<?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: Vook</title>
	<atom:link href="http://netpoetic.com/2009/10/vook/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://netpoetic.com/2009/10/vook/</link>
	<description>exploring digital poetry and electronic literature</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:19:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christine Wilks</title>
		<link>http://netpoetic.com/2009/10/vook/comment-page-1/#comment-243</link>
		<dc:creator>Christine Wilks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 07:31:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netpoetic.com/?p=719#comment-243</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not sure that we&#039;ll ever need to go banging on the doors of the likes of Vook HQ or Simon and Schuster. Should any of us come up with a &#039;monetizable&#039; work of elit, what&#039;s to stop us selling it ourselves? Perhaps via an elit version of something like http://www.etsy.com (elitsy.com?) Or maybe we&#039;re already sitting in the pot at the end of the rainbow: http://www.gamesbrief.com/2009/10/two-reasons-why-facebook-is-about-to-become-bigger-than-google/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure that we&#8217;ll ever need to go banging on the doors of the likes of Vook HQ or Simon and Schuster. Should any of us come up with a &#8216;monetizable&#8217; work of elit, what&#8217;s to stop us selling it ourselves? Perhaps via an elit version of something like <a href="http://www.etsy.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.etsy.com</a> (elitsy.com?) Or maybe we&#8217;re already sitting in the pot at the end of the rainbow: <a href="http://www.gamesbrief.com/2009/10/two-reasons-why-facebook-is-about-to-become-bigger-than-google/" rel="nofollow">http://www.gamesbrief.com/2009/10/two-reasons-why-facebook-is-about-to-become-bigger-than-google/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Edward Picot</title>
		<link>http://netpoetic.com/2009/10/vook/comment-page-1/#comment-240</link>
		<dc:creator>Edward Picot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 18:17:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netpoetic.com/?p=719#comment-240</guid>
		<description>In other words, Alan, we should carry on doing what we&#039;re doing. I&#039;m sure that&#039;s right. It&#039;s a slightly rattling thought that if this were to stick (and from what I&#039;ve seen of it, I&#039;m not at all sure that it will) we could go overnight from being moderately-sized fish in a small pond to tiny little fish in a great big pond, and the big pond dominated by big-money players; but I suppose we might get the benefit of some extra attention.

Another way of looking at it is that Simon and Schuster&#039;s willingness to experiment with new media is indicative of their nervousness about the future of print. If you read the New York Times article, what they&#039;re trying to do is grab some of the audience which is currently giving print the go-by and going to places like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter for its entertainment. Hence the &quot;social networking&quot; aspect of Vooks, which otherwise seems to have very little connection with their content. 

My feeling is that traditional print publishing is in a state of turmoil. So many people are now buying books online that High Street bookstores can now only afford to stock big-selling titles, which means that the marketplace is increasingly dominated by film, television and celebrity tie-ins. Online, on the other hand, as a result of the Long Tail, Amazon will stock absolutely anything, because they don&#039;t have to physically stock it at all, which means no overheads. As a result of this, the online marketplace is increasingly flooded by self-published titles which sell in tiny numbers. It seems likely that in ten years from now the commercial publishing industry will have completely given up trying to &quot;discover&quot; new authors: they&#039;ll confine themselves to publishing the book of the TV cooking series, the autobiography of the sporting celebrity, the latest book by an author who has already sold millions, and so forth - and the only way any new blood will get into the system will be if people have already managed to sell lots of copies of their self-published work, whereupon they will be seen as a safe bet and offered a contract. 

