Razörfist / The Rageoholic / xRazorfistx / Daniel Paul Harris - Hipster Metalfag. Game Journo-Doesn't Play Games He Reviews. Thief Fanfic Author. COOMER AND GROOMER.

[Hagfish]

Spoiler: Click if Gay

As I said, they were consumed in mass numbers in the same way McDonalds fast food is. Anime is more akin to an expensive night at a Japanese restaurant. Especially since both come from Japan, and both can burn quite the hole in someone's wallet. That doesn't mean they were bad, it's just that they were cheap, both in terms of substance and in terms of price. Cheap junk food can still be satisfying, given the circumstances. Shit, I'm shoving cheap potato chips into my mouth as I type.

Pulp as a genre was really no different from manga moreso than anime, but whereas manga (as a term for japanese comics) stuck around by virtue of being defined more vaguely (artstyle? format? anything from japan?) and thus could evolve without shedding its forebears, pulp was all but abandoned in favor of, well, comics as we know them today.

the Re-surgence of Pulp has very much been helped by the fact that the winds of time has done the heavy lifting of making sure that only really the good and decent stuff stuck around in any real capacity, whilst the mountains of bad pulp was washed away when the oceans drank Atlantis. We, as 21st century zoomers who vape and dab, are only really exposed to what floated to the top, and whats at the top is good, decent and even great.

I wouldnt put much stock in what the "high art" crowd thinks, As their tastes are usually defined by what is unique rather than what the quality of something is. Pulp being over saturated in the extreme with trash and also trash that is derivative of better stuff, unsurprisingly, makes it easy to disavow Pulp in its entirety, even if its unfair to the legitimately good stuff.
Danny pulls a reverse uno and instead embraces Pulp, dogshit and all, rather than do what any sensible human being would do and only embrace the stuff one legitimately thinks is good. both are bad extremes.

Calling pulps the equivalent to modern fanfiction is a bit disingenuous. I don't think an H.P. Lovecraft or Raymond Chandler level talent has ever emerged from a fanfiction community.

Thats the thing though, we legitimately dont know if there are geniuses in the fanfiction community who will one day come to define literature. Lovecraft didnt become famous until way after his death, and i have no doubt that it will be decades before we find out whether there were any true savants in fanfiction or not until decades from now.

Rather than strictly compare it to fanfiction, i think pulp should be compared to all forms of digital writing, drawing and even animation that doesnt involve large production companies or what have you. Webcomics, webtoons, creepypastas, which in a similar fashion is comprised of mostly trash, but with some good and even great stuff, but even the bad stuff is consumed en masse by the masses.

TL;DR Most fiction is trash, be it pulp, manga, anime, movies, music, comics, porn, literature, games etc.
however...
-individual stuff can still be good or even great despite an otherwise trashy genre or format.
-people love to consume trash, regardless of quality, as long as they are entertained.
-content thats cheaper to produce has more trash, but also a higher probability of breaking the mold by virtue of the massive amount of content available, as more expensive products have more at stake to lose if it doesnt break even (why hollywood went from dramas to westerns to capeshit).

 

[Wampak]

Spoiler: Why do I even bother?

Not really.

Okay then, commercialized popular fiction you pedant.

Although many respected writers wrote for pulps, the magazines were best known for their lurid, exploitative, and sensational subject matter, even though this was but a small part of what existed in the pulps.

Wow, you refuted your own argument for me. Uh, thanks?

No it isn't. It's a very expensive hobby.

No it isn't.

Especially since its fans tend to collect tons of memorabilia

Most anime watchers don't.

and legally obtaining anime episodes to watch is an expensive venture. Unless you're watching anime illegally online, or paying constantly for a streaming service, (also not cheap)

Crunchyroll is fucking eight dollars a month dude. A dozen eggs costs more in this economy.

Just ask the poor saps who actually buy box sets of anime DVDs

Most people watch anime on TV or streaming. You're describing a small niche of the actual audience.

I'll humor you on this and use the more salient example of anime's literary forebear, manga. Manga is and always has been cheap, disposable junk. In fact it's uncanny how much of a 1:1 similarity there is between what manga magazines are in Japan and what pulp magazines were in America.

