Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Loveography 1: Inside Haemi Fortress




EXT. A SMALL KOREAN VILLAGE. AN EARLY SUMMER EVENING, MID-WEEK.

A WESTERN MAN is walking down the city's main street. To his left is Haemi Fortress, a medieval Korean fort. Its wall is built of unevenly-matched stones, each lightened by age to a gentle ochre, as if the stone itself has softened.

The MAN walking beside this wall has a peaceful expression on his face. But from his body language we can tell he's lonely.

VO: Those were the days before I met you.

SFX: A light breeze.



EXT. THE INNER COURTYARD OF THE FORTRESS. MOMENTS LATER.

The Western man sees a group of CHILDREN. They are giggling and playing with each other. Then one of them spots the man.



CHILD: 의국인! [Foreigner]

SECOND CHILD: [sing-songy] Hello!

MAN: [smiling] Hello.

ALL CHILDREN: [gleefully] Hello! Hello!

MAN: [speaking slowly] Can you speak English?

The CHILDREN suddenly start to giggle uproariously. But their amusement is more a symptom of shyness than a desire to carry the game any further. They run away, still laughing.

The MAN continues walking. He makes his way through small, sad, empty streets.




V.O.: Chris Marker once asked how we can remember thirst. What I want to know is, how can we remember loneliness? It penetrates not just oneself but the world. Reality itself appears changed.
The side-streets suck themselves empty, their noise vacuumed behind shuttered store-fronts. The sky pulls itself as taut as a blue drum. The clouds starve themselves and harm themselves, like self-loathing anorexics.

And as the world seems to change, so does the self: feel lonely enough, and that juncture of soul and body that comprises what you think of as you becomes as parched as cracked soil. The lonely individual is ancient, he is dirt.


INT. AN EVANGELICAL CHURCH. TEN MINUTES LATER.



The MAN enters. He is somewhat surprised to see a CROWD OF WORSHIPPERS. They are very involved in their prayers.

The MAN walks cautiously forward.

A MIDDLE-AGED KOREAN MAN spots him.

CUT TO: CLOSE UP of
MIDDLE-AGED KOREAN MAN.

MIDDLE-AGED KOREAN MAN: 하느님! 하느님이 자를 사랑하습니다! [God! God loves you!]

The MAN pulls back, alarmed.


EXT. A STREET. MOMENTS LATER.

The MAN is walking by himself again. He looks even sadder than before. A DIFFERENT CHILD spots him.

DIFFERENT CHILD: [especially enthusiastically] Hello!

V.O.: I don't know what it is was about that kid's voice. It went to my heart -- pierced it, like an exquisitely fine spear, the sharp end of sweetness. And it was this strange combination of sensations -- the needle's prick and the blood's sunny melt -- that suddenly transported me (there's no other phrase) to a different time. It was a time in the more recent past, when I still felt the residual parch of loneliness. But it was a time when I started to feel.

I mean, it was a time when I started to feel again.



Sunday, January 11, 2009

Edward Champion -- critic, writer (Reluctant Habits)

Ed Champion of Reluctant Habits:


CBT: When I started this interview series it was already clear that publishing -- especially of literary fiction -- was in dire straits. At that time, one explanation that was fashionable was 9/11 was the reason people weren't reading as much literature (or as much anything) as they used to. Now we are living in a time when the long-term repercussions of 9/11 are still with us. But using 9/11 as a primary explanation for what ails literary publishing simply doesn't work. For one thing, we are now in the midst of a particularly serious recession, and for another, it is clear the general decline in reading is a widespread -- and possibly unstoppable -- phenomenon that has roots which go back decades.


What is your take on the current depressed state of literary publishing? Is it a passing phase? Or is it an intractable problem -- in other words, it is the new normal? And if the latter, what can be done to counteract it?



EC: First off, I don't believe that 9/11 is the definitive triggering point that explains where literary fiction and the publishing industry is currently heading, any more than World War II entirely explicates the mergers and consolidations within the publishing industry during the 1950s. The issues pertain more to technological developments and distribution. While there are undeniable economic shock waves which reverberate from historical events and failed economic policies, significant incidents do not stop writers from turning out novels and there remain plenty of passionate people within the industry who don't perceive the book world as if it's a sausage factory. The publishing industry has taken some terrible hits, slashed jobs, and ushered in some crazed consolidation in Q4 2008, but we haven't yet seen the majors close up shop. And we won't see them close up shop until they face serious distribution threats which prevent them from acquiring the vital revenue that keeps them in business.

I do have concerns about what current business developments will mean for emerging debut novelists and whether we will see a book landscape which offers room for quirky or dangerous books. But it's also worth observing that genre novels continued to sell quite well in 2008. (Before Bookscan sent a takedown notice to Paula Guran, Guran published some interesting Bookscan numbers on her blog revealing that genre book sales were up.)

The central issue to be concerned about right now is distribution. AMS's collapse in early 2007 obliterated a number of independent publishers, and revealed just how much publishers rely on distribution to survive.

Now let's take a look at bookstores. Barnes & Noble and (in particular) Borders are both in trouble. The two chains are seeing reduced profits and are closing stores. It's possible that the independent bookstore will survive, particularly if the stores consider community and what consumers want into account. But here's the rub. Amazon continues to maintain such a hold on distribution and price point that even Powell's, which was wise enough to keep up a thriving online business, has recently asked its staff to voluntarily cut their hours. With the Kindle, Amazon has been subsidizing publishers to get them on board (and keep titles at $9.99 a pop) and this, combined with Amazon's lower prices and shipping, has caused the bookstore, in all forms, to face a significant threat right now. If the profit margins are seriously reduced for publishers because of these distribution developments, then this will almost certainly translate into authors receiving a smaller piece of the pie. If, on the other hand, the price point issue forces publishers to be honest about where the money is allocated, well this could entail many positive discussions about the current role of the book in culture. But all of this could spell serious trouble for the publishing industry.

