A poll for the Stephen King fans
Oct. 22nd, 2009 09:42 amRumblings are going around the Net at the moment about how Stephen King's next novel is coming out soon, and how it's a 1,000+ page monster that'll cost $35. The main point of contention is that they're holding the electronic release for a whole month, out of concern that the ebook release might somehow impact the hardback release.
Me, I find this entirely weird and bizarre, because $35 seems like a ridiculous price to pay for a book by anybody. So since my curiosity demands it, for any of you Stephen King fans out there, I present the following poll! And if you're not actually a Stephen King fan, feel free to search-and-replace in a hypothetical release by the author of your choice.
ETA 11:11am: Two people have already pointed this out to me, so yes, folks, I know it's "I COULDN'T care less"; I realized this about two seconds after I posted the poll, and polls aren't editable, so I can't change it! Sorry!
[Poll #1474817]
Me, I find this entirely weird and bizarre, because $35 seems like a ridiculous price to pay for a book by anybody. So since my curiosity demands it, for any of you Stephen King fans out there, I present the following poll! And if you're not actually a Stephen King fan, feel free to search-and-replace in a hypothetical release by the author of your choice.
ETA 11:11am: Two people have already pointed this out to me, so yes, folks, I know it's "I COULDN'T care less"; I realized this about two seconds after I posted the poll, and polls aren't editable, so I can't change it! Sorry!
[Poll #1474817]
no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 04:50 pm (UTC)There is no way that I'd pay $35 for a book. Period. I didn't even pay that for Harry Potter 7. It's enough to make me not even want to buy any other editions, honestly. $8.99 for a paperback is too high for my blood, and that's current cost. I've switched to ebook on my Blackberry because of the insipid prices on physical covers, and most of them I can find in sponsor-supported format.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:25 pm (UTC)But only MAYBE. That's a LOT of money to put down on a book. For that kind of dough, it's got to be a work of ART.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 05:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 07:16 pm (UTC)Honestly $35 doesn't really strike me as a high price for a book, but then again book prices in Canada are generally WAY higher than they are in the US.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 05:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 05:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 06:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 06:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 06:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 06:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 06:25 pm (UTC)But a 1000-page monster? I gotta wonder. I think the dude needs a machete, or at least an editor. I know the quality of Rowling's work did NOT go up as the page count did. Certainly now that Weber has his page count DOWN a bit it's better writing... although he STILL blathers on about the politics for pages on end, it's not quite as bad as it used to be.
Tolkein had a thousand pages-ish worth of story. He broke it up into three books. Asimov had a LOT more than that to tell... ended up being, what, fifteen books by the time the Killer Bees got done writing the prequels? You've got a trilogy in the works. Seanan has two (different genres). I gotta think that over time, the shorter works are gonna sell better.
Don't get me wrong. When it comes to straight drama (as opposed to horror), I *like* Stephen King. Shawshank is one of my favorite movies - and print stories - of all time. But I think I'm gonna pass on this one for sheer size. I don't have that kind of time anymore. I chewed up a fair chunk just getting through Weber's latest... rather go back to reading something shorter like, say, Scalzi. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:20 pm (UTC)And yeah, Ravens was only $25. Which is about the maximum amount I'm willing to put down for a book in general, but that's also a special case anyway since it was specifically for a good cause, as opposed to just a book I'd be reading for pleasure. If it's just a book I'm reading for my own pleasure, I'd just as soon take that $25 and go spend it on three cheaper books and get three times as much reading for the same price!
no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 06:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-22 11:16 pm (UTC)However, my point still stands about a 1,000+ page monster being too damn heavy to carry around. ;)
no subject
Date: 2009-10-23 07:45 am (UTC)That said, if one was a fan of said author's work, I'm not so sure that $35 is really all that outrageous a price. A lot of books come out at around 500 pages and cost easily in the realm of $24 for a hardcover edition of that is purchased at full price (which is usually not the case - book ends up being at Costco and deep discount and on special sale at other big bookstores, yadda, yadda). If the book is 1,000+ pages, then it's the equivalent of two full length books (depending upon the author in question, of course) which would be $48 if you had to buy them separately.
Many people would pay $24 twice for two books by the same author, so I don't find it that hard to believe that someone would be willing to cough up $35 for one book that is the length of two.
I wouldn't, but I don't find it that much of a stretch for a hardcover and a hard core fan.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-24 10:37 pm (UTC)Shoot. It may end up on the remainer pile for $5 like White Knight by Jim Butcher.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-25 12:20 am (UTC)Here is a Stephen King book that looks worth the high price--artwork, artifacts, etc. I may buy it for my Dad for the solstice or something....
A novel? $35 is too much.
Cathy