Sauk Valley's premier bookstore/coffeehouse features fiction, non-fiction, children's & local interest books.
Open 7 days/week, we also have fine coffees & pastries, wooden puzzles, children's art supplies & other toys, handmade fair trade goods plus priceless conversation. Special orders welcomed.
The Poetry of Robert Frost: The Collected Poems, Complete and Unabridged
Available at Books on First ($20.00)
Frost has a certain affinity with nature, and thus, poetry readers will always identify him with the changing of the seasons.
"The Cocoon"
As far as I can see, this autumn haze That spreading in the evening air both ways Makes the new moon look anything but new And pours the elm-tree meadow full of blue, Is all the smoke from one poor house alone, With but one chimney it can call its own; So close it will not light an early light, Keeping its life so close and out of sight No one for hours has set foot outdoors So much as to take care of evening chores. The inmates may be lonely womenfolk. I want to tell them that with all this smoke They prudently are spinning their cocoon And anchoring it to an earth and moon From which no winter gale can hope to blow it -- Spinning their own cocoon did they but know it.
I have enjoyed mysteries, including kinds of mysteries other than murder mysteries (think, Edgar Allan Poe's "The Purloined Letter" and even some of the cases of Alexander McCall Smith's No.1 Ladies' Detective Agency). In this day and age, it becomes difficult to write and publish something other than a "murder mystery," even with the genre-defying novels featuring witches, werewolves, fairies, angels, dinosaurs and food critics all which feature stumbling over or being called to investigate dead bodies as the stimulus for the entire story, the reason for being.
Genre-bending are three titles which I'd like to share but not today or this posting will never get published
Another Mystery: Thank You to Follower of this blog and Books on First fan Deb M has been coming into Books on First, probably since we first opened in October 1998. She and partner Dennis lived in Peoria and now own a house in Washington, IL. Originally from Dixon with family still in town, long-haul truckdriver Dennis drops Deb off in town before a run and then, comes picks her up when he is back in Illinois. Before the acidity became too much, Deb was a daily two larger cups of black coffee customer. And, now, I see that when she is not in Dixon, she keeps in touch with Books on First through this blog and Fans of Books on FirstFacebook (Hi, Deb!)
Generously, she has told me what a great blog this is and says she doesn't leave comments, because I leave her with nothing to say (don't know how to take that). But, the big question she had: why aren't more people following this blog? Sometimes, life is a mystery, Deb. However, it does give me a chance to write and write and edit and edit and edit and edit some more without the pressure of producing for "my readers" as Julie Powell called the readers and followers of her blog.
Speaking of obligation to readers, I heard an extensive (for prime time) interview on NPR's All Things Considered with writer Orhan Pamuk, who won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2006 when he was 54. He said that this award and the exposure it has given him to readers around the world has pushed him to be a more responsible writer and to be a better writer, because they have expectations that need fulfilled. What a two-edged sword recognition is.
I pass along a PBS program that aired last week and was passed along to me. I had heard much of the Alan Greenspan, Rob Rubin, Larry Summers, et al cabal before, but not so much about Brooksley Born (Her father had expected a boy to name after his best friend Brooks, so didn't plan on a girl's name. Love the name, sir.) . What I felt very naive about was Ayn Rand's philosophy and how that influenced Alan Greenspan, or how people have said it did. I still feel like Forrest Gump or someone naive. I still reject the notion that libertarianism and objectivism are for no government intervention whatsoever; it cannot possibly be against crime prevention. I know it's on tape that Ayn Rand is against any regulation and that Greenspan took that to mean that the government is not responsible for stupid fools, but I cling with my fingertips to the cliffedge of sanity -- how can he possibly believe that government is not responsible for punishment of those who act against society? Michael Sandel in his new book wrote that libertarians believed in government's role in at least three areas:
enforce contracts
protects private property from theft
keeps peace
I think preventing fraud is covered under all of these:
enforce contracts with a civilized society
protects private property from theft including theft from the unscrupulous, the greedy and the violators of the Golden Rule
keeps peace including chaos due to economic meltdown and attacks on the lives of innocents
For one thing, although "bespoken derivatives" were so narrowly defined as to be one-of-a-kind and contracts are admittedly or should be between two consenting parties, when these CDOs, etc are being offered up to the general public through the vehicle of the stock market, bond market, insurance policyholders, etc and the public becomes a partner in these contracts (as shareholders or other stakeholders), the government should rightly be a representative of the public as a whole. Maybe it should be under a different name -- not regulation, but oversight, peacekeeping, contract enforcement or theft prevention.