Nevertheless, I maintain some optimism. Nature abhors a vacuum. And if we see nearly every bookstore close, there may finally be a very public debate about how Amazon has changed the publishing industry, and where the industry currently rests.


I am not sure what study you're citing regarding the decline in reading (the NEA Reading at Risk study perhaps?), but books are far from dead. People still want to read their newspapers, books, and magazines. It's a question now of HOW they read, whether it be reading material they purchase at a bookstore or a newsstand, or books purchased through Kindles, Sony eReaders, or, iPhones. (To resist all these developments is suicide. But you'd be surprised by how many dogged people in publishing fail to see the present.) Nevertheless, despite all the hype and the successful sales, and my grave concerns that Amazon is possibly violating some antitrust provisions by selling and distributing the hardware and the software at these price points, I'm not entirely convinced that the Kindle will instantly demolish printed books as we now know them, although the Kindle does represent the greatest success thus far for the e-book. But it's worth pointing out that the printed book is a form that has somehow survived the rise of radio, cinema, and television. The book may not have the prominence it had at the beginning of the 20th century, but so long as we have more J.K. Rowlings and Stephenie Meyers to get young readers excited about books, I believe that both printed books and e-books will continue to flourish in some sense.

Certainly none of these realities have stopped writers from writing. Looking at the literary fiction front in 2009, we see new books from Richard Powers, Nicholson Baker, Thomas Pynchon, William T. Vollmann, Colson Whitehead, China Mieville, and numerous others Whether these books will sell, of course, is another matter. But the way to counteract the possibly decreasing attention now paid to literary fiction is through word-of-mouth. I'm extremely dismayed by attitudes held by some media types that the regular reader is incapable of grasping or getting excited about literary fiction (or even independent films; the disease has spread to other mediums). Did not last year's Bolanomania put a dent into that? Are there not still book clubs around the country devoted to discussing books? And what of the Oprah Book Club? There needs to be more book coverage in the media outlets that remain. Smart, entertaining, and inviting book coverage. Not the dull, bland, and condescending nonsense championed by Sam Tanenhaus at the New York Times Book Review. We need to see more authors on television. We need to see authors going to cities around the nation and engaging directly with the reader. And we need to embrace community. The Internet seems to be doing much of this already, but it still represents a mere sliver of the possibilities applied to all forms of media.



CBT: How much potential do you think the Internet has as a vehicle of publishing? It's clear that there is a place for online criticism; the lit-blogosphere is dominated by it. The blogger Dan Green has even coined a phrase for this form of critical writing: the crit-blogosphere. But the crit-blogosphere's logical partner -- the fic-blogosphere -- is marginalized. Not many people read short stories or novels online.


Will the Internet really become the medium in which serious people both publish and read fiction? Or is this a technological pipe-dream, and is it more a question of using the Internet as an effective means to sell and distribute printed books?



EC: I don't think the Internet faces any shortage of opinions. What is especially interesting is that the so-called "crit-blogs" that have arisen (a label, incidentally, that I reject, because a vehicle that is nothing more than long-form criticism is needlessly limited in my view; you wouldn't know it from reading my longass answers to your questions, but some opinions can be expressed succinctly, as the rise of Twitter has shown) and litblogs that have cropped up have emerged with a strange authority. The blogger's views and sensibilities are on full display, with thoughts and facts openly challenged by other readers. The blogger, if she is any good, gets better at honing and expressing her thoughts. And all this creates a fun and wonderful alternative to some of the stale nonsense that now passes for thought in mainstream media.

Fiction blogs represent a problem: one that pertains to the medium. Blogging is predicated on facts, links, and comments. And you can't very well challenge an author who has composed a fiction piece and come off as anything less than an asshole. Further, when one considers the relentless tales of Kirk ass-raping Spock, Willow getting it on with Anna Torv, and the remarkably illiterate nonsense that most, but certainly not all, fan fiction entails, then anyone with taste or sensibilities views a fiction blog with natural suspicion. I think online fiction has more of a chance with podcasts. We've seen this with such podcasts as Escape Pod, which has built up a well-deserved following presenting audio versions of great science fiction stories. And I believe that Escape Pod has been such a success because fiction demands considerable attention. One takes its authority seriously, because the MP3 player that pops up is entirely separate from your browsing experience. Therefore, you're more or less experiencing the story in that sequestered way that comes with picking up a book. I'd say that if you were a fiction writer content to use the Internet as a primary means of distribution for your work, you should consider radio. Because the shortage of good radio drama (hell, nearly ANY radio drama) in America is truly appalling. And that means presenting work that WORKS for radio. Not just a dry read, but something that presents us with the natural contemporary evolution (not mimesis, mind you) of such wonderful old shows as "Dimension X," Arch Oboler, "The Mysterious Traveler," "Suspense," and numerous others. I truly believe that if there were more places like Escape Pod out there, we could very well see a second golden age of radio through podcasts. And it would likewise be a great boon to short fiction (and could, in turn, move a few printed books).




CBT: It is arguable the Internet isn't effective as a medium for publishing long works of fiction because very few people can stand looking at regular screens for the necessary length of time. But e-ink provides a solution to this. It eliminates eye strain.


How much potential do you think e-ink and e-book technologies have? Do you see e-books catching on with the public? And do they provide a reasonable business model?



EC: I think I've addressed some of this in my observations about the Kindle in my first answer. I believe e-ink is certainly an improvement for the e-book. The format (and such distribution outlets as Fictionwise) presents great possibilities for newspapers and magazines that are now limping by. Aside from these practical publishing issues, you've probably seen some of e-ink's other contributions without even knowing it: there are billboards, magazine covers (such as that blinking Esquire cover celebrating its 75th anniversary), bus station signs, and the like that are using it. The flashing advertisements (which resemble e-ink) that bombard the poor people in Spielberg's film, MINORITY REPORT, will probably be here sooner than 2054. If these developments aid the publishing industry and make our reading experience easier and more pleasant, then I think that's fantastic. I'm certainly no Luddite, but, at the present time, I find it infinitely more practical to read a book that I don't have to recharge. And I can't see myself parting with my books. There are a number of qualities to printed books -- being able to arrange them, being able to sift through them, being able to mark and bookmark them -- that I can't see e-ink entirely replacing. There is something about the permanence of text that I would hate to see go away. But truthfully, on the e-ink/e-book question, I'm more concerned about the long-term effects of Amazon's efforts to monopolize the e-book industry through subsidies.



