More Than a Book

It is perhaps tempting to regard this piece by Richard Curtis as at least evidence that the "book industry" is finally taking some notice of developments in the cyber/blogosphere. However, closer examination of Curtis's essay shows it to be every bit as dim-witted as every other pronouncement churned out by the denizens of American Publishing.

Here's Curtis's vision of what a "book" of the future might be like:

If form follows function - if the experience of reading on screen is different from that of reading on paper - it follows that the nature of the book itself will be transformed by the way it is transmitted from author to reader. In fact, that is just what is happening.

Before we examine how, it might help to look at the reading experience itself. A generation that defines books as material objects is giving way to one that regards them as quanta of digitized information. This new culture thrives on the vivid colors of television and videos, the frenetic interactivity of email and messaging, the emotional stimulation of video games and of channel- and web-surfing, and the instant gratification of cell phones and googling. Hyper-exposed to audial and visual media, the new breed of publishing animal seems to exhibit diminished confidence in the power of words alone to stimulate the imagination. For many jittery young people, printed texts on a stack of paper are, as one editor said, “kind of boring.” “If all it is, is a book, merely words” he elaborated, “it’s hard to get excited. I ask myself, ‘What else is it besides a book? Is it a video game? A movie? A web site?’ It’s got to be more than a book to turn me on.”

Curtis's response to this degradation of the reading experience is not to do something to correct it, but to give in to it. Down with books that are "merely words!" Later in his essay, Curtis puts this more succinctly: "As Big Publishing becomes more and more dysfunctional and authors grasp the capabilities of the new paradigm, the transformation of the book from a three-dimensional object to a dematerialized but richly sensory experience will accelerate." In other words, let's make books into just another visual spectacle in the postmodern media environment.

Curtis really would like to see "Big Publishing" get in on this act, but is afraid it won't be able to. He suspects that blogs are here to stay, that more and more writers will turn to them rather than attempt to navigate the Bizarro world of the "book industry." But he has a pretty reductive view of what blogs are all about:

A blog (contraction of “weblog”) is an online chronicle or scrapbook of a person’s thoughts, views, experiences and passions, enhanced by an almost limitless variety of computer-imported text and graphic material ranging from quotations to pictures to lists to hot links connecting viewers to the blogger’s favorite web sites. The currency of bloggers is called “memes,” bits of cultural content that define the personality of the blogger and the shared interests of his or her community whether it be politics, sports, entertainment, or hobby. The transmission of memes in the “blogosphere” is exponential and almost instantaneous. The term used to describe it is “viral.” One source defines memes as “the cultural counterpart of genes.”

I really can't think of a single literary weblog (consult the list to the right) that fits this description. Literary blogs are engaged in a serious (albeit not heavy-handed) discussion of books and writing. They are "literary" in the best sense: They care about the quality of the books being published and want to promote a genuine literary "culture" in which books can be discussed seriously. Nothing in Curtis's description takes note of this essential feature of literary blogs, but then the worker bees in "Big Publishing" don't really have time for anything "literary," anyway.

As to the cash-flowing potential of the kind of blog Curtis has in mind, I tend to agree with Grumpy Old Bookman:

Curtis's belief is that blogs will meet the needs of niche audiences, people who feel passionately about particular subjects or issues, and that in due course advertising will be targeted precisely at these readers, thus generating lots of moolah for those who write the blogs. Hmmm. Don't hold your breath, is my view.

And here is David Thayer's redescription of what Curtis means by the term "author platform":

Curtis also ranges over the 'platform' issue, a fin de siecle development assuring the publication of famous people when the urge to write a book strikes their fancy. I'm not naming names but apparently the platform works this way: You're a New York editor. Two manuscripts are sitting on your desk, one by Al Camus, one by the renowned slugger J. Canseco. It's pretty clear by page three of a side by side comparison that Al's a talented writer while JC rambles a little. A quick check of the web reveals that Camus doesn't have a web site, a glamorous photo, or even a TV appearance in his portfolio. Rumor is he's bald. JC, on the other hand, was struck on the head by a baseball while patroling right field (the sun was out). He's got fifty web sites, a legion of bookish fans and a tremendous amount of hair. Jose has platform. Jose gets book deal.

One does begin to have a little sympathy for Curtis when he contemplates the "disintermediation" of publishers, editors, and (gasp!) agents. Curtis doesn't see much role for "middlemen or agencies of any kind" in the new publishing "paradigm," and if indeed they were eliminated this would be one great blessing of the e-future, at any rate. But in imagining the "repurposing of the author," Curtis also sees the evacuation of "reviewers, critics, bookstores, and libraries" from his brave new world of sensory bombardment. But this is where readers are to be found, and only because Curtis envisions the replacement of readers with passive consumers of "entertainment" can he assume that criticism of books will disappear or that bookstores and libraries--homes for the book as "material object"--will cease to appeal. Indeed, Curtis makes his attitude toward "mere" reading perfectly plain: "Though the technology for on-screen text display has vastly improved, the original vision of e-book pioneers. . .has yielded to the reality that most consumers want their portable devices to incorporate a multiplicity of functions of which reading is only a minor component."

Unfortunately, the "book industry" has already become an institution for which "reading is only a minor component" of what it stands for. Richard Curtis's essay is a perfect illustration of how book publishing has degenerated into the mudpit it now is. Publishing and selling books are about how "publishing professionals" are able to "package their projects more vividly," about "media savvy," "market analysis," "targeted advertising campaigns," "branding," "technology for on-screen text display," about "business and promotional opportunities." The last thing they're about is printing worthwhile books for people interested in reading them. If the future of publishing looks at all like Curtis's virtualized fever dream, this will continue to be the case, except that, presumably, everyone involved will be more willing to admit it.

Comments

[Scott]

Dan--Richard Curtis's (and other pundits') misstatements about blogs and bloggers have led me to propose a rule: any pundit who wants to spout off about what a blog is or where blogs are headed must, humself, blog 5 days a week for 6 months before saying anything.

Really now, I don't go around offering insight about books I've never read, so why do these people think they can talk about what a blog is or its potential for making money.

Also, yes "meme" can be definted as "the cultural counterpart of genes." That's not a bad definition, in fact. However, it does not follow that memes are "the currency of blogs" or that they somehow constitute a blogger's personality. Memes are more like passing viruses (which fits into their definition as "viral")--they enter a blog, stick around for a day or two, and then leave, perhaps altering the blogger in some way, perhaps not. Much like the common cold.

[David Thayer]

I like Scott's rule of 5 days times six months or the length of Martha Stewart's Katona Captivity whichever is greater. Curtis enjoys himself I think and by and large I enjoy his essays about the publishing business. He's old school in some ways but predicting the doom of literary agents was definitely fodder for the peanut gallery.

[Wyatt Bonikowski]

Thank you for this post. It helped me connect some things I was thinking about a "more than a book" project I had heard about via Grand Text Auto. If you're interested, the post is on my blog, March 7.

[Kevin Smokler]

I'm going add an amendment to Scott's rule. Anyone who writes a "the book business is going to hell in a handbasket" article must also, in said article, show what they've done to keep it from happening. Complaining about it doesn't count.