The problem with the recommendations that Amazon comes up with is that they are similar to what you read already. This is all very well, but I can't help but think that they might be partially responsible for the fact that when I used to hang out on Bookcrossing, I kept meeting apparently intelligent young women who read nothing but Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum novels. Don't get me wrong, they are good books (about a comically inept female bounty hunter) but why would you read nothing else at all?
If I buy, say a Terry Pratchett book, Amazon will suggest that I read all his other books, but I didn't need it to do that; I obviously know about Terry Pratchett already. To be useful it needs to come up with a book I didn't even know about.
Here's how it should work: once Amazon knows I have read and liked a certain book, it should suggest something as different as possible for my next read. For example, if someone likes "Little Women" they should try "American Psycho" next. If they've been reading James Joyce, their next book should be "The Tiger Who Came To Tea", just to stop their head exploding if nothing else. People who read nothing but fast-paced thrillers should be steered towards the European rail timetable. If you will only read science fiction, Amazon should throw you a Mills & Boon. If you read romance, your next book will be a hunt for a serial killer. If you read books suggested by Oprah or Richard & Judy, Amazon should give you no help at all, forcing you to grow up any think for yourself. I think you're getting the idea...
My point is that by limiting ourselves to one kind of reading, whether it be kooky girl detectives or Dragon Crack, we avoid developing any further. It's good for us to be confused and puzzeled every so often. The trouble is that we like the comfy and familiar. My anti-recommendations would supply us all with a useful kick up the arse.
Sunday, 7 February 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment