6 ms·
I agree that funding for otherwise unknown authors is necessary for high quality books, and I agree that more sales mean more money around to fund "risky" autho
by probably_wrong 4y ago
I agree that funding for otherwise unknown authors is necessary for high quality books, and I agree that more sales mean more money around to fund "risky" authors.
But I'd rather see funding work a bit like science, where you ask a non-profit for funding based on a project proposal that's judged more on its merits than on its sales potential. No author would need an "X Twitter followers" pre-requisite anymore.
And then there's the counterpart, namely, reach: when I studied Japanese in South America the only textbook available in Spanish were photocopies sold (illegally, of course) by the University of the only original they had - with such a small market and highly devaluated currency, no bookstore imported the book anymore. Had it not been for piracy, none of us could have studied. And it would have been poor consolation to know that our sacrifice in not pirating a book would have led to better books somewhere else that we also wouldn't be able to afford.