Michael Allen of Grumpy Old Bookman and Kingsfield Publications:
[Note: this interview first appeared in August, 2006]
1. You've said the novel may end up being a very marginal form, like poetry. Why is this? Because of mass media? Or is it because of some characteristic common to many contemporary novels?
It must be 20 or 30 years since Gore Vidal (among others)started to point out that, by and large, young people do not read books. They watch television and movies, and nowadays they have iPods and videos on the internet.
Certainly here in England there are figures published occasionally which show that only about 50% of the population reads books. If all that is true, and I believe that it is, then one has to remember that any future decline (or increase) in interest in novels starts from a modest base. Reading novels is not a universal habit, whereas watching television is something done by (at a guess) 95% of the population.
My reasons for thinking that interest in the novel is likely to decline are twofold.
First, there is so much competition. Consider the situation in the late nineteenth century. Nearly all the population could read (at least in England), and there were books and newspapers. But there was no radio, no recorded music, no TV, no movies. Outside the big cities, even theatres were rare. So the novel had little competition. Today, every passing year brings new advances in technology in the entertainment business. Ever more sophisticated devices are created, and it is not too far-fetched to suggest that, within a few years, we will have virtual forms of entertainment which include the viewer/audience as a participant. Against such sophistication, the novel begins to look pretty dull as a source of emotion. (Just as poetry now seems dull to most of us.)
Second, people who write and publish novels often seem oblivious to the medium's strengths (such as they are), and produce novels which even today few people actually want to read. This trend will continue for as long as people go on believing the kind of nonsense which is taught on Eng. Lit. and MFA courses.
2. You've also said that generally speaking novels would do well to be shorter. Why do you think this?
Can I refer you to my four-part essay on The Problem of Length, published in December 2004. Here are the links:
http://grumpyoldbookman.blogspot.com/2004/12/problem-of-length-part-1.html
http://grumpyoldbookman.blogspot.com/2004/12/problem-of-length-part-2.html
http://grumpyoldbookman.blogspot.com/2004/12/problem-of-length-part-3.html
http://grumpyoldbookman.blogspot.com/2004/12/problem-of-length-part-4.html
3. Is part of the problem with novels that they are overpriced? That is, when they are compared to, for example, the price of a movie DVD, buyers simply don't feel they're "getting their money's worth" with a book?
I don't think novels are overpriced -- not remotely -- provided they deliver what the reader wants. Consider the queues forming at midnight for the latest Harry Potter -- a book which the UK booktrade sold at a discount! No one in the queue would have minded paying the full whack, but, courtesy of clueless marketing, they didn't have to.
4. And if price is a factor, what can publishers and writers do to change this? In other words, what can they do to offer book-buyers "more"?
It's not a question of 'more', it's a question of better. The whole point of the novel is that it tells a story. The right story, told in the right way for a particular audience (e.g. Harry Potter again) exerts a powerful grip on the mind of the reader. And at the end of the book, the reader is conscious of having undergone a powerful (and ultimately pleasurable) emotional experience.
All that writers and publishers have to do is produce the right kind of books for the various audiences which we know to exist. It's not an impossible task, but it does require intelligence, hard work, and PRACTICE. No one can do the job straight out of the box. After that, it's all down to circumstance, fate, karma, randomness, chance.
See my essay On the Survival of Rats in the Slush Pile:
http://www.kingsfieldpublications.co.uk/rats.html
The problem with many novels at the moment is that they are not written for readers so much as to glorify the author. And, unsurprisingly, not many people want to read a book which says 'Look at me! Aren't I clever!'
Bio: Michael Allen is both an author and publisher. As an author, he blogs at Grumpy Old Bookman. He is also a novelist. His latest is How and Why Lisa's Dad got to be Famous. It can be purchased through Amazon or at his blog.
Conversations in the Book Trade: Books, art, art-books, and ... authorial movies.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Jon Paul Fiorentino -- poet, editor (Matrix Magazine), publisher (Snare Books)
Jon Paul Fiorentino of the lit-blog Asthmatronic, the literary magazine Matrix, and the small-press publisher Snare Books:
1. Literature is in trouble -- that is, more trouble than usual. Why do you think this is? The increasing prevalence of TV? The distractions of increasingly narcotic subcultures such as video games? Sept. 11? Or is talk of the "death of literature" simple exaggeration?
I think it's exaggerated to a certain extent. It's pointless to blame other media. I live in a world where people buy books, read books, talk about books. The literary press world I am involved in has its challenges for sure, but I see positive outcomes ahead.
2. And what is literature, anyway? Should the novel be considered the prime example of it?
Literature is the result of an artful use of language. I think. I don't know if the novel is always the best example. There are non-literary novels out there, like the Da Vinci Code or the novels of William Shatner.
3. Prizes and awards are playing an increasing role in determining an author's career-trajectory. In short, winning a major literary prize can win a writer a large audience overnight (not to mention, considerable fame and financial remuneration). But, as British critic Jason Cowley has observed, what is lost is the the ability for readers to think in a critically complex fashion.
Are literary prizes dangerous in this regard? Do they convey to the public the message that "this book is worth reading and all these others aren't"?
It's a tricky question. Remuneration is important for literary artists because they often get so little for their hard work. I think people are smarter than to lose their critical abilities simply because of award culture. I think that prizes can bring an important work to a larger audience. I feel sorry for those whose reading lists consist only of award winners, but you can't blame award culture for that. People should know better and for the most part, I think they do.
4. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
The world I live in is the world of the Canadian literary press. So the cult of the deal is not a huge issue. Presses like Coach House Books (who I publish with) and Snare Books (which I operate) make decisions based on the artistic vision of the editors. I look at sales figures in order to see how to improve what I'm doing for my authors but not to determine what to acquire.
5. As well, should the Canadian cultural nationalism of the 1970s make a comeback? Do we need a "National Culture Policy" that will put more Canadian books front and center in bookstores?
I don't think a policy that attempts to celebrate Canadian books equates to nationalism. I think Canadians should read contemporary Canadian literature. But of course, they don't have to.
6. Last summer, Douglas Coupland published an article in the New York Times criticizing Canadian literature for having too many books set in rural rather than urban settings. Is he right?
He's right. Mostly right. I mean, most of us live in urban centres. The anachronistic tendency of Canadian fiction and poetry is something to be concerned about.
7. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
No, it's not a sound policy. It's a very dangerous policy.
8. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
I don't believe in bitching and moaning about fairness. But there is some work to be done to ensure that corporations, both retail and publishing, are acting ethically. They don't always. And they must be held accountable. But being a small press author does have its advantages. You can be insistent, even aggressive about your own work without being 'corporate'.
9. Does Canada have too many publishers? Or too few?
Too few.
10. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
I don't know. I do most of my work on-screen. But like most writers and editors, I am a fetishist. Book lovers will always love books.
11. You're the author of "The Theory of the Loser Class" and blog at Asthmatronic -- a site devoted to all things loser. In the past, CanLit has produced two of my favourite loser novels: "Sad Paradise" by Britt Hagarty and "1978" by Daniel Jones. Jones' work is still remembered. Hagarty's seems to have slipped into oblivion. Does Canada do too little to keep the flame alive of lesser known writers? Is Canada a bad country for an artistically spirited loser?
No. It's simply that we were born to lose. So it shouldn't come as a surprise when that happens.
11. Editors of small presses and literary journals tend to be taken for granted. Yet there is a strong argument for saying they stand out as real heroes of contemporary literature; they actually read work by unknowns -- a habit the major publishers and agents have, generally speaken, fallen out of. Do editors of small presses and small magazines deserve higher status within the cosmology of literature? Are they currently under-appreciated?
In my personal cosmology, they hold the highest status possible. And since I'm never wrong, I think they deserve a higher status in the universe.
Bio: Jon Paul Fiorentino is a Montreal-based poet whose most recent is THE THEORY OF THE LOSER CLASS (Coach House), as well as an editor and publisher. He co-edits Matrix Magazine and publishes Snare Books.
1. Literature is in trouble -- that is, more trouble than usual. Why do you think this is? The increasing prevalence of TV? The distractions of increasingly narcotic subcultures such as video games? Sept. 11? Or is talk of the "death of literature" simple exaggeration?
I think it's exaggerated to a certain extent. It's pointless to blame other media. I live in a world where people buy books, read books, talk about books. The literary press world I am involved in has its challenges for sure, but I see positive outcomes ahead.
2. And what is literature, anyway? Should the novel be considered the prime example of it?
Literature is the result of an artful use of language. I think. I don't know if the novel is always the best example. There are non-literary novels out there, like the Da Vinci Code or the novels of William Shatner.
3. Prizes and awards are playing an increasing role in determining an author's career-trajectory. In short, winning a major literary prize can win a writer a large audience overnight (not to mention, considerable fame and financial remuneration). But, as British critic Jason Cowley has observed, what is lost is the the ability for readers to think in a critically complex fashion.
Are literary prizes dangerous in this regard? Do they convey to the public the message that "this book is worth reading and all these others aren't"?
It's a tricky question. Remuneration is important for literary artists because they often get so little for their hard work. I think people are smarter than to lose their critical abilities simply because of award culture. I think that prizes can bring an important work to a larger audience. I feel sorry for those whose reading lists consist only of award winners, but you can't blame award culture for that. People should know better and for the most part, I think they do.
4. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
The world I live in is the world of the Canadian literary press. So the cult of the deal is not a huge issue. Presses like Coach House Books (who I publish with) and Snare Books (which I operate) make decisions based on the artistic vision of the editors. I look at sales figures in order to see how to improve what I'm doing for my authors but not to determine what to acquire.
5. As well, should the Canadian cultural nationalism of the 1970s make a comeback? Do we need a "National Culture Policy" that will put more Canadian books front and center in bookstores?
I don't think a policy that attempts to celebrate Canadian books equates to nationalism. I think Canadians should read contemporary Canadian literature. But of course, they don't have to.
6. Last summer, Douglas Coupland published an article in the New York Times criticizing Canadian literature for having too many books set in rural rather than urban settings. Is he right?
He's right. Mostly right. I mean, most of us live in urban centres. The anachronistic tendency of Canadian fiction and poetry is something to be concerned about.
7. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
No, it's not a sound policy. It's a very dangerous policy.
8. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
I don't believe in bitching and moaning about fairness. But there is some work to be done to ensure that corporations, both retail and publishing, are acting ethically. They don't always. And they must be held accountable. But being a small press author does have its advantages. You can be insistent, even aggressive about your own work without being 'corporate'.
