Table of Contents:
- QUESTION 7. HOW CAN OTHER PEOPLE HELP ART AND ARTISTS?
- QUESTION 8. HOW DOES ONE PROPERLY REVIEW ART?
- Physical vs. Digital Books
- QUESTION 1. WHAT ISSUES EXIST WITH THE MARKET SHIFT TOWARDS E-BOOKS?
Read Part 2 here.
A Dialogue between Frank Ormond and Matthew Pungitore
Introduction by Frank Ormond
Postface by Matthew Pungitore
QUESTION 7.
HOW CAN OTHER PEOPLE HELP ART AND ARTISTS?
MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE—
Dear Frank,
First, artists need wealthy patronage. The rich need to start providing for the upkeep of noble aesthetic values; they need to start putting money towards the construction of a more beautiful world. Art needs to be taken out of exile.
Second, communities should reject the major chains and big businesses but nurture small business.
If one wants to help artists, and one wants to see the art community grow, then one should buy art, buy more art, review art, review more art, and talk to their friends about art and artists, especially the local and/or contemporary ones. Doing those kinds of things will help writers, painters, musicians, etc. Reviews are incredibly helpful to any artist.
Buy books, physical books, and, if you have the time, review them.
Read the writings of big-publishing and small-publishing, independent, and so on. Read new and old, contemporary or ancient, popular and unpopular. Talk to people face-to-face, use word of mouth.
Do not rely only on book-signings, conventions, and forums. You can make friendly conversation in the real world with people you actually know or meet. You could send handwritten letters to long-distance friends, trusted associates, reliable acquaintances, and suchlike. Tell others about the stories, books, anthologies, issues, blogs, and/or magazines you read. Talk to people about artists you thought were interesting, and whatnot.
More restaurants, libraries, clubs, cafés, and bookstores should help much more to set up exhibitions and ceremonies to showcase and champion local art. Small businesses and coffeehouses should do better to promote local artists. They should host performances, book-signings, exhibitions, lectures, discussions, et cetera. There needs to be better advertising for such events. Revive the cafés concerts! Revive poster art!
Warmly,
Matthew Pungitore
(END OF MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE.)
FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE—
Dear Matt,
It is an interesting discussion to be had about what other people (that is, not artists) can do to support art. I think the simple answer is to support art with donations, but a more complex answer rears its head as I think of the patronage of the arts in the Middle Ages. In those days, artists were commissioned and paid for their work. They had a wealthy patron, usually a noble, who would ask them to create something and then pay them for that creation. Much of the work in those days were religious or historical, given the nature of the patrons.
This means there are two big things other people can do to support artists:
- Support artists with donations. We don’t need to contribute much to help artists continue creating art. You can buy a small picture or donate a few dollars to them. Any little bit is helpful for an artist.
- Support artists with commissions. To continue with the literary connection, if you have a book coming out and need a cover for your book, try to hire an artist. Too many authors I know are turning to free images online (I have done this as well) or AI-generated art for their covers. To support art I encourage all authors, if they have the means, to hire artists for their book covers.
I hope this makes sense.
Your friend,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE.)
QUESTION 8.
HOW DOES ONE PROPERLY REVIEW ART?
MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE—
Dear Frank,
The critic and the reviewer, they provide important services that help shape and give life to the artistic spirit of our times. We need artists and art criticism to be erudite, professional, and artistically sensitive. More importantly, we need more reviewers and more critics, and they must be able to adequately review all works they receive, within a reasonable amount of time. Ideally, they should judge the work, not the artist.
Generally, critics write long-form. Reviewers write shorter pieces. Criticism usually yields a far more sophisticated, in-depth piece than reviewing, and reviewing is typically more casual and informal. However, I assume, there are exceptions.
When one is writing a review, online or not, it would be far more helpful to avoid writing something too vague or mundane. For the sake of courtesy, when reviewing a piece of writing, try to avoid merely saying something like “Did not finish,” as it could be plain unhelpful, counterproductive, or maybe just plain impolite, depending on the circumstances. Ultimately, when reviewing, one should actually express their honest opinion simply in at least a couple of sentences.
