ForeWord Publishing Insider
Industry leaders highlight current trends and the latest headlines
 Wednesday, April 30, 2008
In 1976, when I quit my job as an associate editor for the Wm. C. Brown Publishing Company, I figured I knew enough to start my own publishing house. Hey, I was young. For the next three years, Avery Publishing Group operated out of the basement of my house and my partner’s garage. We began producing college textbooks and quickly morphed into a niche house specializing in non-traditional markets—from pregnancy to childbirth to military history. To the great relief of my very understanding wife, we eventually moved out of the basement into the front offices of a local printer. While Avery continued to expand its titles into other niche marketplaces, some of our books started to find their way into trade bookstores—a marketplace I had avoided like the plague. Luckily, we found the very laid-back Charlie Winton and his company, Publishers Group West. They were happy to take over our trade sales, and we were happy to let them. By 1990, Avery was in its own building and finally turning a profit. Not a big profit, but enough to satisfy the bank and allow us to borrow more money when we needed it. By that year, I had figured out that I really did not know as much about publishing as I had originally thought. We were certainly good, but not good enough to be considered great.

About that time, I met a gentleman named Nathan Keats, the publisher of Keats Publishing. Nathan had been in publishing since the early ‘40s. He had put together one of the best alternative health publishing companies in the country. He was a crusty maverick, said what was on his mind, was highly innovative, and loved life. I was a wise guy with a sense of humor and I had been following his publishing house as I developed Avery’s own alternative health list. We hit it off the first time we met at the old ABA (now called the BEA). He told me something that has always stuck with me. He said that if you can stay in publishing long enough, you will eventually come out with a bestseller. When he told me that, I asked him to define “long enough.” He answered, “You’ll know how long when it happens. You just have to keep at it.”

In 1991, Avery published Juicing for Life. The juicing craze was just beginning and it became our first major hit. We sold over 700,000 copies in its first six months of publication. From that point until we sold the company in 1999, we couldn’t do anything wrong. It was an amazing ride; one bestseller begat another. Nathan couldn’t have been more pleased by our success—and I couldn’t have had a better mentor. Nathan was someone I could call to ask questions, bounce ideas off of, and learn the secrets of being a publisher. Unfortunately, he passed away a few years before I sold Avery. I did, however, get the opportunity to tell him how much his friendship had meant to me.

Two months after selling Avery, I started Square One Publishers. Having owned my own publishing firm for over twenty-three years, I found myself back at square one—just in case anyone was wondering where the company name came from. It’s now been eight years since we started, and while we have developed a solid backlist and have a number of very strong titles, we are still looking for our first major bestseller. While I no longer like to make predictions about my titles, I think this year we will have our first two bestsellers: Does Your Baby Have Autism?, thanks to the unique breakthrough offered by its author-researchers, and Taking Woodstock, owing to it having become Ang Lee’s next movie project. I am also hoping that eight years is, in fact, “long enough”—yet I also hear Nathan telling me to “never count your chickens before they sell.” We will do our best to make this year, Square One’s year; and if it isn’t, all I have to do is try and stay in business for one more year. Somewhere in that thought—planted in my brain by Nathan—is the hope and passion that continues to drive me and most other publishers forward.

Thank you, Nathan.   

posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2008 3:42:03 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Thursday, April 24, 2008
While Jules Verne was pretty good at predicting the future, I usually dismiss modern-day prognosticators. They don’t seem to get it right when it comes to politics, stocks, or bestsellers. On the other hand, since this is my blog—and I’m not going to write about politics, stocks, or bestsellers—what the hell. We live in an age of technological wonders. It seems that breakthroughs in the field of digital electronics occur every selling season like clockwork. I have now discovered that the television I currently have hooked up to cable at my home will shortly need another electronic gizmo to work. All of this has got me thinking about where the book publishing business will be in about twenty years. I use the period of twenty years because that usually connotes the space between generations.

As a baby boomer, I grew up reading books printed on paper—not unlike the last hundreds of generations before me. However, I now find myself living in the “digital” age—an age in which I keep missing all those seminars on “Publishing in the Digital Age.” I know it’s coming, but I don’t think it’s just around the corner. Let me tell you why.

When I was growing up, I used to listen to AM stations—that is, until FM started playing rock ’n roll (in stereo, no less!). From there, it was on to 8-track players (and some really interesting wardrobe choices) and then cassette tapes. This was followed by CDs, which were followed by  MP3 players, iPods and downloads—and this was all happening just in my car. And you wonder why the music business is in such a mess.

As my generation grew up, music was such an integral part of our lives that we were always looking for that perfect sound. If the equipment we were listening to became obsolete in a few years—or until the car’s lease was up—that was perfectly okay; we’d accept the change and move on. As a generation, we were trained to accept change in order to keep up with the latest musical-producing device.

Yet as much as our musical equipment changed, books remained an unchanged product, allowing only for the development of “books-on-tape.” My generation and then Generation X simply did not have any other choices to select from. Today, however, things have changed. We have e-books, downloads, and handheld reading devices; none of which seem to excite my generation and the X-ers. Of course, paying $299 to $399 for a device that needs to be constantly recharged, is easily broken, lost, or stolen also doesn’t seem like a big plus. The fact is that the generations not raised on GameBoy is not likely to give up their paper books now or perhaps even later—unless the technology begins to encompass a whole lot more than books and drops its price to below $99.

On the other hand, the younger generation out there who were raised on electronic games may absolutely embrace these advancements. However, since they still need to graduate high school and get jobs (good luck to them.), we will not see any dramatic acceptance of these products for at least the next ten years. I therefore predict that our use of traditional paperbound books will continue to remain steady for as long as the Boomers and the Gen X-ers continue to buy books.

What will change dramatically over the next few years, in my opinion, is how that “paper” book will be produced and delivered to its readers. This will change the publishing industry as we know it and impact greatly on retailers of all printed matter. Am I starting to sound like Nostradamus yet? With the development of digital printing a few years back, the printing industry went through a great deal of change and upheaval trying to keep up with the new emerging technologies. Today, we have POD (print-on-demand) presses that can produce one book at a time. This has produced an enormous amount of new books to become available (if not actually sold) online. And as this technology is refined, the machines producing the books will become smaller and more sophisticated. What we will have is a single machine capable of printing and collating the interior text in black and white; printing a color cover; and binding the interior to the cover to produce one commercial-looking, single bound paperback. And that future is already here in the form of the Espresso Book Machine, a complete one-stop printer capable of storing thousands of titles in its memory bank—and that will eventually change everything.

While the bookstore still has its share of bestsellers and perennial backlist titles on its shelves, it will also have several machines capable of printing almost every book ever published in any language requested. Should any of the bookstores’ shelved stock sell out, the manager simply prints out what’s ever needed. Libraries will have the machines available for its patrons--as will supermarkets, health food stores, drug stores, toy shops, or any other retailers that cater to any niche market(s). Publishers themselves will have these machines to produce review copies whenever needed.

