Marion's Open Salon Blog

Marion Stein

Marion Stein
Location
New York, New York
Birthday
January 01
Bio
You can find out everything about me including how to get my books at http://www.marionstein.net. Comments welcome!

MY RECENT POSTS

Editor’s Pick
JANUARY 3, 2010 7:09PM

There's More to Publishing Than in Jonathan Galassi's Op-Ed

Rate: 10 Flag

In a New York Times opinion piece, There’s More to Publishing Than Meets the Screen, (1/3/10), Jonathan Galassi — President of Farrar, Strauss & Giroux, writes of the decision by the heirs of William Stryon’s estate to put out e-book versions of the author’s work. Galassi wonders whether e-books are “a new frontier in publishing” or “simply the latest edition of the books produced by publishers like Random House.”

He points to the contributions made by traditional publishers in creating the finished product that goes to the public. In addition to marketing, design and layout, Galassi speaks of the role of editors in making sure that the final version of a book is the best that it can be.

Galassi does not discuss the other important role of traditional publishers. They have been the gatekeepers, not only ensuring that no book would bare their imprint before it was ready, but that any book with their stamp would be one worth reading. Publishers could be depended upon to bring us new and interesting authors, and beyond that to expand the very foundations of literature.

But the publishing industry abandoned these tasks long before e-books came on to the scene.

Any visit to a bookstore will show that nowadays it’s only name brand best selling authors and celebrity writers getting onto store shelves. If William Styron were starting out today, an editor would never have taken a chance on a book like Lie Down in Darkness (unless perhaps Styron added vampires or zombies) and Styron himself might have been forced to publish only as an e-book if for no other reason than to prove to potential agents or publishers that he could gain a following and his books would sell.

While books may still need “the care and dedication” of a good editor, publishing houses are not going to provide that to any novels they don’t believe are marketable and most of the books they believe will sell, no amount of editing will help.

The result of this is that sales are down and the publishing industry is in trouble. If only it would occur to those involved to look inward, they might find that the problem is not competition from e-book distributors. Perhaps what they need to do is look for books that have literary merit to begin with. Maybe they should be using that marketing acumen to make serious reading “sexy” again, or to find out what kinds of books would compel readers who aren’t buying theirs. Of course they need to make other changes as well. Changes might include a different type of distribution, the realization that e-book and print pricing can’t be the same, a rethinking of how royalties are set, and new ways of incorporating digital marketing. As in any industry, new technologies require new approaches.

Galassi makes a valid a point. The publishing industry plays an important role in the production of books. If they are going to continue to play an important role in the production of important books — both print and electronic, they need to change.

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
You've really framed this issue well, Marion. There's a certain kind of blindness that comes from hubris. We need gatekeepers, but we also need a publishing industry that hypes the best books and seems to know who its book-buying public really is. I'd also make a plug for the lost art of content and line-editing. Rated.
I missed seeing this before commenting on Heather Michon's post this morning on the same topic. Glad to see Galassi's editorial getting some responses here.
There are more good writers out there than can be comfortably accommodated by traditional publishers - publishers who are looking mostly for the "sure thing." It's a bit like Hollywood, in a way, I think, preferring a handful of tremendously expensive blockbusters that simply have to be successful to earn back what was spent to produce, rather than a wide array of moderate-cost productions - some of whom would and some wouldn't earn back their costs; but those which did would cover the rest. Now, mainstream publishers seem to put all their resources into one or two sure-fire winners, which are just exactly like the last dozen or so sure-fire winners.
You can make that argument about most publishers, but Farrar Strauss and Giroux have a generally a well deserved reputation for high standards and literary excellence, so you're kind of barking at the wrong dog. They're suffering because people are, quite simply, not buying the best books anymore.

That said, this op ed read mostly like an argument for why publishers should retain copyright for eternity. It's a desperate argument, but writers lucky enough to be published by FS&G should probably go over the new contracts with a very tough lawyer.
What we tend to forget is that what we now call "literature" had its beginning purely as a creature of the market place—and of societal shifts as well.
The confluence of the printing press with the rise of a relatively leisurely middle class and its gradual literacy boom in 18th century Europe created "the novel." When that art form first manifested, it was considered trash.
It is only fitting and predictable that an art form created by the market place should continue to be effected by it. Great art eventually flourished in that genre, but maybe it's time for great art to move on to some other form. When that new oeuvre first manifests itself, once again it will be considered to be trash. Maybe it's here with us already. Maybe it's the video game.
My blog could definitely use an editor. As for a publisher? I wonder how they would brand me?
Juliet said what I would have....
I agree with Juliet that FS&G remains one of the few to put out quality fiction although I don't see them taking too many chances on new writers. I didn't mean this as an attack on Galassi who is probably one of the good guys. His piece just struck me as somewhat myopic.
it's exactly like film making - no one is willing to stake a career or reputation on something that doesn't make money, no matter its merits. Unfortunately, in film, the ones making the decisions often lack the acumen to determine merit. (Not that the movie-going public would realize merit in film if its orchestra seat swung back into their knees.) I suspect it's the same with book publishers, as it's only the bottom line in the ledger that means anything to them.

people need to remember that digital just means easier and faster, not better (or worse). Like there have always been independent film makers, there have been self-published books. The proliferation of video cameras and the ease of YouTube have made almost everyone filmmakers - in good ways and bad. One need only try to take in the vastness of the "blogosphere" to see the merits - and detriments - of e-publishing.

