> Discovering they weren't didn't change the quality of the writing - it only changed the implied relationship with the author. > But that's a parasocial exper

> Discovering they weren't didn't change the quality of the writing - it only changed the implied relationship with the author. > But that's a parasocial experience, not a feature of the words on the page. So? Consumption of media does not exist in a vacuum - how one feels about the work is inextricably affected by the context in which is was encountered and how one views it. We feel prouder (subconciously or not) of reading works that are considered "great" or "weighty". We feel nostalgia for rereading books from our youth, or affection for a book lent by a loved one. The writer is not saying that the words _themselves_ were changed by the new information, but that his perception and experience of them was. That experience _is still real_. > Why do we expect authors to be scrupulously physical "We" don't. Some people prefer it - others don't care. You're free to fall into the latter camp if you want; but the former is a valid preference, and one which _could_ be served by a market.