Something sensible must be done to help artists get more reviews. Take a look at the current difficulty of getting reviews for written stories or books. With the way things are now, writers can be sending out copies of their work to be reviewed and still essentially not receive any reviews. There are just not enough guarantees, not enough security. Right now, a review is a very rare thing. It is far too difficult a situation.
Reviews posted on social media are, typically, not altogether beneficial, though they can, on occasion, provide some small-scale advertising or hype; this, however, depends more on the strength of one’s stardom or the loyalty of one’s fan base. Blogs, online essays, online periodicals, and such are more valuable, in that regard, to the regular artist. However, be cautious, because we must never allow the world of Art to become swayed by popularity contests, committees, corporate interests, algorithms, or ochlocracy.
Warmly,
Matthew Pungitore
(END OF MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE.)
FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE—
Dear Matt,
I am a prolific book reviewer online, and as such have several thoughts on what is the best way to review art. Over the years, I’ve noticed my reviews have become more relevant to the concerns of the reader rather than just marking off that I’ve reviewed a certain book. Readers want to know (1) what the story is about, (2) whether I enjoyed it or not, and (3) why I did or didn’t enjoy it.
To relate this to art in general, a person reading a review of art wants to know what the art depicts, whether I enjoyed it, and why I enjoyed it. Artists also seek these reviews to see what worked in the piece and what did not.
When I reviewed your books (whether it was Fiendilkfjeld Castle or The Report of Mr. Charles Aalmers) I did so after fully reading the works and taking notes as I went along. It was important to me that I did my best in preparing to review my friend’s books, and although I didn’t want to be dishonest with you, I ended up enjoying them well enough to give positive feedback. Film reviewers will often bring pads of paper with them as they watch films to take notes. Specific examples of what works in a piece of art and what did not work in a piece of art are important for artists to grow.
All of this is to say that the general guidelines I operated by as a book reviewer still apply to longer form criticisms. I feel the proper review of art requires consideration of those reading your review as well as the growth and encouragement of the artist.
Thank you,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE.)
Physical vs. Digital Books
QUESTION 1.
WHAT ISSUES EXIST WITH THE MARKET SHIFT TOWARDS E-BOOKS?
FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE—
Dear Matt,
I am interested in your thoughts on this subject, since I know both of us have ebook copies of our works available. However, I also know where my mind drifts to when I consider this question. There are several issues with ebooks in the current market of literature:
- ebooks tend to be low-effort. A simple search on Amazon will show that low-effort work like romance stories involving harems of catgirls are prevalent on that platform. While I enjoy the genre of LitRPG, I readily admit it is the type of literature one “shuts their brain off” to enjoy, and Amazon is full of those as well.
- ebooks make it too easy for AI to generate books as “content”. This is becoming a larger problem. I know people online who use AI to generate 50k word novels on a regular basis, with minimal editing and AI generate covers. It takes them minimal time to create this work and it barely sells, but when they do get a random hit they continue to do it. ebooks are the source of many of these issues since they are easier to feed into as AI content.
- ebooks are quickly forgotten. It’s much easier to read an ebook and forget it than it is to do that with a physical book. After you finish reading your book, when you see it on the shelf you recall it. ebooks are “content”, and like modern “content consumption”, you scroll from it as quickly as you scroll to it.
All of this results in a format that is much cheaper for the author to self-publish, but creates a collection of work that is also much harder to find quality in. Likewise, it waters down the entire industry by making print books less prominent. If nothing changes, print books may disappear from big box book stores entirely.
Thanks,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE.)
MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE—
Dear Frank,
Would you want e-books on display in an Art museum, Frank? A Science museum? If you think they should be displayed at all, tell me, in what way should they be displayed?
E-books are products of utility, they have their value, they have their charms, practically everyone uses them—that is fine—and the skills and efforts that go into writing an e-book should be valued and admired, certainly; in my opinion, e-books are not true books, however, nor should they be considered true books, and they should not replace physical books, nor should they be a crutch.
