<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The book as social contract</title>
	<atom:link href="http://snarkmarket.com/2010/5370/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2010/5370</link>
	<description>The stomping grounds of Tim Carmody, Robin Sloan and Matt Thompson. It&#039;s a long-running conversation about media, journalism, technology, cities, culture, design, books, music, movies, the future and the past.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:20:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Carmody</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2010/5370/comment-page-1#comment-9296</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Carmody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=5370#comment-9296</guid>
		<description>Now, with blogs, you&#039;ve got a string of evolving mechanisms that serve some of the same function. A good blogger is a good writer, sure, but they have arguably even more value as a reader and filter. If you run good links, you get a good rep. Start running crummy links, and your rep drops.

Ultimately, though, a bad link, a bad blog post, is just that. You can slough it off. You don&#039;t NEED the same level of legitimacy and social signals, if only because the body of writing, and the time required, is so much smaller. Ditto a YouTube video or MP3 vs. a feature film or full-length album. It&#039;s one reason why podcasts are tricky, because the things are so danged long.

And, blogs, videos, MP3s are all free.

A book has all sorts of ways to signal that it deserves your attention. But that&#039;s because it NEEDS more of it. The digital world, those legitimation mechanisms are just as social, but a little more porous, but that&#039;s okay. After all, they&#039;re not asking for so much.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now, with blogs, you’ve got a string of evolving mechanisms that serve some of the same function. A good blogger is a good writer, sure, but they have arguably even more value as a reader and filter. If you run good links, you get a good rep. Start running crummy links, and your rep drops.</p>
<p>Ultimately, though, a bad link, a bad blog post, is just that. You can slough it off. You don’t NEED the same level of legitimacy and social signals, if only because the body of writing, and the time required, is so much smaller. Ditto a YouTube video or MP3 vs. a feature film or full-length album. It’s one reason why podcasts are tricky, because the things are so danged long.</p>
<p>And, blogs, videos, MP3s are all free.</p>
<p>A book has all sorts of ways to signal that it deserves your attention. But that’s because it NEEDS more of it. The digital world, those legitimation mechanisms are just as social, but a little more porous, but that’s okay. After all, they’re not asking for so much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl Caputo</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2010/5370/comment-page-1#comment-9295</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl Caputo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 00:39:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=5370#comment-9295</guid>
		<description>Exactly, Tim. Other people add worlds of responsibility and accountability to the process. They help to make our attention worthwhile. We trust these objects produced by many hands much more and with much better reason than we have to trust the words produced by a solitary writer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactly, Tim. Other people add worlds of responsibility and accountability to the process. They help to make our attention worthwhile. We trust these objects produced by many hands much more and with much better reason than we have to trust the words produced by a solitary writer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Carmody</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2010/5370/comment-page-1#comment-9294</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Carmody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 23:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=5370#comment-9294</guid>
		<description>I think the &quot;95% done&quot; figure is self-consciously wrong, Dan-as-character putting forward something that Roy-as-character can knock down. 

In a way, the fact that half of the work involved in book production isn&#039;t done by the writer makes it even &lt;em&gt;more&lt;/em&gt; of a signal of social value. It&#039;s not just the effort implied, but the fact that other people, many of them experts on what makes a book good, have found the book worthy of their additional effort. 

Few books are as de luxe as those made by vanity presses. I mean, if I give my own self-published, self-written book a fancy cover and acid-free paper, and embed gold into the leather, who cares? I&#039;m probably biased to think that what I&#039;ve written is worth the effort. But if independent craftsmen and publishers and editors put in that work, putting their own reputations on the line, then a reader can feel pretty confident that they might be about to read something good -- right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the “95% done” figure is self-consciously wrong, Dan-as-character putting forward something that Roy-as-character can knock down. </p>
<p>In a way, the fact that half of the work involved in book production isn’t done by the writer makes it even <em>more</em> of a signal of social value. It’s not just the effort implied, but the fact that other people, many of them experts on what makes a book good, have found the book worthy of their additional effort. </p>
<p>Few books are as de luxe as those made by vanity presses. I mean, if I give my own self-published, self-written book a fancy cover and acid-free paper, and embed gold into the leather, who cares? I’m probably biased to think that what I’ve written is worth the effort. But if independent craftsmen and publishers and editors put in that work, putting their own reputations on the line, then a reader can feel pretty confident that they might be about to read something good — right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl Caputo</title>
		<link>http://snarkmarket.com/2010/5370/comment-page-1#comment-9293</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl Caputo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:58:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://snarkmarket.com/?p=5370#comment-9293</guid>
		<description>Charlie Stross has been writing recently about books and book production. He estimates the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/02/cmap-2-how-books-are-made.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;writer&#039;s proportion of effort in getting a book into print&lt;/a&gt; at closer to fifty percent than ninety-five percent. It&#039;s about half the work to write the manuscript, and then it goes into the hands of people who do the unsung but deeply necessary work of making a book into a thing worthy of respect and attention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Charlie Stross has been writing recently about books and book production. He estimates the <a href="http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/02/cmap-2-how-books-are-made.html" rel="nofollow">writer’s proportion of effort in getting a book into print</a> at closer to fifty percent than ninety-five percent. It’s about half the work to write the manuscript, and then it goes into the hands of people who do the unsung but deeply necessary work of making a book into a thing worthy of respect and attention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