CBT: In the past few years, articles and blog posts (for example, at LitKicks) have appeared criticizing the pricing of books. Are books too expensive? Has this been a factor in reducing the size of the book-buying audience over the last twenty or so years?




EC: Certainly the rise of warehouse discount stores in the 1980s and Amazon's efforts to make books all about price have made this more of a visible issue. Are books too expensive? It depends upon what books that you're buying. Independent bookstores such as Cody's became an intellectual center in the 1960s and the 1970s because there was a mass market explosion. You could essentially walk in with very little money and walk out with a solid library to keep you busy for some time. If we must price reading by hour, it's actually better than a movie or a concert. A $25 hardcover for five hours of reading? That's about $5/hour. Certainly better than the $6/hour you'll pay for two hours at a movie, or the $20 you'll pay for a 74 minute CD. Or the $15/hour you'll pay for a two and a half hour concert at a midsized venue. And speaking gruffly, you'll have to pry my hardcovers from my cold, dead hands, thank you very much.


Nevertheless, with Levi's entreaties for more paperback originals and fairer book pricing, I think he was right to point out that publishers are cutting out younger readers and a certain economic sector. There's a good book on this subject that Kenneth Davis wrote years before his success with the DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT series (and indeed presages some lessons for his own success) called TWO-BIT CULTURE: THE PAPERBACKING OF AMERICA that takes these issues into account. My great concern about pricing is that the conversation is too much about the ruthless free market, rather than the ethical consequences of always buying from Amazon (the independent bookstore goes out of business, et al.). Then again, America got quite used to buying cheap clothing and not paying attention to the sweatshops and the export processing zones which sustain that industry. So I'm sure that America wil have no problems looking the other way in relation to books while the rest of us worry.




CBT: Staying with the same theme. Literary novels were once publishing in hardcover and then, several months later (and a spot on the best-seller lists willing), they were available as affordable pocket-sized paperbacks. However, in the 1980s this practice ceased and literary paperbacks started being published in North America as pricier trade paperbacks. Only genre fiction retained the pocket-book form. In retrospect, was this a prudent decision by publishers of literary fiction? Or should the literary pocket-book make a return?




EC: I'd like to see the pocket book format for literary fiction return. As a scrappy young man, this was an invaluable and affordable way for me to get acquainted with numerous authors. It can be exceptionally prudent for a publisher to keep mass-market editions out there if the publisher wants to think about hardcover sales for the latest volume. Consider Neal Stephenson's ANATHEM. It debuted at #1 on the New York Times Bestseller list, which is rather extraordinary for a 900 page novel with an invented language that deals largely with mathematics and philosophy. I think one of the reasons this happened was because the publishers were wise enough to split up THE BAROQUE CYCLE into eight mass-market paperbacks and thereby keep it in print. I also believe that FSG was smart to issue Roberto Bolano's 2666 in both hardcover and a three-volume paperback set. That was also one of the reasons Bolano sold as well as he did. Perhaps if publishers kept mass-market print runs smaller and could find a way to justify doing this for the midlisters, we might see an increase in demand. This might likewise be a way for prolific literary authors who aren't quite hitting to get unexpected outreach. Keep an author in print in mass-market and this may very well persuade readers to come around and purchase the latest $25 hardcover. (Consider the $35 price point for Harry Potter.)




CBT: Agents now have enormous power, effectively controlling which writers get access to acquisition editors at major houses. Furthermore, agents find themselves under enormous pressure, acting as the line of first readers who have to sift through avalanches of submissions. Is this tenable over the long run? Is it good for art? Or should large houses be accepting both agented and unsolicited submissions?




EC: Well, let's also keep in mind that agents are also quite helpful for the writer. There remain enough a good deal of writers out there who have no real business sense, can't mind the store, and willfully sign everything away. Yes, I think agents are tenable, because an agent has a vested interest in staying alive. (Keep in mind that the two-year cycle in which an author gets paid for a book also applies to the agent.) Just as the publishing industry has places for the commercial and the literary, there are literary-minded agents and then there are the well-oiled Andrew Wylies. If the writer really wants to produce art, then he'll find a way to do it. And if we get rid of the agent, then we get rid of someone who is, by and large, looking after the writer's financial interest. Some quality control is necessary in order to keep wretched manuscripts from being sold or considered, and I don't believe this criteria, much less the financial health of writers, would be aided by a house suddenly considering a torrent of unsolicited submissions.




CBT: Literary prizes have also grown in power. They have arguably replaced the glowing review as a marketing tool. But are they as effective as criticism in building a contemporary canon? After all, critics can express nuance, prizes can't. Do book prizes give the message: this books is worth reading and all these others aren't?




EC: You're right. Book prizes (and prizes in general) are mostly useless in relation to a greater consideration of a book. And one thing that's overlooked in all this backslapping is that prizes are almost never about the more interesting quality of conversation. I certainly don't go about my business expecting to win a prize. I don't see book prizes having much of an impact on book discussion, but they certainly have an impact on sales. And by this standard, you may as well have authors mud wrestling on television or perhaps competing on FEAR FACTOR. Obviously, pointing to good books is helpful. The question is whether any of this gets anyone, other than the publishers who bankroll these events, excited about books. I do think a lot of great books, particularly genre titles, get overlooked by the snobs, who are usually the type to point how important great talents like Thomas M. Disch and Donald E. Westlake were to them just after their deaths. Well, where the hell were they before Disch blew his brains? And, boy, you certainly were a Richard Stark champion just when you realized that loving him and Westlake was the hip thing to do. I think we have an obligation to find and celebrate the misunderstood talents who are now tilting at windmills, offering them some appreciation when they are still alive. (To this end,I have been organizing an online symposium to one such writer in March.)