The economic model for publishers should improve as well. As a book is electronically purchased, a percentage will be paid directly into a publisher’s and/or author’s account. While this amount may be smaller than the traditional revenue made, the savings for the publishers will more than offset the smaller profit.  No longer will publishers have to spend money maintaining stocked inventory, warehousing, or shipping. Nor will they have to contend with returns, damaged books, or overstocks. The system of distribution will become completely electronic. No book will ever be out of stock. For the first time, smaller independent publishers will be able to compete with mega-publishers on an even playing fair.

And of course, as with the coming of the automobile and its impact on the horse carriage trade, there will be changes in the industry that rely on the old book publishing model. The need for distributors and wholesalers will be greatly reduced, as will the need for traditional book printers. Online booksellers will take a beating—unless Amazon chooses to buy Borders (but we’ll leave that for a future blog). And as these industries may devolve or evolve, new ones will emerge to meet the new economic models to come.

The fact is we are definitely living in a time of great change. However, we still have a long way to go to get to that future. And, of course, I could always be wrong. But hey, that’s what happens when you make predictions.  

Posted by: Rudy Shur

posted on Thursday, April 24, 2008 9:37:54 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [1]
 Wednesday, April 09, 2008

For independent publishers, it is the best of times and it is the worst of times. And yes, I know I took that line from Dickens—but it is absolutely true. Today’s breakthrough technologies have allowed more people to print books than ever before in the history of mankind. Years ago, the cost of editing, typesetting, printing, and promoting a book made publishing prohibitive for most. Now, we are able to digitally typeset and print a single copy for peanuts. This remarkable technology has ignited the entrepreneurial spirit in thousands of people here and around the world. Now, we can all be publishers! Every would-be author can see his or her name on books; children can give their grandparents a copy of their latest handy work in a bound edition; and no books need ever go out of print again. Could it be the dawn of a new golden age of independent publishing? I don’t think so.

About sixty years ago, an individual in England would have to work years to become a bonafide publisher. They would first work as a publisher’s apprentice, and then move up the ranks. After years of service, they would hopefully be granted a certificate letting the world know that they have proven themselves worthy of being called a “Publisher.” Publishing was considered a trade, but that was then. Today, it seems all you have to do is get on the right website, download your file, and within a few days your book will arrive at your front door. And yes—according to the website copywriters, you have just become a publisher. The truth—and what the website will not tell you--is that your book has been printed, which is, in fact, not the same as being published. And while it may look, feel, and even smell like a book, it is not a published work.

For the indie publisher today, publishing is a hard-nosed, fight-for-every-sale, better-know-what-you-are-doing business. Financially distressed distributors can bring you down; vendors think nothing of holding onto your money for months at a time; and, even when you think you are ahead of the game, there are those unexpected returns to put a dent in your cash flow. And just like that smell of napalm in the morning, I love it. What I don’t love, however, are all those people who tell anyone with a computer that printing a book makes them a publisher. For every one of those folks who buy into it, there is another person willing to teach them how to create a bestseller, how to get free PR, how to become rich—off of their book. The truth is the only people becoming rich are the people printing the books and selling the seminars.

Now don’t get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with lots more people becoming publishers. Independent publishers have always been the driving force behind innovations, discovery of new voices, and quality over profits. However, if you are going to be a publisher, you not only need to know how to run a business, you also need the drive and instincts to run it. Take courses on the subject. PMA, the Independent Book Publishers Association, offers great workshops on the subject. Talk to people who are in the business. Read books about the subject. Send some time walking the halls of the BEA. Do all you can to prepare to be brutalized, and then when you think you are ready, ask yourself one question. Do I want to run a business or be a writer? And if you truly want to be a publisher, then go for it.

I answered that question years ago, and have never looked back.

Back to you.
Rudy Shur
Publisher
Square One Publishers

Posted by: Rudy Shur

posted on Wednesday, April 09, 2008 11:21:24 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [1]
 Friday, April 04, 2008
The first year in any business is a sink or swim time. In publishing, there are two first years: the planning year, when you find your distributor, raise your capital, set up your web site, and buy your titles; and the printing year, measured from the day that your first book arrives crated at the warehouse. I am in my planning year now. My print year starts in the Winter season, 2009.  

For my first print year, I was looking for books that fulfilled both my creative and my capitalistic vision. The books needed to be good, but they also needed to be marketable. I wanted to fall in love.

And I did.  

My first book is Brian Evenson’s LAST DAYS. Currently the MFA director at Brown, Brian is my perfect kind of writer—a writer who walks the line between the literary world and the genre world, a writer who knows a good story and who knows how to write it well. He has everything: craft, structure, character-driven plots. He’s an NEA recipient, as well as an O. Henry prize winner. He translates from French, he’s won the Horror Guild Award, and his last book, The Open Curtain, was picked as one of the ten best books of the year by Time Out New York. All that, plus he’s a great guy to have across the table at a meal. You can read more about him here: http://www.brianevenson.com.

I met Brian at BEA, when I was an editor at Dark Horse. He agreed to write an Aliens novel for Dark Horse, which was a bit of a triumph, I thought. LAST DAYS is a detective novel set in a secret society of self mutilators. The detective was kidnapped by members of the society, and is forced to solve a murder mystery for them. It’s a down the rabbit hole kind of story, where nothing is as it seems.

My second book is Jeff VanderMeer’s third novel set in the Ambergris world, FINCH. I met Jeff through Brian, and, though Jeff and I have never talked face to face, we carry on a lively email correspondence. Jeff pitched me a Predators story when I was an editor at Dark Horse. The resultant Predators novel is also a bit of a triumph.

Jeff is one of the most prolific writers I’ve met. He has ten (yes, ten!) books coming out next year. He’s widely considered to be one of America’s best fantasy writers, having won the World Fantasy Award, been translated into 17 languages, been featured on the NYT’s blog and Wired.com. He’s kind and intelligent, and also a gonzo marketer, with ideas coming out of his ears. Read more about him (and see some pretty cool art) at www.jeffvandermeer.com.

FINCH is a noir tale, set in a world where the gray caps, mysterious underground inhabitants, have taken over the city. Martial law is in place. Against a backdrop of oppression and rebellion, the hero, John Finch, must solve an impossible double murder while trying to make contact with the rebels. His girlfriend, Sintra, might or not be the leader of the resistance. Something is about to happen.  

