Tuesday, February 09, 2016
Thad McIroy - publishing consultant, analyst
From 2012
CBT: V. S. Naipaul has declared there
are not any important writers anymore, Philip Roth has predicted the
novel will become a cult activity, Peter Stothard has asked if
fiction writing simply used to be better, Cullen Murphy, David
Shields, Lee Seigel, and Geoff Dyer have all stated that non-fiction
is superior to fiction. The list of people of letters who apparently
have lost faith in literary fiction goes on and on; it is clear that
an elementary questioning of the novel is not a passing cultural
phase.
What is your opinion? Does the novel
have a future? If so, what kind? And will e-technology alter the very
form of the novel? If so, how?
TM: I have to agree with you that an
elementary questioning of the novel is not a passing cultural phase –
I’ve been seeing the question since I was in my teens. The big
writers loomed large in front of me, geniuses, while papers I
respected, The New York Times Book Review, The New York
Review of Books, The Village Voice and so on, would run
these articles asking if the novel was dead. Could it be? I wondered.
Had the novel died before I could fully discover it?
I bought into the crisis back then, but
forty years later the novel seems to be doing just fine thank you.
It’s fashionable to wring one’s hands that the boom in technology
adoption will finally bring the great experiment to a halt. I don’t
buy it.
People are experimenting with applying
technology to narrative fiction. I’m all for the experiments,
whether anything comes of them or not. The novel seems to function
well – the form succeeds as constituted today. If you embed a 90
minute video in an ebook (which can be done with the new EPUB 3
standard) have you created a movie with an accompanying program, or a
book with a movie to illustrate it? Does it matter?
CBT: Are the very significant
structural changes taking place in the publishing industry having an
effect on novel writing? If so, how?
TM: The structural changes in the
publishing industry don’t necessarily impact how novels are
written, with the exception of commercial fiction. Perhaps even the
most classically literary of authors still keep one eye on the
bestsellers lists and so may make some sort of adjustment to the
explosion in teen fantasy and adult S&M fiction. But most of
these impacts are short-term trends of interest mainly to commercial
writers.
CBT. Is the cutting back of mid-lists
and a general cautiousness about taking risks on new or relatively
unknown writers affecting the caliber of writing that does manage to
get into print?
TM: This question cuts to the heart of
what I see as a major challenge in the analysis of the future of
publishing: acknowledging that the New York and London school of
publishing is not the only possible model for the conduct of a
successful publishing business.
The “cutting back of mid-lists and a
general cautiousness about taking risks on new or relatively unknown
writers” refers mostly the “big six” publishers. Small
publishers have been chugging along taking risks with mid-list and
below authors for years.
I say to my writer friends that the
only significant impact thus far on book publishing has been striking
fear into the hearts of publishers wed to what has become a
significantly more shaky publishing model. If you had your heart set
on Knopf publishing the follow-up to your unsuccessful first novel,
you may be disappointed. If you stop thinking that Knopf publishing
your next book is the only way to validate your talent, you’ve got
a whole new world of opportunity.
CBT: Do you have an author's website?
Does it help you sell books?
TM: I have an author’s website for my
books on publishing technology, www.thefutureofpublishing.com.
It does help me sell some books, although that is far from its main
purpose. Mostly I use it to publish ideas about project in progress,
as a way of connecting my ideas to others in the publishing
community.
My books wouldn’t be bestsellers even
if I ran ads during the Super Bowl. There’s a limit to what any
promotion can do for books with small targeted audiences.
CBT: How do you feel about running an
author's website? Do you feel it’s a labour of love – or an
annoying imposition? Or something else altogether?
TM: I believe that authors have two
choices when it comes to web sites: jump in feet first, or skip it
all together. Readers can spot a half-hearted effort a mile away, and
it’s more of a turn-off than no site at all. Running a site doesn’t
have to be as big a chore as it’s sometimes made out to be. Nor is
it effortless.
Ideally authors find ways to blend
their online world with their world of writing. It is a natural, but
not all writers are naturals. For those writers I say: no blame. Get
back to writing.
CBT: Is the selection system for novel
and short story manuscripts fair? Should it be made blind?
TM: I don’t really understand this
question. What alternative is there than the judgment of
professionals within a publishing company? If they don’t select
your work, take it elsewhere or self publish.