CBT: Thinking of your own site, what sorts of changes do you foresee in it? Are blogs destined to become the new magazines? Will you start using a format (and possibly working with partners) in a magazine-type way? Or is blogging as it's currently defined how you want to keep posting work on the Net?




EC: It may be the long-form conversations or the newspaper work, but I've found myself more interested in long-form content. The website is hardly profitable, but it is a good deal of fun for me, a great way to get the community fired up, and certainly a place where I can write at length about ideas and authors whom the editors I work with sometimes resist. I am now branching out into a few other cultural areas, and I'm trying to make the website not entirely books-centric. This is an effort on my part to prevent burnout and to ensure that everything I write (or that others write) remains fiery and passionate. Just about the last thing I want is to turn into some condescending bourgeois hack like Laura Miller, Lee Siegel, or John Freeman. I look to folks like the late John Leonard, James Wood, Scott McLemee, Ed Park, Liesl Schillinger, John Updike, and Tom LeClair (to name only a few), all of whom understand that remaining open-minded, passionate, playful, and sometimes a bit idiosyncratic about books (yes, even Wood and Updike) is part of the deal. I am certainly very lucky to be here, and don't feel entitled to anything. Nevertheless, if I can make all this profitable in any way and do what I do with a sense of joie de vivre, then I hope that I can help others. Perhaps blogs or more outlets like The Quarterly Conversation will be the first place for books as the newspaper books sections dwindle, although let's not kid ourselves: editorial oversight is invaluable. The daily question I ask myself is whether I can extract enough dimes from under the couch to pay the rent.

Bio: Edward Champion is the managing editor of Reluctant Habits. From 2003 to 2007, he wrote the literary blog Return of the Reluctant. In 2008, this was absorbed into the long-form written format of Filthy Habits, before being transformed into the short-form/long-form site Reluctant Habits. His work has appeared in The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Los Angeles Times, The Chicago Sun-Times, New York Magazine, Time Out New York, The Philly Inquirer, Newsday, and elsewhere. He is a member of the National Book Critics Circle, a podcaster, a playwright and director (Wrestling an Alligator, the San Francisco Fringe Festival) and a fiction writer (novel in progress, working title: Humanity Unlimited).

Thursday, January 08, 2009

Jeremy Bowen's Israel/Gaza diary.

[via BBC]

Upcoming

Upcoming interviews:

Edward Champion of Reluctant Habits

Daniel E. Pritchard of The Wooden Spoon

Kassia Krozser of Booksquare

Levi Asher of LitKicks

John Reed of The Brooklyn Rail

Adam Bellow -- publisher, editor, author [part three]

Adam Bellow of the New Pamphleteer and HarperCollins:

Note: This is the second part of my interview with Bellow. An abridged version of it appeared at The Brooklyn Rail.

Note 2: This part of my interview with Bellow took place in the summer of 2007. Given that the interview includes a discussion of the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, but took place long before the current war in Gaza, it should be read in that context.



CBT: Id like to talk to you now about particular pamphlets that youve published. But first, if you dont mind, would you please re-cap and tell us why pamphlets? Why this format?


AB: For me, the idea goes back to the late 90s, when I observed the beginnings of a contraction in the publishing industry that affected what are called mid-list books. That is to say, all the big companies yielding to the pressures of the market -- particularly the mass distribution model via Barnes and Noble all began to prune back from their lists books they thought would not sell more than 10,000 copies. And this had an effect on what I do as a non-fiction editor specializing in books about politics and ideas. I found that I had less freedom to experiment and be playful and creative in my publishing choices. I had to lend my efforts more and more to brand-name authors with a track-record who the publisher felt we could turn into best sellers. And I thought this was an unhealthy development in the intellectual life of the country.

Particularly in a period when, as we then were and still are, ideological certainties were clearly breaking down in the aftermath of the Cold War, and now, even more, with the advent of the war on terror, were in a period of ideological flux. As we can see from American politics, many people, traditional Democrats, have moved right (or did, at least initially, after 9/11). And its not clear where were going to be after the next election. I think the most significant thing is the growth of a sector of voters who identify themselves as Independent. And it is this group of people Im most interested in publishing by and for.


CBT: In terms of your list, Id like to start with The Plucky Smart Kid with the Fatal Disease: A Life with Cystic Fibrosis by Dean Barnett. How did you come into contact with Mr. Barnett. Is Dean Barnett a blogger himself?


AB: Yes, Dean is a blogger who blogs on the website maintained by radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt. Hugh is a friend and someone who was very helpful to me in publishing one of my most successful pamphlets a dictionary of military jargon called Embrace the Suck: A Guide to Milspeak. Hugh had us on his show which is one of the most effective ways to promote pamphlet sales -- to promote that. And when we finished he said, Oh, you must speak to my colleague Dean Barnett who has cystic fibrosis.

Dean writes mostly about politics, but when he writes about his own life and his experience of having this dreadful disease, the traffic on the site spikes. Hugh had often read aloud on the radio Deans pieces about having cystic fibrosis. So there was a feeling this was something he could address, and so we worked with Dean not only to repackage his blog posts but tell his life story in about 6 or 7,000 words.

And it came out as really a lovely piece of writing, which is the main thing we try to maintain above all: a standard of intellectual and literary quality, and also to give an impression of variety and diversity, if not eclecticism.


CBT: Another pamphlet that impressed me was Raising Wild Boys into Men: A Dads Survival Guide by Tony Woodlief. It is about a much less poignant much more commonplace predicament than Dean Barnetts. But its a difficult one: raising kids. Now, his concern is how we can raise boys to be boys on the one hand, and responsible adults on the other, without falling into the pitfalls of a certain form of political correctness that wants to smother aggressiveness in boys.