9. Does Canada have too many publishers? Or too few?
Too few.
10. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
I don't know. I do most of my work on-screen. But like most writers and editors, I am a fetishist. Book lovers will always love books.
11. You're the author of "The Theory of the Loser Class" and blog at Asthmatronic -- a site devoted to all things loser. In the past, CanLit has produced two of my favourite loser novels: "Sad Paradise" by Britt Hagarty and "1978" by Daniel Jones. Jones' work is still remembered. Hagarty's seems to have slipped into oblivion. Does Canada do too little to keep the flame alive of lesser known writers? Is Canada a bad country for an artistically spirited loser?
No. It's simply that we were born to lose. So it shouldn't come as a surprise when that happens.
11. Editors of small presses and literary journals tend to be taken for granted. Yet there is a strong argument for saying they stand out as real heroes of contemporary literature; they actually read work by unknowns -- a habit the major publishers and agents have, generally speaken, fallen out of. Do editors of small presses and small magazines deserve higher status within the cosmology of literature? Are they currently under-appreciated?
In my personal cosmology, they hold the highest status possible. And since I'm never wrong, I think they deserve a higher status in the universe.
Bio: Jon Paul Fiorentino is a Montreal-based poet whose most recent is THE THEORY OF THE LOSER CLASS (Coach House), as well as an editor and publisher. He co-edits Matrix Magazine and publishes Snare Books.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Catheryn Kilgarriff -- publisher (Marion Boyars)
Catheryn Kilgarriff of Marion Boyars Publishers:
1. Literature is in trouble -- that is, more trouble than usual. Why do you think this is? The increasing prevalence of TV? The distractions of increasingly narcotic subcultures such as video games? Sept. 11? Or is talk of the "death of literature" simple exaggeration?
Literature is not in trouble. Film adaptations help literature, blogs spread the word of good books (both private and ones like The Guardian Unlimited,) video clips on YOU TUBE are used to promote novels, writers are seen as cool people.
The one area that is intensely dangerous is the discounting of books in the UK by the chains – the 3/2. There are only so many books a person wishes to read, so if they have bought 3, they will not buy again for another month. But I am hoping that very soon, internet buying direct from publishers web sites will replace the power of amazon, and the availability of books in shops. Ie – if you read good publishers web sites, and buy directly from them, you should never have to hunt for a book in a large chain fruitlessly again. But the chains run the danger of only being visited by people looking for a bargain, and I am afraid the blame for this lies at their doors.
2. And what is literature, anyway? Should the novel be considered the prime example of it?
Literature is anything which challenges the status quo – so Riverbend’s blogs, Baghdad Burning, published by us in two volumes, are an excellent example of good literature.
3. Prizes and awards are playing an increasing role in determining an author's career-trajectory. In short, winning a major literary prize can win a writer a large audience overnight (not to mention, considerable fame and financial remuneration). But, as British critic Jason Cowley has observed, what is lost is the the ability for readers to think in a critically complex fashion.
Are literary prizes dangerous in this regard? Do they convey to the public the message that "this book is worth reading and all these others aren't"?
I think book buyers are capable of making choices – they do not buy every prize winner. But certainly, books they would not have noticed come to their attention, and this is a good thing. Prizes are important.
4. Literary publishing has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
The art side of the business has to co exist with the business side. Neither should be ignored, and the books published to make money will be different from the ones published because an editor or publisher loved them. It is just that some books loved by an editor will not see light of day since sales just cannot be envisaged, and the publisher does not wish to lose money and disappoint the author.
Some advances are silly – they are so large. But this just does not apply to the literary independent.
5. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
We have only taken one novel from the slush pile – a very good Irish writer living in Canada called Gerard Beirne. His novel, THE ESKIMO IN THE NET, sold a respectable 2000 copies. If it had got onto a good prize long list, it would have done better. So, we look at our slush pile properly, but it rarely produces the goods.
6. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
There is no reason for a good small house to be squeezed out by the large publishers. With head offices at the chains taking the buying decisions, the role of the rep in the large houses has diminished. Penguin now has 10 reps, HarperCollins UK, about 12. We have 6 plus myself, which makes 7. There is hardly any difference between how our books are presented to the trade and how the lead titles from the main houses are. The only difference is that we are more often breaking new authors, since we cannot afford large advances. Ie, when we have made the name of a new author, we often lose them to a large house. BUT – the authors often come back to us, since we work harder for our authors (we have fewer front list books a year) and we achieve better sales for them, better publicity, and we tour them at the major literary festivals. We also enter them for prizes – and, please note, each house is limited to 2 or 3 entries per prize (Booker, Orange). So, any author at a large house is LESS likely to be entered than if they are published by a small house.
In the area of rights, big and small houses work closely together. The big houses acknowledge our skill at finding new talent and they often want to buy the mass market paperback rights from us. This whole system benefits everyone.
7. Returning to the question of agents -- are they too powerful? If so, in what ways? Or are they a largely beneficial and necessary element of contemporary publishing?
I’d love to see an agent negotiate with Waterstone’s or Borders over discounts and 3/2 promotions. That’s the area agents have no idea of. They choose to ignore it, try to raise advances and change terms, and all that happens is that the author gets let down by too high expectations coming from their agent.
8. Does Britain have too many publishers? Or too few?
Probably too many. New houses start all the time. I wish them well, but it’s a tough business.
9. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
Not as much as people think. The 3D book is transportable, user friendly and lasts over time.
10. Putting aside the hype, does the Internet provide a real opportunity to publishers? If so, how?
As said before, it’s a wonderful promotional device and hopefully soon a lot of book sales will be direct from publisher’s web sites.
11. And what role can traditional, venerable institutions such as libraries and English Departments play in reversing the decline in sales of literary fiction?
English teachers will always be hugely influential on young minds. Young people hardly use public libraries as they have personal computers. So entertainment is already at the flick of a button. But parents can be influential. I bring back 4 books a month from my local library for my two teenage daughters who are as lazy as they come. But, shock horror, they run to the pile and read these books very fast. One day they will manage to walk two blocks to the library themselves…probably when they are at university and I am not there.
12. What projects are you working on now that you are excited about?
Chocolate and Zucchini by Clotilde Dusoulier May 2007
Builds on the success of recent books from blogs, including Julia and Julie by Julie Powell which won the Lulu blog award in 2006, and of course, Baghdad Burning
Probably the first cook book with international appeal for the new generation which uses the net as their networking base. High profile launch at the Institut Français with food.
“Not some wronger-than-wrong fusion cooking site, but a blog (in English) built around the twin culinary passions of its 27 year old Parisian writer, Clotilde Dusoulier: fresh, healthy eating and, as well, the magical dark stuff. It is real escapist, drool-on-your-keyboard stuff as Dusoulier drifts around Paris on a waft of sugar-scented air, stumbling across delicious delicacies.’ The Guardian
‘You can just see Audrey Tatou playing her in the movie as she traipses all over Paris, finding the bakery supply store that her mother shopped at, eating out, cooking and writing down recipes and shopping tips along with insights into French life.” Los Angeles Times
Enlightenment by Maureen Freely. March 2007
An investigative journalist returns to Istanbul, the scene of her early love affair with Sinan. She has to overcome her qualms when she is asked by his ‘honeypot’ wife to help her regain her son, taken away by the American authorities when Sinan is arrested on entry into the States.
A thriller involving a retired intelligence operative, a mysterious ‘trunk’ murder, and a group of young people involved in subterfuge, but now tackling a real crisis, Maureen Freely’s novel shows how in Turkey nobody is who they are and everyone is suspect.
Maureen Freely writes widely for several newspapers, and is a respected authority on the current situation in Turkey. She is a controversial writer who is not afraid to criticise the Turkey she loves.
Touba and the Meaning of Light by Shahrnush Parsipur
An epic and challenging novel about one woman’s lifetime covering eight decades of Iranian history
Winner of a PEN WRITERS IN TRANSLATION AWARD 2007.
Banned books are a major draw, and one of the broadsheets is running a promotion so reviews guaranteed. Tour highlighting other banned and prosecuted authors on our list, Elif Shafak, Hong Ying and Hubert Selby Jr.
‘Parsipur…endured jail and torture to preserve her sense of dignity and integrity, and as a writer and innovator… Her protagonists are women whose rebellions are not merely political but existential.’ Azar Nafisi, author of Reading Lolita in Tehran
‘Initially published in Iran in 1989, this ground-breaking novel – which juxtaposes reality and mysticism, becoming especially fantastical toward the book’s conclusion – was quickly banned by the Islamic Republic.’ Publisher’s Weekly (starred review)A new novel by an author who left us and has come back (still confidential but highly commercial)
Statement: Firstly, Marion Boyars was my mother who died in 1999 so she will not be answering any questions. The eminent back list, with the novels of Hubert Selby Jr, the UK rights for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey, the works on John Cage, Heinrich Boll and Georges Bataille, these are all her work. Our recent publication of novels by Hong Ying, Elif Shafak, and the Iraqi blogs by Riverbend, Baghdad Burning – all of which have attained world wide fame, are my work. So, it’s a kind of combination of both of us.
1. Literature is in trouble -- that is, more trouble than usual. Why do you think this is? The increasing prevalence of TV? The distractions of increasingly narcotic subcultures such as video games? Sept. 11? Or is talk of the "death of literature" simple exaggeration?
Literature is not in trouble. Film adaptations help literature, blogs spread the word of good books (both private and ones like The Guardian Unlimited,) video clips on YOU TUBE are used to promote novels, writers are seen as cool people.
The one area that is intensely dangerous is the discounting of books in the UK by the chains – the 3/2. There are only so many books a person wishes to read, so if they have bought 3, they will not buy again for another month. But I am hoping that very soon, internet buying direct from publishers web sites will replace the power of amazon, and the availability of books in shops. Ie – if you read good publishers web sites, and buy directly from them, you should never have to hunt for a book in a large chain fruitlessly again. But the chains run the danger of only being visited by people looking for a bargain, and I am afraid the blame for this lies at their doors.
2. And what is literature, anyway? Should the novel be considered the prime example of it?
Literature is anything which challenges the status quo – so Riverbend’s blogs, Baghdad Burning, published by us in two volumes, are an excellent example of good literature.
3. Prizes and awards are playing an increasing role in determining an author's career-trajectory. In short, winning a major literary prize can win a writer a large audience overnight (not to mention, considerable fame and financial remuneration). But, as British critic Jason Cowley has observed, what is lost is the the ability for readers to think in a critically complex fashion.
