Charles Wooley wrote an article for The Australian yesterday and has posed the question of whether or not books are being made big for marketing's sake?
He cites Mawson by Peter Fitzsimons and mentions that we don't get to read about his adventures to Antarctica until we are halfway through.
But hold on a moment? As a history trained teacher, doesn't one needs to understand the background of a person before we understand why they chose a particular path in life or made a decision/s that shaped a person into who they are?
In any story in order to understand it, we need to know one's background in life.
The size of a book should not determine whether its a good read or not. It is what is written and how it is written that determines its success.
Some of our biggest selling books are in fact books with long plots or explore an issue in depth. There are readers who will love the fine details of a character or person or of an event or topic. It is merely one's choice.
Strapped for time, there will always be shorter books or abridged versions. Some want to get the point read quickly.
It does amaze me how some smaller and shorter books retail for high prices. That question needs to be raised? No guarantee that it will be a quality read either.
Should writers show restraint? No. Let them write and let them focus on making what is written great.
As for people struggling to get to the end? I always would encourage a person to read a long book if they feel that they have the time and energy to complete it. I also believe that reading levels are important too. Weaker readers don't benefit from a long book. It's nice to set a challenge for one to read challenging texts, but they need to be realistic.
If a person cannot get there, take it steps. Aim for a book of 300 pages, then 350, then 400 pages.
