Conversely, very clever Ted. Up-votes will be rolling in through 2090 just from folks like me who got snagged into losing hours to days during our weeks-long Christmas-New Year deluge 2024-25 here in the Pacific NW reading through long-form joynalism, each forever scrolling megillah (Hey, Trademark ™ that web-site name: "Forever Scrolling Megillah"™) corporate-capturing Ka-Ching interruptive projectile vomiting advertising like Santa left in our communal chimney...
As a P.S., 58,000 titles published in a single year = loss leaders. I haven't worked in bookstores since the 90s, but even then, there were *far* too many titles being published. That any one new hardcover (keep in mind that most titles from major houses are still issued in HC 1st, with paperbacks following in 9-12 months) sells more than a few hundred copies is pretty amazing, given current list prices.
That people *are* buying books is indisputable, but what they're buying are *backlist titles.* Not new HC books, unless they're intended as gifts.
I'm not sure the author who claims that nobody's buying books understands much about bookstores and bookselling - and I wonder if e-books are included in the figures she cites? My hunch is that they're not.
Most publishers make the bulk of their profits on backlist titles. And since used books aren't counted (by publshers or anyone else, any more than used LPs or CDs are), there are more buyers and sellers than the article suggests.
With today's economy, buying new books on a regular basis is something relatively few people can afford. Like most library patrons, you know?
I think that the author's statements are pretty misleading - not on purpose, but b/c she lacks context and perspective. And there are a *lot* of small, independent publishers in this country. They're not taken into account by the writer.
Honestly, 58K new titles per annum is just idiotic. 10-15K is also way up there, but farr more reasonable than 58K.
Only in America would such excess ever be thought of as normal; the more so b/c an awful lot of those new titles are the kind of sci/tech writing that only specialist booksellers carry. I used to work near a store that specialized in math, science, and tech titles. It was a large store and was crammed with books that only a handful of people would ever buy or read, and yet, they sold lots and lots of books daily, to people who knew that this store - and only this one (except for their opposite numbers in Manhattan) carried what they needed.
Those kinds of titles are as far off from what's stocked by most bookstores as Antarctica is from Timbuktu (and its amazing libraries from the 1st millennium CE/AD).
Thanks, though more than a few of these pieces are paywalled. So, for me, and probably for some other readers, inaccessible. (People on fixed incomes, for example.) It's unfortunate.
I'm quite disappointed with the very first one in the list. Someone took their Goldman Sachs money and bought a franchise to a business with it, which he runs. Sprinkled with some not-so-subtle anti-vax sentiment and far-right ideology (e.g. "moved to Florida because it's free"). If this list was an album, I'd say the starting track is not a winner.
The piece on Gothic (and Gothic Revival) architecture neglected to mention something that's very important: architects moved from the Romanesque to the Gothic style b/c barrel-vaulted buildings are pretty dark inside. Since the walls are the primary load-bearing elements for those massive vaults, it's not possible to put more than a few windows in them.
The Gothic style has an awful lot to do with two things: what my profs. referred to as "verticality" and *light.* (Flying buttresses are used in Gothic cathedrals and chapels; they are the main load-bearing parts of all of the medieval churches built in the Gothic style.) What they were going for was a foretaste of heaven - and a lot of builders pulled off the ultra-high vaults + many window openings. The stained glass that went into them and the effect of colored light in the interiors was unlike anything people had ever encountered. There are contemporary records of peoples' reactions, and not only were folks wowed by the beautiful glass and ultra-high vaults - it was a deeply spiritual experience for them.
Small chapels allowed architects and builders to more or less do away with walls altogether, as at the French royal chapel, Ste. Chapelle - https://www.sainte-chapelle.fr/en
At any rate... I'm not a fan of Gothic Revival or neo-Gothic architecture. It *is* on the gloomy side, to me anyway - in many cases per early GR buildings, that's intentional. Patrons wanted "atmospheric" buildings - evoking the kinds of structures associated with contemporary novels (The Castle of Otranto, The Monk, etc.). I know this is all discussed in the AD piece, but i do find the way light isn't mentioned to be puzzling.
Another thing about medieval (as opposed to Gothic Revival) buildings in the Gothic style is that their interior walls - speaking of cathedrals, etc. - were plastered, then various architectural elements were painted. Of course, the plaster reflected light. At any rate, none have anything more than a few remnants of all that now, just as only a few Greek and Roman statues have traces of paint today - even though they were originally covered in it. We prefer plain marble, but that didn't get any traction til the Renaissance.
TL; DR - click on the link to Ste. Chapelle above.
dammit Ted - how long is it gonna take me to red all of these? which i now have no choice about…
Conversely, very clever Ted. Up-votes will be rolling in through 2090 just from folks like me who got snagged into losing hours to days during our weeks-long Christmas-New Year deluge 2024-25 here in the Pacific NW reading through long-form joynalism, each forever scrolling megillah (Hey, Trademark ™ that web-site name: "Forever Scrolling Megillah"™) corporate-capturing Ka-Ching interruptive projectile vomiting advertising like Santa left in our communal chimney...
Jest saying..