Id like to ask two questions about this. The first is, again, how did you come in contact with Mr. Woodlief? And second, have you thought of publishing a follow-up title about raising girls a sort of Raising Wild Girls into Women? But lets just start with the question of how you came across Mr. Woodliefs work.


AB: I was on a panel of the BEA in June, to talk about alternative publishing models, in front of a room full of literary agents. I was on a panel with a bunch of other publishers who do regular books, and so finally the question was asked of me, Why should we pay any attention to you? You know, Im not paying advances, and I sell small quantities of pamphlets online for four dollars a piece. From an agents point of view, theres not much to be gained from doing any business with me. And I said, Thats fine, I actually dont want to deal with agents. I have nothing to gain from dealing with you, either [laughs]. But what I can tell you is Im doing work thats important to you in the long run, because Im finding writers in the blogosphere and the people Im choosing to publish are people you should want to sign.

The blogosphere is a pure literary democracy in the sense that stuff that is good, that has some quality, is going to attract readers. People emerge with a following, and they will be the voice of the future. And Tony Woodlief is one of these people. Hes a private individual: a guy who has an ordinary job, who happens to be a conservative Christian, and he and his wife are religious people who home-school their children. They have three little boys now four and Tony just writes about the day-to-day life in their household, which is very rich and emotionally and spiritually satisfying. He has a small following, very loyal. And he wrote to us, basically, and asked us if we were interested in publishing something by him. So he sent us a few ideas, and the one we liked the most was a straight-forward anecdotal account of what its like to be the father of three rambunctious little boys, all under ten, and trying to bring them into manhood.

And the theme was something thats in the air. Theres a current bestseller called The Dangerous Book for Boys that did so well they brought out a companion book for girls. And so there seems to be a kind of general reaction against the politically correct swing of the pendulum toward trying to make boys play nice, and give up their rambunctious and violent ways, and be more like girls. This is how it was for many years in our culture, and school system. Boys were discouraged from being loud and noisy. And now the pendulum has swung back the other way.

In the case of Tony Woodlief, we had someone we felt had real appeal, and his pamphlet has been one of our most successful publications.


CBT: Now that brings us to the next title, Embrace the Suck: a Pocket Guide to Milspeak by Colonel Austin Bay. If my memory serves correctly, in the introduction Col. Bay mentions that you approached him. Could you tell us about that?


AB: This is something that all editors do not just to read submissions from agents but to think up ideas on our own. Magazine editors do this, too. But as a magazine editor, you have the incentive of payment. We dont really have that, but we do have the ability to come up with ideas and pitch them to people. And this is something that we could try, mainly because pamphlet publishing is its own paradigm. Were not publishing little books or expanded magazine articles. Were publishing a pamphlet, which is a different sort of animal. So the question is, what is that animal?

And one genre that I was interested in is the little pocket dictionary. I mean, people love books of lists. For example, were going to be coming up with a compendium of pop culture quotes selected by men. You know, its a similar idea behind Embrace the Suck. I read a lot of blogs, and I came across a neologism called milspeak. And I thought, thats an interesting use of the word. Ive never heard that before. What is milspeak? What are some of the terms? And I contacted Col. Bay, who has a blog, teaches at UT Austin, has a syndicated column, does NPR radio commentary, and blogs about Iraq and military matters. I asked him if hed be interested in compiling this. And it happened quite quickly; Austin Bay, because of his connections in the military, was able to pull together several hundred military slang definitions very, very quickly, and so in a matter of weeks we had something ready to publish.

It had that kind of peculiar appeal, that whimsical charm that a pamphlet needs in order to succeed. Because the realities are that, unlike book publishing, you cant push a pamphlet. We arent going to ship 50,000 copies to Barnes and Noble. We dont have a marketing budget and publicity department. If a pamphlet is going to succeed, it has to have a sort of magnetic attraction. It has to pull rather than push. And so this pamphlet, Embrace the Suck, is our most successful title, because it exerted that kind of appeal. Weve sold around 5,000 copies of it, including a number of large-quantity bulk sales, which suggests that people are distributing it as gifts, and using it as subscription premiums, and so forth. So on the whole it was a very positive experience for us.


CBT: One of the reactions I had to it as a reader, especially as someone whos self-consciously against current U.S. policy in Iraq and to a certain extent in Afghanistan, was the degree to which the book lent itself to satire. When I read the acronyms, my instinctive reaction was to make up acronyms of my own.

As well, I remember during the first interview we had you talked about your desire, when you were at the Free Press and when you started the New Pamphleteer, to have the equivalent of pamphlet wars debates between authors. Since you do have a reputation as a neoconservative, I was wondering how open youd be to a blogger who came along and wanted to do what was in effect a satire of one of your first publications?


AB: I think thats a clever idea. I guess my response would be, I dont care what your politics are. What I care about is how good a writer are you, and is your theme or topic something for which theres a market? I need to feel I can sell at least 300 copies. Youd think that wouldnt be such a difficult target, but it turns out it can be. Unless people are charmed by what youve done, or you have an existing audience base, it can in fact be difficult to reach that target. So I dont think you can go wrong with each of the categories that we know are reliable in publishing: sex and humour. And since Im not publishing pornography, I have to fall back on comedy, humour and satire. And Im happy to do that. I certainly dont have any sectarian emphasis. Let me put it this way: if I had wanted to make this a right-wing pamphlet series, I easily could have done that.


CBT: Id like to turn finally to the trio of books that you published about the war in the summer of 2006 between Hezbollah and Israel. The three titles are: Hassan Nasrallah: In His Own Words. Writings and Speeches by the Head of Hezbollah edited by Stephen Schwartz, Blog Digest #1: The Hezbollah War, edited by Michael Totten, and Everything Could Explode at any Moment: Dispatches from the Lebanese-Israeli Front by Michael Totten.

The pamphlets cover a very broad range of points of view, in particular the collection of blog posts in Blog Digest #1. And on a personal level, I found myself responding to this pamphlet in particular in a very empathetic way. It was a roller-coaster to read, because one moves from one point of view to a diametrically opposed one, and often both points of view, despite being conflicting, are, on a visceral level, very convincing.