Third up? Will Elliott’s PILO FAMILY CIRCUS. Talk about the genre / literary crossover… The book is about a troupe of demonic clowns working in a between-worlds circus. The currency that the circus runs on is bits of white crystal—or souls. The writing is smart, dry, and humorous. The book made me both look over my shoulder in fear, and laugh out loud. The word Elliott creates crackles with tension. He’s a fantastic writer, and to think that this is only his first book…

I bought the North American English rights to Will’s book from Quercus, his U.K. publisher. The book was originally printed in Australia, where it won the ABC prize. The novel also won the Aurealis Award, the Shadows Award, and the Ditmar Award. Elliott got a nod from the Sydney Herald as the best young novelist for 2007.  

And about the wovel? Last week, I found my wovelist. He’s young, he’s smart, he’s ready for a break out from the limited edition publishers. He’s Kealan Patrick Burke, and if you haven’t heard of him, you will.

His wovel, called The LIVING, is set in a world torn apart by civil war—the undead humans versus the living humans. The undead are not your typical zombies. They were created by genetic mutation, and they are the underclass of this new world. Our heroine, Madison, might be the last hope for peace in this world. The wovel follows Madison’s attempted escape from a city ravaged from the civil war.

In preparation for writing this wovel, Kealan sent me not a plot synopsis but a conflict synopsis. With the help of the readers, who will vote on the plot branch points as they come up, Madison might escape from the city alive. Or she might not… The readers get to decide. Read more about Kealan at his web site www.kealanpatrickburke.com.

I can’t announce my fourth print title yet, because the contract isn’t signed…

Know these authors? Have thoughts about the lineup? Comment here, or write me at Victoria@underlandpress.com.

And thanks for reading the blog. It’s been fun to write for ForeWord. Keep in touch by visiting www.underlandpress.com, and signing up for our newsletter.

Best of luck, and happy reading…

Victoria

Posted by: Victoria Blake

posted on Friday, April 04, 2008 10:42:23 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Wednesday, March 26, 2008
My hunt for a web writer continues. I’ve been knocking on doors, sending out emails, calling friends, pitching hard. I’ve gotten one writer lined up, but I’m looking for one more.

Here’s the idea:

I want to publish a Wovel, or web novel. The concept is to allow readers to participate in the formation of the plot arc, while leaving the writing, characterization, setting, description, and problem solving up to the author.  

Here’s how the Wovel works: The author posts an installment every week, say every Monday. Every post ends with a plot branch point. For example: the heroine, chased by zombies, reaches her car. The car a) starts, b) does not start. The readers get to decide. Every installment is between 1,000 and 3,000 words: long enough to get somewhere, but short enough to read Monday morning in your cubicle at work.

The post would go up on Monday, voting would be open until Wednesday, the writer would work on a draft until Friday, I would edit it, turn it around for final correx on Saturday, to repost it Sunday night.

Sound like a magazine or newspaper schedule?

It is. And that’s one of it’s strong points.

We wouldn’t be asking the readers to read fifteen or twenty pages of text. We’d be asking them to read short, and then vote. It could work out magically.

To my knowledge, this structure for writing on the web has never been tried before. There have been other variations, and each has had its own failings. Remember Steven King's much-publicized e-book The Plant? He kept it up for six chapters, before bowing out, saying that too many readers had jumped ship. The Wovel form, by contrast, gives the readers a stake in the book, providing them a reason to come back for more.

I’m incredibly excited by this idea. As with everything on the web, though, it takes a certain slantwise look to understand how it would work, and what the practical benefit would be.

For the author, the benefit would be a pure and simple readership build. The principle is that the more people read, the more people want to buy it. Interest equals monetization. It’s the same principle behind publishing for pittance in quarterlies.  

The author would come out of the Wovel term with a workable manuscript for possible reprint in the traditional book form. Some authors and agents say that publishers won’t want a manuscript that’s been online already. It seems to me, however, that the growing trend of print publishing blogs has well paved the way for a second print life for a Wovel. In fact, I would think that the print life would equal the online life, the two would build off each other. Heard of how well the Radiohead album In Rainbows is doing, despite being offered free online? What about the book Julie and Julia? It sold more than 150,000 in trade and cloth, and it was based off a blog.

For the publisher (Underland), the benefits would be to drive traffic to my site, to increase interest in my books, and to build my stable of authors. It’s a no-brainer for me, if the author and I can make it good, and if the readers keep coming back for more.

There’s a certain amount of experimentation that goes with this online territory. I don’t yet know what will happen with the Wovel, and there’s a possibility it will fall flat on its head. What do you think? Good idea? Bad idea? Scary idea? Interested in hearing more? I’m still working on my web site. I have a holding page up there now with an email capture. Sign up, and I’ll send you news as it comes. Underland Press is online at www.underlandpress.com. Or email me directly. I’m at victoria@underlandpress.com.

Next week is my last week as a guest blogger for ForeWord. I’m planning on announcing my first-year title list, plus announcing who my Wovel writer will be…

Posted by: Victoria Blake

posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 3:55:10 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Wednesday, March 19, 2008
A few months ago, I invited a group of my smartest web developer friends to sit at my big table, bought a case of Terminal Gravity, a pack of Oreos, and said “Go.”

They went.

Among the ideas for the web page: an RSS calendar that ticked through the worst things that happened on the day in question; an “eye” that hacked into the computer’s on-screen camera, re-routed the feed, and reflected the user back to himself; a room that the user could wander inside, picking up knives, opening doors, finding links, etc.

Impressive? Yes.
Overkill? Possibly.
Exciting? Absolutely.

My intent with Underland has always been to try to use the web not only to market and sell the books that Underland publishes, but to push the boundary of what is currently being done with text on the web. It occurred to me early on that print publishing is where music was in 1996: pre-Napster, ready for something big.

I don’t think that big thing is going to be the new digital readers. I’m in the camp that thinks paper and ink are pretty close to the best technology we need for books. But text has gone digital, and we haven’t yet figured out what to do with it. The issue might not be a readability issue. Finding and keeping online readers might require a new way, or at least a new style of writing.

Consider: A journalist writes an A1 story differently than a newspaper feature, differently than a long-form magazine feature, differently than a front-of-book news item. Each of those forms has its own requirements and limitations and opportunities. Indeed, professional journalists are extremely good at writing for all the various content platforms: newspapers, magazines, radio, TV. They have courses for this in their degree programs. They specialize.

Fiction writers? Fiction writers are lagging a bit behind. The majority of fictional prose I read online is originally written for print. Or it might have a second life in print. Or it wanted to be print, before it was put up on the web.

When I hear industry people talking about web publishing, I hear them talking about intellectual property rights and technology issues. I have never heard anybody talk about writing style and form issues. I recently had a writer send me a sample as a "audition" for an Underland Press web novel. The sentences were long and complicated, the paragraphs were long and complicated, and I couldn't find a story outside of the synopsis.