Because capeshit evolved. Early capeshit stories, which were a lot like pulp fiction, were considered cheap entertainment

Capeshit "evolved," so now for some reason the early, "unevolved" capeshit stories are literary classics and the new ones aren't. Okay? You do know that your "deep, evolved" capeshit from Frank Miller and the like was literally just riffing on Chandler and Hammett pulp stories but putting Batman in it, right?

had deep philosophical themes and moral conundrums that most pulp stories didn't have.

"muh deep themes" lmao. I remember being in high school too.

Yes, and many pulp stories were considered cheap fiction full of lurid/M-rated material that's not suited for kids.

The vast majority weren't. The kids who read Planet Stories grew up to make Star Wars.

Also, it had a sense of high adventure and storytelling that wound up creating its own mythos, lore, and universe.

So did pulps.

it also taps into things like fairy tales, legends, and fantasies

You're literally describing the Romantic movement, which pulps were a successor to.

Star Wars is more akin to Lord of the Rings than Conan the Barbarian.

No it's more akin to the pulp sci-fi stories that it took 99% of its iconography from.

The difference was, Lucas' film was actually appealing to the high art crowd, whereas most pulps were laughed at by said crowd or seen as low-brow entertainment

They saw both as low-brow entertainment. Did you actually read any of those reviews that were posted? The only difference was Star Wars had pretty spectacle while pulps just had words. Star Wars in another medium is literally pulp.

Lucas was also trying something new; fusing fantasy with science fiction, which at the time, seemed impossible, since the two genres were diametrically opposed

Holy shit read a book you fucking nigger, Jack Vance would like a word. Pulp mixed sci-fi and fantasy all the time because back then they didn't even exist as separate genres. It was all "weird fiction."

It was an experiment, a costly experiment, that was anything but a cheap and easy endeavor to accomplish.

ANY book is cheaper and easier to make than ANY movie. This isn't an argument.

It was a film that critics described as legendary, defying expectations, not just because of its effects, but because of what it showed to be possible. (ie. mixing two genres that are very much considered to be opposites)

Ah, I see, you're just an illiterate. I feel bad for wasting my time now.

Pulp fiction is considered cheap and low-brow by the critics and literature experts of the time.

Have you ever actually read any literary criticism from the 1930s or whatever? Do you know what anyone actually thought of this stuff beyond scanning the wikipedia article? Rhetorical question, of course. You don't even know of the most basic literary antecedents to Star Wars.

Really? Why is that?

Does it really have to be spelled out for you?

Anime is more akin to an expensive night at a Japanese restaurant

Ah yes, "fantasy harem isekai no. 1080707897897890897608", truly high class shit.

Pulp as a genre was really no different from manga moreso than anime, but whereas manga (as a term for japanese comics) stuck around by virtue of being defined more vaguely (artstyle? format? anything from japan?) and thus could evolve without shedding its forebears, pulp was all but abandoned in favor of, well, comics as we know them today.

Pulp magazines died as a format but the same types of stories continued on well into the late 20th century, with the men's adventure paperbacks of the '60s-'80s and the like. The modern evolution of the pulp fiction style is, like I said, stuff like Lee Child or, God help you, light novels . I'm not a fan of these things, not because I want to be an edgy hipster, but because the difference in reading levels for popular fiction written before everyone grew up with TV and after is pretty shocking, and I find the modern bestseller crowd to be very boring.

I wouldnt put much stock in what the "high art" crowd thinks,

I have no idea what they actually thought. I only have second- to tenth-hand accounts from wikipedia and such, and if my time online has taught me anything, it's to never believe in stuff thought of as "fact" just because that's been the consensus for a little while. I will go out on a limb and say there were definitely more than a few pulp authors who reached literary acclaim in their day, particularly in the crime and mystery genres. Hammett, Chandler, most of the Black Mask crew tbh, Agatha Christie if I can squeeze her in there. I don't think anyone wrote them off as trash besides the biggest Victorian aged fart-huffing elitist.

 

[Buttz McSmellington]

Razor uses "pulp" the same way as edgy Norwegian teenagers in the early 00s used "true" or "kvlt". It means "I like it, but if you say you like it too I'll call you a poser because clearly you don't know as much about it as I do".