Are literary prizes dangerous in this regard? Do they convey to the public the message that "this book is worth reading and all these others aren't"?
I think book buyers are capable of making choices – they do not buy every prize winner. But certainly, books they would not have noticed come to their attention, and this is a good thing. Prizes are important.
4. Literary publishing has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
The art side of the business has to co exist with the business side. Neither should be ignored, and the books published to make money will be different from the ones published because an editor or publisher loved them. It is just that some books loved by an editor will not see light of day since sales just cannot be envisaged, and the publisher does not wish to lose money and disappoint the author.
Some advances are silly – they are so large. But this just does not apply to the literary independent.
5. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
We have only taken one novel from the slush pile – a very good Irish writer living in Canada called Gerard Beirne. His novel, THE ESKIMO IN THE NET, sold a respectable 2000 copies. If it had got onto a good prize long list, it would have done better. So, we look at our slush pile properly, but it rarely produces the goods.
6. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
There is no reason for a good small house to be squeezed out by the large publishers. With head offices at the chains taking the buying decisions, the role of the rep in the large houses has diminished. Penguin now has 10 reps, HarperCollins UK, about 12. We have 6 plus myself, which makes 7. There is hardly any difference between how our books are presented to the trade and how the lead titles from the main houses are. The only difference is that we are more often breaking new authors, since we cannot afford large advances. Ie, when we have made the name of a new author, we often lose them to a large house. BUT – the authors often come back to us, since we work harder for our authors (we have fewer front list books a year) and we achieve better sales for them, better publicity, and we tour them at the major literary festivals. We also enter them for prizes – and, please note, each house is limited to 2 or 3 entries per prize (Booker, Orange). So, any author at a large house is LESS likely to be entered than if they are published by a small house.
In the area of rights, big and small houses work closely together. The big houses acknowledge our skill at finding new talent and they often want to buy the mass market paperback rights from us. This whole system benefits everyone.
7. Returning to the question of agents -- are they too powerful? If so, in what ways? Or are they a largely beneficial and necessary element of contemporary publishing?
I’d love to see an agent negotiate with Waterstone’s or Borders over discounts and 3/2 promotions. That’s the area agents have no idea of. They choose to ignore it, try to raise advances and change terms, and all that happens is that the author gets let down by too high expectations coming from their agent.
8. Does Britain have too many publishers? Or too few?
Probably too many. New houses start all the time. I wish them well, but it’s a tough business.
9. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
Not as much as people think. The 3D book is transportable, user friendly and lasts over time.
10. Putting aside the hype, does the Internet provide a real opportunity to publishers? If so, how?
As said before, it’s a wonderful promotional device and hopefully soon a lot of book sales will be direct from publisher’s web sites.
11. And what role can traditional, venerable institutions such as libraries and English Departments play in reversing the decline in sales of literary fiction?
English teachers will always be hugely influential on young minds. Young people hardly use public libraries as they have personal computers. So entertainment is already at the flick of a button. But parents can be influential. I bring back 4 books a month from my local library for my two teenage daughters who are as lazy as they come. But, shock horror, they run to the pile and read these books very fast. One day they will manage to walk two blocks to the library themselves…probably when they are at university and I am not there.
12. What projects are you working on now that you are excited about?
Chocolate and Zucchini by Clotilde Dusoulier May 2007
Builds on the success of recent books from blogs, including Julia and Julie by Julie Powell which won the Lulu blog award in 2006, and of course, Baghdad Burning
Probably the first cook book with international appeal for the new generation which uses the net as their networking base. High profile launch at the Institut Français with food.
“Not some wronger-than-wrong fusion cooking site, but a blog (in English) built around the twin culinary passions of its 27 year old Parisian writer, Clotilde Dusoulier: fresh, healthy eating and, as well, the magical dark stuff. It is real escapist, drool-on-your-keyboard stuff as Dusoulier drifts around Paris on a waft of sugar-scented air, stumbling across delicious delicacies.’ The Guardian
‘You can just see Audrey Tatou playing her in the movie as she traipses all over Paris, finding the bakery supply store that her mother shopped at, eating out, cooking and writing down recipes and shopping tips along with insights into French life.” Los Angeles Times
Enlightenment by Maureen Freely. March 2007
An investigative journalist returns to Istanbul, the scene of her early love affair with Sinan. She has to overcome her qualms when she is asked by his ‘honeypot’ wife to help her regain her son, taken away by the American authorities when Sinan is arrested on entry into the States.
A thriller involving a retired intelligence operative, a mysterious ‘trunk’ murder, and a group of young people involved in subterfuge, but now tackling a real crisis, Maureen Freely’s novel shows how in Turkey nobody is who they are and everyone is suspect.
Maureen Freely writes widely for several newspapers, and is a respected authority on the current situation in Turkey. She is a controversial writer who is not afraid to criticise the Turkey she loves.
Touba and the Meaning of Light by Shahrnush Parsipur
An epic and challenging novel about one woman’s lifetime covering eight decades of Iranian history
Winner of a PEN WRITERS IN TRANSLATION AWARD 2007.
Banned books are a major draw, and one of the broadsheets is running a promotion so reviews guaranteed. Tour highlighting other banned and prosecuted authors on our list, Elif Shafak, Hong Ying and Hubert Selby Jr.
‘Parsipur…endured jail and torture to preserve her sense of dignity and integrity, and as a writer and innovator… Her protagonists are women whose rebellions are not merely political but existential.’ Azar Nafisi, author of Reading Lolita in Tehran
‘Initially published in Iran in 1989, this ground-breaking novel – which juxtaposes reality and mysticism, becoming especially fantastical toward the book’s conclusion – was quickly banned by the Islamic Republic.’ Publisher’s Weekly (starred review)A new novel by an author who left us and has come back (still confidential but highly commercial)
Statement: Firstly, Marion Boyars was my mother who died in 1999 so she will not be answering any questions. The eminent back list, with the novels of Hubert Selby Jr, the UK rights for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey, the works on John Cage, Heinrich Boll and Georges Bataille, these are all her work. Our recent publication of novels by Hong Ying, Elif Shafak, and the Iraqi blogs by Riverbend, Baghdad Burning – all of which have attained world wide fame, are my work. So, it’s a kind of combination of both of us.
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Michael Bryson -- author, publisher (The Danforth Review)
Michael Bryson of The Danforth Review:
1. Literature is in trouble -- that is, more trouble than usual. Why do you think this is? The increasing prevalence of TV? The distractions of increasingly narcotic subcultures such as video games? Sept. 11? Or is talk of the "death of literature" simple exaggeration?
I would say that literature is like Christianity. If it isn’t being persecuted, it isn’t doing its job. I know that’s probably an odd and possibly provocative statement, but I can’t agree with a bald statement that “literature is in trouble.” At the same time, I wouldn’t agree that “death of literature” is a “simple exaggeration” either. Literature has always been a sub-culture. I’m not sure video games are any more a risk to literature than television or nuclear weapons. Apparently 9/11 was a pretty big threat to literature, though, because sales of fiction fell dramatically as everyone started reading nonfiction frantically to understand what the hell was going on.
2. And what is literature, anyway? Should the novel be considered the prime example of it?
In absolutely no way should the novel be considered the prime example of literature. Literature has three major genres: poetry, short story and novel. But then there is also the novella. And, of course, the essay. What is literature, anyway? I would prefer a definition along the lines of “a mode of thinking.” What kind of mode of thinking? A mode of thinking that filters experienced reality through the imagination and acknowledges that life is a mystery never to be fully untangled. One goes to literature for insight into the mystery. The mystery is perpetually unfolding. If the mystery disappeared, literature would then be dead. Video games won’t kill literature. An end to curiosity would, but I believe humans are innately curious.
3. Prizes and awards are playing an increasing role in determining an author's career-trajectory. In short, winning a major literary prize can win a writer a large audience overnight (not to mention, considerable fame and financial remuneration). But, as British critic Jason Cowley has observed, what is lost is the the ability for readers to think in a critically complex fashion. Are literary prizes dangerous in this regard? Do they convey to the public the message that "this book is worth reading and all these others aren't"?
Prizes do convey the message that “this book is worth reading.” At least, according to the jury who awarded the prize. However, it’s a leap to suggest that because there are prizes, people lose their ability to “think in a critically complex fashion.” Does the existence of the Oscars mean people stop thinking about which movies they “like”? That said, while people may know which movies they like, does that mean they can think critically about them? Of course not. Critical thinking is a learned activity. Most people don’t learn it. They don’t care to. And that’s okay. For them, prizes can tell them what to read. For the critical readers out there, the prizes are a distraction from the real conversations they have with each other about what books they have been awed by recently, which ones they recommend reading and which ones they recommend avoiding. In short, prizes are irrelevant to literature, but good for the book trade.
4. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. Sounds more 1996 than 2006. Or rather, I’m not sure anything has really changed, except as I said after 9/11 it’s a fact that fiction sales fell and nonfiction sales rose. Also, the big publishers have become bigger and focused more on the bottom line than they did, say, when William Faulkner was about to lose money on virtually every book he ever wrote. So, I’m not sure there’s a “recent years” phenomena. In Canada, the small presses were put under tremendous pressure in the late 1990s by Chapters. But that had nothing to do with agents and marketing people. I think the business as a whole is more complex than this question suggests.
5. As well, should the Canadian cultural nationalism of the 1970s make a comeback? Do we need a "National Culture Policy" that will put more Canadian books front and center in bookstores?
No.
6. Last summer, Douglas Coupland published an article in the New York Times criticizing Canadian literature for having too many books set in rural rather than urban settings. Is he right?
I’m not sure he was saying that. I read that article and I think he was trying to be deliberately provocative. And also funny. But he also didn’t make his point very well, in my opinion. What I think he was trying to say is, Canadian writers too often repeat our cultural stereotypes and don’t take the risk to write about the modern, multi-media, globalized cultural reality that we live in. Yes, there are still books being published that read like they were written by Alice Munro in 1970. We don’t need more books like that. We need people daring to tell the truth about life right now. Coupland attempts to do that. For that, he deserves credit. I think he wishes more people took up that challenge.
7. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
If by “squeezed out” you mean “disappear from the face of the earth,” then no. But of course there is a risk that someone will write something brilliant and it will never be read by anyone. But that risk has always existed. Dr. Suess was rejected by 20+ publishers before his first book was taken. We can all be glad that he kept trying. Are agents less able to choose and champion talent? Maybe. I’m sure agents would say they look for talent, because it means they’re likely to have a longer and more productive relationship with the author. Do publishers care about “the best new literary voices”? The publishers who only speak to agents probably have a limited view of the type of author they want. The small presses, for example, still have open submissions policies, and this is where the new literary voices almost invariably begin their careers.
8. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
You seem to be asking here if small presses can compete with large presses. You might as well as why have the New York Yankees won so many pennants in the past decade. Because size matters. Budgets matter. On the other hand, do small houses have a fair chance of winning an audience? Yes, with qualifications. Like I said, the small presses are known as the breeding ground for new writers, who nearly inevitably jump to the larger presses later. The small presses have smaller audiences, but it’s probably true that they also have more dedicated, knowledgeable audiences. Can specialty stores compete with Wal Mart? No. But they don’t have to. They have different clients.
9. Does Canada have too many publishers? Or too few?
Just right.
10. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
I think it was Roberto Eco who said the book will persist because it is a perfect technology, like the glass. I tend to agree. The book form isn’t going to change substantially. Audio books are more like radio plays. E-books are … sorry, I don’t know anyone with an e-book.
11. In a review of Kenneth Harvey's Inside and Matthew Firth's Suburban Pornography in The Danforth Review, you draw a distinction between "CanLit" and "GritLit". Are there other kinds of lit that also need encouraging in Canada? For example, Philip Marchand has recently argued that Toronto still lacks a great novel. (And the same could be said for many other Canadian cities.) And R. M. Vaughan argues we need to be more accepting of genre literature. Do we need more of many kinds of "lit"? CityLit, GenreLit, etc.? In short, does Canadian literature still have a tendency to be too rigid in its thinking of what "good writing" is?
This goes back to my comments in response to question #6: Yes, Canadian literature is too dependent on certain dominant tropes, particularly a kind of lyrical realism that seemed to articulate Canada’s small-town conservative culture in the post WWII era so well that many of our writers and readers have taken the subjectivity of that position as an objective view of reality. Canada hasn’t produced writers like J.G. Ballard, for example. Well, we have. But they tend to be film makers. David Cronenberg, for example. There are experimental writers, and always have been, in Canada. But they haven’t been held up as examples of “good writing” or even seen as legitimate challengers to the leading team. Our experimental writers languish on the margins, which are smaller in Canada, because our culture and population are smaller, and so spread out coast to coast.
About different labels for different types of literature, I can’t say this interests me really. What I would like to see is a more open-minded reading public to all kinds of writing. CanLit, to go back to Coupland’s point, was so strongly defined in nationalistic terms in the 1970s, that writing that articulate elements of life other than nationality were diminished in the public imagination. This is a distortion that needs to be corrected.
12. In the same review, you also mention other exponents of the kind of writing about life on the margins that Firth is in favour of. For example, authors who have produced great work such as David Adams Richards, Daniel Jones, Milton Acorn. Is part of the problem that this sort of literature gets produced but then gets forgotten by those who shape the CanLit canon?
Bingo.
13. Lit-blogging has become a huge phenomenon. Yet Canada has proportionately few lit-blogs compared to the United States, even taking into account the difference in population. And there is often a cliquey quality to many Canadian blogs; people not responding to link requests, and otherwise engaging in petty, passive-aggressive behaviour. Are Canadians too passive about taking advantage of the possibilities blogging offers? Are we too laid back for our own good?
This is an interesting question that raises a couple of different issues. I would link it to the previous question and suggest that part of the reason why certain books are forgotten is because they are only celebrated within the cliques. There is a kind of tribal behaviour that keeps broader alliances from being formed. Which is a shame and detrimental to everyone in the long run. On the other hand, I’m not sure that Lit-blogging is the solution to the problem. I’m not a big blogger myself, and find that many blogs – literary or otherwise – foment an anti-literary attitude. I said earlier that literature was a mode of thinking. It might also be a habit of mind. Blogging seems to encourage a kind of sarcasm, a kind of aggressive I-know-better-than-you subjectivity, which isn’t what I would call “entering into the mystery of life.” So, being laid back and not into blogs might speak to the strength of our literary culture, not the weakness of it. About the Internet in general, however, I’m more optimistic. It’s a great tool for linking people, sharing ideas and inspiration and generally providing opportunities for “oh-that’s-interesting” moments.
14. Editors of small presses and literary journals tend to be taken for granted. Yet there is a strong argument for saying they stand out as real heroes of contemporary literature; they actually read work by unknowns -- a habit the major publishers and agents have, generally speaking, fallen out of. Do editors of small presses and small magazines deserve higher status within the cosmology of literature? Are they currently under-appreciated?
Absolutely. But then again, if you follow my theory about the best readers being like the specialty store shoppers, then it’s probably true that the editors are appreciated by the people who are best able to appreciate them. Minor hockey league coaches are under-appreciated by the general public compared to the NHL, but those deep in hockey know that one without the other wouldn’t exist.
Bio: Michael Bryson is the author of two short story collections: Thirteen Shades of Black and White (Turnstone Press, 1999) and Only a Lower Paradise (Boheme Press, 2000). He is also the founding editor and publisher of the online literary magazine, danforthreview.com. His story "Six Million Million Miles" appeared in 05: Best Canadian Stories (Oberon Press, 2005). His website is http://www.michaelbryson.com/
1. Literature is in trouble -- that is, more trouble than usual. Why do you think this is? The increasing prevalence of TV? The distractions of increasingly narcotic subcultures such as video games? Sept. 11? Or is talk of the "death of literature" simple exaggeration?
I would say that literature is like Christianity. If it isn’t being persecuted, it isn’t doing its job. I know that’s probably an odd and possibly provocative statement, but I can’t agree with a bald statement that “literature is in trouble.” At the same time, I wouldn’t agree that “death of literature” is a “simple exaggeration” either. Literature has always been a sub-culture. I’m not sure video games are any more a risk to literature than television or nuclear weapons. Apparently 9/11 was a pretty big threat to literature, though, because sales of fiction fell dramatically as everyone started reading nonfiction frantically to understand what the hell was going on.
2. And what is literature, anyway? Should the novel be considered the prime example of it?
In absolutely no way should the novel be considered the prime example of literature. Literature has three major genres: poetry, short story and novel. But then there is also the novella. And, of course, the essay. What is literature, anyway? I would prefer a definition along the lines of “a mode of thinking.” What kind of mode of thinking? A mode of thinking that filters experienced reality through the imagination and acknowledges that life is a mystery never to be fully untangled. One goes to literature for insight into the mystery. The mystery is perpetually unfolding. If the mystery disappeared, literature would then be dead. Video games won’t kill literature. An end to curiosity would, but I believe humans are innately curious.
3. Prizes and awards are playing an increasing role in determining an author's career-trajectory. In short, winning a major literary prize can win a writer a large audience overnight (not to mention, considerable fame and financial remuneration). But, as British critic Jason Cowley has observed, what is lost is the the ability for readers to think in a critically complex fashion. Are literary prizes dangerous in this regard? Do they convey to the public the message that "this book is worth reading and all these others aren't"?
Prizes do convey the message that “this book is worth reading.” At least, according to the jury who awarded the prize. However, it’s a leap to suggest that because there are prizes, people lose their ability to “think in a critically complex fashion.” Does the existence of the Oscars mean people stop thinking about which movies they “like”? That said, while people may know which movies they like, does that mean they can think critically about them? Of course not. Critical thinking is a learned activity. Most people don’t learn it. They don’t care to. And that’s okay. For them, prizes can tell them what to read. For the critical readers out there, the prizes are a distraction from the real conversations they have with each other about what books they have been awed by recently, which ones they recommend reading and which ones they recommend avoiding. In short, prizes are irrelevant to literature, but good for the book trade.
4. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. Sounds more 1996 than 2006. Or rather, I’m not sure anything has really changed, except as I said after 9/11 it’s a fact that fiction sales fell and nonfiction sales rose. Also, the big publishers have become bigger and focused more on the bottom line than they did, say, when William Faulkner was about to lose money on virtually every book he ever wrote. So, I’m not sure there’s a “recent years” phenomena. In Canada, the small presses were put under tremendous pressure in the late 1990s by Chapters. But that had nothing to do with agents and marketing people. I think the business as a whole is more complex than this question suggests.
5. As well, should the Canadian cultural nationalism of the 1970s make a comeback? Do we need a "National Culture Policy" that will put more Canadian books front and center in bookstores?
No.
6. Last summer, Douglas Coupland published an article in the New York Times criticizing Canadian literature for having too many books set in rural rather than urban settings. Is he right?
I’m not sure he was saying that. I read that article and I think he was trying to be deliberately provocative. And also funny. But he also didn’t make his point very well, in my opinion. What I think he was trying to say is, Canadian writers too often repeat our cultural stereotypes and don’t take the risk to write about the modern, multi-media, globalized cultural reality that we live in. Yes, there are still books being published that read like they were written by Alice Munro in 1970. We don’t need more books like that. We need people daring to tell the truth about life right now. Coupland attempts to do that. For that, he deserves credit. I think he wishes more people took up that challenge.
7. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
If by “squeezed out” you mean “disappear from the face of the earth,” then no. But of course there is a risk that someone will write something brilliant and it will never be read by anyone. But that risk has always existed. Dr. Suess was rejected by 20+ publishers before his first book was taken. We can all be glad that he kept trying. Are agents less able to choose and champion talent? Maybe. I’m sure agents would say they look for talent, because it means they’re likely to have a longer and more productive relationship with the author. Do publishers care about “the best new literary voices”? The publishers who only speak to agents probably have a limited view of the type of author they want. The small presses, for example, still have open submissions policies, and this is where the new literary voices almost invariably begin their careers.
8. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
You seem to be asking here if small presses can compete with large presses. You might as well as why have the New York Yankees won so many pennants in the past decade. Because size matters. Budgets matter. On the other hand, do small houses have a fair chance of winning an audience? Yes, with qualifications. Like I said, the small presses are known as the breeding ground for new writers, who nearly inevitably jump to the larger presses later. The small presses have smaller audiences, but it’s probably true that they also have more dedicated, knowledgeable audiences. Can specialty stores compete with Wal Mart? No. But they don’t have to. They have different clients.
9. Does Canada have too many publishers? Or too few?
Just right.
10. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
I think it was Roberto Eco who said the book will persist because it is a perfect technology, like the glass. I tend to agree. The book form isn’t going to change substantially. Audio books are more like radio plays. E-books are … sorry, I don’t know anyone with an e-book.