Tio Mitchito
Mitch Ritter\Paradigm Sifters, Code Shifters, PsalmSong Chasers
Lay-Low Studios, Ore-Wa (Refuge of Atonement Seekers)
Media Discussion List\Looksee ™
As a P.S., 58,000 titles published in a single year = loss leaders. I haven't worked in bookstores since the 90s, but even then, there were *far* too many titles being published. That any one new hardcover (keep in mind that most titles from major houses are still issued in HC 1st, with paperbacks following in 9-12 months) sells more than a few hundred copies is pretty amazing, given current list prices.
That people *are* buying books is indisputable, but what they're buying are *backlist titles.* Not new HC books, unless they're intended as gifts.
I'm not sure the author who claims that nobody's buying books understands much about bookstores and bookselling - and I wonder if e-books are included in the figures she cites? My hunch is that they're not.
Most publishers make the bulk of their profits on backlist titles. And since used books aren't counted (by publshers or anyone else, any more than used LPs or CDs are), there are more buyers and sellers than the article suggests.
With today's economy, buying new books on a regular basis is something relatively few people can afford. Like most library patrons, you know?
I think that the author's statements are pretty misleading - not on purpose, but b/c she lacks context and perspective. And there are a *lot* of small, independent publishers in this country. They're not taken into account by the writer.
Honestly, 58K new titles per annum is just idiotic. 10-15K is also way up there, but farr more reasonable than 58K.
Only in America would such excess ever be thought of as normal; the more so b/c an awful lot of those new titles are the kind of sci/tech writing that only specialist booksellers carry. I used to work near a store that specialized in math, science, and tech titles. It was a large store and was crammed with books that only a handful of people would ever buy or read, and yet, they sold lots and lots of books daily, to people who knew that this store - and only this one (except for their opposite numbers in Manhattan) carried what they needed.
Those kinds of titles are as far off from what's stocked by most bookstores as Antarctica is from Timbuktu (and its amazing libraries from the 1st millennium CE/AD).
Thank you so much for publishing the link to the MAD piece. That was excellent.
I became a Mad Magazine reader in the early 1960's, sadly I was just a broke kid so I'd only get to see it once or twice a year .
I've heard so many deride it but I think those who don't think much are the ones who didn't 'get' it and so need to deride it .
-Nate
What an honour to be included -- thank you so much
Would you do a similar one but with some of your own articles this year? Might be a good recap of your work!
I thought the same thing!
Thanks, though more than a few of these pieces are paywalled. So, for me, and probably for some other readers, inaccessible. (People on fixed incomes, for example.) It's unfortunate.
Yep couldn’t read several because of the paywall.
Thank you 🙏
Good list.
The Chris Dalla Riva piece on Sinatra was my favorite thing I read this year.
Also was not surprised to see a couple Wall Street Journal pieces on here. It's the most interesting newspaper in the country right now.
I'm quite disappointed with the very first one in the list. Someone took their Goldman Sachs money and bought a franchise to a business with it, which he runs. Sprinkled with some not-so-subtle anti-vax sentiment and far-right ideology (e.g. "moved to Florida because it's free"). If this list was an album, I'd say the starting track is not a winner.
Response to story no 1:
Derivatives Traders belong in Jail.
Isaiah should be WEARING them,
not making them🙃
The Sonatra article was definitely worth reading. Classic sleuthing.
Thank you for such a generous gift.
What a fine gift, thank you.
The piece on Gothic (and Gothic Revival) architecture neglected to mention something that's very important: architects moved from the Romanesque to the Gothic style b/c barrel-vaulted buildings are pretty dark inside. Since the walls are the primary load-bearing elements for those massive vaults, it's not possible to put more than a few windows in them.
The Gothic style has an awful lot to do with two things: what my profs. referred to as "verticality" and *light.* (Flying buttresses are used in Gothic cathedrals and chapels; they are the main load-bearing parts of all of the medieval churches built in the Gothic style.) What they were going for was a foretaste of heaven - and a lot of builders pulled off the ultra-high vaults + many window openings. The stained glass that went into them and the effect of colored light in the interiors was unlike anything people had ever encountered. There are contemporary records of peoples' reactions, and not only were folks wowed by the beautiful glass and ultra-high vaults - it was a deeply spiritual experience for them.
Small chapels allowed architects and builders to more or less do away with walls altogether, as at the French royal chapel, Ste. Chapelle - https://www.sainte-chapelle.fr/en
At any rate... I'm not a fan of Gothic Revival or neo-Gothic architecture. It *is* on the gloomy side, to me anyway - in many cases per early GR buildings, that's intentional. Patrons wanted "atmospheric" buildings - evoking the kinds of structures associated with contemporary novels (The Castle of Otranto, The Monk, etc.). I know this is all discussed in the AD piece, but i do find the way light isn't mentioned to be puzzling.
Another thing about medieval (as opposed to Gothic Revival) buildings in the Gothic style is that their interior walls - speaking of cathedrals, etc. - were plastered, then various architectural elements were painted. Of course, the plaster reflected light. At any rate, none have anything more than a few remnants of all that now, just as only a few Greek and Roman statues have traces of paint today - even though they were originally covered in it. We prefer plain marble, but that didn't get any traction til the Renaissance.
TL; DR - click on the link to Ste. Chapelle above.
What an interesting, eclectic assortment of articles. I too love longform journalism and this will keep me busy for a while.