Danny doesn't know what most words he uses regularly mean (see obese door or piteous stomach). He doesn't believe Noir to be a style of filmmaking but says it's "movies based on hardboiled detective pulp novels." This definition immediately negates the majority of film noir out there, including a movie Danny covered on Film Noirchives, The Third Man. He has spent countless hours on Twitter arguing with people from TCM about their definition of Noir. Who are they though? It's not like they studied film or anything. Nah, let's trust the word of some sperg in his bedroom in Arizona.

Calling yourself a "pulp" author during the time when those stories were being made would make most people from those times think that you write cheap, sensationalist smut for a living-not exactly the profession of an honorable, western man.

Even if we went off Danny's definition of pulp being cheap adventure stories, he couldn't even get the cheap part right.

By the way, John Norman actually writes cheap sensationalist smut (my copy of Tarnsman has a cover price of .95) but I consider him to be more of an honorable Western man than Danny.

Anime is more akin to an expensive night at a Japanese restaurant.

LMAO

Essentially, the same way we view fanfics, hentai, and other low-brow entertainment.

 

[Wampak]

By the way, John Norman actually writes cheap sensationalist smut (my copy of Tarnsman has a cover price of .95) but I consider him to be more of an honorable Western man than Danny.

I spat out my drink looking at the prices these maniacs are asking for new copies now


The Gor books are just the S&M porno version of John Carter and yet Norman still writes circles around Danny and every other "iron age" imitator of that style.

 

[Buttz McSmellington]

I spat out my drink looking at the prices these maniacs are asking for new copies now
View attachment 4283491

The Gor books are just the S&M porno version of John Carter and yet Norman still writes circles around Danny and every other "iron age" imitator of that style.

Yeah, it's ridiculous and has definitely been a deterrent in acquiring the newer books. I think the newest one I have is Witness and that's because it's the only one I've managed to find dirt-cheap.

Norman still writes circles around Danny and every other "iron age" imitator of that style.

He's ninety-one and is still pumping out books on a regular basis. It's insane.

 

[Hagfish]

Pulp magazines died as a format but the same types of stories continued on well into the late 20th century, with the men's adventure paperbacks of the '60s-'80s and the like. The modern evolution of the pulp fiction style is, like I said, stuff like Lee Child or, God help you, light novels . I'm not a fan of these things, not because I want to be an edgy hipster, but because the difference in reading levels for popular fiction written before everyone grew up with TV and after is pretty shocking, and I find the modern bestseller crowd to be very boring.

The reality is just that Pulp was, by and large, just a format built around its limitations and cheapness, and the writing style of pulp fiction was based entirely on working around those limitations. unsurprisingly, the moment most authors managed to reach some degree of success and thereby no longer had to rely on writing short stories for magazines, fighting with other wannabe-authors, they immediatly leaped on writing books and or making full blown comics and actually indulging their more creative side.

reading the early pulp stuff of famous authors can sometimes feel like going to a famous restaurant and then ordering a soup. great soup, but you cant help but feel as if its limited.
TV pretty much killed casual reading. Though i'd say its making a resurgence with various forms of digital writings. Hell, i was borderline illiterate and hated reading growing up until i discovered my own fondness for writing stories digitally. Once i learnt the structure of stories i could appreciate books a lot more.
But none of it compares to the past where the only way you really could consume media was with books and early comics.

I have no idea what they actually thought. I only have second- to tenth-hand accounts from wikipedia and such, and if my time online has taught me anything, it's to never believe in stuff thought of as "fact" just because that's been the consensus for a little while. I will go out on a limb and say there were definitely more than a few pulp authors who reached literary acclaim in their day, particularly in the crime and mystery genres. Hammett, Chandler, most of the Black Mask crew tbh, Agatha Christie if I can squeeze her in there. I don't think anyone wrote them off as trash besides the biggest Victorian aged fart-huffing elitist.

considering how very few of the authors we consider groundbreaking today actually found success within their lifetime, i am prone to believe the consensus that early critics, just like modern critics, were exceedingly harsh on any medium that was saturated (pulp) or new (comics).
they probably viewed pulp in the same way a lot of modern critics used to view video games.