11. In a review of Kenneth Harvey's Inside and Matthew Firth's Suburban Pornography in The Danforth Review, you draw a distinction between "CanLit" and "GritLit". Are there other kinds of lit that also need encouraging in Canada? For example, Philip Marchand has recently argued that Toronto still lacks a great novel. (And the same could be said for many other Canadian cities.) And R. M. Vaughan argues we need to be more accepting of genre literature. Do we need more of many kinds of "lit"? CityLit, GenreLit, etc.? In short, does Canadian literature still have a tendency to be too rigid in its thinking of what "good writing" is?
This goes back to my comments in response to question #6: Yes, Canadian literature is too dependent on certain dominant tropes, particularly a kind of lyrical realism that seemed to articulate Canada’s small-town conservative culture in the post WWII era so well that many of our writers and readers have taken the subjectivity of that position as an objective view of reality. Canada hasn’t produced writers like J.G. Ballard, for example. Well, we have. But they tend to be film makers. David Cronenberg, for example. There are experimental writers, and always have been, in Canada. But they haven’t been held up as examples of “good writing” or even seen as legitimate challengers to the leading team. Our experimental writers languish on the margins, which are smaller in Canada, because our culture and population are smaller, and so spread out coast to coast.
About different labels for different types of literature, I can’t say this interests me really. What I would like to see is a more open-minded reading public to all kinds of writing. CanLit, to go back to Coupland’s point, was so strongly defined in nationalistic terms in the 1970s, that writing that articulate elements of life other than nationality were diminished in the public imagination. This is a distortion that needs to be corrected.
12. In the same review, you also mention other exponents of the kind of writing about life on the margins that Firth is in favour of. For example, authors who have produced great work such as David Adams Richards, Daniel Jones, Milton Acorn. Is part of the problem that this sort of literature gets produced but then gets forgotten by those who shape the CanLit canon?
Bingo.
13. Lit-blogging has become a huge phenomenon. Yet Canada has proportionately few lit-blogs compared to the United States, even taking into account the difference in population. And there is often a cliquey quality to many Canadian blogs; people not responding to link requests, and otherwise engaging in petty, passive-aggressive behaviour. Are Canadians too passive about taking advantage of the possibilities blogging offers? Are we too laid back for our own good?
This is an interesting question that raises a couple of different issues. I would link it to the previous question and suggest that part of the reason why certain books are forgotten is because they are only celebrated within the cliques. There is a kind of tribal behaviour that keeps broader alliances from being formed. Which is a shame and detrimental to everyone in the long run. On the other hand, I’m not sure that Lit-blogging is the solution to the problem. I’m not a big blogger myself, and find that many blogs – literary or otherwise – foment an anti-literary attitude. I said earlier that literature was a mode of thinking. It might also be a habit of mind. Blogging seems to encourage a kind of sarcasm, a kind of aggressive I-know-better-than-you subjectivity, which isn’t what I would call “entering into the mystery of life.” So, being laid back and not into blogs might speak to the strength of our literary culture, not the weakness of it. About the Internet in general, however, I’m more optimistic. It’s a great tool for linking people, sharing ideas and inspiration and generally providing opportunities for “oh-that’s-interesting” moments.
14. Editors of small presses and literary journals tend to be taken for granted. Yet there is a strong argument for saying they stand out as real heroes of contemporary literature; they actually read work by unknowns -- a habit the major publishers and agents have, generally speaking, fallen out of. Do editors of small presses and small magazines deserve higher status within the cosmology of literature? Are they currently under-appreciated?
Absolutely. But then again, if you follow my theory about the best readers being like the specialty store shoppers, then it’s probably true that the editors are appreciated by the people who are best able to appreciate them. Minor hockey league coaches are under-appreciated by the general public compared to the NHL, but those deep in hockey know that one without the other wouldn’t exist.
Bio: Michael Bryson is the author of two short story collections: Thirteen Shades of Black and White (Turnstone Press, 1999) and Only a Lower Paradise (Boheme Press, 2000). He is also the founding editor and publisher of the online literary magazine, danforthreview.com. His story "Six Million Million Miles" appeared in 05: Best Canadian Stories (Oberon Press, 2005). His website is http://www.michaelbryson.com/
Monday, January 01, 2007
Note
"Conversations in the Book Trade" is a side-blog of The Screenplay-novel Manifestos, a site devoted largely to my screenplay-novel Truth Marathon.
Robert Lasner, author, publisher (Ig Publishing)
Robert Lasner of Ig Publishing:
1. Ever since Sept. 11, there has been a decline in book sales, particularly sales of literary fiction. And since that time, it's been common in publishing circles to explain Sept. 11 as the main "cause" of this phenomenon. Do you agree? Or have other, equally important factors been driving the decline in sales?
Sept. 11th has had nothing to do with the overall decline in sales of literary fiction. Things began to change long before then, mostly as the result of two phenomena: America's declining interest in reading fiction, particularly literary fiction, and the consolidation that has occurred in big publishing. The end result of these two developments is that, there are less review sources for literary fiction, which make it hard to get the word out about your books, and the careers of many midlist authors, who used to be the heart and soul of literary fiction, have been harmed. While many smaller, independent presses have come to the rescue of many of these midlist authors, it doesn't help the overall sales of literary fiction. These days, to sell fiction, you have to a genre hook, positioning your book as a mystery, for example.
If there was an event that has affected booksales in general it was the Iraq War. The invasion of Iraq has given serious political books a more prominent place in the marketplace.
2. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being squeezed out?
Being the editor of an independent press that pays modest advances, this issue doesn't affect us all. In fact, at our press, we're very interested in making a place for the "art" side of the business.
3. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
We accept unsolicited manuscripts. It is worth it to us--for now--to keep accepting unsolicited submissions on the hope of finding that hidden gem, which we do occasionally.
4. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
Big presses and small presses operate in completely different universes. As a small press publisher, what the big presses do has no effect on me, as they are financially in a different stratosphere, and we do not compete on any level for the same authors. Where big presses do have a substantial effect is at the review and retail level, as it is very difficult for smaller press books to get review attention because so much of the ever shrinking review space is reserved for big press books. If a book review editor is holding a big press book in one hand, and an Ig book in the other, which book do you think he is going to choose to review? A former book review editor for a major newspaper once said that he only paid attention to books from Knopf, FSG and Simon and Schuster because that was where the quality books came from, and that small presses weren't worth his time. I think that reflects the attitude of the majority of book reviewer editors, though most wouldn't state is so bluntly. And to be fair, some places will, if you persist long enough, pay you some attention, but it takes years of persistence.
Also, big presses take out print advertisements, paying thousands of dollars which help keep the book review sections alive. Generally, small presses cannot afford advertisements and thus, will be given less of a voice.
As far as the retail angle, strange as it might sound, we have had better luck getting our books into Barnes and Noble and Borders than with many of the independent bookstores, despite the accepted publishing wisdom that independent bookstores support independent presses. Our first novel, my very own For Fucks Sake, sold high numbers through Borders, and BN has always been good to our political books, and has recently started giving us decent orders for our fiction. However, with some notable exceptions, we don't get great orders from independents.
5. Returning to the question of agents -- are they too powerful? If so, in what ways? Or are they a largely beneficial and necessary element of contemporary publishing?
There are good agents and bad agents, and I don't believe that I can make a blanket statement about their relative worth. Most bigger agents won't give small presses a chance, because we can't afford to pay what they are looking for.
7. Does America have too many publishers? Or too few?
Too many. There is simply not enough retail space for the number of books being published.
8. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
So far, e-books have been a failure. I think people like the feel of a real book, and I don't know if electronic substitutes will ever suffice.
9. Putting aside the hype, does the Internet provide a real opportunity to publishers? If so, how?
One of the main reasons that publishers like Ig can exist is because of the internet. First of all, many of our books, particularly our political books, emerge from the progressive blogosphere, where the freshest and most interesting ideas are coming from. Instead of competing with big presses for authors, which we cannot do, and other small presses, the internet has given us the opportunity to identify authors and ideas that are often overlooked. The big presses tend to ignore the blogosphere because they don't see the $ in publishing an unknown author. However, for us, a growing small press, these new and upcoming thinkers are perfect.
The internet has also provided new retail space through Amazon.com and review spaces like the LitBlog Co-op.
10. And what role can traditional, venerable institutions such as libraries and English Departments play in reversing the decline in sales of literary fiction?
Library budgets, and as a consequence library sales, have been declining for years. English Departments can support fiction by introducing new authors to new generations of readers, but that is really hard to do, as most professors are not going to sacrifice the canon to introduce new authors.
11. What projects are you working on now that you are excited about?
This coming spring, we have three strong political titles coming out.
Framing the Debate: Famous Presidential Speeches and How Progressives Can Use Them to Change the Conversation (and Win Elections) by Jeffrey Feldman, is a fascinating book that analyzes fifteen key presidential speeches from George Washington to George W. Bush in order to pull the "frame" out of the speech, and show how contemporary progressives can apply that frame to change the tenor of the political debate.
Moving A Nation to Care: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and America's Returning Troops, by Ilona Meagher is a passionate and informative call to arms to educate and hopefully inspire people to get involved in the issue of PTSD, which affects over 25% of our troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, and will be a major issue in the coming years.
Steeplejacking: How The Christian Right is Hijacking Mainstream Religion talks about the war within religion between the radical right and liberal and mainstream churches, and how agents of the right covertly infiltrate mainstream churches in order to stir dissent, with the eventual goal of taking control--or "steeplejacking"--the church.
In the fall of 2007, we have two novels we are extremely excited about. Sandrine's Letters to Tomorrow is a first novel from New Orleans author Dedra Johnson, a delicate and disturbing tale of a young African American girl growing up in poverty in the 1970s New Orleans. Just a great novel which deals with issue of racism, broken families and religion.
Mortarville is a second novel from Grant Bailie, whose Cloud 8 we published in 2003, and is the story of a man who is born out of a test tube, is raised with his fellow test-tube babies by a shady government agency in an underground facility, and how he escapes to the outside world, and his life thereafter.
Bio: Robert Lasner is the author of cult best-seller, For Fuck's Sake, and the publisher of Brooklyn-based Ig Publishing, which publishes literary fiction, and poltical and cultural nonfiction with a progressive slant
1. Ever since Sept. 11, there has been a decline in book sales, particularly sales of literary fiction. And since that time, it's been common in publishing circles to explain Sept. 11 as the main "cause" of this phenomenon. Do you agree? Or have other, equally important factors been driving the decline in sales?