I don’t know if I’m right about this, but it seems that in order for prose to be successful online the sentences would have to be shorter, the story more obvious (ie less subtle), and the paragraphs would have to move more quickly. Chapters would have to be shorter, too. Maybe even short enough to read in the cubical at work, with the back turned to the hallway and the finger on the minimize button…

You know. Like blogs.

I’m going to keep thinking about this problem. I’m going to talk to the writers I know. I’m going to talk to the lawyers. I’m going to talk to my web guys. I might not be the one to crack the problem, but I’m in the generation of publishers who will.  

As before, and as always, I welcome your comments. Unlike print journalism, the blog gives us a way to talk back. I love that, though it might force me to develop a thicker skin.

Posted by: Victoria Blake

posted on Wednesday, March 19, 2008 9:43:56 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Thursday, March 06, 2008

    They say that starting a business takes twice as long as you think it will, and costs twice as much. When I heard this-on NPR, the week before I was going to leave my good, solid editorial job to start Underland Press-I thought, Nah. Not me. I have a plan.
    What was that plan? To start a publishing house with between five to seven titles in the first year. To be distributed by one of the industry heavies. To develop my web site beyond industry boundaries. To only publish what I love, and to love what I am sure I can sell. 
    I love stories that scare me. I like weird things-monsters and magic and characters with nothing to lose. More than anything, I like to be intrigued and entertained. I started Underland Press to bring the best of the world's weird, scary, odd, unsettling and strange stories to life and to light.
    So how's it coming? I left my editorial job in October. In the last five months, I've been to Frankfurt and back, found a lawyer and fired a lawyer, negotiated for five books, read eleven manuscripts, taught myself QuickBooks, opened two bank accounts, designed one cover and three different business cards, had in-depth discussions about the definition of "weird," been yelled at by one agent, and been reduced to tears exactly twice.
Also: I signed a distribution contract with PGW. I bought the rights to three of my five books. My web site is coming along, and I'm about ready to announce something big.
    I might be four months behind where I wanted, but my launch won't take twice as long.
    I might be spending more on my web site than I wanted, but the business won't cost twice as much.
    Plus, I am having a blast.

ForeWord has asked me to blog about my experience starting a genre press. If there's something you're interested in, please ask. Next week, I'm planning to write about the creative vision behind Underland, and what my definition of genre is. I wish I had a web site up for you to go to, but it's taking a little longer than I hoped… Maybe by the time I next post…

Posted by: Victoria Blake

posted on Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:54:23 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Warning — May Cause Nightmares.

Book industry numbers are cold-sweat terrifying for publishers and authors alike. According to Nielsen Bookscan, 3,000 books are published per day in the United States alone (as reported on www.deadlyprose.com). ForeWord can review at most a few thousand per year. Publishers report an average of 2,100 submissions per year, totaling 132 million submissions. Just under one percent are accepted for publication.

In the face of these staggering odds, is there any hope for authors and publishers?

The Majority of Books Sell Fewer than 99 Copies
Of the 1.2 million titles tracked by Bookscan in 2006, only 2.1% sold more than 5,000 books, 16.6% sold fewer than 1,000, and a terrifying 79.6% sold fewer than 99 copies. The 99 copies are no doubt the reason only one percent of authors’ submissions make it through the arduous publisher-review process.

This is all the stuff of wake-in-a-sweat nightmares: 63,000 publishers vie for readers with their wonderful author lists (according to Dan Poynter’s ParaPublishing.com).

The terror is no less for authors: only six conglomerate publishers publish fewer and fewer debut authors and less and less fiction. Then the real horror story commences as a book makes it into distribution. The bestseller dreams of authors and publishers are splashed with the cold water of real numbers.

Negative or Naïve?
Am I being negative or naïve? Perhaps both. The naïve part of the equation is my firm belief there are ways to break through these barriers to success. Kunati  was founded with this goal in mind, and has proven it can work.

Heather Shaw touched on one important element of the success formula in her insightful Blog on book covers. When competing with 1.2 million titles, first impressions (impact) and credibility are vital. These are the twin functions of a cover.

What Works for Selling Books?
Websites, book videos and novel trailers, author critique groups, social marketing, author Blog tours, old-fashioned but still-important book signings, and publicity are the proven methods for marketing. I hope to focus on these in future Publisher Insider Blogs in a more how-to format.

Innovation begins with a study of what works. Read every Blog in the ForeWord archive and every article in the magazine. Visit the sites of successful publishers—the innovative publishers who lead with new ideas such as novel trailers, Blog touring, online publicity. (hint, hint, Kunati). Read every page on sites from innovative publishers.

Getting Noticed is the Primary Goal
My message is simple. With these horrifying numbers, being noticed is almost the only thing that matters—for both authors and publishers. Many authors are creative, even brilliant, yet if they can’t market their “author brand” no publisher is interested.

The publisher faces an epic battle analogous to a Tolkien quest to get attention in the marketplace. The publisher must build the authors’ brands, edit the manuscripts for the market, arrange distribution, obtain reviews from magazines (which choose from millions), then sell to wholesalers, retailers and finally readers.

The Retailer
How does a retailer choose which titles to carry? The average retailer chooses to stock a few thousand copies per year, far less than 1% of the titles available—similar in numbers to the reviews published annually by ForeWord. That’s not a coincidence.

Publisher and author success relies on buzz, which is a combination of review exposure, social networking, book cover designs, author activities such as Blogs and signings (the two types of touring, virtual and tangible). The last part of the equation is wonderful content.

Innovative Authors Look Beyond Good Prose
With the knowledge that more than 80% of books published are going to fail, how can a publisher risk taking on new, unproven property? How can an author convince a publisher to take them on?

There are certain musts in an author presentation, and in our evaluation of the author:
• Is the query well-written? An author who doesn’t polish a query until it becomes the choicest morsel of prose ever written has no chance at all.
• Is the idea compelling? Yes, tell us the comparables (claims of being the next Da Vinci Code or Harry Potter are overused though!), but what’s the UNIQUE aspect—the high concept. No matter how small, there must be one.
• The sample chapters? Same story. If those three chapters aren’t pure masterpiece, the editor will tend to move on.
• Did they read the submission guidelines on the website? One mistake here disqualifies most authors. Take the time to study your prospective publisher.

Innovative Publishers Look Beyond Agents
Unlike many publishers, Kunati accepts un-agented submissions by email. How can we do this, given the awful odds against a new author’s success?

We certainly acquire agented manuscripts, but the creative-process required for an author to pitch a manuscript is clearest sign of ambition, drive and creativity. We believe in the un-agented submission. It allows the author to prove they can develop their author “brand.” Other things we look for:
• Is the author realistic about his/her prospects?
• Is the author able to work with the publisher at making the book as marketable as possible? Considering the numbers, this might be the most important of all.
• These days, we also look for authors who are savvy about online marketing, blogging, MySpace and social marketing, and who are not shy about public appearances. Some writers are notoriously shy, preferring to hide behind their keyboard.