Also remember that too many (now-) critically-acclaimed authors weren't so much at the time, and were commercial failures.
Thoughtful piece. Agree with Juliet, too.
If you take a look at most published books today, you will find that they are not as well made as they were a few years ago. Publishers have cut costs in order to keep making projected profits, focusing more and more on simplistic novels that sell quickly, and rarely employing real copy editors and proofreaders.

Today's editors and publishers do NOT take the care they used to take in the creation of their product. It is extremely unusual to find a book that has been thoroughly proofed, let alone edited, before it goes to press.

Traditional print publishing is still an option. It just isn't as good as its defenders claim, and many of its current practices are shoddy. Electronically spellchecking a manuscript is not the same as proofreading it--but many publishers can't be bothered any more.
right on. before the corporations took over publishing, and there were still folks around who ran publishing companies that published books that were "creative" and well written books meant something. now, there is a no-man's land between university books and books made to please and stroke the "average consumer."

I'm not sure many of those editors you talk about even have the capacity any longer to judge a book on it's merits as a piece of writing rather than a "marketable product." (I am actually convinced of this as a result of a lifetime of experience.)

Agents are worse since their cut is even less they have less of an interest in whether the book is actually any good or another piece of shit that is Guaranteed to reach the best seller list.

of course, Galassi is feathering his nest because he fancies FSG is among the last houses that know or at least pretend to know what literature is, but I'm not even convinced of that any longer. I don't trust any of them.
I could foresee a future when the entire publishing process is moved online, but I don't think that will happen. The merging of TV and the internet has been predicted for a long time, too, and WebTV came out fifteen years ago. So far people prefer the two mediums separate. And I think people will continue to prefer their books in paper and cardboard for a long time. It's really not about the techne, or physical medium, but rather about the development of new discursive strategies. The Kindle does nothing for this. However, new forms, like the cellphone novel (shiver), and the blog, are another matter. Rated.
Ah the Guardians, of publishing, or ideas, or whatever.
Like Plato said, the question is,
Who guards the guardians?
good piece.
My view is that the problems are multiple and go much deeper than anyone has suggested so far. One has been the takeover of major publishing houses by multinational corporations whose primary concern is the bottom line. At many houses even when editors want to support good literature they aren't allowed to if it doesn't promise big returns.

Another is the deplorable state of education in this country - people BUY the junk, remember; they buy it because they like it. Their literary taste has never developed beyond the 8th grade. Slightly irrelevant but maybe not: I recently met a college student who doesn't know how to write longhand. She prints everything because she was never taught to write. She's in COLLEGE, folks.
I'm with Juliet. For its rep and editorial acumen, FSG would be a dream publisher for my novel. But I understand the parent company has imposed awful, mandatory restrictions on all new contracts for authors. Not so appealing when writers with a little multimedia skill and vision can epublish on their own and reap much better rewards. That said, without a strong print-publishing partner behind such efforts, will those eBooks sell?

Also, I think many publishers are still thinking too small or as if epublishing possibilities are just a fad. I'm convinced multimedia is the future-now and the "sexiness," per Ms. Stein's marketing statement, can be found there. We need to consider the audience (formerly known as readers) for our stories and give these individuals what they want however they want it, which means choices: print, yes, but also audiobook, eBook, accompanying soundtracks, videos, photo essays, blog interactivity, etc.

Stories come to us in many different forms today. Writers who fail to keep up -- i.e., expand their definition of narrative -- will likely never be "read."
Ah, how quaint the notion that the people who actually make money at producing books, care about quality.

Sorry. It's a business.

The good news is, anyone with a computer and a printer (and now you don't even need a printer) is a publisher.
Marion, right on! Great article. It's the only industry that doesn't sell what it buys. Essentially, the real "editors" of yesterday are gone. Completely. And, probably, never to return. I'm not romanticizing the past; I'm just stating an obvious fact...obvious, because much of what's published today reads like blog posts, anyway! Unfortunately, the "art" of fiction is dead.
Nightlyscribe --While big publishing houses have for the most part abandoned the "art", people are still producing original, amazing fiction. It's just harder to find and may lack a bit of the polish. Small literary magazines still exist and there are some great books available as PODs. It's just difficult to pick through the dross.
Marion - for good POD books, try PODBRAM (http://podbram.blogspot.com/) - it's run by a rather eccentric curmudgeonly guy named Floyd Orr, who has very high standards for POD books, and a stable of volunteer reviewers. This site reviews POD books only, and in the interests of full disclosure, I am also one of the reviewers! We do not pull our punches, and Floyd screens applicants for review pretty carefully. If it has a good review - be assured it's a pretty good book.