How are the works of serialised fiction of the past unlike webnovels now? Is it merely because they stood the test of time?

For one, Dumas must have written more than 1500 words per day for the last 16 volumes (more than 100 chapters almost) for his Count of Monte Cristo, which were all published in 1845. That is only slightly less writing than some "well rated" webnovels, but it is still in that ballpark of writing constantly without as much humming and hawing. 

Crime and Punishment by Dostevsky was serialised only within a year, which would have meant less than 5000 words per week. That might be what someone would write as a webnovel if it already had a following.

I'm just trying to say that serialised fiction has always been around with the same sort of writing demands of constant output.

Great Expectations was serialised only over 35 weeks. Even if he wrote a good deal beforehand, that is still a pretty similar rate to Dostoevsky's, as it would require 5000+ words per week.

>>21988915 (OP)

middlemarch

>>21988915 (OP)

Better quality

What they did at the time was considered not as good as Homer, Dante, Shakespeare, and others. I think you're just using cultural paradigms, of what has been privileged as good art, to dictate your tastes.

Pro-tip: he wasn't doing the writing.

Talented authors can make any format work. The difference is there is nothing about a webnovel that would attract a great artist.

Yeah Its always the same argument with this type of threads (if old novels were used as entertainment that means current novels good) but modern webnovels dont have the same quality as dostoevsky or dumas.

It's only been around really since there was webhosting that was cheap and free. Now with Patreon, there might be someone willing to publish everything they write online, since they have full artistic control and get all the proceeds. Here is the most successful webnovel so far:

https://parahumans.wordpress.com/category/stories-arcs-1-10/arc-1-gestation/1-01/

How would you know? Do you read webnovels? If you have already made up your mind, then it seems you don't really care enough about art to make that judgement.

>its

>type of threads

You yourself barely even write parseable English, by the way.

Yeah im esl but you know what im saying

Well what's your first language? Surely there is cool, unappreciated stuff in that which mightn't be able to get through publishing houses yet. The internet might help us bring more of that to the light. I think technology frees literature.

Sure but most of the webnovel market is aimed at cheaply done power fantasies (harem, litrpg, bdsm romance for women). There doesn't seem to be an audience for more complex stories that's why I think the comparison to the old serialised novels is unfitting.

Balzac wrote romance novels for bored bourgeois women. There have been plenty of writers who wrote to the lowest common denominator of buyers. Even current writers like McCarthy fit that bill since he’s adapted so much and lauded by popular sites like Reddit and 4chan. 

I don’t read those usual progression and harem novels, but I don’t see why that would define the form of serialising online.
