't know what the solution to all of this is. But if you, or someone you know, decides to start gripping at the actual booksellers for the way things are going, stop. Take a moment to remind yourself of all the factors beyond their control, that are actually controlled by consumers like you. Are you taking responsibility for your local bookstore closing down? Or are you rejoicing at save $2.50 on a paperback you could have just as easily picked up at your local store for the exact same price?
*When I say bookstore, I mean observations and realities as pertains to my bookstore, and ones like it in my town. Perhaps your book store has a different situation, and if so I'd love to discuss how it is effecting your store in the comments, but just saying OMG YOU'RE WRONG isn't helpful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)