Sept. 11th has had nothing to do with the overall decline in sales of literary fiction. Things began to change long before then, mostly as the result of two phenomena: America's declining interest in reading fiction, particularly literary fiction, and the consolidation that has occurred in big publishing. The end result of these two developments is that, there are less review sources for literary fiction, which make it hard to get the word out about your books, and the careers of many midlist authors, who used to be the heart and soul of literary fiction, have been harmed. While many smaller, independent presses have come to the rescue of many of these midlist authors, it doesn't help the overall sales of literary fiction. These days, to sell fiction, you have to a genre hook, positioning your book as a mystery, for example.
If there was an event that has affected booksales in general it was the Iraq War. The invasion of Iraq has given serious political books a more prominent place in the marketplace.
2. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being squeezed out?
Being the editor of an independent press that pays modest advances, this issue doesn't affect us all. In fact, at our press, we're very interested in making a place for the "art" side of the business.
3. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
We accept unsolicited manuscripts. It is worth it to us--for now--to keep accepting unsolicited submissions on the hope of finding that hidden gem, which we do occasionally.
4. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
Big presses and small presses operate in completely different universes. As a small press publisher, what the big presses do has no effect on me, as they are financially in a different stratosphere, and we do not compete on any level for the same authors. Where big presses do have a substantial effect is at the review and retail level, as it is very difficult for smaller press books to get review attention because so much of the ever shrinking review space is reserved for big press books. If a book review editor is holding a big press book in one hand, and an Ig book in the other, which book do you think he is going to choose to review? A former book review editor for a major newspaper once said that he only paid attention to books from Knopf, FSG and Simon and Schuster because that was where the quality books came from, and that small presses weren't worth his time. I think that reflects the attitude of the majority of book reviewer editors, though most wouldn't state is so bluntly. And to be fair, some places will, if you persist long enough, pay you some attention, but it takes years of persistence.
Also, big presses take out print advertisements, paying thousands of dollars which help keep the book review sections alive. Generally, small presses cannot afford advertisements and thus, will be given less of a voice.
As far as the retail angle, strange as it might sound, we have had better luck getting our books into Barnes and Noble and Borders than with many of the independent bookstores, despite the accepted publishing wisdom that independent bookstores support independent presses. Our first novel, my very own For Fucks Sake, sold high numbers through Borders, and BN has always been good to our political books, and has recently started giving us decent orders for our fiction. However, with some notable exceptions, we don't get great orders from independents.
5. Returning to the question of agents -- are they too powerful? If so, in what ways? Or are they a largely beneficial and necessary element of contemporary publishing?
There are good agents and bad agents, and I don't believe that I can make a blanket statement about their relative worth. Most bigger agents won't give small presses a chance, because we can't afford to pay what they are looking for.
7. Does America have too many publishers? Or too few?
Too many. There is simply not enough retail space for the number of books being published.
8. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
So far, e-books have been a failure. I think people like the feel of a real book, and I don't know if electronic substitutes will ever suffice.
9. Putting aside the hype, does the Internet provide a real opportunity to publishers? If so, how?
One of the main reasons that publishers like Ig can exist is because of the internet. First of all, many of our books, particularly our political books, emerge from the progressive blogosphere, where the freshest and most interesting ideas are coming from. Instead of competing with big presses for authors, which we cannot do, and other small presses, the internet has given us the opportunity to identify authors and ideas that are often overlooked. The big presses tend to ignore the blogosphere because they don't see the $ in publishing an unknown author. However, for us, a growing small press, these new and upcoming thinkers are perfect.
The internet has also provided new retail space through Amazon.com and review spaces like the LitBlog Co-op.
10. And what role can traditional, venerable institutions such as libraries and English Departments play in reversing the decline in sales of literary fiction?
Library budgets, and as a consequence library sales, have been declining for years. English Departments can support fiction by introducing new authors to new generations of readers, but that is really hard to do, as most professors are not going to sacrifice the canon to introduce new authors.
11. What projects are you working on now that you are excited about?
This coming spring, we have three strong political titles coming out.
Framing the Debate: Famous Presidential Speeches and How Progressives Can Use Them to Change the Conversation (and Win Elections) by Jeffrey Feldman, is a fascinating book that analyzes fifteen key presidential speeches from George Washington to George W. Bush in order to pull the "frame" out of the speech, and show how contemporary progressives can apply that frame to change the tenor of the political debate.
Moving A Nation to Care: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and America's Returning Troops, by Ilona Meagher is a passionate and informative call to arms to educate and hopefully inspire people to get involved in the issue of PTSD, which affects over 25% of our troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, and will be a major issue in the coming years.
Steeplejacking: How The Christian Right is Hijacking Mainstream Religion talks about the war within religion between the radical right and liberal and mainstream churches, and how agents of the right covertly infiltrate mainstream churches in order to stir dissent, with the eventual goal of taking control--or "steeplejacking"--the church.
In the fall of 2007, we have two novels we are extremely excited about. Sandrine's Letters to Tomorrow is a first novel from New Orleans author Dedra Johnson, a delicate and disturbing tale of a young African American girl growing up in poverty in the 1970s New Orleans. Just a great novel which deals with issue of racism, broken families and religion.
Mortarville is a second novel from Grant Bailie, whose Cloud 8 we published in 2003, and is the story of a man who is born out of a test tube, is raised with his fellow test-tube babies by a shady government agency in an underground facility, and how he escapes to the outside world, and his life thereafter.
Bio: Robert Lasner is the author of cult best-seller, For Fuck's Sake, and the publisher of Brooklyn-based Ig Publishing, which publishes literary fiction, and poltical and cultural nonfiction with a progressive slant
Friday, December 22, 2006
Holiday Break
Yep, just as in the West, it's holiday season in Seoul. My wife and I know this because when we take the bus downtown we pass department store after department store. And all of them are covered in even more festive lights than the shopping monoliths in my old home-town, Toronto. And that -- given the quiet Canadian fetish for "world class" consumerism -- is a lot of lights.
Here at "Conversations in the Book Trade" we don't do lights. We just do interviews. And here are some already in the can that will appear in the New Year:
- R. M. Vaughan (The National Post)
- Jon Paul Fiorentino (Matrix Magazine, Snare Books)
- Michael Bryson (The Danforth Review)
- Robert Lasner (Ig Publishing)
Happy holidays. And remember, in 2007, perhaps even more than ever, it's worth doing the altruistic wish thing.... Peace.
Here at "Conversations in the Book Trade" we don't do lights. We just do interviews. And here are some already in the can that will appear in the New Year:
- R. M. Vaughan (The National Post)
- Jon Paul Fiorentino (Matrix Magazine, Snare Books)
- Michael Bryson (The Danforth Review)
- Robert Lasner (Ig Publishing)
Happy holidays. And remember, in 2007, perhaps even more than ever, it's worth doing the altruistic wish thing.... Peace.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
When Books Don't Sell - 2
[This is the second and final part of an article about an exchange I had with Laura Miller and the changing publishing landscape. To see part one, simply scroll down]
.... In any case, all this is a lead-up to the email correspondence Miller and I had.
When I wrote to her, she was kind enough to reply. Here is the beginning of what she said:
About 175,000 new titles are published every year
I think it would be fair to say that what Miller wanted to do was offer me a reality check. She does not know me, and is being kinder than many arts journalists would be by simply acknowledging my email. From her point of view, it's possible that I'm a decent writer (I described my work in so little detail that she had to assume I write fiction). It's also possible I'm an untalented crank. In either case, my argument, that the big houses need to change their ways and at least offer that sliver of hope to emerging writers, was, she felt, beside the point. The main thing to think of was the reality of the book market today: it is saturated with new books, and starved of enough readers.
She continued:
Books, especially fiction, are unfortunately
Again, fair enough. But already there is more than one way to consider the current crisis in falling sales of literary fiction. (I'm going to go into alternatives in a later post.) For the time being, though, I think it's worth pointing out that probably everyone -- from industry insiders to the the most obscure writers -- agree that the goal of literary publishing remains finding the best possible work. And so the question arises, is the current system of relying exclusively on agented work going to bring out the best?
Agents are an extremely varied group: some of them are wonderful and committed to good writing. Others are woefully incapable of recognizing anything except marketable pap.
Underlying the agenting business are two essential factors: the first is that the top agents are often already too busy to consider work by emerging writers -- that avenue of approaching a major publisher is closed, too. (And if at this point you're asking, well, why approach a big house? Why not publish with a small one? The answer is, writers who are serious want to make a decent living. Small houses are almost saintly in their devotion to the cause of literature, but are too often squeezed out by the muscle of the big houses.)
The second factor is agents are unregulated; even real estate agents have to meet more stringent professional standards before they can go into business. Some agents are outright charlatans, and, for writers, it is very much a case of caveat emptor. The agents that publishers will listen to are the ones worth doing business with. They are the ones the publishers refer to with the adjective "established". But they, unfortunately, usually fall into the the group described above: the very, very busy ones who themselves don't consider unsolicited work.
In the end, the result for writers who are outside the loop is extraordinarily frustrating. And if it turns out that some of these writers are worth giving at least a reading to, well, that may not be the way it works out in reality. Luck has become an increasingly important aspect of getting your foot in the door. (Speaking for myself, I've had several tantalizing close-calls. And I think my work is worth at least consideration: I have both a completed memoir and a working draft of a screenplay novel.)
The history of culture of rife with examples of writers, artists and musicians who were either under-recognized or unrecognized in their life times. The filtering system by which those we consider talented are distinguished from those who are, so to speak, clogging up the drains of civilization, has never been perfect. Why assume the the current system of almost entirely walling off major publishers will lead to continued publishing of the very best manuscripts available? If nothing else, the majors should return to giving emerging writers a small chance: if a return to the classic slush-pile is too much to ask for, they should at least allow emerging writers to submit cover letters and sample chapters.
It's not too much to ask.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
When Books Don't Sell - 1
[This is part one of a piece I wrote a few months ago]
Laura Miller is a journalist who frequently writes reviews for Salon. For my money, she's one of the best literary journalists around. She has a direct, unaffected yet highly intelligent style that usually gets to the heart of the matter.