Please, do not misunderstand me, my friend. I make no judgment against anyone who buys or sells e-books. I am not saying anyone should stop buying or selling e-books. I am not against e-books. At the time of writing this, I have e-book copies of my books for sale. If someone wanted to buy an e-book copy of one of my writings, I would be very grateful. I do appreciate the fact that some may be unable to provide anything other than an e-book copy of their work, or what have you. I simply wish things would change. Buying e-books should not be the norm. I do not want to see machines further cloud our minds or distance us from the physical presence of artistic Beauty.
Physical books must become more beautiful. Provide people with beautiful, quality books. Make people want to own physical books again! We should not allow the norm to be mediocrity. Books should be predominantly hardcover. Paperback books are suitable, but not ideal. Physical books should be durable yet delicate; ideally, they should have breathtaking cover-art, exquisite paper, splendid typography, and, if possible, lovely adornments (e.g., illustrations, historiated initials, illuminating, leatherwork, silk, metalwork, goldwork, engraving, embroidery, and embossing). Books are precious and special. They should be highly respected. But, what can be done when everything is so expensive?
Printing, design, bookbinding, quality materials, artwork, writing, editing, distribution, etc.: everything involving making, selling, and buying books costs too much money, especially for average folks. Prices on everything are too high; then again, people need to be paid better for their hard work. National debt and inflation, too, needs to be solved.
Respectfully,
Matthew Pungitore
(END OF MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE.)
FRANK ORMOND’S REPLY TO MATTHEW PUNGITORE—
Dear Matt,
I agree with much of your response. In fact, I’m hard-pressed to find anything I disagree with in it. However, I want to latch onto a few points of emphasis.
You said “physical books must become more beautiful” and your ideas in that section remind me of J. R. R. Tolkien, who refused at first to allow his books to be published in paperback since he saw it as an insult to their content. I see no harm in paperbacks. They provide the printed word for a lower price point.
However the current run of paperback books are large fanciful text on a textured surface with no illustration on the cover. This occurrence happens commonly in the young adult and fantasy genres. Such books queue the reader into what the book is: the same drivel they’ve read before. So, readers who enjoy those books now know they will enjoy this one since it looks like it. Where are the ornate art pieces? Where are the beautiful covers?
I agree with you that books are special, but it’s the words within them that hold the power. I recall some time ago an artist on Etsy was producing sculptures made of discarded books. She cut the pages into shapes and fashioned sculptures from them. The artist received death threats as a result of her work! People saw books as sacred, the words of wisdom that shouldn’t be damaged. Yet these were discarded books.
I would be interested to hear your thoughts on such things. I have no strong opinion, but feel it raises interesting ideas.
Thank you,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S REPLY.)
MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S REPLY TO FRANK ORMOND—
Dear Frank,
I am extremely grateful to all the publishers with whom I have ever worked, and I sincerely respect those who have published my works; I appreciate and sympathize with the endeavors and hardships of any of those publishers and editors; I wish those individuals and/or businesses all the best.
Additionally, I am deeply grateful for all the artists, musicians, designers, and such who have made any art, music, designs, and the like for me, for any of my books, for my works, et cetera; I am immeasurably grateful for any works of Art and/or designs, even if they are digital art, that have accompanied or decorated my works, books, writings, et cetera; even if any work of art was not completely what I would prefer, I am satisfied with what I have received from publishers, creators, and artists, and I truly appreciate their skills and hard work; I wish them profound success and happiness.
I am also grateful to all the blogs and bloggers I have worked with, those who have published my writings, articles, and guest posts on their blogs and such, those who have interviewed me or cited me; to them I wish great prosperity.
For many years of kindness and support, special thanks go to the fine folks of Cirsova Magazine, DMR Books, and the Castalia House blog.
My appreciation also goes to you, my friend. Thank you, Frank, for the kindness and support you have shown for me and my work over the years.
I am not completely against e-books, digital art, or cartoonish art; I just wish they were not the norm. Though I do not much support those things, I feel an overwhelming pressure and challenge from the circumstances of the Art world, and I must try to survive and stay somewhat competitive; thus, I offer for sale e-book versions of some of my writings, and I submit writings to publishers who do use digital art and cartoonish artworks for their issues and/or products.