Successfully Marketing Books Require a Publisher-Author Partnership.
The truth is, only bestselling authors receive major publishing support in marketing. A publisher’s first duty is to market to the trade. That’s a big job. Stores stock thousands out of the millions of titles. Just getting the books into distribution is monumental. Trade ads, reviews, advance reading copies, publicity, great book covers, strong web presence, book trailers—these all help. Even the big conglomerate publishers typically stop there. There’s not much in the way of marketing dollars left for end-reader marketing for 90% of authors. Hand-selling from retailers and buzz becomes the key to success.

Hand-selling and Buzz
Book selling is still very much a word-of-mouth business. Readers don’t always respond to what we think they will. Social marketing, in all its aspects, it the true secret of any book’s success. Books can become bestsellers when just one influential person finds it and starts buzzing (Oprah will do.)  Social marketing involves building a broad network of friends.

Ultimately, the true secret to publishing success is a strong partnership between authors and publishers, working together to create buzz. This is a big topic, and the subject of next week’s Blog.

Posted by: Derek Armstrong

posted on Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:01:32 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [10]
 Wednesday, February 06, 2008

This week, a “close friend” of O.J. Simpson offered Kunati—a publisher focused on “controversial and provocative books”—a tell-all book project: “O.J. told me that I was the only man he was comfortable enough to talk openly with. Web of Controversy will remove the public facade of O.J. Simpson.” Nice friend. More O.J. controversy. Will it sell? Almost certainly.

Condemning Controversy?

Why are readers receptive to controversy? Judging from a report I received this week—the Library Open Access report “Tracking Challenges in Libraries: 2007 Results”—the opposite is true. Patrons are vocal in condemning anything notorious or contentious. It seems that some library patrons would bring back book-burning. So, why do Kunati’s provocative books sell so well? Why do controversial books such as The Da Vinci Code become bestsellers? How is it that publishers can turn controversy into bestsellers and provocation into opportunity when some readers seem vocally in favor of censorship?

Violence, Racism and Promoting Witchcraft

The easy answer seems to be the power of the silent majority—enlightened readers—voting for freedom and fun with their wallets. Librarians, publishers and booksellers continue to offer these books despite a vocal minority. Among the condemned titles from library patrons in the “Challenges” report were: Oliver Twist (for violence), Brer Rabbit and Tar Baby Girl (for racism), and—of course—Philip Pullman’s Golden Compass for religious viewpoints. I recall Harry Potter being on a previous list for “promoting witchcraft.” The list of 36 “patron condemned” books in the 2007 list included my favorite classics, making me wonder if this is indeed a 2007 report. Fortunately, the librarians—stewards of free thought—denied all requests to “burn” or remove books.

What’s so Controversial?

A quick analysis of this most entertaining report from librarians shows the most common reasons for requests to “pull” books off library shelves, in order of prominence, were: homosexuality, religious viewpoint, sexually explicit language, violence, offensive language. Thank goodness for librarians, otherwise all of my own novels would be burned:

  • The Game: let’s see, explicit violence, offensive language—it is a thriller, after all

  • The Last Troubadour: ah, religious viewpoint for its portrayal of the Cathars as heroes and the Inquisition as evil?

  • MADicine: oh, probably everything on the no-no list.

I suppose I’d be in good company with nearly all of Kunati’s popular books—including a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and a NY Times bestseller. Not to mention the rest of the “challenges” list: Exit to Eden, The Monkey King, Perks of Being a Wallflower, Rainbow Boys, Fly on the Wall, and the entire religion-based bestselling Left Behind series.

Steve Jobs says, “No One Reads Anymore.”

It seems that Apple’s Steve Jobs believes “people don’t read anymore.” The computer guru declared in his keynote at MacWorld 2007 that Amazon’s new e-ink reader was “dead on arrival” with a sweeping, and inaccurate, statistic: “It doesn’t matter how good or bad the product is, the fact is that people don’t read anymore. Forty percent of the people in the U.S. read one book or less last year.” Good to know, Steve. I guess Job’s forty percent only read controversial books?

According to a landmark study of 10,800 Americans by Persona Corp in 2007: 30.6% “Can’t live without books”; 23.4% “LOVE books”; 20.9% “Read regularly”—totaling 74.9% of all Americans. I guess it depends on whether you make phone gadgets or publish books which survey you trust, although a quick look at actual book sales indicates Persona’s study is closer to the right number.

Book Sales Over 36 Billion Net in 2007

Net revenues on book sales, according to The Book Standard, were up another billion dollars to $35.69 billion net sales in 2006 and another 1% up in 2007. After removing the 162 million in sales, which are exports, this translates into approximately billions of books sold in a nation of three hundred million. Even a rough averaging works out as every man woman and child in America reading at least 12 books each. Clearly, Steve Jobs has some research to do. And Amazon’s out to prove Steve wrong, putting all their sizable marketing muscle behind the Kindle, a device that, by all accounts, might become the iPod of e-books.

Librarians and Publishers Do It For Love

Contrary to the doom and gloom scenarios often painted in the trade news, books are not only alive and well and flourishing (sales continue to go up, and contrary to Steve Jobs, we’re reading books) but the trade remains an important champion of free thought and free will. Is there anything more important to a free nation of free people? I don’t think so.

So next time you visit your public library, don’t forget to shake your librarian’s hand and say “thank you.” Independent booksellers and small press publishers—who publish and sell books for love, not profit—equally deserve the support of free-thinkers everywhere. I’ll go one step further, at risk of offending my beloved indy booksellers—bravo to Amazon, for ignoring the e-book’s checkered history and coming out with the Kindle. We may be a fragmented industry, but we come together for freedom—and we do it for love.

Posted by: Derek Armstrong

posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 2:08:56 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [11]
 Wednesday, January 23, 2008
As book publishing, especially trade book publishing, has become absorbed into larger media companies, and as the pressures of digital technology continue to mount, publishers find themselves looking to other media to understand vulnerability and to gain insights.

In creating their digital warehouse last year, HarperCollins looked to “sister” companies like newspapers and magazines for guidance in the process. But one of the fixations of the publishing industry over the last decade, especially publishing associations, has been the record industry. Year after year at the AAP’s Annual Meetings, Napster and its ilk provided the fascination of a train wreck, until that offending company was wrestled to the ground by lawyers. The health of copyright was/is, purportedly in grave danger, if, god forbid, a P2P file sharing system that has bedeviled the record industry were to raise its head in book publishing. And the flames were fanned by the crowing of the RIAA that the reason for the declining success of their companies is that CD sales have been undercut for years by the “illegal” availability of music for free.