CBT: According to media reports, e-book
sales now represent a significant percentage of overall sales. But
small bookstores see them as more a threat to their survival than
anything else, and a lot of book people remain print people. Are you
enthusiastic about e-books? Do they hold the potential for a
renaissance in literary publishing? Or are they over-rated and too
susceptible to piracy?
TM: After several years of hype ebooks
are settling down for most titles as but one format of several. As
publishers we used to fret about the transition from hardcover to
paperback. The ebook is the third format in this equation.
For many authors the ease of self
publishing of ebooks has made this a viable alternative to a world of
painful rejection from brand-name publishers. In some cases books are
being published that had slipped through the cracks and deserve to be
read. In other cases self-published ebooks are about as durable and
engaging as a 3-minute YouTube video. But at $1.99 that’s not a bad
thing.
Ebooks are an exciting new format,
offering lots of opportunity and very few drawbacks as far as I can
see. The big thing is choice, and with millions of books now
published every year, added to the many more millions in print,
choice is not an issue.
CBT: What do you think of literary
prizes? As Jason Cowley has commented, they reduce our culture's
ability to think in a critically complex fashion? Do they suggest,
“this book is worth reading and all these others aren't?”
TM: I understand the argument regarding
the distortion that the prize system introduces into making the
public aware of worthwhile books. But it’s not like the
alternatives are a smoothly-functioning critical engine.
As far as I’m concerned anything that
celebrates books in a lively manner is good news all around.
CBT: What are you working on now that
you’re excited about?
TM: After nearly 40 years in publishing
I’ve decided to move on. I’m exciting about taking my knowledge
of the digitization of information and applying that to the
challenges of health care.
I’ve greatly enjoyed working in
publishing. It’s a marvelous industry, both challenging and
rewarding. But I’ve decided that “the problem of publishing”
has in fact been successfully addressed. We’re fretting about very
small issues and painting them large just because that’s what
people do. They take their small problems and use them to fill the
available space.
There is no crisis in publishing. Book
sales are holding up well in the West, and growing by leaps and
bounds in the Third World and other less-developed nations. Sure
there’s disruption to some of the existing players, but overall
literacy continues to improve worldwide, and the access to the
written word has never been better.
Health care, on the other hand, is a
mess. Information standards in health care are probably three decades
behind where they are in most industries. Most medical records are
still on paper, invisible to the physician currently treating you.
I’d love to see more people from publishing take their talents to
health care. They could make a far greater difference to the quality
of life than publishing the revised edition of Feng Shui for
Cats.
Bio: Thad McIlroy is an electronic
publishing analyst and author, and president of The Future of
Publishing, based in San Francisco and Vancouver, BC.In 2006 he
launched www.thefutureofpublishing.com, a Web site nearly a decade in
the making, and the most comprehensive source of information on the
present and predicted outcomes of all sectors of the publishing
industry.
Also in early 2007 he affiliated with
The Gilbane Group, and in 1988 he founded Arcadia House, a consulting
firm specializing in implementing electronic publishing technology in
the graphic arts and publishing industries. In 1990 he co-founded
(with Miles Southworth) The Color Resource, a publishing and
distribution company devoted to books and training materials on color
design, imaging and prepress.
McIlroy’s latest market reports are a
2012 study of the future of Barnes & Noble as well as Adobe’s
Designs on Web Analytics: The Omniture Acquisition (2009). He
contributed the Composition, Design, and Graphics chapter (with
contributions from Frank Romano) for The Columbia Guide to Digital
Publishing (Columbia University Press, 2003). He is the co-author of
Using Color Management Systems for Push-Button Color (1993: Smart
Color and The Color Resource), Inside Photo CD: Market Opportunities
in a Leading Edge Technology (1993: The Color Resource), The Color
Resource Color Desktop Publishing Product Annual (1992/93: The Color
Resource), The Complete Color Glossary (1992: The Color Resource),
and eight other books.
Monday, February 08, 2016
Ciel Canadien/ Canadian Sky - II
Rarement possible de voir cet coloration en Corée de sud.
Rarely possible to see this sort of colouration in South Korea.
Rarely possible to see this sort of colouration in South Korea.