I hope that one day I will have enough money to produce works of glorious fine art that will totally honor and satisfactorily represent my aesthetic vision. I pray that readers will like my current works and my ideals enough to want to support me, tell a lot of people about my writings, and purchase the physical copies. If the Gods are willing, one day, I will find a patron and/or lucrative artistic commissions. After all, writers can only work within opportunities that are available and financially affordable as well as aesthetically, morally, ethically, and ideologically acceptable to them.
See, sometimes—and this is doubly true for writers who are struggling, independent, small, or self-publishing—sometimes, it is far more important for one to focus on creating a work of Art, or of entertainment, and getting it published, getting it out for people to enjoy and experience, and not caring about what the publisher will use for things like cover-art or interior designs of the book in which one’s work is to be published. As well, getting published, in the end, attaining publicity or recognition, it is all too difficult, anyhow; so, why be overly picky or stubborn? An artist may not like cartoonish art, e-books, digital art, or what have you, but if one can get their work out there, and get paid, then one should, definitely, so long as everything is as safe and respectable as possible, mind you.
Within reason, one of the main objectives of a writer is to gain, in an honorable way, profit, renown, recognition, appreciation, and more work, to be published by anyone who will accept their submission, regardless of whatever art styles and such the publisher chooses to use to decorate the publication that will include the writer’s work; furthermore, in such processes, writers and publishers should attempt to create noble, honorable things, and conduct ethical, honorable business. Artists should not become mercenaries; on the other hand, we should not criticize the mercenary-minded too harshly, and we should have more understanding and compassion for the struggle of artists and publishers; but, at the same time, we should try to find a comfortable solution, so that it will be much easier for artists to find patronage and homes for their works, publishers that better fit their aesthetic ideologies.
This is part of a major dilemma occurring today. Writers, often, are unable to easily find a simpatico home for their works, a publisher whose aesthetics and products, au fond, meticulously represent the aesthetic values and ideologies of the writer’s. Usually, writers have little to no control over what kinds of art pieces, illustrations, or designs an editor, publisher, and suchlike will use for whatever item that will hold the writers’ works (e.g., anthologies, blogs, books, and issues). For now, much of the world of Art is still business, and artists have very little power or influence. A writer or artist has very little to no control over whether or not a publisher uses digital art or AI in a product. Consequently, we must try to incentivize individuals as best we can towards non-AI, towards the purchase and production of physical works. Let us work towards getting more power in the hands of writers, artists, editors, and publishers, the right kind of power that will give them more choices, so they will be able to afford better artwork, better ornamentation, et cetera.
Significant is the difference between e-books and writing a manuscript with a computer. I do not think it is evil or wrong to use, read, buy, sell, or make e-books; the prevalence of e-books is worrying, however, and something must to done to preserve physical books and the sanctity of Art. Get more and more people appreciating and buying physical books. It would be incorrect, misguided, if one were to suggest that since writers are writing on computers then e-books could be some kind of logical or evolutionary artistic improvement. New artistic moods, and their expression through works of Art, are not being improved nor awakened by the e-book format, as the e-book format is just a type of storage and transmission; e-books are simply stopgaps or tools of convenience. AI, digital tools, and e-books: these things are not like new pigments that could enhance or expand an artist’s range of artful expression; they do not bring us closer to the eternal Forms or help us discover unfamiliar shades of Human emotion; they are software, distractions.
Consider some hues of Literature and storytelling: the novel, the novella, and the novelette; the short story and the flash fiction; as well as poetry, prose, and oral tradition. Each one of those styles and arrangements is a different color of Art and Beauty, each has strengthened Humanity’s Literature abilities and brought upon us new tints of artistic imagination. The e-book format is not in their realm, for it shares some similarities with bookbinding, but it exists in a sort of computer-streaming category. The e-book, as a format or medium, is more like a delivery medium of Art, but it also contains Art, too.
The e-book medium is in some ways like the blog medium: the blog and the e-book are kinds of Art, they contain Art, they exist primarily in the virtual or internet, they can be valuably educational and entertaining, but there is something almost inexpressibly cold, numbing, or colorless about them both, especially when compared to physical media and oral tradition.