Oh, really? Then how do we explain this phenomenon, reported on January 10 in the NY Times?
In a twist for the music industry’s digital revolution, “In Rainbows,” the new Radiohead album that attracted wide attention when it was made available three months ago as a digital download for whatever price fans chose to pay, ranked as the top-selling album in the country this week after the CD version hit record shops and other retailers.
Several things come to mind. All large media companies are afflicted by lawyers… who individually may be great people. I remember being in a meeting where the lawyers were crafting language for book contracts that would give them not only electronic rights to an authors work, but rights to “whatever medium may be created in the future.” Nice, guys. Fortunately, we don’t seem as afflicted as the record industry, with the suits now crying in their beer after living for decades off the fat of rock and roll.

I would suggest that the book industry cast its eyes inwards. People love to be entertained. There is an infinite market for good works of all kinds. Understand your customers. Improve your processes. Do a better job of finding writers and nurturing them. Do your homework and go to bed at a reasonable hour. We’ll all be ok.

Posted by: Jim Lichtenberg

posted on Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:24:19 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Wednesday, January 16, 2008
The transformation of publishing from finding and nurturing authors for the long term, to acquiring the most ready-to-go, commercially-promising packages that the budget allows, happened several decades ago.

So we’re used to it, right? We know what is, and what to expect from, a “NY Times Bestseller” (which is not the same as the NY Times bestseller lists).

A rock critic in my ill-spent youth (East Village Other to NY Times), I am now grooving on the spate of new books about rock icons like Dylan, Clapton, and even Patty Boyd, a beautiful young Brit, born of a dysfunctional family, who grew up to be a model and wife of George Harrison and then Eric Clapton. Wonderful Tonight by Ms. Boyd, is actually a whole lot better than Clapton’s Eric, which is an interminable set of acknowledgments of all the cool people he knew. (hence my title.) However, at a crucial point in Patty’s account of her break-up with George she describes the tension as being the same as “a chop stick about to come apart. Something had to give,” she writes.

Help! Did an editor ever read this? Not that Patty should be treated like Raymond Carver, but shouldn’t someone have asked for a better metaphor?

Of course, it is completely unfair to tar all editors with this brush. And I recommend, if you can, being a fly on the wall at an editorial meeting. It’s a fascinating dynamic to watch.

But, it does beg the question: what is a publisher? A few years ago, Peter Jovanovich, scion of Jovanich Publishers, told me that a publishing house is “a bank with an editorial department attached.” After all publishers haven’t printed, manufactured, distributed or sold books for nigh on to a long time. And if they are no longer really editing them, then what are they? Just a bank?

Enter the Internet, which is changing the equation quite fundamentally. As other publishing blogs have been feverishly discussing, and as I will attempt to demonstrate at the O’Reilly Tools of Change conference next month in NYC, bringing content to customers is essentially a “service” in which an increasingly customized and customizable product (often self-published by the author) is embedded.

Two examples of the dawn of this service function are author sites, for example:
http://www.harpercollins.com/author/index.aspx?authorID=17367 and http://www.oreilly.com/authors/

But then Tim O’Reilly foresaw this direction in a 1995 paper.  

Which just goes to show that things that appear to be suddenly “right on the brink of change,” were probably there for a while. They were just hard to see.

Posted by: Jim Lichtenberg

posted on Wednesday, January 16, 2008 9:57:54 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Wednesday, January 02, 2008
When I was a kid in high school in the mid-1960s, one of my favorite books was A Sense of Where You Are, John McPhee’s 1965 account of the college basketball career of Princeton all-American and later New York Knick and US Senator, Bill Bradley. If distant memory serves, McPhee got his evocative title from Bradley himself, who coined it in demonstrating that success in basketball derived from an informed appreciation of one’s place on the court—from “a sense of where you are.” While no advice could have helped me in my frustrated pursuits on the basketball court, the phrase “a sense of where you are” resonates so clearly in my experience as an editor that it has never left me, even as I recognize it in the work of today’s great editors. 

 

In my end of our business, scholarly publishing, having “a sense of where you are” in perceiving where your field is going is what excites an editor’s imagination. That is, your success as an editor is predicated on having a clear sense of where your field is moving —be it religion, economics, or physics—and working backwards from that horizon to imagine what the next great books will be. “A sense of where you are” in the milieu of ideas inspires you, the editor, to ask, “what will the next truly great philosophy list look like, and what do I have to do to publish such a list. Which authors will I have to attract? What kinds of books will I have to develop, and in what combination?  What are readers—scholars and students here and abroad—interested in? What does the field need and how will such a list shape its frontier and its connections to other fields?”   

 

Scholarly publishers help to spur the course of intellectual progress by publishing various kinds of books—the tools of our trade:  Research monographs, the building blocks of knowledge in most fields; academic trade books, statements that provoke big questions about controversial issues within and across fields; treatises, systematic explorations of big subjects by major figures that galvanize entire intellectual discourses; and reference books, works that consolidate and memorialize knowledge in their fields.

 

While each of these genres is essential to a great scholarly list, of the four, the treatise provides editors their most delicious publishing opportunity because editors can often exercise an active hand in conceptualizing this kind of book and because it so generously rewards the editor’s sense of his or her field. Signing the big treatise is sometimes a function of blessed serendipity—being in the right place at the right time with the right author—but at a deeper level, such books can result from the planful imaginings of editors.  That is, astute and informed editors draw on a sense of what kinds of major, synthesizing works their fields need and actively look for such titles. 

 

Treatises can, and do, make singularly impressive contributions to learning. Think of the effect of E. H. Gombrich’s canonical Art and Ideas on the field of art, or Huston Smith’s The World’s Religions on comparative religion, or Terry Eagleton’s Literary Theory on literary studies, or Hans Morgenthau’s Politics Among Nations on international relations. Provocative and path-breaking texts of this kind have for generations helped draw and redraw the map of scholarly knowledge—and can mark the careers of their editors.     

 

An excellent example of this kind of publishing can be found in the work of my colleague Brigitta van Rheinberg, Editor-in-Chief and History Editor of Princeton University Press. A few years back, Brigitta began thinking about the evolving trend toward global history, and started to discern the opportunity to engage this trend with a new set of books on master themes in global history. Beginning by signing a broadly contextualized historical book on racism, Brigitta followed through by signing global histories of empire and of famine, and is now working with prospective authors on similarly significant themes.

 

Brigitta works with a sense of where the field of history is going, a conception of how to embrace the themes that unify comparative and historical research, an understanding for how certain books would enhance the intellectual infrastructure of the field, an appreciation of the broad cross-national readership engage the themes addressed in these books, and a network of outstanding historian authors whose command of the relevant subjects enables them to tell the big story.