Very few people wanted to write pulp magazines, but chose to write for pulp since at least then they could get paid doing what they loved. If an author found a degree of mainstream success, they would generally quickly abandon the pulp format in favor of writing their own books. IF a pulp author failed to leave pulp behind it was generally indicative of their lack of success, which usually came down to critics either ignoring their work, skimming through it or just rebuking pulp as a format. BUT i could be wrong.

Pulp was the workhouse for aspiring authors.

He doesn't believe Noir to be a style of filmmaking but says it's "movies based on hardboiled detective pulp novels." This definition immediately negates the majority of film noir out there, including a movie Danny covered on Film Noirchives, The Third Man.

So he is straight up lying then.
Not only is Noir not solely based on "hardboiled detective pulp novels", but Hardboiled fiction is its own genre entirely separate and even diametrically opposite to Noir.

It would be like someone saying that period dramas are defined as having laugh-tracks and musical numbers.

 

[Wampak]

The reality is just that Pulp was, by and large, just a format built around its limitations and cheapness, and the writing style of pulp fiction was based entirely on working around those limitations. unsurprisingly, the moment most authors managed to reach some degree of success and thereby no longer had to rely on writing short stories for magazines, fighting with other wannabe-authors, they immediatly leaped on writing books and or making full blown comics and actually indulging their more creative side.

For short story authors in those days there were hierarchies within hierarchies for magazines. There were the low-paying pulps, the high-paying pulps, then the slicks, and probably others (maybe fanzines at the very bottom). The ones who were good enough to make it into the higher-paying pulps like Argosy and Blue Book were an elite in some sense. Many famous authors had stories in pulps AND slicks. Back then, one really could make a living just by writing short stories and sending them to magazines. Plenty of authors of the time never wrote any long-form stories nor had any inclination to.

And of course many novel-length pulp stories that became popular enough received their own standalone hardcover editions, like most of Edgar Rice Burroughs's early work.

reading the early pulp stuff of famous authors can sometimes feel like going to a famous restaurant and then ordering a soup. great soup, but you cant help but feel as if its limited.

Eh, it's more true for some than others. I don't think Elmore Leonard was at his best when he was writing pulp western stories, but there are also plenty of authors who only excel when working to a formula or within limitations. When they go off and do something new (their "dream novel") it can often wind up being not nearly as good.

 

[Hagfish]

For short story authors in those days there were hierarchies within hierarchies for magazines. There were the low-paying pulps, the high-paying pulps, then the slicks, and probably others (maybe fanzines at the very bottom). The ones who were good enough to make it into the higher-paying pulps like Argosy and Blue Book were an elite in some sense. Many famous authors had stories in pulps AND slicks. Back then, one really could make a living just by writing short stories and sending them to magazines. Plenty of authors of the time never wrote any long-form stories nor had any inclination to.

And of course many novel-length pulp stories that became popular enough received their own standalone hardcover editions, like most of Edgar Rice Burroughs's early work.

Eh, it's more true for some than others. I don't think Elmore Leonard was at his best when he was writing pulp western stories, but there are also plenty of authors who only excel when working to a formula or within limitations. When they go off and do something new (their "dream novel") it can often wind up being not nearly as good.

True, the goal of every pulp publisher was to get people to read the magazines, and the best way to get people to read the magazines was to build a repertoire of quality authors with consistently good output. Maybe a better comparison than "workhouse for authors" would be a proverbial football team of authors. Better teams get better paid etc.
And some definitely shone more in limited amounts.
But with authors like Lovecraft i cant help but believe that the format of pulps might have been a contributing reason for why it was difficult for him to reach fame before his death. Hell, his decision to continue writing in pulp magazines might have been somewhat informed by his sense snobbery and refusal to "sell out" and properly market his own work.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

@Allosaur
Again, I don't mean that pulp stories are bad. I mean, junk food isn't bad, it's good to have it now and then. It's good in the same way a Reeses peanut butter and chocolate cup is good-it tastes good, it feels good, but it's cheap as hell (and it obviously isn't healthy for you). But pulp stories are characterized by two things: A) they are made to be cheap and easily consumed and B) they are considered low-brow by the high art crowd of their time. No one called Star Wars or The Ten Commandments pulp, because the critics of their day considered them to be high art, especially with how much care went into making them, which is the exact opposite of pulp fiction.

