I think that weaving some of the pulp and retrospective posts into the first collection would give your newer readers or even readers unfamiliar with your blog what the those next volumes woudl look like. Like teasers maybe. I would also reprint them in their appropriate collections (so I would keep the number low) so readers wouldn't have to by the first to get all of the early ones.
I decided to put this in a separate comment because reasons. I think that every single entity you publish should have some type of theme even if it's loose like 'early osr', 'middle osr', 'late osr', or 'how the osr has changed over the years'.
I don't like delineations based on time at all. I have Philip Athan's book in hard copy that he put out that I think covered the first year or two of his blog. Love the man's work. Took one of his classes. Amazing stuff. Didn't like the book because it was all over the place, it was only limited by what he posted during the first years of his blog. It gave a taste of his style, but not enough meat for the things that interested me. And it was missing a lot of the posts I had already downloaded and knew I wanted to save.
With that said, I am your target audience for the pulp posts. The pulp posts lead me to things that either I hadn't read or hadn't seen what you had caught. So I would track these stories down to either read or read them. Super valuable work on your part for me.
So for argument's sake, say you had to do one book for each year because you felt you had that many posts you wanted to preserve. Guess how many I am likely to buy. Now think if you could put all of your pulp posts into three volumes, Now how many of those am I likely to buy?
Posting my thoughts here because I am not creating an account on substack for a post and a poll, but thought that I could offer some helpful insights regardless.
Upon further reflection, if your were thinking of having these as more of a reference set for a bookshelf based on year. Which book am I going to find your thoughts on Howard's, 'The Fire of Ashurbanipal'?
But like Kevin Kenan wrote on Substack, if archival is a primary concern, you should just automate (or get someone to help you automate) downloading of everything under grognardia.blogspot.com. If you then place this in a git repository (on GitHub?), others could clone it, providing you with free backups by your readers. The automation can also be regularly scheduled, so your git repository stays up-to-date.
I wholeheartedly agree with this: you should archive all of it. Put it in as-is HTML format, or turn it into pdf or epub if you must.
But whatever sub-selection you make, it will always be inferior to the whole thing. Sure, if you want to give readers a sample of what the blog is like, go ahead and collect a subset if it it in a physical book. But I really feel the entire things needs to be preserved. Obviously you cannot realistically do that in a physical form, but some form of digital format of all of it deserves to be there.
I disagree - that first year makes sense as its own volume. It's important to go over the First Secrets in some detail. After all, it is the platform - for good or bad - upon which all later years build.
Now I wouldn't mind a Basic set of introductory Grognardia, then thematic editions to follow: Retrospectives, other series, or maybe even specific lines: Dragon, Howard, Lovecraft, Piper/Space, Founding Fathers or something like that.
But I think chronology deeply matters at launch. Year One should get its own primary book.
After all, even D&D 3.0 defaulted to Greyhawk for its initial launch, then branched out to different settings later. Returning to roots necessitates the early years get special attention, whether or not the later ones follow suit.
I vote wholeheartedly for Maliszewski's Concupiscible Tome of Holding
ReplyDeleteI think that weaving some of the pulp and retrospective posts into the first collection would give your newer readers or even readers unfamiliar with your blog what the those next volumes woudl look like. Like teasers maybe. I would also reprint them in their appropriate collections (so I would keep the number low) so readers wouldn't have to by the first to get all of the early ones.
ReplyDeleteHow much would a 250 page book cost?
ReplyDeleteI decided to put this in a separate comment because reasons. I think that every single entity you publish should have some type of theme even if it's loose like 'early osr', 'middle osr', 'late osr', or 'how the osr has changed over the years'.
ReplyDeleteI don't like delineations based on time at all. I have Philip Athan's book in hard copy that he put out that I think covered the first year or two of his blog. Love the man's work. Took one of his classes. Amazing stuff. Didn't like the book because it was all over the place, it was only limited by what he posted during the first years of his blog. It gave a taste of his style, but not enough meat for the things that interested me. And it was missing a lot of the posts I had already downloaded and knew I wanted to save.
With that said, I am your target audience for the pulp posts. The pulp posts lead me to things that either I hadn't read or hadn't seen what you had caught. So I would track these stories down to either read or read them. Super valuable work on your part for me.
So for argument's sake, say you had to do one book for each year because you felt you had that many posts you wanted to preserve. Guess how many I am likely to buy. Now think if you could put all of your pulp posts into three volumes, Now how many of those am I likely to buy?
Posting my thoughts here because I am not creating an account on substack for a post and a poll, but thought that I could offer some helpful insights regardless.
Upon further reflection, if your were thinking of having these as more of a reference set for a bookshelf based on year. Which book am I going to find your thoughts on Howard's, 'The Fire of Ashurbanipal'?
My feelings align with JasperAK’s.
ReplyDeleteBut like Kevin Kenan wrote on Substack, if archival is a primary concern, you should just automate (or get someone to help you automate) downloading of everything under grognardia.blogspot.com. If you then place this in a git repository (on GitHub?), others could clone it, providing you with free backups by your readers. The automation can also be regularly scheduled, so your git repository stays up-to-date.
I wholeheartedly agree with this: you should archive all of it. Put it in as-is HTML format, or turn it into pdf or epub if you must.
DeleteBut whatever sub-selection you make, it will always be inferior to the whole thing. Sure, if you want to give readers a sample of what the blog is like, go ahead and collect a subset if it it in a physical book. But I really feel the entire things needs to be preserved. Obviously you cannot realistically do that in a physical form, but some form of digital format of all of it deserves to be there.
I disagree - that first year makes sense as its own volume. It's important to go over the First Secrets in some detail. After all, it is the platform - for good or bad - upon which all later years build.
ReplyDeleteNow I wouldn't mind a Basic set of introductory Grognardia, then thematic editions to follow: Retrospectives, other series, or maybe even specific lines: Dragon, Howard, Lovecraft, Piper/Space, Founding Fathers or something like that.
But I think chronology deeply matters at launch. Year One should get its own primary book.
After all, even D&D 3.0 defaulted to Greyhawk for its initial launch, then branched out to different settings later. Returning to roots necessitates the early years get special attention, whether or not the later ones follow suit.