But it was partly because of that emotional quality of the collection of posts that I wondered if you had considered also producing a pamphlet that gave a historical background or political analysis of the war. As well, I was struck in Tottens pamphlet of his own posts that the war itself is skirted over. He has a lot of material about the days leading up to the war, and he has material about the end or the days very close to the end of it. But very little about the war itself. I suppose when putting the collection together, he felt the war was so fresh in everybodys mind, that there would be no need to pay much attention to it. But even though I followed events fairly closely while the war took place and even though it didnt occur so long ago, I found while reading this pamphlet I had to go to the Internet to remind myself of its particulars, and the timeline of events. Will you be publishing any more on this topic? Do you wish you had published more at the time?


AB: : I learned a valuable lesson there, which is dont try to publish the news. Part of the point here is because you raised a critical objection there are three items in this release. One is a set of writings by Hassan Nasrallah. We thought it would be interesting. Nobody knew who he was at the time. It looked like hed be the next leader of the world jihad. I thought it would be a public service to make some of his ideas accessible. And in fact, that material is fascinating. Hes a very intelligent guy. Hes crazy and dangerous, but hes not irrational, and he has a definite point of view. So I think its valuable to read that material.

The editor of the other two volumes is Michael Totten, a very popular and well-liked blogger. Hes one of the first people who decided to make a living off blogging. This was essentially from contributions from his readers. He went to live in Lebanon, and blog from Beirut, and write about whats going on there.

Michael Totten seemed to me to be a very interesting person, not just because hes a good writer but also because hes a citizen journalist who decided to go somewhere and write about something. Its a form of economic democracy: if people like his stuff, they pay him. And if they dont like it, of course they dont.

He did a collection of his articles. But then we also decided to have him edit a compendium of responses to the war by Israeli and Lebanese bloggers. And Im glad you read it. I agree with you, I think its very gripping material. What youre doing is youre alternating perspectives between Israeli and Lebanese bloggers. This is actually a very poignant document because as it happens, before the war broke out Lebanese and Israeli bloggers writing in English had begun to engage one another. And in a real sense, it was a dialogue. It was a real hope outside the normal chat for an interaction, and developing a relationship and friendship. And the war destroyed that, and it was a terrible tragedy.

In response to your comment that theres a need for historical background you know, thats true. And if we had the time and the space, it would have been nice to publish an introduction. But we had too much material as it is.

You know, this is not a textbook or hardcover book. Its a document a kind of literary and historical document. Its value is literary in the sense that you can read it in terms of people just crying out in the wilderness of the blogosphere. Theres a lot of poignancy in that. It also has historical value. This is the first time a war was debated online between the two sides while it was going on. And I just felt as a publisher that it had documentary value.


Bio: Adam Bellow is, with his partner David Bernstein, publisher of the New Pamphleteer. He is also an editor with many years experience at houses such as MacMillan, Simon and Schuster, Random House and HarperCollins. Finally, he is an author in his own right, and has written several articles as well as the book In Praise of Nepotism. He is working on a new book.

Monday, January 05, 2009

Who is a Civilian?

A must-read article from the BBC on the current war in Gaza. Whatever one feels about the conflict, the issues raised in this article cut to the heart of what makes modern war both so appalling in its effects yet a form of political/military action that can define itself as "surgical".

As I argue below, the contemporary tendency in Western artistic discourse to attempt to wall off discussions about war as if these can be kept discrete from discussions about art and the "aesthetic" are only one example of how understanding of international law is stunted. This stunting means international law does not register as meaningful within Western popular culture; it does not receive the kind of attention it deserves -- that is true in the early days of this year, and it has been true in the years that have just passed.

Hopefully that will change. If it does not, future years will take the same shape as the ones we are currently living through.

Adam Bellow -- publisher, editor, author [part two]

Adam Bellow of the New Pamphleteer and HarperCollins:

Note: This is the second part of my interview with Bellow. An abridged version of it appeared at The Brooklyn Rail.


CBT: To what extent does mass media and here Im thinking of electronic media -- play a role in driving the choice that publishers make? After all, these days, mass media is so much about debate, and I think thats one reason why the polemical books you mentioned earlier were a natural phenomenon, so to speak, since mass media can integrate its coverage with polemical books very easily, whereas novels arent given much attention. I live in South Korea, and when I watch North American TV, theres zero coverage of Western literature, but there is a lot of coverage of Western movie-making. And while polemical books may not get much direct coverage as specific titles, the themes that particular polemical books deal with can be worked into the discourse of mass media very easily and in this sense get international coverage. How would you respond to that?


AB: I think its very true. In my career Ive been very focused on publishing the kind of book that can be translated into sound bites. Obviously its difficult to do that with a novel, particularly a good one. Although there are very successful novels that succeed because of that. For example, a novel we published at Doubleday, The Devil Wears Prada, which succeeded because everyone knew it was a roman a clef about Anna Wintour, written by someone who had worked for her. And this set the New York media atwitter. And despite its lack of literary qualities, it became a best-seller because it was possible for the media to talk about it in their own terms in a way that was interesting to a mass audience. You cant really do that with a Franzen novel. So there are obvious limitations there. Especially with non-fiction, we are particularly dependent on the interest of the media. We work very hard to package our books in such a way I would even say we spoon feed handles and talking points to people in the media.

One thing we know about the media Im talking about television and radio primarily is that it is a vast sort of bottomless maw that needs to be fed on a daily basis. Its literally starving for content. And thats a good thing, because books, for a number of reasons, continue to be the source and the driver of so much of what is talked about in popular media.

The big driver, the big engine, outside of politics, is the movie and entertainment industry. Thats an endless source of fascination, and the media feed off the film industry and the social life of Hollywood. But books retain a special authority, simply by virtue of their having been published between hard covers. And this is actually a valuable service that publishers perform.