Star Wars might have some elements of pulp, but it also has elements of things like high fantasy a la Lord of the Rings, which is the exact opposite of pulp in terms of narrative. Star Wars is a tapestry of different genres, pulp is just one of them. That doesn't make it part of pulp fiction.

Danny doesn't know what most words he uses regularly mean (see obese door or piteous stomach). He doesn't believe Noir to be a style of filmmaking but says it's "movies based on hardboiled detective pulp novels." This definition immediately negates the majority of film noir out there, including a movie Danny covered on Film Noirchives, The Third Man. He has spent countless hours on Twitter arguing with people from TCM about their definition of Noir. Who are they though? It's not like they studied film or anything. Nah, let's trust the word of some sperg in his bedroom in Arizona.

Basically, yes. Danny-boy doesn't even know what the fuck he's talking about, his definitions of things like "pulp" come from his modern-day definitions rather than any historical knowledge of the term.

View attachment 4283453
Even if we went off Danny's definition of pulp being cheap adventure stories, he couldn't even get the cheap part right.

Because he doesn't know what pulp means. If I were to write a pulp story, and sell it online, it would be below $5. Shit, I'd probably make it below $2. Get it out quick, get it out cheap, so that as many people will buy it and notice my work. Being cheap was one of the advantages of pulp, and it helped spread the word of some of these authors and helped gain them some respect from their readership.

By the way, John Norman actually writes cheap sensationalist smut (my copy of Tarnsman has a cover price of .95) but I consider him to be more of an honorable Western man than Danny.

Now that actually is how pulp is meant to be consumed. Cheap, easy to buy, so that you can enjoy it without spending a lot of money.

As for anime, yes, it is expensive. Some view it in the same way as pulp, but they obviously don't buy anime DVDs. That shit's expensive. Especially the box sets that contain dozens, maybe even hundreds of episodes of series like Bleach, One Piece, Naruto or Dragon Ball. That shit will leave a burning hole in your wallet. It may or may not be high art, (some animes are, others aren't) but it is expensive, which is the exact opposite of what pulps are.

And yes, the pulp fiction genre is sometimes known for having lurid, sensationalist works, which is why I likened it to smut like erotic Deviantart fanfiction and hentai, not because of the latter's price, (at the end of the day, it IS anime) but because they're seen as lurid and low-brow by art critics. People obviously enjoy them, and I'm not judging them for that, but I was going off on reputation.

 

[Wampak]

No one called Star Wars or The Ten Commandments pulp, because the critics of their day considered them to be high art, especially with how much care went into making them, which is the exact opposite of pulp fiction.

You keep repeating this (you repeat yourself a lot actually) even though it's been directly contradicted by things that you yourself have posted. Also, Ten Commandments, what the fuck? Where did that come from? Why does everything always come back to geeks trying to imbue Star Wars with religious significance? It's a fucking spaceship movie for children.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

You keep repeating this (you repeat yourself a lot actually) even though it's been directly contradicted by things that you yourself have posted. Also, Ten Commandments, what the fuck? Where did that come from? Why does everything always come back to geeks trying to imbue Star Wars with religious significance? It's a fucking spaceship movie for children.

Star Wars is practically Lord of the Rings in space, especially thanks to its fantasy aspects, which get higher with each entry in the OT, and eventually, the Prequels. Vader goes from being just some militarized schmuck in a helmet to Space Sauron, taking orders from Space Lucifer/Morgoth. Luke goes from just some wide-eyed adventurer to becoming a savior-esque character redeeming evildoers like Vader with the power of love. The latter especially wouldn't fly in most pulp action stories, where the bad guys usually get whacked like in Schwarzenegger's Commando or the Bayformers movies.