Brian Fawcett - novelist, poet, critic, magazine publisher
[Interview conducted in October, 2012]
1 V. S. Naipaul has declared there are
not any important writers anymore, Philip Roth has predicted the
novel will become a cult activity, Peter Stothard has asked if
fiction writing simply used to be better, Cullen Murphy, David
Shields, Lee Seigel, and Geoff Dyer have all stated that non-fiction
is superior to fiction. The list of people of letters who apparently
have lost faith in literary fiction goes on an on; it is clear that
an elementary questioning of the novel is not a passing cultural
phase. Furthermore, the short story seems to be under siege as well:
many agents and multinational publishers do not handle/publish story
collections, small magazines seem perpetually underfunded, and a
YouTube-ification of text and image seems to be taking short
narrative in new directions.
What is your opinion? Do the novel and
shortstory have a future?
There’s two affective things going on
here. One is the imposition of the marketplace over all cultural and
educational activities, which has transformed most fiction writing
into arid exercises in conventional behavior—trying to please
novel-reading little old ladies who want to escape their lives with
Robert McKee-grade mechanical nonsense. The other is a “natural”
degradation of the importance of written literature in the face of
more technology-driven forms of narrative—television series drama
(which is approaching a golden age), motion pictures, the Internet,
and really, the nightly news, which has writers making up arbitrary
narratives about how human reality is unfolding, and at a
minute-by-minute speed that authenticates it as fact to the unwary.
All the evidence suggests that what we
thought of as literature—the novel and the short story—will end
up as a minor heritage activity with little or no cultural impact.
I’m probably closest to the position David Shields has, which is
that both fiction AND non-fiction are epistemological absurdities,
and that the boundary between them was always a cultural illusion.
I think there IS a way of writing that
does have cultural relevance: it’s that tiny edge of postmodernism
that never got far beyond the experimental and the precious, but
which I still think holds allpostmodernism’s valuable mineral core,
where writers seek a paratactic depth and transparency at the same
time that allows readers to move as quickly as the human mind now
naturally moves while being completely candid about where the
materials are coming from and how they’re being deployed. I’ve
probably written about 15-20 passages across my various books that
succeed at this. It’s really hard work, but its also a huge amount
of fun. The Spanish writer, Javier Cercas, is probably the most
successful writer who regularly achieves this, most recently with
Anatomy of a Moment.
If so, what kind? And will e-technology
alter the very forms of them? If so, how?
I think I answered the first question.
The second question really isn’t very interesting. E-technology is
here. It works, sort of, and will get better, maybe, and will end up
with 50-70 percent of the book trade. The danger lies in Google and
the text mash-up crowd, who are going to, if they get what they want,
undermine the evidential/referential systems upon which Western
civilization is based. So what’s at risk here is the rule of law
and the judicial systems. What happens to individual authorship is a
crucial element in this, even if literature isn’t. How e-books will
change conventional novels is relatively speaking, not very
important. Literature might be, because it remains the most effective
device for long-form thinking that exists outside research
collectives. And long-form thinking is what got human beings most of
the good things civilization has created.
2 Are the very significant structural
changes taking place in the publishing industry having an effect on
novel or short story writing? If so, how?
Of course changes are occurring. It’s
winnowing out everyone who isn’t terminally conventional or
independently wealthy. And it’s contributing to the general dumbing
down of readers.
3. Is the cutting back of mid-lists and
a general cautiousness about taking risks on new or relatively
unknown writers affecting the caliber of writing that does manage to
get into print?
Probably. But there are lots of nuances
here. It’s been a big boon to young writers coming out of the
creative writing factories, because they’ve been taught how to
market themselves, and how to be acceptably conventional. Publishers
are looking for “new, fresh writers” because that’s a prime
marketing category. And really, if, as a writer, you’re just trying
to get laid by the market, why not go do real estate, where there’s
real money to be made?
4 Do you have an author's website? Does
it help you sell books?
No, and no. It’s sort of like having
a Visa card. If you don’t have one, you lose elements of full
citizenship. The test of this is simple: can you find an author’s
website that isn’t so crudded with bullshit and self-congratulation
that you feel like barfing after 20 seconds?
5 How do you feel about running an
author's website? Do you feel its a labour of love or an annoying
imposition? Or something else altogether?
I don’t have one, so I can’t say.
But I’d think it would be an ongoing humiliation for any writer who
isn’t completely stupid or fixated on the market (which is more or
less the same thing.
6 Is the selection system for novel and
short story manuscripts fair? Should it be made blind?