A while ago, I had heard the airing of a letter to an NPR program that complained about people misusing the word "literally" and that the anchor of the show (I forget the details, although I want to say it was regarding Scott Simon of Weekend Edition Saturday, but I won't) did not help matters when he too said something like, "Hearing that literally struck terror in my heart."
Larry says we must first explain what to use instead. What's the opposite of "literally?" Figuratively. Tell them what the definition of "figuratively" is. In Carolynspeak, it means, "in a figure of speech..." Then, I thought, no one says, "Hearing that figuratively struck terror in my heart." No, he would say, "Hearing that struck terror in my heart." No "literally" and no "figuratively," because "struck terror in my heart" is already a figure of speech. It suddenly struck me (figuratively): "Literally" is being used as emphasis. It really, really, really did strike terror in my heart -- no ifs, ands or buts about it. I consulted with The American Heritage College dic-tion-ar-y (Fourth Edition) and here, I was confirmed: definition 3b of lit-er-al-ly = "Used as an intensive before a figurative expression." And, I thought, welcome to the 21st century, where language along with civil society has been going to hell in a handbasket for over twenty centuries, while those advocates of living language say, "Fuhgeddaboudit." And, then, right after definition 3b between lines in grey background (as if in intensiveness) is a
USAGE NOTE: For more than a hundred years critics have objected to the use of literally with figurative or hyperbolic expressions, as in It's literally roasting in here. The critics maintain that in such constuctions literally is used to mean the exact opposite of its primary sense, "in a manner that accords with the literal sense of the words." While this looser use of the word as an intensive to mean "without exaggeration" may be infelicitous, it cannot be said to be incorrect. It can lead, however, to inadvertent comic effect when used together with an idiomatic expression that has its source in a frozen figure of speech, as in I literally died laughing.
Wow! I will merely say that a professional (dictionary definition) writer can certainly articulate the controversy better than I! In Carolynspeak, he said that not only is this use for emphasis not incorrect (at least not since the early 20th century), but it could still be ridiculed -- a "So, there!" for both sides!
Well, then, there's something I heard just the other evening from a business CD on economic trends. They were speaking of the "new normal" in which they first had to describe the "old normal" in order to present how it changed. One factor is globalization as well as technology. With cellular, satellite, etc technology, a person can "literally be in three, four, even five places at one time." He can? If so, I think the cellular technology would be human gene cloning, not SSID.
Again, it was for emphasis, although whether that emphasis was needed or not becomes the issue. I searched my brain for another, maybe more proper, word. Would "virtually" work? Again to the dictionary. But, given the old fashioned, maybe 19th century, definition of "virtual" is not what people who were born in the last forty years (a group which does not include myself) or have read science fiction from this period, perhaps no. But lo and behold, virtual means what it always has meant and what it continues to mean: 1) In fact or to all purposes; practically, and/or 2) Almost but not quite; nearly. And, I think that makes "virtually" the best word, because of that double meaning -- the 15th century as well as the 21st century ones.