As for those reviews I posted, at most, some said that Star Wars has elements of pulp, but that is far from the only thing they said, and those reviews showed to prove how Star Wars was well-embraced by the high art crowd of its day, which again, is the exact opposite of how pulp fiction was seen by the same crowd. Star Wars might have some elements of pulp, but it also has elements of things like high fantasy a la Lord of the Rings, which is the exact opposite of pulp in terms of narrative. Star Wars is a tapestry of different genres, pulp is just one of them. That doesn't make it part of pulp fiction.

Also, Lucas openly makes allegories to religion in Star Wars. Like Tolkien before him, Lucas imbued his works with religious themes. Allusions to life after death (literally, Luke takes advice from a ghost for two out of three SW OT movies) Order 66 being similar to the Mark of the Beast-the number 666, a knightly order getting whacked by a centralized monarchy (LOL Templars), Vader being the prodigal son redeemed by forgiveness, and the Jedi Knights having a religion that's basically bastardized Buddhism/Catholicism, (detachment and compulsory celibacy) among others. Literally the man describes himself as a Buddhist-Methodist, and his film reflects that. We are talking about the same idiot who put the Ark of the Covenant and the Holy Grail in his other movies. If it was just a spaceship movie devoid of religious leanings, it'd be more like the Starship Troopers movie, where the most you have is space men shooting bugs.

Pulp fiction would have more in common with films like Terminator 1, Commando, Die Hard, and other m-rated works filled with hardcore violence and/or sex, and don't require much heavy thought or philosophy. There's some asshole running around, go pop a cap on his ass and save the girl.

And as I've said before, you're stretching out this debate when this forum is about Danny-boy. Go move this BS to another forum, for fuck's sake.

 

[Buttz McSmellington]

You're stretching out this debate when this forum is about Danny-boy. Go move this BS to another forum, for fuck's sake.

^This

Tax:

lol

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Tax:
View attachment 4286075
lol

If it were me, I'd place the price at $10 or less. Especially since as an amateur author, someone like Razorfist isn't that well-known in the novel circles. He's not Timothy Zahn or GRRM. At most, he has a decent fanbase on Youtube.

 

[Battlefield2142EU]

The Gor books are just the S&M porno version of John Carter and yet Norman still writes circles around Danny and every other "iron age" imitator of that style.

You think Danny grinds his teeth knowing the Gor series, his beloved Micheal Moorcock, just to get cancelled, will be more successful than Elric of Melniboné will ever be? Gor spawns a global subculture, while Elric of Melniboné gets French comic adaption and gets references by obscure metal bands. Unlike anything written by male feminist Micheal Moorcock, Gor is loved by millions of women.

 

[Corn Flakes]

If it were me, I'd place the price at $10 or less. Especially since as an amateur author, someone like Razorfist isn't that well-known in the novel circles. He's not Timothy Zahn or GRRM. At most, he has a decent fanbase on Youtube.

You know what's really funny? There's a ton of sleazy and/or low-wordcount-high-volume fiction on Amazon going for about 5 bucks. I should know, I have a couple short stories published in that format. A lot of pulp magazines during the heyday of the genre (Amazing Stories, Weird Tales, etc) went for about 25 cents. And if you correct for inflation...

Well, will you look at that. Clearly, Danny should have taken a page out of his "pulp" forefathers and stuck to the $5 price point. Write a shorter story if you think that's not enough money for the effort, or serialize it across multiple short stories. Much like with those old magazines, you only really find recognition after you put enough volume out there.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

You know what's really funny? There's a ton of sleazy and/or low-wordcount-high-volume fiction on Amazon going for about 5 bucks. I should know, I have a couple short stories published in that format. A lot of pulp magazines during the heyday of the genre (Amazing Stories, Weird Tales, etc) went for about 25 cents. And if you correct for inflation...

View attachment 4286364

Well, will you look at that. Clearly, Danny should have taken a page out of his "pulp" forefathers and stuck to the $5 price point. Write a shorter story if you think that's not enough money for the effort, or serialize it across multiple short stories. Much like with those old magazines, you only really find recognition after you put enough volume out there.

