I’ve often thought that the idea of a “Top 10 Chart” is somewhat poorly-thought out. Inevitably it will start to drive itself along; a book which hits the number one spot may sell twice as many copies and stay there for twice as long. Thus less popular books won’t make it into the chart and won’t get the same recognition.
I don’t know whether the idea is good or bad; there’s lots of different points to make.
As a consumer, how do I cope with a bookshop? I may well ask friends what books they like. I might look at a chart. Both of these systems are very similar, except that the chart will use a bigger group of people, not all of whom will be my friends. Thus charts are useful to consumers in informing their choice of which book to buy.
Charts stifle innovation. A popular book will stop others reaching the chart and a wider readership. Not only this but charts will be driven towards a mean population, and the sort of books or music that a mean population would enjoy. Driving everything towards a lowest common denominator with the aim of increasing sales cannot be good for the world of literature as a whole.
As a consumer, I’m not entirely likely to always enjoy books which others do. Perhaps there’s a point of view that charts can never entirely work as people’s opinions differ too much.
On balance, I think that charts are here to stay, but I’m not convinced they’re a good thing. The biggest blow to their credibility, in my opinion, came when The Da Vinci code by Dan Brown hit the top of the charts and seemed to stay there forever. I’ll never get back the hours of my life I wasted reading it, but perhaps I won’t make the same mistake again.
3 Comments