How many books does a man need? (allusion)

[Paul Mackin]

Its mean to say, but the most pejorative thing you can say about a novel is
that it was different.  Not here of course.
On Oct 31, 2017 11:33 AM, "Mark Kohut" <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:

> more so than ever, yes, I'd say, although some good ones do sell and many
> good ones might get rediscovered
> at a future time
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Isn't it also true that the books not worth reading are the ones that
>> sell?  Excluding vanity and tenure granting, I mean.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Arthur,
>>>
>>> Take it from one who knows: most of those books, say 160,000 are not
>>> worth reading. Say 100,000 are what I call interchangeable books, newly
>>> reshuffled pages of generic stuff: on self-help, business, dieting, etc.
>>> etc. that leaves 20,000.....at least half of those are the equivalent of
>>> vanity publishing, I say....not good enough for anyone but relatives and
>>> tenure-granting Department heads to read....so, maybe 10, 000 now, of which
>>> at least half of those are medicore, earnest finishers....so, 5,000 left,
>>> of which more than half cannot be of any major reader's interest since we
>>> cannot be interested in all---that half varies by individual, of
>>> course---so only @ 2,500 fiction and non-fiction ( or around 55 a week)....
>>>
>>> So.......just.......read....slowly.......enough; .....feel.....every
>>> ...............word ......which the books worth reading demand......
>>>
>>> to not care about the other 54 while you are reading.
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20171031/1aede115/attachment.html>