You know, we are an industry that has the privileged position of feeding material into the culture that people tend to trust because it comes from us. Books themselves inherently retain a certain numinousness, a certain authority, even if theyre not by a Harvard professor or New York Times op-ed columnist. The fact that a book has been printed and has a certain permanence and is not fleeting like a movie or TV show, gives it a certain authority.

And thats why books continue to drive a great deal of what is talked about in other media. So were conscious of this role in the system, sort of this feeder of the media. And we try to play along with them and give them what they need in a form they can readily absorb and understand. Because we know theyre not going to actually read these books. Theyre going to read the press release, the press kit, Q & A, and so forth. And we just try to prepare them to talk intelligently about things


CBT: So its all true! Its all true, the rumours about interviewers who dont read


AB: [laughing] Whats the point of publishing a book that people dont understand and cant grasp? This is not news to anybody. We have a very short time to establish a book in the marketplace. And if it takes too long to explain what a book is about, the media, which is incredibly impatient, simply ignores it or takes note of it and moves on very quickly. And this raises a question that you raised earlier, which is can pamphlets compete in this kind of culture? But before I answer that, Id like to say to say something about why Im doing this, and how I came to conceive of this idea and what Im hoping to accomplish. Then we can talk about the obstacles that I face, because there are definitely obstacles.

This idea goes back to the years in the 90s when I was editorial director of The Free Press at Simon and Schuster. I took over The Free Press at a time that was really the height of the domestic culture war. And I had been very involved as an editor in publishing books by what was then the conservative intellectual opposition movement. It was a very exciting time because we were battering down the ramparts of the liberal-dominated opinion media. And it was a tremendous victory if we got a book reviewed in the New York Times. Typically they didnt feel they had to do it. But we had published a number of best-sellers. So at the time I took over The Free Press it had acquired a reputation as a right-wing house. But this was not really fair to the other editors.

The Free Press had a long and venerable history as a social science publisher, and it put out around 120 books a year. There were seven or eight editors, publishing all these serious books. And yet it was only the conservative books that got attention, so the general perception of the Free Press was that we had gone right-wing. And as the editorial director, I felt it was my job, my responsibility, to reposition the press so it would not be misperceived. But this was a difficult thing to do. So I began to think about how one would go about doing this. And I had the idea, because Im something of an amateur historian of publishing, and Ive always been fascinated by the role of pamphlets in fostering political debate and also social movements of various kinds. And I thought, well, maybe I could publish a pamphlet series, and what we would do is invite people from the left as well as the right to contribute, and wed start our own little in-house pamphlet war.

I didnt think this would be a money-maker. But it would serve to position the Free Press as a house that was not so much partisan or right-wing as a house that was serious about ideas.

So I took this idea to Simon and Schuster, and I reminded them that back in the 1920s and 30s, most publishing companies had magazines that they also published. You know, Scribner had Scribners magazine and there were Harpers, Colliers, the Atlantic, and they served a number of purposes.

First of all, they were going concerns in their own right. But they also served to show-case house authors and to attract new authors. It was a smart thing to do. And I thought of the Free Press pamphlet series as the equivalent of a magazine. Well, needless to say, the management at Simon and Schuster didnt really see the point in doing this, and I gave up.


CBT: Did they say why during those meetings?


AB: Well, they just -- I think they were correct insofar as it would have been a nice thing to do if you could have done it successfully on a mass market level. But it would have been very difficult to make it financially viable because with something youd be publishing at a low price point you know, 4 or 5 dollars to get that kind of thing into mass distribution you have to meet all kinds of market tests that one usually applies to a mass market book. You have to have a famous author, to whom you have to pay a lot of money, and you have to figure out how to earn back that money. And the only way to earn back that money is to have a thesis, or an argument, thats truly timely and controversial and is likely to attract media attention. And thats hard to guarantee. And to make back the kind of investment lets say we couldve gotten Tom Wolfe to write a pamphlet, we would have had to pay him $50,000 and we would have had to sell at four dollars a unit, five dollars a unit, something like 30 40,000 copies. And without the ability to count on the review media, its a tough thing to do. Really, it would have been like launching a magazine, and it would have cost a lot of money. So I didnt really disagree with them, I just tucked the idea away in the back of my mind.

But as I said earlier, I continued to feel there was somehow a kind of pamphleteering spirit trying to be reborn. There was a pamphleteering culture trying to emerge, and it was really being stifled by the business model of the big publishers. I mean, only a few very established voices like Schlesingers were able to get through, and to be published in that medium.

So I basically tabled the idea. I just put it aside, and went back to my conventional job as an editor. Soon after that I left the Free Press. And I wrote a book myself, In Praise of Nepotism, which was published by Doubleday, and along the way I accepted a position at Doubleday as an editor-at-large, which is my current role. And that is a position that was designed to allow me to do my own writing or other projects, and contribute a limited number of books to the Doubleday list.

However, a big change that occurred in the culture after 9/11, as you know, is that the blogosphere exploded. It really came into its own as a medium for independent journalists and writers, and it began to challenge the existing media. And I became, like many other people, an addictive reader of blogs during the Afghan War and the Iraq War. And it suddenly occurred to me that this was the solution to my pamphlet problem.

Id had to give up on the idea of publishing pamphlets because I couldnt make it work in the conventional structure of distribution and promotion. But with the internet I realized not only did you have an immense pool of talent to fish from but you also had a low-cost delivery system. As long as you could print small quantities of a pamphlet and sell it cheaply through your website, you didnt have to spend a lot of money on printing, shipping and warehousing. You didnt have to have a big marketing budget. All you had to have were certain conditions to be met in terms of an author with a certain visibility within a very well-defined niche market, and you could break even in effect and even make a little profit at low levels. And really what Im describing is a re-invention of mid-list intellectual publishing.