 

While it would be easy to consider the publication of these books simply as a string of thematic histories, that misses the point. Developing the idea for these books rewarded Brigitta’s sophisticated knowledge of the direction of her field, her understanding of the market, and her appetite for thinking big. For Brigitta, as for all good editors, “a sense of where you are” is the necessary ingredient in achieving major signings such as these. 

 

Bill Bradley would understand.  Ever the student of his game, Bradley offers an instuctive model to us for ours.  I recall stories of Bradley practicing his jump shot by methodically moving from under the basket outward, breaking down his hook shot into distinct parts, and deliberately pounding the last dribble of the ball before releasing his jumper to gain greater control over his shot. This mania for method may seem silly in a game as seemingly fluid and improvisational as basketball, but that’s not the point.  By self-consciously becoming a student of the game, Bill Bradley found ways to expand and refine his repertoire and improve his already awesome athletic gifts.

 

The lesson for scholarly editors is clear. To animate one’s publishing, it is vital to develop a sense of where you are in the flow of your field. That sense will produce a clearer understanding of the trajectory of your list, and will reveal new and exciting publishing possibilities.   

Posted by: Peter Dougherty

posted on Wednesday, January 02, 2008 10:34:00 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [2]
 Wednesday, December 19, 2007
About two years ago, the tribal elders at Princeton University Press gathered and concluded that the Press could stand a face-lift--that is, that our graphic identity needed some sprucing up.  I was pleased to hear this news because, having worked as an editor at the Press for many years, I felt the same, as did many of my colleagues. As the recently appointed Director, suddenly I was in a position to do something about this.  As I thought about the challenge ahead, I guessed this was how sports teams got new uniforms (although they seemed to gain cartoonish mascots in the process—not exactly something we were in the market for).  So we consulted with our advisors and commissioned a new logo and graphic identity.  An example of the resulting logo appears in action on our new homepage: http://press.princeton.edu/

The lessons from this exercise, though not yielding a mascot, certainly went well beyond the artwork and typefaces that form the finished expression of our new graphic identity.

 

First, the designers forced us to think hard about who we were as a publisher and as an organization.  Ivan Chermayeff and Tom Geismar, whose firm, Chermayeff & Geismar Studio we hired to commission our new look, were tough interrogators—identity detectives, first; identity analysts throughout; and identity architects, later

 

Following several meetings with Ivan and Tom—we visited them at their offices in New York and they hopped New Jersey Transit to pay a house call on us in Princeton—they succeeded in cajoling from us a concrete sense of who we thought we were: a scholarly press with a public face, a traditional Ivy League press with an eye towards the future, a print publisher with an electronic presence, an American company active globally, and a partner of Princeton University, a distinguished institution with a celebrated identity all its own.  Each of these elements, as well as a more intangible sense of our personality, had to be engineered into our graphic identity.  Its eventual combination of classical and modern type, imaginative use of the letter “P,” and deployment of universally recognized Princeton colors, black and orange, united these elements.  

 

Second, we learned that there is more to a logo than window dressing.  Properly used, it becomes a leadership tool.  Yes, leadership.  Leadership entails many characteristics, among them intelligence, toughness, courage, diplomacy, equanimity, and adaptability.  Not least, however, it means vision; and vision—an idea in service of a goal—can be represented visually.  The idea at PUP is that we publish the major scholarly books throughout the arts and sciences and enlist the informed imagination of our colleagues at every stage to support this greater goal.  Chermayeff and Geismar attempted to capture this vision in the boldness and clarity of the graphics they incorporated in our logotype.    

 

To speak of the devil, the ultimate source of information and inspiration on logos as leadership tools is Tony Spaeth, whose firm, Identityworks, is a treasure trove of useful knowledge on logos of all kinds, how they are supposed to work and why, how they really do work, and how to develop one: http://www.identityworks.com/

 

Third, the development of a new graphic identity is messy--an exercise in group grope.  That is, it required the participation of the entire press, from inception through deployment.  We purposely engaged the participation of all departments of the Press as well as the advice of one of our trustees in choosing the basic imagery developed for us by Chermayeff and Geismar.  Although this exercise in organizational democracy hardly guarantees artistic inspiration, it certainly helped sharpen our judgment in this case.  It also provided an initial groundswell of support for a new feature of the firm’s culture that everyone at the Press would have to live with for a long time. 

 

Integrating the new logo and identity into the graphic materials of the Press was no picnic.  It took about a year, it tested the patience and imagination of everyone from our marketers through our book designers, our IT specialists, and web architects (to say nothing of our financial managers).  Every conceivable graphic element, from business cards through catalogs, book spines, web pages, exhibit stands, email signatures, even checks had to be revised.  Old stock had to be used up and discarded, new stock, ordered.  But in the end, a new visual iconography—modern and classical, black and orange, print and pixel--was born.  And although it fails to include a mascot, a baseball hat came with the program.  The elements of our graphic identity, baseball hat included, appear in the attached guidebook: http://www.identityworks.com/tools/PrUnivPress.pdf

 

How effective is PUP’s new graphic identity?  That depends on how faithful we are in adhering to its standards, but only time will tell.  For what it’s worth, more than a few of Chermayeff and Geismar’s logotypes have held up for decades and have become iconic symbols of the world’s most prominent and successful organizations.  Many of these logos, from The Museum of Modern Art through PBS and beyond, can be seen on their website: http://www.cgstudionyc.com/  

 

But you won't find any mascots.   

Posted by: Peter Dougherty

posted on Wednesday, December 19, 2007 3:48:51 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Tuesday, December 11, 2007

A little over two-and-a-half years ago, the scholarly publisher for whom I work, Princeton University Press, achieved the unlikely goal of placing one of our titles at the top of the New York Times bestseller list: Harry Frankfurt’s On Bullshit. Weighing in at 80 pages in a small 4x6 format, Frankfurt’s book became an instant classic, and its author, an elderly and distinguished philosopher and teacher, something of a pop culture icon.

But for those of us at PUP, some of the most interesting action on this title has since occurred far from the roar of the American bestseller lists, and the media, including The Daily Show, and 60 Minutes, that popularized this book: that is, on the translation front. Now appearing in some twenty-five translated editions, On Bullshit has quietly achieved the status of an international publishing phenomenon.

Appearing in languages as diverse as Finnish, Hebrew, Portuguese, Catalan, Japanese, German, Czech, Korean, Indonesian, Serbian, and Italian, On Bullshit now travels under a remarkable variety of titles and covers. The Italian edition sports my favorite Euro-title, the expressive, Stronzate; the Finnish edition, Paskapuheesta; the French, De l’art de dire des conneries; the Portuguese, Da Treta; and the Brazilian Portuguese, Sobre Falar Merda.