Exactly. Pulp stories are the kind of stories you write when you're trying to get your foot in the door, and the best way to do that is to sell these stories for cheap so that as many people will buy these stories, enjoy them, and want more from you. Danny-boy fails to understand that, and sells his books at the same price someone like Timothy Zahn or GRRM does. The difference is, guys like Zahn and GRRM are established, respected authors with large fanbases, who can sell at a higher price because of demand, Razorfist only has a decent following on YouTube that may or may not be novel connoisseurs.

 

[Corn Flakes]

Exactly. Pulp stories are the kind of stories you write when you're trying to get your foot in the door, and the best way to do that is to sell these stories for cheap so that as many people will buy these stories, enjoy them, and want more from you. Danny-boy fails to understand that, and sells his books at the same price someone like Timothy Zahn or GRRM does. The difference is, guys like Zahn and GRRM are established, respected authors with large fanbases, who can sell at a higher price because of demand, Razorfist only has a decent following on YouTube that may or may not be novel connoisseurs.

That's if you're trying to make it old-school. These days people just cut their teeth in fanfiction. Half the "romance" crowd that spawned Twilight crawled out of Harry Potter fanfiction communities back in the early 00s. The point is, even if you're avoiding the corporate filter by self-publishing, you still need to get a lot of words on paper, and a lot of pages in front of people's eyeballs, before you get any kind of success.

Or, you know, you get someone far more successful than you to shill for you. In Danny's case, he's fucked because he's already alienated most people in that category, and these days the people following his videos are doing it for the political hot takes, not for any actual creative content. The overlap between the politispergs hanging on to his every word, and people who actually do enjoy literature, pulp or not, is very narrow.

 

[Wampak]

Tax:
View attachment 4286075
lol

It’s twenty dollars for the paperback now?? This is insane price gouging. And having a few illustrations is no excuse. Publishers like Sea Wolf Press are able to put out fully illustrated reprints of much longer books for no more than ten dollars. It wouldn’t matter so much if he included a digital option like a sane person (you know, the method by which people actually read books in 2023), but now there’s no affordable way to consume this content. Not even pirate sites have it because no one gives a shit.

And I’m just now realizing that the Amazon listing doesn’t even credit the illustrator. So, way to lose out on an obvious cross section of your audience who are also fans of George Alexopolis or whatever his name is but might not already know that he did the drawings, or fans of his who are searching for more stuff by him who won’t find this.

This whole thing is like some kind of tax write-off scheme, like they don’t want it to make money.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

That's if you're trying to make it old-school. These days people just cut their teeth in fanfiction. Half the "romance" crowd that spawned Twilight crawled out of Harry Potter fanfiction communities back in the early 00s. The point is, even if you're avoiding the corporate filter by self-publishing, you still need to get a lot of words on paper, and a lot of pages in front of people's eyeballs, before you get any kind of success.

Or, you know, you get someone far more successful than you to shill for you. In Danny's case, he's fucked because he's already alienated most people in that category, and these days the people following his videos are doing it for the political hot takes, not for any actual creative content. The overlap between the politispergs hanging on to his every word, and people who actually do enjoy literature, pulp or not, is very narrow.

Maybe Danny-boy should go for political thrillers or full-on political books. If his current fanbase is filled with politispergs, maybe he can mooch off them the best by focusing on writing books focused on politics and things like Trump. At least he can get some Trump fans or the occasional famous guy who likes Trump to shill for his books. I mean, it could be a decent way for Razorfist to keep the lights on, especially if YouTube eventually starts turning against all right-leaning content creators and he gets banhammered. There are pro-Trump books for sale in book stores.

Take for example, Razor's recent rant on Lincoln. An hour long. But imagine if he had more content than that, and he put it in book form. Sell it for $10-$15, and you've got a decent book arguing for the Confederate side that a lot of right-wingers will consume. And don't tell me that can't be done when the Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War (which is a pro-Confederate book) is still being sold on Amazon. I mean, another guy writing a book about how the South were the good guys all along isn't necessarily new, but it could help Razorfist detach from Youtube in the odd case Youtube decides that Danny-boy's brand of politics is no longer acceptable.

 

[I.B. Niggin]

I think Razorfist is a fag but I think referring to him as Danny-boy is kinda gay and annoying too.

Anyway, has anyone subjected themselves to the new book yet?