Recently, she wrote a column entitled "Rank Insubordination" on the New York Times list of the best American novels of the last quarter century. Or rather, she wrote on the compilation of literary best-of lists generally, and the fact they raise as many questions as they answer. (Miller's conclusion was while a single best-of list may have made sense a few decades ago, the reading public has become so diverse that what is really required is a series of best-of lists; a recognition that standards are not absolute, and have become more varied as reading audiences have become more diverse.)
I wrote her an email in response to this piece. I agreed with the column and its conclusion, so what I focussed on instead was my own opinion that part of the problem with achieving diversity in literature was that the major publishing houses were now walling themselves off from emerging writers. That is, emerging writes who don't have an agent.
I can't remember exactly how I worded my argument, but it was along these lines. This question of how the major houses process (or refuse to process) work by lesser-knowns is connected, I think, to the question of canon formation ... which in turn is what lists like the NYT's effectively influence. Furthermore, the fact that major publishers are not looking at any work by emerging writers has received almost no critical attention. It seems to me the lit-world's equivalent of the Patriot Act: shave off a few traditions and liberties here and there ... what's the big deal?
Essentially, what has happened is this: the major publishers have killed the slush pile. You know the slush pile -- it was that means by which an emerging writer could submit his/her manuscript to a publishing house. There, it would be read by a junior editor with negligible influence over final publishing decisions. But at least it offered a small ray of hope. And it is this hope that generations of writers have clung to during the early phases of their career. Once upon the time, the slush-pile was "just how things are done". Well, those days are gone now, at least as far as the big houses are concerned.
And this change has gone unannounced: some houses simply pretend that no one is interested in submitting to them and evade the issue altogether, but a few major publishers will state clearly at their webites that they simply will not consider unsolicited work. This doesn't mean they will consider a cover letter and a sample chapter (this was the way it worked until just a few years ago). It doesn't mean they will consider even a cover letter and CV (this is how some agents work). It means they will consider ... nothing -- nothing that does not come through an agent. But here's the thing: many agents do not consider unsolicited work these days either. The Catch-22 is obvious.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Richard Nash, Softskull Press
Richard Nash, of Softskull Press:
1. Ever since Sept. 11, there has been a decline in book sales, particularly sales of literary fiction. And since that time, it's been common in publishing circles to explain Sept. 11 as the main "cause" of this phenomenon. Do you agree? Or have other, equally important factors been driving the decline in sales?
1. I’m actually not aware there has been a decline in sales. I’ve certainly heard various bits of pontification here and there, but my sense is that it is soundbite stuff, and journalists trying to shoehorn trend pieces
2. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
The “art” side of the business has always been pretty marginal. Michael Korda, who ran Simon & Schuster in the 1980’s, has said that the publishing business’s relationship to supporting literature has never been all that significant, and that was a welcome bit of candor. That said, the business has become more hit-driven, hence the larger advances
3. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
They’re not trying to find the best literary voices, they’re trying to find hits. The agents are doing the same thing. The agents have more time to read than do editors so, as a division of labor, that seem “smart.” Sure, sometimes those qualities may overlap, and sure editors would like them to overlap, but ultimately it is only slightly more than coincidental. Which is something that has been true lo these many centuries. It is of course true that I am not going to publish something that I know is crap, but will sell, and that’ll be true for some of my indie publisher peers, but it is just as true that I will not publish something just cause it is good. The best literary voices will be found over a long period of time, true cultural processes, of criticism, word-of-mouth, the entire cultural apparatus. Publishing is simply a significant component of the economic component of the culture-making process...
4. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
Retailers are the issue here, not the publishers. The biggest publisher in the US has maybe 5% market share...the biggest four retailers have over half the market. (in Canada, one has 70%...) Retailers mostly want velocity. Books selling fast in the first few weeks there are there, and wanting co-op/payola. Also, many independents don’t read unsolicited work any more—there’s simply not enough time. I’ve 400 MSS going back to Summer 2004...
5. Returning to the question of agents -- are they too powerful? If so, in what ways? Or are they a largely beneficial and necessary element of contemporary publishing?
5. There are a great many different kinds of agents. Some might have too much pricing power vis-à-vis publishers, but they don’t affect me at all. For the most part, agents are part of the filtering process, just like creative writing programs, freelance editors, professors, reviewers, critics etc etc. However yes, if there are a couple thousand editors in the business, and several hundred thousand manuscripts, then yes, obviously agents will be a crucial component...
7. Does America have too many publishers? Or too few?
Too few.
8. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
Way way way too soon to tell, as Mao’s premier Chou Enlai famously said about the French revolution when talking to Kissinger in the 1970’s. There will be massive changes.
9. Putting aside the hype, does the Internet provide a real opportunity to publishers? If so, how?
Developments in technology, many of which don’t have that much to do with the internet (the PDF, Quark & Adobe, higher quality printing) have an ongoing year-in, year-out significant incremental improvement to all publishers, though it slightly favors smaller ones, as the benefits of those technologies are only loosely related to scale. The internet constitutes an improvement in communications technology, improving the word-of-mouth process by which most books are sold, allowing retailers like Amazon to carry a broader array of inventory (though it is as much improvements in distribution and warehouse technology that enable Amazon as it is the internet...)
10. And what role can traditional, venerable institutions such as libraries and English Departments play in reversing the decline in sales of literary fiction?
Libraries none, since certainly there the sales of books have declined. English depts...well...it really depends on what you mean...the proliferation of creative writing programs have helped the sales of literary fiction, but the graduates are mostly too broke to buy books, and mostly focus on trying to get publishers to publish book. So there’s a small net positive effect. But English depts certainly don’t create lifelong readers.
About Softskull:
[by Ginny Weihart]
Soft Skull Press, an independent press based in Brooklyn, NY, was founded in 1993. Soft Skull Press publishes approximately forty titles per year, one-fourth to one-third of which are fiction. The average print run for a fiction title is 4,000.
[To get a broader overview of Softskull (as well as another interview with Richard Nash), go to "Your Guide to "Fiction Writing" ]
UPDATE: Also check out the following, here and here.
1. Ever since Sept. 11, there has been a decline in book sales, particularly sales of literary fiction. And since that time, it's been common in publishing circles to explain Sept. 11 as the main "cause" of this phenomenon. Do you agree? Or have other, equally important factors been driving the decline in sales?
1. I’m actually not aware there has been a decline in sales. I’ve certainly heard various bits of pontification here and there, but my sense is that it is soundbite stuff, and journalists trying to shoehorn trend pieces
2. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
The “art” side of the business has always been pretty marginal. Michael Korda, who ran Simon & Schuster in the 1980’s, has said that the publishing business’s relationship to supporting literature has never been all that significant, and that was a welcome bit of candor. That said, the business has become more hit-driven, hence the larger advances
3. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
They’re not trying to find the best literary voices, they’re trying to find hits. The agents are doing the same thing. The agents have more time to read than do editors so, as a division of labor, that seem “smart.” Sure, sometimes those qualities may overlap, and sure editors would like them to overlap, but ultimately it is only slightly more than coincidental. Which is something that has been true lo these many centuries. It is of course true that I am not going to publish something that I know is crap, but will sell, and that’ll be true for some of my indie publisher peers, but it is just as true that I will not publish something just cause it is good. The best literary voices will be found over a long period of time, true cultural processes, of criticism, word-of-mouth, the entire cultural apparatus. Publishing is simply a significant component of the economic component of the culture-making process...
4. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
Retailers are the issue here, not the publishers. The biggest publisher in the US has maybe 5% market share...the biggest four retailers have over half the market. (in Canada, one has 70%...) Retailers mostly want velocity. Books selling fast in the first few weeks there are there, and wanting co-op/payola. Also, many independents don’t read unsolicited work any more—there’s simply not enough time. I’ve 400 MSS going back to Summer 2004...
5. Returning to the question of agents -- are they too powerful? If so, in what ways? Or are they a largely beneficial and necessary element of contemporary publishing?
5. There are a great many different kinds of agents. Some might have too much pricing power vis-à-vis publishers, but they don’t affect me at all. For the most part, agents are part of the filtering process, just like creative writing programs, freelance editors, professors, reviewers, critics etc etc. However yes, if there are a couple thousand editors in the business, and several hundred thousand manuscripts, then yes, obviously agents will be a crucial component...
7. Does America have too many publishers? Or too few?
Too few.
8. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
Way way way too soon to tell, as Mao’s premier Chou Enlai famously said about the French revolution when talking to Kissinger in the 1970’s. There will be massive changes.
9. Putting aside the hype, does the Internet provide a real opportunity to publishers? If so, how?
Developments in technology, many of which don’t have that much to do with the internet (the PDF, Quark & Adobe, higher quality printing) have an ongoing year-in, year-out significant incremental improvement to all publishers, though it slightly favors smaller ones, as the benefits of those technologies are only loosely related to scale. The internet constitutes an improvement in communications technology, improving the word-of-mouth process by which most books are sold, allowing retailers like Amazon to carry a broader array of inventory (though it is as much improvements in distribution and warehouse technology that enable Amazon as it is the internet...)
10. And what role can traditional, venerable institutions such as libraries and English Departments play in reversing the decline in sales of literary fiction?
Libraries none, since certainly there the sales of books have declined. English depts...well...it really depends on what you mean...the proliferation of creative writing programs have helped the sales of literary fiction, but the graduates are mostly too broke to buy books, and mostly focus on trying to get publishers to publish book. So there’s a small net positive effect. But English depts certainly don’t create lifelong readers.
About Softskull:
[by Ginny Weihart]
Soft Skull Press, an independent press based in Brooklyn, NY, was founded in 1993. Soft Skull Press publishes approximately forty titles per year, one-fourth to one-third of which are fiction. The average print run for a fiction title is 4,000.
[To get a broader overview of Softskull (as well as another interview with Richard Nash), go to "Your Guide to "Fiction Writing" ]
UPDATE: Also check out the following, here and here.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Conversations in the Book Trade -- Fred Ramey
Fred Ramey is Co-Publisher with Greg Michalson of Unbridled Books, a decentralized publisher of quality fiction and narrative nonfiction. Known for debuting literary talent, Unbridled’s books make frequent appearances on the Book Sense lists and in the Discover program at Barnes & Noble. Ramey and Michalson have been publishing together since 1992 when they opened the fiction line at MacMurray & Beck. Among many other award-winning writers, they have handled the debut novels of Susan Vreeland, William Gay, Steve Yarbrough, Patricia Henley, Nancy Zafris, Rick Collignon, and Frederick Reuss. Take a look at www.unbridledbooks.com .
