It is commonly thought that lists are more likely to convince a person to follow a link. You are going to feel greater interest, for example, if the title “Unusual Financial Advice” is replaced with “25 Unusual Ways to Make Money”. Personally I can say that I am vulnerable to this strategy, but I cannot claim to appreciate how well it works with others. That said, there appears to be a proliferation of lists and this lends logic to the idea that many consider it to be effective. Beyond marketing, the value of these lists is dubious. After all, who generates them and what authority do these creators have over the subject matter? At year’s end the lists seem to appear with more frequency as web page editors bait visitors with nostalgic casts of the last twelve months. Unsurprisingly, lists of this type are frequently created in regard to fiction.
As Tim Parks has done well to remind us, literature does not dodge the market. With this in mind, it is natural that publishers, editors, and authors push their products; particularly as we move closer to the gift-giving year’s end. Any reading of lists that present “2015’s Best Fiction” must be taken with this sales-focused grain of salt. The market, however, is an inundated place and hours for reading are scarce. In the past we depended on editors to be gatekeepers of quality. Whether they did their job well is contentious, but their role in restraining the number of published texts is unarguable. Because of them the shelves of books that could be purchased was large, but more manageable than the ones which challenge us today. These numbers were further reduced by the realities of materials, languages, and the ability to get books into faraway hands. Although to a lesser degree, these forces continue to exercise influence on the literary market today. However, submarkets and niche areas appear with frequency as self-publishing, online sales, cheapened materials (ebooks!), and translation work to streamline the obstacles between an author’s draft and a reader’s nightstand. The result of this shifting market is a larger and more diverse selection. While this means fewer people will find texts that they have in common, it also provides opportunity for writing that previously would not have found readers to become available to the public. Although sometimes difficult to navigate, I generally feel that this growing heterogeneity is positive.
Thanks to this amplified market, it is easy to find texts that you perceive as different or exotic; particularly if one is interested in literature on a global scale. However, how do you know if something is worth purchasing? Obviously the true answer to this question can only be determined by reading a few chapters, but these yearly lists have become a useful resource. For better or worse, with all this in mind, the following are a few lists that have recently caught my attention:
As Tim Parks has done well to remind us, literature does not dodge the market. With this in mind, it is natural that publishers, editors, and authors push their products; particularly as we move closer to the gift-giving year’s end. Any reading of lists that present “2015’s Best Fiction” must be taken with this sales-focused grain of salt. The market, however, is an inundated place and hours for reading are scarce. In the past we depended on editors to be gatekeepers of quality. Whether they did their job well is contentious, but their role in restraining the number of published texts is unarguable. Because of them the shelves of books that could be purchased was large, but more manageable than the ones which challenge us today. These numbers were further reduced by the realities of materials, languages, and the ability to get books into faraway hands. Although to a lesser degree, these forces continue to exercise influence on the literary market today. However, submarkets and niche areas appear with frequency as self-publishing, online sales, cheapened materials (ebooks!), and translation work to streamline the obstacles between an author’s draft and a reader’s nightstand. The result of this shifting market is a larger and more diverse selection. While this means fewer people will find texts that they have in common, it also provides opportunity for writing that previously would not have found readers to become available to the public. Although sometimes difficult to navigate, I generally feel that this growing heterogeneity is positive.
Thanks to this amplified market, it is easy to find texts that you perceive as different or exotic; particularly if one is interested in literature on a global scale. However, how do you know if something is worth purchasing? Obviously the true answer to this question can only be determined by reading a few chapters, but these yearly lists have become a useful resource. For better or worse, with all this in mind, the following are a few lists that have recently caught my attention:
- The New York Times wants you to see one hundred “notable books” from 2015.
- The Huffington Post presents 23 books by Latinos that “might just change your life”.
- And, the Telegraph goes for the classics (and the hyperbole) with the “ten best Latin American books of all time”.