A work of Art does not primarily rely on lots of interaction, something most working motor vehicles require: consider the manufacturer, the driver, vehicle mechanisms, roads, refueling and repairs, traffic, other drivers, and such. The more a thing relies on or subjects itself to interactions and outside influences and being operated, the less artistic it becomes; as well, the more mundane a thing becomes, the less artistic it becomes. Think about the similarities and differences between algorithms, infrastructure, architecture, dancing, and Art. Computer systems and data structures, things that largely are of computer science and mathematics, they are not the same as physical infrastructure and architecture, sculpture, paintings, literature, and music. A video game or a sport, such things are not a dance performance or an opera. Engineering is different from Art, too.
We must not allow Vanity, Apathy, and Science to replace Beauty, Art, and Wisdom. We must not allow the digital to overtake the physical or the spiritual. Humanity has been putting such an excess of energy and focus into their digital constructs that they believe such things to be superior to anything else; they replace the spiritual world with a world of illusion and virtual reality; they replace the natural, physical world with a world of mediocrity and mechanization. Emotions, minds, flesh, and souls: they are no longer working in harmony for most people, many of whom are unable to fathom the dangers of getting too close to the digital, to the machine, to the abyss. We must wake and rise forth.
Sure, a writer can use a computer to create a physical book: that is a perfectly acceptable and justified artistic process. A writing created through the use of computers is a work of Art, in general, providing the writing-process used to make the composition does not involve any sort of participation from AI. Of course, there is nothing wrong with using a computer to write something or to create a work of Art. I used a computer to write my responses and replies in this article, which I consider a work of Art and Philosophy. I simply ponder on and worry for the spirit of Art and Humanity’s relationship with it in the present and future.
Think about the involvement of AI in the actual act of creation. It turns a work of Art into a commodity, which has its uses for some people, but it is not an object whither we should be going. In essence, regarding those who work with AI for legitimate work or something seemly, I have compassion for them, in some regards, more so with those who are sincerely trying to use it for virtuous causes. I have sympathy, to a certain extent, for anyone using AI, but they should try not to make it a habit; in fact, they should be moving away from AI and helping to keep AI out of Art. Nothing should become dependent on AI for anything.
Humans and Heaven make Art, not machines, not beasts, not Nature.
Admiring sentient beings that have both high intelligence and earnest heart, the Muses choose humans, never computers.
I pray that writers, printers, and publishers will not feel dependent on computers. I would like to see society predominantly use the non-electric printing press, the typewriter, the quill, and the scroll. Pre-1900 CE methods of printing, publishing, lithography, wood engraving, and the like could elevate culture; preserve traditions and skills; create more satisfying, human jobs; stop machines from replacing humans; and save us from our modern printing-publishing crisis.
Obviously, I do not blame anyone who uses electronics, computers, and similar things these days; the times we are living in have made machines, computers, and the like almost impossible to avoid, and gravely inconvenient and expensive to escape, which is, in part, why I hope we can try or, at least, dream to reverse the oversaturation, overreliance, and dependence on computers, machines, social media, streaming, et cetera.
For the sake of upholding justice and virtue, and to safeguard the rights and claims of writers and artists and creators, we must protect and/or improve our current political and legal systems of copyright, intellectual property, ownership, freedom of speech, privacy, cybersecurity, et cetera.
To conclude, I believe e-books are a type of Art, as are blogs and compositions written on or using computer and/or word processing programs, software, and such; furthermore, while there are those who classify AI art as real Art, and though works created with the help or use of AI could, conceivably, appear to involve or contain some artistic aspects, I do not believe anything created via AI could ever be pure Art; in truth, I must oppose those qualities of AI that are emotionally degenerative and a negative influence on the souls of Art and Humanity. In summary, Humankind has pushed computers, the internet, AI, and machines way too far, made them much too powerful and endemic in all areas of society; consequently, Humans must return to a balance and resist the smoking grayness of computers.
With gratitude and respect,
Matthew Pungitore
(END OF MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S REPLY.)
End of Part 3. Stay tuned for the next installment!
Thank you.
Continue to Part 4.
Frank Ormond 