Just a quick mention: Barnes & Noble has joined the ranks again of those pioneering into that world of offering readers the ultimate in portable electronic reading medium. Every time someone does, we progress a little closer to becoming that futuristic place which science fiction writers (and readers of the classic genre) saw. How long ago has it been since I read of two kids finding a dusty old printed, bound book while playing in an attic, opening it up and quickly losing interest in the artifact -- the most disappointing point being that when they turned the paper page back and forth, the words were still the same, not refreshing with movement to a new point in the book? (Someone, quick! tell me what book it was I was reading!) BN has conquered yet another objection: sharing a book. With its Nook, a reader can buy the book, download it into the Nook and share it for 2 weeks with anyone he wants (who also has a Nook). During that time, the original purchaser of the e-book wouldn't have access to the book, just like as if he had lent someone a printed, bound book. Hmm, why only 2 weeks? Is BN encouraging people to become miniature lender libraries? I mean, can the friend renew the book for another 2 weeks? Can the original buyer then lend it to someone else? Can the friend lend it to someone else? Can the original buyer simply give the friend the book? For one thing, this would certainly cut down on people losing books due to lending them to irresponsible people who don't make the effort to return them to the original owner. (Not that I'm complaining. I recently sold Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged to a woman who had searched for her prior copy on her bookshelf with the intent to re-read it (in these interesting times -- see my website review saved somewhere earlier in this blog) only to find it gone. Probably not stolen by a burglar who had crept into the house with the sole purpose of taking Ayn Rand. BN should think about that sage piece of advice: "Neither a borrower nor a lender be." Cash, books, ... all good.
Still, there are people complaining about the cost... the cost of the Nook, the cost of each title... Grumblers who expect all things electronic to cost 99 cents or some small multiple thereof and watchers of the walmart.com vs amazon.com downward spiral seem to think that there are no more costs associated with e-books once costs of printing and distribution are discounted. How much do they think printing and distribution actually cost? And even if we did say, ok, no more "free" freight to recoup somehow along with the cost of ink and paper, what about throwing a little something to the authors (yeah, back to those "I just want to be read" socialists again)? How about marketing costs since no one wants to buy a book he never heard of (even "viral" Youtube videos cost $$ to make)? How about the hourly wages and health care benefits of junior editors and word processors? How about the cost of software development and silicon (or whatever is the current wonder conductor) chips made in third-world firetraps? Not to mention electricity charges and ISP fees?
I am in the midst of enjoying the advance reader copy of a new title by Jasper Fforde -- Shades of Grey, which has a "street date" in December, maybe not even in time for Christmas (what kind of marketing is that?). In all honesty, I enjoy having an actual, physical bound ARC to hold and carry around and read, but if sending me even a .pdf file will cut that $25.95 book down to a list price of $9.99 , I'll accept that. However, we may no longer be able to discount it by 20% to acknowledge our loyal customers' snub of walmart.com and amazon.com. More on the actual book in a later posting. TTFN.
Michael Sandel's Justice: What is the Right Thing to Do? was treated to a lot of fanfare at the BookExpo this past May. They had a bio video that showed students hanging off the rafters in his lecture hall-- the most popular class at Harvard. And, I heard him speak in person, sort of a mini-lecture, albeit with the same material I had heard from his editor the previous evening at a panel featuring choice editors' picks.
Sandel is certainly an engaging speaker. He seemed a little disconcerted while attempting to interact with the older, more reticent crowd (probably a median age of 45 at the BookExpo versus the more familiar bold & brightest 19-year-olds), but one could tell that he is intelligent and passionate about his subject. He must have charmed those who should have known better within Farrar Straus Giroux, because the book itself is so poorly edited, that it is difficult for me to recommend it without qualification. I would have recommended to the publishers that they bundle the books as a companion to an audio or even a video of his reading the book or lecturing on the topics of Aristotle, utilitarianism, libertarianism, Kant, market theory and much more. With the sheer force of his personality leaping across the audio or visual medium, he might have been able to make this book a decent reading experience, although still a pale shade to live performance, er, I mean class offering.
In an open learning mode, a reader on his own can learn quite a bit and gather ammunition for almost any position. We can almost see the libertarian in each of us, while wanting to be really morally good -- whatever that means. Like a good teacher, Sandel makes every effort to stay objective, not take a stand on one position or another, explain how each situation would have been viewed by expousers of one philosophy of justice (or, what is right, what is fair, what is morally good) versus another's. In that spirit, he manages to confuse, frustrate and bore the reader who has no outlet to air opinions or ask for further clarification. However, I must concede that as a reference from philosophy to real, current world situations, it is more accessible than actually reading and then, interpreting Aristotle, Immanual Kant or John Rawls on one's own. And, I like to recommend anything that might get us all to think about and again yearn for a civil society.