1. Ever since Sept. 11, there has been a decline in book sales, particularly sales of literary fiction. And since that time, it's been common in publishing circles to explain Sept. 11 as the main "cause" of this phenomenon. Do you agree? Or have other, equally important factors been driving the decline in sales?
Speaking here of fiction publishing only, there is little doubt that the events of September 11 changed the equations. At first, it appeared that serious work in literature would return to a more prominent place as Americans looked for meaning. And I think that, aside from their obvious literary value, the critical attention such works as Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America and Marilynne Robinson’s Gilead , among other books, received when we were finally getting back on our feet may owe something to a desire in the American reader to read that which explains who we are, a desire that has risen in the political air since 9/11. This is the same desire, I think, that has moved nonfiction titles about the Founders and about the Revolutionary War and World War II onto the best-seller lists. But September 11 had another effect on literary publishing: It increased the corporate drive toward fiscal caution in the publishing of fiction. This led to an increased focus on the fiction that appears most nearly a sure thing and ultimately resulted in the sense now that at any given moment everyone is reading the same novel. (I think the one-city/one-book programs are furthering this.) Book sales overall have not dropped as dramatically as your question implies, but fewer books seem to reach the readers’ consciousness now and literary fiction has taken a hit in that process. This may have begun with the caution 9/11 introduced, but that caution itself seems to me the real source. If everyone is reading the same book, newspapers see less need to review books, a handful of books in the big-box stores will cover the reading habits of their customers who don’t now frequent bookstores, the reality of fewer book-only retail outlets make it easier to keep the readers’ attention focused on a manageable inventory of an artificially finite number of titles, etc. The cause of the decline in literary book sales is complex (though it is not untraceable).
2. The publishing industry has always been a marriage of art and commerce. But in recent years, the Cult of the Deal has become more influential, with agents demanding larger advances and marketing people paying especially close attention to sales figures. Is the "art" side of the business being pushed out?
The art side of the business is being cornered perhaps, but it’s not because of the Deal. Certainly the two-book deal that Spiegel & Grau made for Sara Gruen’s next works would indicate that the Big-Deal thinking you refer to is still operational. But high-profile, high-dollar deals seem to me far less frequently reported these days. What is shadowing the art of literature seems, rather, to be a combination of the corporate need for a sure thing and the instant availability of sales numbers. Of course booksellers have always been able to access their own sales records and to know how an author’s previous book has sold. And they’ve always used that information to guide their buys. But now a chain fiction buyer can instantly tell how many copies of an author’s first book sold through hundreds of stores, and acquiring editors can get a pretty good look at the author’s sales record even if they weren’t the publisher for the earlier titles. As a result of this, an author’s second novel might be under-stocked in the chains — that is, IF he or she is able to sell that second book to a publisher in the first place. This makes it far more difficult for authors to develop across long careers, to gain an expectant readership while developing their art, to expand their literary reach. I consider this use of numbers as though they were predictive a real threat to American literature. We all know that sales records of past books do not indicate what an author’s next will sell — unless that next book is not acquired or is under-stocked to make the prediction self-fulfilling.
3. Many major publishers now refuse to accept "unsolicited" work; that is, they will not even consider work unless it is agented. Is this a sound policy from point of view of finding the best new literary voices? Isn't there a chance good writing will be squeezed out?
There is a chance, of course, that an unagented book could be good. But, first, there is a sea of independent presses to handle that and, second, this big-house policy has allowed to develop an editorial role for agents — which the large publishers apparently need.
4. Alternatively, for small presses that do accept unsolicited work, is the problem that the majors are squeezing the small houses at the distribution/retail marketing end? In other words, even when good writers get published by small houses, do they have a fair chance of winning an audience? Or are the major houses introducing an overly corporate, overly aggressive mentality to the book trade?
I think my preceding answers probably imply the answer to this one.
5. Returning to the question of agents -- are they too powerful? If so, in what ways? Or are they a largely beneficial and necessary element of contemporary publishing?
Once we did battle with agents. We no longer do much of that. The changes we’ve been discussing here that have arisen from the caution of the larger houses and the focusing of readers upon a smaller number of titles at any given moment have changed that relationship for the kinds of books we handle. (As an aside here, we had to delay publication of one of our books in 2006 for two weeks because of how much print capacity the latest Harry Potter took up that month. This indicates the world agents now work in, too.) Now, agents know that while the smaller houses may not be able to put much money down for advances, they will take good care of the authors and their books, give the books a chance, invest in them and the authors over a longer period of time. In this context, the remaining problem for independents seems to be the agents’ inability to resist the big-house offer once an independent publisher has succeeded with an author’s first or second or third book. That can at times be dangerous to the author’s career, but it isn’t always. I suppose it’s just part of the small-press reality.
7. Does America have too many publishers? Or too few?
The marketplace dictates that. If one new publisher survives over the long haul, I suppose there aren’t too many. A better question is whether collectively we publish too many books. Where are we now? 175,000 titles a year? If we publishers focused on what is good, would more people be able to find what they like and thereby read more books on their own rather than waiting for a single book to be anointed by this taste maker or that one?
8. In your opinion, how will new technologies such as the e-book or audio books affect the "form" of the book?
It is my opinion that, while new technologies will certainly — but only eventually — change the delivery of the text, the answers to the issues that face publishing are not technological. Again, I’m speaking here only as a publisher of quality fiction and speaking only about fiction. People need narrative. For a long while yet, I imagine, the artifact of the book will be necessary to those people who read narrative rather than get it only through media — including audio books. And I don’t think that users of audiobooks are the same market as users of e-book devices (though I have no empirical evidence for that). It seems to me that the wrong term is in quotation marks in your question: it’s “book” that will eventually be antiquated. Those publishers who can convert their practices as the “book” itself converts will survive — we all assume this, but none of us knows what that conversion will be or how quickly it will happen. This is because the people who are developing the technologies are not the publishers. What other industry runs that way? What other industry yields R&D up to outsiders?
9. Putting aside the hype, does the Internet provide a real opportunity to publishers? If so, how?
The practical uses it offers in the editing and production of books aside, in the current reality, the Internet is a tremendous tool for publishers to reach those readers who want something besides the designated book of the season. This will become even more the case so long as review inches are shrinking in the print media (which I fear will be right to their complete disappearance). And as the influence of the literary bloggers grows — as I think it will once they convince those readers who are not bloggers that the blogs are the source of information about What to Read — that is, once readers recognize that bloggers have an authority that the reader reviews on Amazon do not — then the Internet will be an even more powerful tool for publishers. Of course at the same time as all of this is occurring, the Internet is becoming a more valuable tool for readers and authors. Whether this will ultimately result in its replacing publishers is something we all wish we knew.
10. And what role can traditional, venerable institutions such as libraries and English Departments play in reversing the decline in sales of literary fiction?
I think this is asking the same institutions that are threatened by the forces of change to resist these developments in the same way that publishers are resisting them. And I don’t think that will work. Libraries are already something other than wholly “book” oriented. They’ve already redefined themselves. And if American literature must move onto the Internet to survive, literature programs at the university level won’t have much to do with the continued existence of publishing. (Whether a book sells or not has never been a concern of the Academy.) Certainly it would be fascinating for English Departments to turn their attention from underscoring the literary canon to fostering an ongoing national literature. I suppose it could happen. But it would endanger the canon, and it would be a burdensome addition to the curriculum in Departments that have suffered decreasing numbers of majors for decades.
11. What projects are you working on now that you are excited about?
Each season we have titles that invigorate us, and the 2007 Spring season is no different. We promise our readers a good reading experience and I think Andrea Portes’s courageous debut, Hick, and Timothy Schaffert’s charmingly human Devils in the Sugar Shop both will do that. M. Allen Cunningham also returns with the lyrical Lost Son, a gorgeous novel on the life of Rilke. And Elise Blackwell’s eloquent The Unnatural History of Cypress Parish is an evocative story about the 1927 flooding of New Orleans that rewards the reader line by line. We’re also proud of the books in our current season: beautifully wrought novels by William J. Cobb (Goodnight, Texas), Carolyn Turgeon (Rain Village), and Lise Haines (small acts of sex and electricity), Marc Estrin’s provocative and outrageous Golem Song, and the delicate second memoir of Mireille Marokvia — Sins of the Innocent.
But what I’m immersed in now is Marc’s next project, an annotated edition of a dishonest novel by William Hundwasser. It’s called The Annotated Nose and, I think, exists in the narrative tradition of Nabokov. My task as editor is to make the physical artifacts of the original novel, the annotations by “its subject, Alexei Pigov”, and Estrin’s editorial notes all chime together in what is a singular, playful, and again outrageous reading experience. This will be the fourth Estrin book to be published, with three more in the works. He’s an absolutely brilliant author I hold onto and hope I don’t get tossed off in the ride.
12. Unbridled Books is a literary publishing house that places a lot of emphasis on audio versions of books. Given the recent release of electronic book platforms such as the Sony Reader, how do you think audio books will combine with a technology such as this? In other words, do you foresee the audio book and electronic book as merging?
Thanks for noticing. We’re currently producing a series of interviews by Kay Callison under the collective name of Unbridled Aloud. We think that Kay — the formidable force behind the American Audio Prose Library — is one of the most perceptive readers and insightful literary interviewers at work today. And her interviews with our authors have revealed aspects of the works that I was unaware of even when I was the editor. All of these productions are available for free both as podcasts and as audio cds. In addition, we have a complete version of Estrin’s Golem Song read by the author, which we serialized on our website, and we’re hoping to produce more author-read, unabridged recordings of our books.
But your question gets back to the value of the Internet to publishers in the current reality. Literary titles have never been widely available as audiobooks — this may be because of an actual separation between of the audiobook market from the traditional reading market, but it may, instead, be the cause of that separation. I don’t know. But now that we can use our website to deliver audio versions of quality fiction, especially in the downloadable form of the podcast, we have an opportunity to see whether readers of literary fiction commute to work.
But I want to get back to the assertion that addressing the issues publishers now face is not identical with the need to focus on technology. The issues seem to me, instead, to be behavioral. The leisurely pace of reading (whether on a paper page or on some imaginable, eye-friendly screen) is an essential part of the experience of written narrative. Heard narrative is not paced by the reader. I know that sounds quaintly McLuhanesque, but it remains true. Audio versions of narrative are received. Written versions are taken. So, whatever happens in the delivery of literature, it’s hard to imagine the ipod replacing the book. Something else will, I suppose, but, no, I don’t think that the audiobook market and the e-book market will merge.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)