More and more light fiction comes in series. Once an author gets something published, it's easy to publish sequels, unending sequels, leading to a whole series of books. Cool and all that, plus doing a sequel is easier on the writer, and the publisher is more likely to make an advance on a known property than take a flier on something new. So far, so good.
But, when I am book shopping, the stores don't stock all the books in the series, and even worse, don't stock the first book of the series.
This is a serious turnoff for this reader. Even if the series has an attractive title, and an intriguing cover illustration and a good blurb, I probably won't buy it if the cover says "Book N is the exciting Yada Yada series".
Why? Simple, authors writing sequels assume the read has read the previous book [s], and save time and work by skipping (or failing to repeat) essential development material. In the sequels characters appear, do something, and move on, with never a word about who they are, what side they are on, who they are involved with.
Anyhow, you book store operators, you could boost sales by making an effort to keep the first book of the series in stock.
This blog posts about aviation, automobiles, electronics, programming, politics and such other subjects as catch my interest. The blog is based in northern New Hampshire, USA
Monday, October 7, 2013
Sunday, October 6, 2013
Economist loves traffic circles
For some reason the Economist loves traffic circles ( aka rotaries or roundabouts) ) enough to run TWO articles reminiscing fondly about them in the same issue. The Economist thinks the British invented them and seems proud of the fact. You gotta wonder why.
Actually, a traffic circle is what you build when you cannot afford a proper clover leaf intersection. Some people think a traffic circle is better than a plain grade crossing of two roads. Other people think they are death traps.
The Economist has some strange numbers in their articles. They claim that traffic circles were introduced into the United States by Nevada in 1990. That ain't right. Memorial Drive in Cambridge MA has a pair of vicious traffic circles on Mem Drive that have been bending fenders since the 1950's to my certain knowledge. In fact their have probably been there since the 1930's, but that's before my time. And there was another lethal traffic circle on US route 1 in Saugus, now happily gone, that bent it's share of fenders in the 50's and 60's.
Must be a slow news week at the Economist.
Actually, a traffic circle is what you build when you cannot afford a proper clover leaf intersection. Some people think a traffic circle is better than a plain grade crossing of two roads. Other people think they are death traps.
The Economist has some strange numbers in their articles. They claim that traffic circles were introduced into the United States by Nevada in 1990. That ain't right. Memorial Drive in Cambridge MA has a pair of vicious traffic circles on Mem Drive that have been bending fenders since the 1950's to my certain knowledge. In fact their have probably been there since the 1930's, but that's before my time. And there was another lethal traffic circle on US route 1 in Saugus, now happily gone, that bent it's share of fenders in the 50's and 60's.
Must be a slow news week at the Economist.
Saturday, October 5, 2013
She wants to be a mainstream novelist
I wonder why. After writing the immortal Harry Potter books, why would anyone want to write mainstream novels? We can understand that perhaps she has written all that needs to be written about Harry, and she wants to try something new, but why mainstream novels? They have been boring and unreadable ever since Hemingway died. The modern writers who made a real mark are fantasy writers, J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Philip Pullman, Rick Riordan, Brian Jacques, or science fiction writers like Robert A. Heinlein or Tom Clancy. Come to think of it, J.K. Rowling made her name as a fantasy writer, as good as any.
Anyhow, she has a mainstream novel out, it's in the Village Bookstore now, but I didn't buy it.
Anyhow, she has a mainstream novel out, it's in the Village Bookstore now, but I didn't buy it.
Friday, October 4, 2013
How long can "shutdown" stay shut?
Just asking. So far, I haven't heard of anything very horrible happening. Either we ain't very shut down, (lots of guys still coming to work) or the ones not coming to work aren't being missed. In which case, some obvious cost savings spring to mind.....
Leaves are peaking up nicely
This is peak leaf weekend for Franconia Notch. They are bright, and mostly still on the trees. Won't be long now and they will be on the ground, needing raking up. If you want to go leaf peeking, this is the weekend. Even with a bit of cloudiness, the view out my windows is all bright yellow and orange.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
So how hard does sequester hit DoD?
Hard enough to make the generals flinch, and flinch a lot. According the Aviation Week, the Pentagon figures Congressional deadlock will persist up to and maybe thru the 2016 election. They are preparing for current and even lower funding until 2016 and beyond. So
The Air Force is talking about retiring 552 older aircraft, about 10% of the fleet. On the chopping block, A10 close air support tank buster , KC10 tanker and MC12-W (the Beechcraft King Air fitted out for reconnaissance).
The Army will loose 18% of its soldiers.
The Marine Corps will loose 7% of its soldiers
The Navy drops from 295 ships to 255-260 ships.
Reducing the size of the Army and Marines means that in event of war, they have to work harder. For Iraq and Afghanistan we were able to send the troops on one year combat tours and then rotate them back stateside. If we run out of troops, then the combat tours get longer, they get extended, and the rotation home goes away. It's tough on the troops, and tough on their families, but we have done it in the past. In WWII troops enlisted for the duration, and nobody got rotated home after a one year combat tour. (except the Air Force got rotated home after 50 missions, if they lived that long)
The Air Force is talking about retiring 552 older aircraft, about 10% of the fleet. On the chopping block, A10 close air support tank buster , KC10 tanker and MC12-W (the Beechcraft King Air fitted out for reconnaissance).
The Army will loose 18% of its soldiers.
The Marine Corps will loose 7% of its soldiers
The Navy drops from 295 ships to 255-260 ships.
Reducing the size of the Army and Marines means that in event of war, they have to work harder. For Iraq and Afghanistan we were able to send the troops on one year combat tours and then rotate them back stateside. If we run out of troops, then the combat tours get longer, they get extended, and the rotation home goes away. It's tough on the troops, and tough on their families, but we have done it in the past. In WWII troops enlisted for the duration, and nobody got rotated home after a one year combat tour. (except the Air Force got rotated home after 50 missions, if they lived that long)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)