Who is Published by Whom

Lissa Warren at The Huffington Post:

As someone who has worked in book publishing for the past 13 years, I'm keenly aware of the different houses that exist in the United States and the kinds of book they produce. I can name a number of the bestselling titles at most of the major presses -- or, at least, their most prominent authors or series. Keeping tabs on the competition is part of my job, and I take it pretty seriously.

But I have to admit that I don't think the general consumer cares very much who is published by whom. I don't even think most people notice. Tell me the last time you walked into a Borders, or a B&N, or your local independent and said, "Hmm, wonder what Simon & Schuster has been up to this week?" The companies just don't matter.

Indeed. And eventually, whether a book is published on paper between covers by a "publishing company" or on paper between covers by the author through a "publishing service" won't matter either.

Comments

[Matthew Tiffany]

I can't agree. I look to certain publishing houses that have delivered quality, challenging material consistently. Maybe it's accurate to say that the conglomerate mega-corporation owned publishing houses, with lengthy lists of books spewed out each quarter in hopes that one of them will stick, don't really inspire any seeking, but the smaller presses work to earn some brand loyalty. Soft Skull? Coffee House? Archipelago? And so on.

[Pete]

I agree with Matt. With huge corporate publishers, indeed, "companies just don't matter", because they'll generally publish anything they think will sell, but many independents have distinctive voices that readers can safely rely on when deciding what to read. Soft Skull and Akashic being just two examples.

[Dan Green]

Although of course Soft Skull doesn't really exist anymore as an independent press. It's taken the first step toward being "folded into" corporate publishing.

[Gail Pool]

The general consumer may not notice or care what press has published a particular book, but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. The trade notices. And that has an impact on what the consumer knows about and buys. Review editors at trade publications, such as Publishers Weekly, and in the mainstream press can't read everything that's published, and in making their selection of what to review, they rely on the reputation of such as houses as Knopf. Booksellers depend upon these reviews in determining which books to stock--and they also depend upon the better discounts offered by more established and wealthier presses. All of this means that consumers who go into Barnes and Noble or Borders are more likely to know about and look for books from certain presses--because these books have been reviewed; and consumers are also more likely to find these books stocked--because they've been reviewed and because of the publisher discount. Whether or not consumers are aware of these factors is irrelevant: they're influenced by them all the same.

[Edward Williams]

"And eventually, whether a book is published on paper between covers by a "publishing company" or on paper between covers by the author through a "publishing service" won't matter either."

Now that's a stretch if I ever heard one. The truth is more like there will be ONE publisher. And one book store. Not ten million self-published authors, or should we say . . . bloggers. Dream on, Dan.

[Dan Green]

"Whether or not consumers are aware of these factors is irrelevant: they're influenced by them all the same."

That contemporary book publishing is a racket--a legal form of bribery and influence peddling--is obvious. This doesn't mean that the books being published by this racket are any good.

[Daniel]

It has nothing to do with brand, it has to do with capital. Houses with back/front list authors who sell well are able to take risks and offer advances to new promising authors. Thus they keep their stables full of studs.

And anyone who knows books knows where well-made books get published. Godine, Mark Batty, Princeton: authors and illustrators want to get their books in at these houses for the high quality. There is more to a book than words on paper.

[Dan Green]

"There is more to a book than words on paper."

This is probably where I most profoundly disagree with those who champion the "book business," or, for that matter, those who simply fetishize "the book." When it comes down to, if the "words on paper" aren't worth your while, if they don't justify themselves as a reading experience, then "the book" is useless. The rest is just folderol.

[Edward Williams]

Well, since Daniel has his "stables full of studs", it is no wonder he steps in it (the manure), when he ventures out. David Godine, for whom Daniel apparently works, doesn't even look at writers who don't come through their own stable of Agents. It's that Boston club scene, you know, with new recruits coming in from Breadloaf. His remarks are highly disingenuous, or maybe just naive.

[marly]

In defense of those who have not spoken here, I would like to point out that my first book came in "over the transom" and was picked out of "the slush pile" at David R. Godine, Publisher. I had not ventured to Breadloaf; the idea of an agent had never sprouted in my innocent mind. I was a poet with a novella and some stories; I knew no better than to put them in a little brown paper envelope and stamp it. I was "maybe just naive."

My impulse came from reading a Godine book that stirred me and felt kindred to me. If he likes this book, I thought, he will like mine. And so he did.

Many things are said. This is one little thing that I know to be truth.

[BostonBookEd]

I'm off to read Lissa's full post at Huffington now, but this sounds like someone who has definitely drunk the Kool Aid. A good, conscientious writer, I maintain as a book editor, should know who is publishing their book, and who else is reaping the benefits. If your book goes on a list at HarperCollins, is it going to be in a catalog next to blowhard Rush Limbaugh? And if your book does exceedingly well and his doesn't but appeals to some important rightwing lunatics, will your book be supporting his lesser sales, so they can do it all over again?

And as someone pointed out, smaller presses work to get recognized. And new outlets make that easier, with websites and email lists. I know I did a program at Soft Skull where you give them 100 bucks and they send you an assortment of books, and I thought it was a terrific idea that worked well.

Messages like Lissa's are just call-outs on the march to death for indies, sadly. It's like saying it doesn't matter where you buy a book. It's ignorant.

[Daniel]

Ah come on Dan G, there are plenty of publishers who just want to & try to do good work, publish books they like, books they care about, and still have things like a house & healthcare for themselves and their families. I think Soft Skull and the ones I mentioned, along with Graywolf, Coffee House – and I don't know how many more – all try in their own ways. I would certainly never say the words don't matter – they matter first and foremost when the text is central.

But there are people for whom the construction & design of books is their lives. It is wrong to deny them as artists while championing an author's writing, or to belittle their craft.