I share with you a Wall Street Journal item from today (Warning: as [blogger] is not among the choices for sharing, this link is not a permalink and thus, may disappear on us at WSJ.com's convenience). The article is about walmart.com figuratively rolling up its sleeves and taking on amazon.com. There must have been taunts exchanged and tongues stuck out at some point, as walmart.com CEO Raul Vazquez is quoted: "If there is going to be a 'Wal-Mart of the Web,' it is going to be Walmart.com.... Our goal is to be the biggest and most visited retail Web site." Walmart.com wants to be the biggest and most visited retail Web site?? Classic business school strategy studies says, first pick off the competitor's fringe markets and then, when it doesn't have additional legs to stand on, attack at its (seemingly) strongest point. Gee, had walmart.com been attacking amazon.com's toaster oven and disposable diaper sales online as well as its brick-and-mortar big box bookstores cum acre parking lots which also ban non-family-oriented music CDs and sell five kinds of lettuce all this time and we weren't paying attention?
So, while these two duke it out, the publishing industry is supplying its fingers for ammunition and big-name authors are weighing in.
WSJ probably could not get Stephen King to comment, so Dean Koontz and James Patterson (sometime co-author with Maxine Paetro, Michael Ledwidge, Gabrielle Charbonnet, Martin Dugard,... sorry if I missed anyone else) did the honors:
James Patterson, whose coming novel, "I, Alex Cross," is being discounted from $27.99 to $10, said he was happy to be in Wal-Mart's top 10. However, he warned any industry that sets low price points may later have a difficult time re-establishing those prices. "Obviously e-books have gotten this thing going," said Mr. Patterson. "E-books are terrific and here to stay. But I think that people need to think through the repercussions....But I'm not taking sides....I'm not the endangered species here."
"I'm not the endangered species here." What does that mean? No matter what happens to books -- any kind published by anyone bought from anywhere, he'll still get his advances and royalties? Who then is the endangered species, Mr Patterson? Is his quote just like a character's non-sequitor thoughts or is this poor reporting/editing?
(By the way, steet date for his new book is November 1, 2009. Books on First offers 20% all adult hardcover fiction. Reserve your copy now!)
Dean Koontz expresses conflicting emotions of the writer's need for recognition and readership (see blog post on "aspiring" writers) and his acknowledgement that it's actually a good thing to have small, independent bricks-and-mortar bookstores where a writer and his work can be discovered by a new reader a rainy day browse or through trusted bookseller's personal recommendation.
"Any time people are fighting over your work it's a good thing, especially when you've worked all those years hoping it would be fought over," he said.
Mr. Koontz said he's more worried about the independent bookstores. Although most limit their stock of best-sellers, a price war on the most popular books may hurt.
Thank you, Mr Koontz. Keep on feeling conflicted; that means you're thinking ahead of tomorrow to day after tomorrow. (By the way, just in time for holiday giving -- street date is November 24, 2009, is Dean Koontz's latest book, Breathless.)
Stephen King too looks kindly on us indies although his sales are nothing to sneeze at. He has a book, Under the Dome, also out November 1, 2009, and also, discounted by Books on First at 20% off list (no cover art yet available for posting).
All in all, we independent booksellers cannot sit on our hands (or wring them) while bigger, better-funded retailers trample all over the published book landscape.
I am especially interested in the comments that WSJ.com articles sometimes generate. This one has inspired over 30 of them at last look, and it 's a (generally) good discussion about capitalism, civil society, culture, elitism (whoa, Sherman Alexie!), technology, socialism, ...
