Jeannette's defense of the audio vs written format for Dan's book provoked a great deal of thought. But then I ran into this, which sent me scurrying to my small bookcase of tarot books...
Jeannette said:
When was the last time you read a book on tarot that was written in the second person? Have you ever read a book on tarot written in the second person?
And what I discovered was that
most of the tarot books I own are written in the second person. They include:
-
Tarot for Your Self and
21 Ways to Read a Tarot Card (Greer)
-
Learning the Tarot (Bunning)
-
The Complete Tarot Reader (Michaelson)
-
What's in the Cards for You? (McElroy)
-
Tarot Tips (Amberstone & Amberstone)
-
Tarot Shadow Work (Jette)
I didn't even check my larger collection of companion books, but I'm certain some of them are also second person.
Now it's certainly true that beyond tarot books, finding a book written in the second person is very unusual (in fiction it's almost unheard of). But, with all due respect to Jeannette, I don't think her principal argument stands up. Sure, the voice connection is powerful; I haven't yet heard
The Process so I can't address it's value but it seems very high in this case. But let me just mention one other reason for having it in hardcopy besides the oft-cited ease of reference -- price. A paperback book would probably be $10 to $15; the audios are $45 or $60. That's a significant difference for those who are on a tight budget.
While I'd no doubt lose some of the intimacy and personal connection of the audio (but no more so than I would Mary Greer or the Amberstones if those books were available on audio - and maybe they are), I'd still rather have the book. And frankly, I believe it would reach a wider audience. So I remain an advocate of publishing a hard copy. Thanks for listening...