Leibowitz: what's the appeal?
Bliv bruger af LibraryThing, hvis du vil skrive et indlæg
Irrespective of the design differences between the two proposals, I have to ask: what's the appeal of the novel?
I’ll certainly read it again if it’s the inaugural CP title, but it’s not a favorite of mine. In my opinion, Miller’s ideas far exceed his skills as a writer.
Just started reading “A Flower for Algernon”. Only a few pages into it, but so far so good…
Interesting that the proposal that attracted the most votes in the first round is proving to be the most divisive among members of this forum.
Fundamentally we are uncovering the true challenge with the consensus press idea, none of the titles were voted for by even half of the members in the first round. Whatever wins will likely be divisive.
I personally only voted for 2 out of the top 10, but the only ones I might pass on if they’re selected are the Seneca titles, and only if they’re particularly expensive and/or fail to hook me on the long description. The other 8 all have fantastic proposals coming together, each with their own interesting details that I’d love to see executed.
I see the key to this part of the process being 1) vote for the titles you must want to read, but 2) advocate for any of the top 10 to be something you’d at least like to see done and have in your collection. For me, that second point means encouraging the finest printing and bookcraft alongside interesting / experimental design, binding and illustration.
I see that as a benefit, personally. I don't know that universal popularity has ever been the goal, so much as sharing ideas that we're individually very excited about and seeing if enough other people share that interest to actually make it happen.
So "buzz" may have pros and cons, depending on one's goal for the imprint. Our first title will likely set the press on its future path.
Who knows until we see, though!
I think that if Consensus Press succeeds, the inevitable trend will be towards members who are members because they enjoy or believe in this process itself. Members whose participation is contingent on the outcome of each edition will eventually drop out.
I would be open to membership as high as 150, but I think the caps that you and kdweber suggest are probably more reasonable. Means fewer proposals to review each round as well. As long as that membership size is sufficient to cover operational costs.
But even if you take a title I was interested in - Narayanan's version of the Mahabharata - I voted only for one of the two proposals specifically to avoid the situation we're in now with the Canticle and, to a lesser extent, Seneca hogging extra spots.
While I'm hoping one of the three works I voted for in the top 9 wins, as >24 grifgon: said I find the process interesting and I'm open to other works except maybe 1 (will need to read a longer sample to decide whether it's something I could accept to keep participation in the project going).
Bliv medlem af gruppen, hvis du vil skrive et indlæg