Capitalism and writers: So, these price reductions supposedly would result in reductions in an author's royalties. One comment was about how no one is forcing someone to be an author. If it doesn't pay, then, don't be a professional writer. There's still distribution, recognition and readership to consider. I am trying to imagine Mr Patterson with a website offering a couple of free chapters and a BUY NOW TO CONTINUE READING as well as DONATE button, because yes, that's what might result, when there are no publishers to nurture, edit, be passionate about, promote and publicize, print, ... [repeat] writers new to a genre, less known authors (critically acclaimed or otherwise good or bad), and eventually, well-known and bestselling authors like Koontz and Patterson. And, that's just the publishers. I haven't begun to talk about independent booksellers and the costs they incur to offer the value they add. Why stop at watching walmart.com succeed at selling hardcover copies of titles listing at $25-$30 for only $9 but fail to become "the biggest and most visited retail Web site," or amazon.com survive but struggle to maintain its community of reader-contributed reviews and its mighty search engine and network of small used & rare book vendors in the effort to serve two groups: the "I know what I want and I want it now buyer" and the "let's see what might be interesting to read today reader"? Just cut out the middleman entirely.
Another wisdom I learned at graduate management school -- price competition is bad for everyone. It's a downward spiral and lots of stakeholders lose, including readers.
Think about the day after tomorrow, when we must all find a reason for existence that goes beyond the numbers.
I just found Graham Beattie's Book Blog in which you may be interested, also. (This does not happen everyday, as "browsing" on the internet is a lot less fun than browsing in a bookstore -- my opinion.) He has a great quote from the author of The Art of Racing in the Rain Garth Stein (speaking at a gathering that Larry and I did not attend) about selling books. Check it out!
We can now move to the distinction between professional writers (who must by definition be published, right?) and non-professionals (are they the ones who are not getting paid to write, or not published?). If you are a brochure writer, you're still a writer, in my book/blog. Again, the distinctions become blurred. And, now, the FTC is regulating blogs and thus, reminding readers that some bloggers are not or no longer writing out of the goodness of their hearts. Some writers are up in arms. How dare the government regulate free speech! We Americans used to believe what was printed in the newspapers ("they wouldn't print it if it weren't true" rationalization). Now, some people still say they found it over the internet, as if that decides it, it must be right. Are you a doctor or just play one on TV? Are you a writer or a blogger? We writers (those of us who actually consider ourselves so) have a responsibility to write well. Do we have the responsibility to tell the truth?
Well, I have already disclaimed I get payola for anything and probably will not "monetize" this blog, simply because I doubt anyone's going to pay to have the cover of a book on here.
I will add that as a bookseller, I receive what we call in the biz ARCs -- advanced reader copies. This is to enable us to read a book, review it and sell it to our customers. We booksellers would love free stuff or to be paid to sell a book, but as a group (I believe I can almost speak for probably 99.94% Ivory-soap pure), we will only push that about which we are passionate. And, if we are passionate about a best-selling author, we still read his works, although we may not "push" them as hard as a newly published writer or a little known author or little known but well-written book. We don't have to do it. Are we falling down on the job? Just because he's a very very good seller, does it mean we are allowed to "ignore" him? Well, no, first off, we'd never ignore someone's work that can actually bring in some funds to meet the payroll. Secondly, what kind of expectations do publishers, writers, makers of products and Federal regulators really have of us little indies (whether we are booksellers or bloggers) influencing large blocks of sales?
Just sending a clip of a nice story that was on the Today Show this morning about a deli worker named Ed, from Winnetka, IL. At about 40 seconds into the clip you see Larry’s daughter, Kelly -- (she’s blonde and she says “Thanks, Ed!”) So besides Larry’s daughter making major morning television, watch the entire story, because it’s very inspiring!
Just a For Your Reference, I don't know about anybody else, but Larry's children have always been civil and Kelly is a great example of a Larry adnascentia (Save the Words!) or acorn not falling far from the tree -- she is not only civil and respectful, she's sensitive to people's needs (whether they be strangers, acquaintances, friends or family) and a darn hard worker. Thanks, Kelly!
And, we'd like to take the opportunity to highlight the civility and respect you will find from all of us at Books on First. Thank you, Brenda, Antoinette and Bri.
