Back in Black
Our flight went relatively smoothly from Queenstown to Auckland yesterday. At one point there was some very scary turbulence even to the point that I started looking at the exit door and trying to remember how to open it in case we went down. The episode lasted about 60 seconds, but was enough to bring some of the passengers to tears and leave a lump in my throat for the rest of the flight.
I just finished reading a book called "How to Lose Friends and Infuriate People." It's a 400-page book with 1) a great title and 2) promises to contradict the vast majority of "common wisdom" in the world today. Sadly, it had about 300 pages of purposeless ranting by the Australian author and only about 100 pages of decent ideas. Combine this lack of substance with a very large typeface and you have about a small pamphlet worth of decent materials. In other words, something readable in about the time it takes to eat your lunch. After about 150 pages I skipped to "skim" mode.
I have read too many books that were just devoid of substance like this one. Why? I think much of it is because authors are forced to fit into a mold so the books can sell. If you don't have 300 pages and some pictures, forget about getting your book publicized by a publisher and carried in Barnes & Noble. A pamphlet of 75 pages just doesn't carry a price-point sufficient to be economically viable.
I don't necessarily blame the publishers and booksellers completely. I think it's a people problem as well. People just have a feeling that any idea requires 200+ pages to be completely explained. That's simply not the case. Is this a damning problem in our world? Not really, but we could save a bunch of trees if we just changed our expectations and realized that, in literature, "less" is much much harder than "more" to do a topic right. As a co-worker's email signature said back at BEA: "If I had more time I would have written you a shorter email." Perhaps this also explains why these Blog entries are getting longer and longer.