The other thing that occurred in the 90s in the publishing business was something referred to euphemistically as the Great Mid-list Contraction. This occurred when a number of big companies decided all at the same time to go out of the business of publishing first novels by literary authors. You know, small novels that they didnt think really had the potential to be commercial. So Harper-Collins, for example, famously cancelled several hundred contracts in one stroke just got rid of them. And they also got rid of Basic Books, which was a venerable non-fiction publishing imprint the analog of the Free Press along with Pantheon which was part of Random House -- and Addison-Wesley, and a few other formerly independent publishers that had become part of various publishing houses. These places were all sold off or shut down or re-invented.

Pantheon today is a little boutique publisher that doesnt really have much reason to exist, and is part of the main Random House list. But it has no connection with its past. It was founded by a couple of German-Jewish refugees, Kurt and Helen Wolff, and they brought to it a European kind of publishing sensibility and they published very serious books. And their successor Andre Schiffrin made what to all appearances was a successful, lively, vibrant publishing company with a sort of left-leaning agenda. And they published a lot of bestsellers. But even so, it just didnt make enough money, and from the point of view of upper management, quite simply it was a better use of floor space to publish cook-books or Dilbert, or what have you, because that stuff makes money. There might be one or two books published by Pantheon the Studs Terkel books, for example, that were worth publishing. But the rest they thought were inconsequential. And they just changed it.

Now this decision on the part of the big publishing companies was really driven by changes in the marketplace for books; the emergence of Barnes and Noble as a national chain had all kinds of ripple effects backward up the chain of the publishing process. Because when you have a big chain store, their interest was in moving large numbers of books and so they will order large quantities of books they think will sell.

But as publishers start to think about, well, how do I supply this marketplace, what do I have to do? The answer is if you want to have a book that will sell in very large numbers, you have to have an author who can get on the mass media outlets like Good Morning America, the Today Show, and so forth. And those people are celebrity authors, and celebrity authors have to be paid million dollar advances. And if youre spending all your money on a couple of seven-figure books, youre not going to have the room in your budget, or even the desire, to do a couple of first novels that some editor happens to be crazy about. Thats just not going to happen.

So what Im describing is a kind of ossification that occurs in the editorial and publishing process thats driven by whats happening on the retail floor. These are the changes that we in the creative end of the publishing business have had to contend with. And its affected me as well as a non-fiction editor because when I worked at the Free Press in the old days wed sit around the boardroom and wed say, well, heres an odd little book by a maverick sociologist whos got an interesting idea, and heaven knows if anyones going to find it interesting, but what the heck, its only going to cost us $10,000. Well pay very little advance the author didnt have an agent. Lets just publish it, throw it at the wall and see what happens. And you know -- sometimes those books disappeared without a trace, and sometimes theyd catch on. Because you never knew when something would catch on.

We cant do that any more. In my end of the business, we cant do it when we sit down in a meeting with the sales and marketing people. We have to be able to say, this person is the best-selling author of X, and this book is going to outperform that one for the following reasons. And they take that kind of analysis seriously. What they dont want is to be told that this book is terrific, but we can give you no help in terms of marketing and positioning the author. And so these sorts of books are subtly (or not so subtly) discouraged. And editors who obviously want to succeed like everyone else, they just dont propose those books anymore.

So what Im trying to do in part with my pamphlet series is to I would say from an industry perspective, Im trying to re-create the mid-list publishing model lower down the food chain. Just because those books are no longer going to be published by Random House and Penguin and Harper-Collins, well, it doesnt mean that theres no longer any demand for them. And theres plenty of supply. The question is how to bridge that gap how to connect the supply with the demand in a format through a publishing vehicle that makes sense in the New Economy. And my solution is, lets take the guts of this 300 page non-fiction book, shrink it down in effect to under a hundred pages and give people something for low cost that we as editors think is worth their time. And remember the real equity that I and my partner David Bernstein bring to this enterprise is to combine 25, 35 years of combined experience as professional editors.

Now to turn to the question of the material were publishing: we are for the most part deriving it form the internet and the blog world. But it is important to be clear that we are not simply re-packaging blog content because that would not be of any interest to anybody. What we are doing is identifying talent in the blog world. And were offering to work with people and develop their ideas and their skills to the point that theres something people might actually want to pay for.


Bio: Adam Bellow is, with his partner David Bernstein, publisher of the New Pamphleteer. He is also an editor with many years experience at houses such as MacMillan, Simon and Schuster, Random House and HarperCollins. Finally, he is an author in his own right, and has written several articles as well as the book In Praise of Nepotism. He is working on a new book.

Sunday, January 04, 2009

Art and the leash

I spend a lot of time -- perhaps an inordinate, shameful amount of time -- surfing the lit-blogosphere. This is partly the result of my living overseas and needing some way to keep in touch. It's also a reflection of a belief the lit-blogosphere matters, and that the Internet, despite its many short-comings, represents one of the best paths for literature to save itself.

One thing that has recently struck me, however, is the near-total silence surrounding the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I'm speaking of course of silence in the lit-blogosphere; there's no shortage of coverage -- and opinion-expressing -- elsewhere. And maybe this is partly the result of disaster-fatigue: a seemingly interminable state of strife between the Palestinians and the Israelis, the invasion of Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq, the war two-and-a-half years ago between Israel and Hezbollah (in fact, a war whose territory covered most of southern Lebanon), and half-acknowledged "low-intensity" conflicts in Darfur, areas of the Congo, the southern Philippines and southern Thailand are now coated by the thick patina of domestic, economic disaster. Numbness is a natural response to this much in the way of interesting times.

But it's not simply numbness, I think, that inspires the litblogosphere's silence on politics; it's also a belief specific to the West that politics and art cannot, by their very natures, mix, and that to attempt to do so is to mark one as a tiresome ideologue at best, an artistic all-thumbs at worst. Furthermore, the argument of arguments -- the ur-argument of the institutions of the literary establishment -- is such engagement by artists is futile. This is a truth apparently discovered after the end of the Romantic Movement and during the bloody middle of World War One. Poetry can't change the world because it can't change human nature.

But what happens in a world without poetry? That is, what happens to a world that lacks politically aware poetry when the age itself is political? What happens to art in times when history, to use a paraphrase employed by Jan Kott, is "let off the leash"?