Comments on: Lament for a Lost Sofa http://www.literateur.com/2009/10/lament-for-a-lost-sofa/ Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:27:36 +0100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Literateur http://www.literateur.com/2009/10/lament-for-a-lost-sofa/comment-page-1/#comment-1420 Literateur Mon, 18 Jan 2010 01:51:00 +0000 http://www.literateur.com/?p=1790#comment-1420 I think you trace a very tenuous line that sofas in bookstores means 'the inevitability of reading only being for the polite classes'. The first time good books became available to a wider audience was with the penguin paperbacks in 1935, way way before the disappearance of sofas in bookshops, which was (as is clear by this article) relatively recent. There has not been a sudden increase in poorer people being able to buy books in the last few years. But there almost certainly was since the penguin paperbacks (apart from the dip again during the paper shortage of WWII). Before then good books were only published in hardback, which was and still is expensive. I think very very few people sit down in a bookshop sofa and read the WHOLE book cover to cover and then not buy the book. Think how long it takes to read the average paperback novel. At least two or three hours. Do you really think most bookshop browsers would sit in a bookshop for that long and then not buy anything? Do you really think that the sales assistants wouldn't come up to them and say something? I think it very unlikely and even if this happens very occasionally, certainly not enough to affect the overall profitability of books and hence the price as you claim so vigorously. Also, as Ling mentions, the internet is what is killing bookshops. The only way for physical bookshops to survive is offer something different, perhaps a comforting environment that makes book buying in person more pleasurable than buying on the internet would do the trick. That is the one thing that bookshops do better than the internet, browsing and letting you have a read of some of it. Is giving opportunities for poorer people to read books *all* that matters? To say that is to say that physical bookshops shouldn't exist because it is cheaper to have an internet business. To say that is to say that only large chains such as amazon should exist and small independent bookshops shouldn't - for they cannot compete on price with waterstones, let alone amazon. I think giving opportunities for poorer people is important. But it is not the ONLY thing that is important. Making sure that our independent businesses aren't completely wiped out by large chainstores is also important. Making sure that there are still places where one can have a browse around the new books and buy it in person is also important. I certainly think that poorer people should not be prevented from reading books. Libraries do a good job of preventing this. Cheap editions such as Wordsworth Classics do a good job too. I also think that people who don't usually read books (who are not necessarily poor) should be encouraged to read books. Cheaper books won't particularly encourage them; a cheap football ticket would not encourage me to go to a game. Something more needs to be done. Workshops to schools are good (sth we hope to do if we get some funding). Charities like Reading Agency and the Readathon scheme are also very good and, whatever you feel about it, television and film adaptations of books are also good at encouraging new readers. There is no need to be aggressive. Ling is not a cigar-smoking aristocrat who talks of 'plebs' and 'the Great Unwashed' while stroking her impressive moustache while counting the thousands she has got in bonuses from RBS. (Though it would be pretty funny if she were...) She is merely a book lover who quite liked sitting in a sofa in a bookshop and has the perfect right to not do as you order her to do and instead carry on lamenting the lost sofa. I think you trace a very tenuous line that sofas in bookstores means ‘the inevitability of reading only being for the polite classes’. The first time good books became available to a wider audience was with the penguin paperbacks in 1935, way way before the disappearance of sofas in bookshops, which was (as is clear by this article) relatively recent. There has not been a sudden increase in poorer people being able to buy books in the last few years. But there almost certainly was since the penguin paperbacks (apart from the dip again during the paper shortage of WWII). Before then good books were only published in hardback, which was and still is expensive.

I think very very few people sit down in a bookshop sofa and read the WHOLE book cover to cover and then not buy the book. Think how long it takes to read the average paperback novel. At least two or three hours. Do you really think most bookshop browsers would sit in a bookshop for that long and then not buy anything? Do you really think that the sales assistants wouldn’t come up to them and say something? I think it very unlikely and even if this happens very occasionally, certainly not enough to affect the overall profitability of books and hence the price as you claim so vigorously.

Also, as Ling mentions, the internet is what is killing bookshops. The only way for physical bookshops to survive is offer something different, perhaps a comforting environment that makes book buying in person more pleasurable than buying on the internet would do the trick. That is the one thing that bookshops do better than the internet, browsing and letting you have a read of some of it.

Is giving opportunities for poorer people to read books *all* that matters? To say that is to say that physical bookshops shouldn’t exist because it is cheaper to have an internet business. To say that is to say that only large chains such as amazon should exist and small independent bookshops shouldn’t – for they cannot compete on price with waterstones, let alone amazon. I think giving opportunities for poorer people is important. But it is not the ONLY thing that is important. Making sure that our independent businesses aren’t completely wiped out by large chainstores is also important. Making sure that there are still places where one can have a browse around the new books and buy it in person is also important.

I certainly think that poorer people should not be prevented from reading books. Libraries do a good job of preventing this. Cheap editions such as Wordsworth Classics do a good job too. I also think that people who don’t usually read books (who are not necessarily poor) should be encouraged to read books. Cheaper books won’t particularly encourage them; a cheap football ticket would not encourage me to go to a game. Something more needs to be done. Workshops to schools are good (sth we hope to do if we get some funding). Charities like Reading Agency and the Readathon scheme are also very good and, whatever you feel about it, television and film adaptations of books are also good at encouraging new readers.

There is no need to be aggressive. Ling is not a cigar-smoking aristocrat who talks of ‘plebs’ and ‘the Great Unwashed’ while stroking her impressive moustache while counting the thousands she has got in bonuses from RBS. (Though it would be pretty funny if she were…) She is merely a book lover who quite liked sitting in a sofa in a bookshop and has the perfect right to not do as you order her to do and instead carry on lamenting the lost sofa.

]]> By: Young Contrarian http://www.literateur.com/2009/10/lament-for-a-lost-sofa/comment-page-1/#comment-1419 Young Contrarian Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:36:20 +0000 http://www.literateur.com/?p=1790#comment-1419 What the author of this piece forgets is that bookstores are not libraries: like it or not, romanticise it or not, bookstores exist to sell books - not to offer 'customers' the chance to read them and disappear. If Waterstone's were to focus on customers sitting around for hours reading, then they would not sell enough books, which would lead to the overall price of each book needing to be increased. That retail stores have focussed on selling means that the price of books - even the pretentious ones - have gone down. To lament the sofa is to lament the existence of expensive books. To lament expensive books is to lament poor people being able to read them. Stop moaning about sofas and realise that the by-gone (thank goodness) era of couches in bookstores (and the inevitability of reading only being for the polite classes) is over. Capitalism and the quest for higher profits has, perhaps unexpectedly, opened up opportunities for poorer people to read books. That's all that matters. Stop lamenting the lost couch. What the author of this piece forgets is that bookstores are not libraries: like it or not, romanticise it or not, bookstores exist to sell books – not to offer ‘customers’ the chance to read them and disappear.
If Waterstone’s were to focus on customers sitting around for hours reading, then they would not sell enough books, which would lead to the overall price of each book needing to be increased. That retail stores have focussed on selling means that the price of books – even the pretentious ones – have gone down. To lament the sofa is to lament the existence of expensive books. To lament expensive books is to lament poor people being able to read them.

Stop moaning about sofas and realise that the by-gone (thank goodness) era of couches in bookstores (and the inevitability of reading only being for the polite classes) is over. Capitalism and the quest for higher profits has, perhaps unexpectedly, opened up opportunities for poorer people to read books. That’s all that matters. Stop lamenting the lost couch.

]]>