the unbook
 

http://theunbook.com/2009/02/18/what-is-an-unbook/

the unbook: in the old days we called that 'the first draft', 'the second draft', 'the third draft', and so on...

'the first draft', etc., are the working drafts...raw, undisciplined, and not for public consumption

*sigh*

seems nowadays: everything is fodder for committee and, to that end, a writer’s initial compositions (the beginning of an idiosyncrasy) are -- by way of this 'unbook' concept -- supposed to be accessible to (and readily accessed by) anyone with a mind to participate

how depressing...not everyone with a mind to participate actually has something 'to' contribute

as a model: i guess the 'unbook' might work well for nonfictions (manuals, teaching materials, etc.)...but: i predict the model would be disastrous for anything else

one more prediction: most of the 'unbooks' that pop up will never see a version 2.0...the 'authors' of such things -- having attention spans less impressive than a mayfly’s life -- will move on to the next awkward, flash-in-the-pan, internet/real life, hybrid as soon as such a thing rears its ugly head

unbooks -- as concept -- will end up as a cultural cul de sac: a curious artifact of a misguided desire to see 'the people' empowered beyond 'their' competence... -henry quirk

Sounds more like attention whoring than an attempt at literature.

yep: like so much of what passes for 'culture' these days, i'm afraid

'culture' (literature, for example) is a slow-cook event, and -- usually -- a one-man affair

yes: the production of the 'final product' is collaborative, but only in bringing the idiosyncrasy of one person to the market

this 'unbook' crap is like so much of what lingers out in the public sphere: shallow, surface, ephemeral, as both method and result

henry, I like you! :)

You really think that culture=literature="a one-man affair"? How?

if i write the book (my idiosyncrasy/worldview made tangible) then, indeed, it's a one-man affair (i'm talking, here, of original work...not formulaic or genre crap)

everything that comes after may be collaborative, but only in bringing my work to the marketplace

and that can be sidestepped by way of self-publishing and selling

at the very least: the self-publisher takes a great many collaborative hands and minds out of the mix

regardless: the work itself (the cultural artifact i crafted) is the 'reason' for the collaborative effort

hell: even in the transaction between writer and reader (the transaction/telepathy mediated by my book) it is -- at best -- a two-man event

sure: i hope thousands of individuals read what i've written, but it will be 'individuals' -- not an aggregate or collective -- who read my work

like a 'free market', 'culture' is the median of all these aligned, individual, transactions between writer and reader, sculptor and viewer, filmographer and film-watcher and so forth and so on

i can see how some might take a collectivist view on culture, but -- really -- it starts with 'one'

-----

"henry, I like you!"

;)

:)

Yes, but one is not culture in and of itself. I believe most do take a collective view that it is the contributions of many that make up culture, certainly not the one, or a single work of art, written or otherwise that the masses may or may not ever see in their lifetime. As you state it is the collective that really makes up culture, "'culture' is the median of all these aligned, individual, transactions between writer and reader, sculptor and viewer, filmographer and film-watcher and so forth and so on".

Thanks for sharing your thought process anyway.

Henry, are you Irish, by chance?

:p

Tell us everything, henry. Hey, did jim ever give you the quiz? :rolleyes:

Reminds me of: "How To Heal the Hurt by Hating".........Anita Liberty.

thought this was about the Kindle.

"As you state it is the collective that really makes up culture"

i said no such thing

again: if a 'free market' is the measurable median of the economic transactions between, among, and of, INDIVIDUALS, then so too is 'culture' the measurable median of the INDIVIDUAL, transactions between writer and reader, sculptor and viewer, filmographer and film-watcher and so on

there is no aggregate or collective mind

as you say, merc, "the contributions of many that make up culture"

many what?

many 'ones'

the measurable median of a cluster of singular events doesn't make singular events a single event...the median only measures the similar consequences or outcomes of these similar, but separate, events, it doesn't homogenize them (despite the desperate efforts of hegel and marx to do just that)

-----

and no: i'm not irish

i just don't care for the caps key ('cept for on MY terms)...or the period key (a period is nuthin' but a hobbled ellipses)...or the... ;)

-----

i don't even know who jim is...and: i don't take tests

You missed the caps key.