Thanks, again, to Liz for sending this along. The New Republic‘s issue of October 21, 2013 featured a cover focus on books and publishing, with five articles included. They range from a one-page infographic to 3 pages long; no serious time commitment here, although you will have to find them. I accessed these stories through a database (Ebsco, if you’re curious) through my employer; you may have similar access through your local public library, for example. I know that on Houston Public Library’s page you can go to “research databases” and search for the publication you want (New Republic), and then you’ll need to put in your library card number to see the articles. Contact your local librarian if you want to get in and you need some help; she or he will be happy to assist. Or, there’s always the print edition, if you subscribe or know of a decent newsstand!
I found these articles interesting (obviously) and wanted to share just a few thoughts. In the order I read them (I have no idea how this relates to the print magazine):
- “Books Don’t Want to Be Free: how publishing has escaped the cruel fate of the other culture industries” by Evan Hughes examines the fact that books have avoided the way music and movies have become open to pirating and price drops. Those industries are struggling, Hughes writes, in ways that the book publishing industry isn’t. (And don’t even get started on print magazines and newspapers…) This article is optimistic and thus refreshing. It touches on the recent price-fixing court case between a group of major publishers, and Amazon. It also speaks to pricing differences between e-books and traditional print, which is addressed in the next item:
- “The Words Business, In Numbers,” an infographic (sort of) identifying trends in revenue (e-books vs. print), reader trends, and foreign readership. In a word, “e-books are growing the pie.”
- “The Dastardly Defender of Letters” by Laura Bennett is an article about and interview with Andrew Wylie, “who still makes millions off highbrow.” He is an infamous agent for clients including – I shamelessly reproduce those listed in the article – Amis, Nabokov, Bellow, Rushdie, Roth, and more in that vein. He is delightfully curmudgeonly, snobbish about the lowbrow, and defending books as they should be made (says he, and I largely agree). This was the most fun piece to read. His apparent serene calm regarding the future of traditional books was heartening.
- “I Hope They Read Books in Hell” by Norene Malone, on the other hand, touches on the opposite end of the spectrum. Malone visits with the editor, Ruby-Strauss, and agent, Leavell, of Tucker Max, author of I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell.” Max’s cache, if you didn’t know, is being 1) internet-born and 2) offensive as all get-out. Ruby-Strauss and Leavell work with others in the same vein: Snooki from Jersey Shore, that University of Maryland student who wrote that bitchy email, Shit My Dad Says (whose twittering I like, btw). It was interesting to consider that counterpoint, the lowbrow, which (it is argued) helps finance the highbrow.
- Finally, “The Rancid Smell of Success” was written by Lionel Shriver, author of a good number of novels, most famously We Need to Talk About Kevin, which became a major motion picture. She laments the changed life of a successful novelist: from the scary, financially insecure obscurity of an undiscovered writer to the publicity-exhausted successful author – who is still financially insecure and has to immediately begin work on the next book, but can’t because of all the promotional demands of the current one. It’s a beautifully written article, and she acknowledges the problem with her complaints about the literary festival she has to attend in Bali; but she justifies her complaints, too. It’s a thoughtful piece.
On the subject of e-books versus print – and the question of the future of the traditional book (“is it dead?!” they ask hysterically) – others have said it better before me, but I’ll briefly file my position. The birth or the rise of the e-book does not signal the death of the book, any more than the birth or the rise of television sounded a death knoll for radio. Radio has changed over the decades, but we still have a recognizable semblance of what it was when the television was born. There’s room for both e- and print books in this world, and both have their uses, their pros and cons, their seasons if you will; and both have their fans. Those of us who prefer print (even if we occasionally read electronically!) will continue to buy and borrow real books. Everybody calm down, is my concise message. And please, read books – any kinda way.
Filed under: musings | Tagged: e-books, journalism, Liz, publishing |
pagesofjulia 
I’m going to go on a bit, but you raise some interesting questions (so, you see, my long-windedness is actually your fault š ).
I don’t know anybody who’s following the traditional publishing world who’s really optimistic (let alone the people who work in it), but of course they’re not worried about piracy. They’re worried about Amazon, so that is a difference from the music industry.
But, of course, the future of books is not tied to the contemporary publishing model. The Big Six were never the gatekeepers of quality — they have just been the gatekeepers of what they think will sell. If someone else does a better job of figuring that out, then okay. I think books will be fine either way.
“Lowbrow” has often financed “highbrow,” and “genre” has often financed “literary.” Lolita and Naked Lunch were originally published by Olympia Press, which published erotica. The top selling author at Scribner’s in the 1920s (and the top selling author in the US during that decade) was not Hemingway or Fitzgerald, it was S. S. Van Dyne, who wrote the Philo Vance mysteries.
I think the fate of radio may be a bit different from what you say, though. Radio has survived, yes, but mostly by changing the content of its programming almost completely. Comedy, drama, and variety all moved to television, not overnight but pretty completely (too bad for me, since I’m a big fan of old-time radio detective shows). Radio mostly focused on playing music, news, and, more recently, talk shows of various kinds.
I also wonder if part of what makes radio work these days is how much time people spend in their cars. Someone asked Howard Stern about the demographics of his audience, and he said his audience was angry people in cars. Race, sex, and age were all irrelevant. Anger + cars was what counted.
Your long-windedness is welcome, Anthony! I’m glad to hear you believe that books will be okay – I call that optimism, and I think flexibility and a resistance to doom and gloom (if not actual optimism) are what’s required of books and publishing these days. I think we’ll be okay.
Point taken about radio; it looks a lot different. I think books might look a lot different, too.
And I am amused by your Howard Stern paraphrase – makes perfect sense!