Where does this leave hyperliterature? Probably in the same position as all other forms of creative writing. If you can demonstrate through your own efforts that your work can command a sufficiently large audience, someone will come out of the woodwork to offer you offer you money for it. You then have to make up your mind whether you want to tell them to get stuffed, and carry on as you are, or run for cover and buy yourself a house. It would be nice to think that efforts to foist hyperliterature best-sellers on the marketplace top-down, through a combination of slick technology and heavyweight marketing techniques, will go belly-up of their own accord. On the other hand, it worked for Harry Potter. If something gets enough publicity, it doesn&#039;t have to be great - it just has to be good enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In other words, Alan, we should carry on doing what we&#8217;re doing. I&#8217;m sure that&#8217;s right. It&#8217;s a slightly rattling thought that if this were to stick (and from what I&#8217;ve seen of it, I&#8217;m not at all sure that it will) we could go overnight from being moderately-sized fish in a small pond to tiny little fish in a great big pond, and the big pond dominated by big-money players; but I suppose we might get the benefit of some extra attention.</p>
<p>Another way of looking at it is that Simon and Schuster&#8217;s willingness to experiment with new media is indicative of their nervousness about the future of print. If you read the New York Times article, what they&#8217;re trying to do is grab some of the audience which is currently giving print the go-by and going to places like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter for its entertainment. Hence the &#8220;social networking&#8221; aspect of Vooks, which otherwise seems to have very little connection with their content. </p>
<p>My feeling is that traditional print publishing is in a state of turmoil. So many people are now buying books online that High Street bookstores can now only afford to stock big-selling titles, which means that the marketplace is increasingly dominated by film, television and celebrity tie-ins. Online, on the other hand, as a result of the Long Tail, Amazon will stock absolutely anything, because they don&#8217;t have to physically stock it at all, which means no overheads. As a result of this, the online marketplace is increasingly flooded by self-published titles which sell in tiny numbers. It seems likely that in ten years from now the commercial publishing industry will have completely given up trying to &#8220;discover&#8221; new authors: they&#8217;ll confine themselves to publishing the book of the TV cooking series, the autobiography of the sporting celebrity, the latest book by an author who has already sold millions, and so forth &#8211; and the only way any new blood will get into the system will be if people have already managed to sell lots of copies of their self-published work, whereupon they will be seen as a safe bet and offered a contract. </p>
<p>Where does this leave hyperliterature? Probably in the same position as all other forms of creative writing. If you can demonstrate through your own efforts that your work can command a sufficiently large audience, someone will come out of the woodwork to offer you offer you money for it. You then have to make up your mind whether you want to tell them to get stuffed, and carry on as you are, or run for cover and buy yourself a house. It would be nice to think that efforts to foist hyperliterature best-sellers on the marketplace top-down, through a combination of slick technology and heavyweight marketing techniques, will go belly-up of their own accord. On the other hand, it worked for Harry Potter. If something gets enough publicity, it doesn&#8217;t have to be great &#8211; it just has to be good enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eabigelow</title>
		<link>http://netpoetic.com/2009/10/vook/comment-page-1/#comment-237</link>
		<dc:creator>eabigelow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 02:20:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netpoetic.com/?p=719#comment-237</guid>
		<description>Edward--We&#039;ll just keep offering what we do for free. That ought to bring an audience!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Edward&#8211;We&#8217;ll just keep offering what we do for free. That ought to bring an audience!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Edward Picot</title>
		<link>http://netpoetic.com/2009/10/vook/comment-page-1/#comment-234</link>
		<dc:creator>Edward Picot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:45:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netpoetic.com/?p=719#comment-234</guid>
		<description>It looks like just text and video, Jim, at a quick glance. I&#039;m not too sure how it&#039;s constructed, either: you can either buy a web version or a download for your i-pod, if that&#039;s any clue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It looks like just text and video, Jim, at a quick glance. I&#8217;m not too sure how it&#8217;s constructed, either: you can either buy a web version or a download for your i-pod, if that&#8217;s any clue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Andrews</title>
		<link>http://netpoetic.com/2009/10/vook/comment-page-1/#comment-232</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Andrews</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 07:43:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://netpoetic.com/?p=719#comment-232</guid>
		<description>What media can it handle, Edward? Text and video? Does it have a scripting language? Like HTML has Javascript and Flash has Actionscript and Director has Lingo and so forth.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What media can it handle, Edward? Text and video? Does it have a scripting language? Like HTML has Javascript and Flash has Actionscript and Director has Lingo and so forth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