No, and No. On the first question, no,
because it can’t ever be fair, because human beings are social, and
thus gossip and sleep with one another and talk and think and do
elementary detective work. No to the second question because the last
thing we should do with literature is put it in the hands of
bureaucrats and their systems. I’ve been on a jury in a blind
manuscript selection procedure. The reality was that all the jurors
knew who 2/3rds of the writers were, because good writers write
distinct sentences. I went out of my way to point that out, along
with who most of the writers in the competition were. That got me
permanently blacklisted from literary jury duty, but it did get the
best manuscripts on the table.
Rick Salutin once remarked that there
are only about 900 people in Canada, and they all know one another—or
should. He was talking about Canada as a cultural entity. You can
froth at the mouth about how shocking and appalling this is, but it
won’t change it, and if you erect a bureaucracy aimed at preventing
it, you’ll end up in Stalin’s lap with a bunch of tight-assed
dickheads telling you what to do.
7 According to media reports, e-book
sales now represent a significant percentage of overall sales.
They’re lying about this, but it’s
coming.
But small bookstores see them as more a
threat to their survival than anything else, and a lot of book people
remain printpeople.
The independents are going to be wiped
out by it. And print people are going to get old. There’s no
pleasant future to any of this.
8. Are you enthusiastic about e-books?
No. But not for the reasons you might
guess.What worries me about the e-book industry is that it will put
an end to the editing of books. And that would be an intellectual
catastrophe, because most e-books right now are really just blogs,
which is to say, they’re mostly unedited. You can see the effect of
this already in the U.S. where publishers—even the major ones—are
demanding that books arrive already edited.
9. Do they hold the potential for a
renaissance in literary publishing?
Only if you believe in the old Kerouac
“Firstthoughtbestthought universe, which I think may have been the
greatest disaster to have befallen intellectual life in the 20th
century. I happen to love being edited, for the simple reason that
two minds are always better than one.
10. Or are they over-rated and too susceptible to piracy?
I don’t care about rating or piracy.
I care about the demise of editing. That’s a cultural catastrophe.
11. What do you think of literary prizes?
As Jason Cowley has commented, they reduce our culture's ability to
think in a critically complex fashion? Do they suggest, “this book
is worth reading and all these others aren't?”
That isn’t the problem with prize
culture. The problem with it is that prizes always reward
conventional behavior. And that has led to a situation where books
being published are run through the prize mill, and if they don’t
get nominations or wins, the publishers abandon them, and the morons
who run the chain bookstores, people who have expertise in marketing,
don’t order them. Meanwhile, the books that win prizes nearly all
disappear within a few years, because they’re mediocre. This is, by
the way, more true in Canada than in any country in the
English-speaking world, and it’s utterly toxic. We need to worry
less about prizes and more about the stupidization of the public
realm that this is part of.
12. Philip Marchand once stated, “Not
even the most fervent partisans ofCanadian literature will say that
Canadians have done fundamentally new things with the novel form, or
changed the way we read in the manner, say, of a Joyce, a Kafka, a
Nabokov, or a Garcia Marquez. Marchand is correct as far as
*perceptions* go; Canadian writing is not considered formally or
stylistically groundbreaking. However, is this in fact the case when
one regards our de facto production? What examples can you think of
(including your own work) which would suggest otherwise?
I’m guessing you never saw Gender
Wars: A Novel & Some Conversation about Sex and Gender: 1994,
Somerville House. If you want radical with the novel form, that has
it, in both content and graphic representation. It may not succeed as
prize “fiction”, but it’s as crazy as it gets and travels at 4
times the speed. I also thought that Ondaatje’s “Coming Through
Slaughter, George Bowering’s Burning Water, and Barbara Gowdy’s
We So Seldom Look on Love were ground-breaking by any International
standards. Phil’s beef is with the Jane Urquhart/later Ondaatje
universe, along with every nominee/winner of the Giller since it
began, of which his description is accurate. What he doesn’t say
(even though he knows the truth) is that conventionality is what
literary prize culture begets.
12. What are you working on now that
you're excited about?
The Epic of Gilgamesh According to
Enkidu, where the issue is whether or not I’ll ever know enough to
finish it. The truth is that I do know how to finish it, but I'm just
not a temple priest, and they’re the ones who wrote all the other
versions.
Sunday, February 07, 2016
Saturday, February 06, 2016
토론토/ 多伦多/ トロント/Торонто /Τορόντο/ Toronto
Une vue de la centre-ville de l'Esplanade.
View of downtown from The Esplanade.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)