And yet, according to my colleague Ben Tate, PUP’s Director of Subsidiary Rights and Translations Editor, many of the foreign editions have retained the English term, “bullshit,” either as their title or in their title of their respective editions. Some of these include the German, Danish, Swedish, and Dutch.

Adds Tate, “among the those editions which conveyed the book’s title in the local language, only the Italian comes closest to a straightforward translation, as “stronzate” means bullshit in the literal sense of cow excrement, but also in the sense which Frankfurt is considering. The rest of those publishers who sought to localize the title either had to approximate the expression using several words or had to settle for something close but inexact, such as the Brazilian Portuguese edition, Sobre falar Merda (On talking Shit) or the French edition, De l’art de dire des conneries (On the Art of Saying Crap) . Indeed, that is the reason so many of the publishers left the word untranslated. It’s a unique word with a specific history, and its meaning as addressed by Frankfurt is underpinned by the crassness and vulgarity of its literal meaning. It’s a special word.”

And while many of the international editions have emulated PUP’s sober, monochromatic cover, some of our foreign co-publishers bravely chose to go the graphic route, in the process rendering some pretty imaginative cover art. The Dutch edition is a shocking pink, the Portuguese edition sports stripes. Truly amazing is the Japanese edition which features anatomical images.

What are the lessons for publishers and authors in this international story? First, size—in this case, brevity—matters. Since time immemorial, book editors have encouraged authors to keep their books brief, partly—though not entirely—because foreign publishers find it easier (cheaper and faster) to translate shorter books. This is an object lesson in that sage bit of editorial advice.

Second, ideas matter. Say what you will about the nature of the subject, bullshit is an idea and Harry Frankfurt treats it as such—that is, philosophically. Ideas, if they are engaging, travel to the far corners of the earth, and so do good books about ideas.

Third, on a more anthropological note, the global popularity of Harry Frankfurt’s book suggests, and to put it more emphatically, confirms, that “bullshit” as a cultural feature knows no boundaries. We Americans have no monopoly on it. It is everywhere.

Last, but not least, the fact that so many of our foreign co-publishers used the English-language title, On Bullshit, attests to the enormous power of global English as an all-pervasive cultural force and, I suspect, of the enduring power of American popular culture.

So much for my brief publishing disquisition on the international aspects of this remarkable little book. I’d better stop now, lest I find myself engaging in more stronzate than I’d like to be accused of.

Posted by: Peter Dougherty

posted on Tuesday, December 11, 2007 9:35:55 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [0]
 Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Even if you are a dedicated liberal Democrat with a jones for anything Kennedy, do you really think Ted’s book is going to be interesting? Do you really think he’s going to write about the alleged philandering, partying, Chappaquiddick, dysfunctional relatives, misogynistic nephews, and homicidal cousins? If he does, I’ll shell out for a copy. More likely, he’ll tell us about his life in government and gloss over the rest. I’m sorry, but reading about that sounds like an intellectual form of “water boarding” (definition: A weird and legally questionable torture technique).

As publishing professionals, let’s follow the money. No, let’s fantasize about the money. An 8 @#%* million dollar advance! How many independent publishers can compete with that? It’s a rhetorical question and I assume we all know the answer. Grand Central, formerly part of Time Warner AOL, now part of Hachette, a French based, otherwise referred to as “Freedom,” 10-figure communications conglomerate, won the competition to publish the book. The French have always had a thing for the Kennedys, Jerry Lewis, and the willingness of Americans to bleed out on French soil.

In the days when book publishing assets were actually owned and controlled by the people whose names were on the mastheads, we were all independents. Some were big and some small, but the buck always stopped at the desks of the people who owned the firm and only cared about publishing books.  There’s no way that kind of money would or could have been concentrated on a single acquisition. Banks would not have extended that kind of credit line to even the largest houses, and there were not any multinational conglomerates in command yet to subsidize outsized advances and write-off the subsequent losses.

In less than a generation, a huge dichotomy has developed between the mega houses and everyone else. Except the term “mega” is misleading, because within the body of the conglomerate, the trade book publishing assets may amount to little more than the tip of one small toe nail. The book publishing companies get pulled around and traded like indentured servants. Firms like Grand Central have nothing to say about who owns them or from which nation their flag is planted. Perhaps there’s no reason to care, but most American book publishing assets aren’t domestically owned and haven’t been for years. This isn’t to suggest that the American based editors and other professionals are not entirely dedicated to their craft, but it does mean they ultimately have to answer to powers that would otherwise have nothing to do with the book business or this country. For them, it’s business. So at the end of the day, retiring Presidents and politicians can look forward to trading their connections and influence for multi-million dollar book advances; on the surface, all they have to do is deliver an “acceptable” manuscript. Behind the scenes? Well, what would you do under the radar for 7 to 8 figures?

Let’s go to the proverbial Main Streets, where privately owned publishing companies still exist and often thrive. This is where the real passion for books will be found. The only inhibitors will be poor choices or practices by the proprietors. This is probably not the soil within which the Kennedys and other celebrities will plant their so-called books. But it is where the word “independence” achieves its highest meaning and purpose. If there’s ever a day when conglomerate publishing is entirely controlled by “other” agendas, independent publishing will be here to save everyone.

Posted by: Jeff Herman

posted on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 10:27:00 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [1]
 Wednesday, November 21, 2007

I can’t claim to be a F-O-J (friend of Judith’s). I have met her professionally on a few occasions, I know people who know her, and I know people who talk about her; there’s only a few degrees of separation between Judith and myself. And now I want to write about her, because she’s in the news again and is the most interesting book editor in memory to cross an otherwise boring stage.

About 18 years ago I had a private lunch with Judith Regan. I remember it and doubt she does. I was a young insecure literary agent and she was a youngish fledgling book editor at Simon & Schuster. I didn’t guess that within a few short years she would become the most dynamic and innovative editors in the business. In fact, it seemed that most new editors moved in and out of the business with silent velocity. I recall she was above average looking and had a great sense of style in the way she was dressed and groomed—a genuine head-turner in a town that boasts a lot of them, and in a business that’s known to clone blandness.  I was especially impressed by her sun glasses, or at least that’s what stays with me. I can’t say that I detected a sense of humor per se, but there was a mix of irony and sarcasm in her, and I suspected that if and when she laughed, it was noticeable and for good cause.

She was a high-strung Type-A personality, which is normal for a mid-towner in the middle of the week at mid-day. She was new to her job and had not yet made any big acquisitions. She explained she was recruited because of her Hollywood/LA LA Land connections, which made her a different species than her Ivy League in-bred colleagues. She expressed her dismay that “they” assumed she could simply open her Rollodex and recruit the rich and famous, and infamous, to write books real people would buy. Ms. Regan felt pressured to prove herself, and was willing to display her anxiety about it.

It was a warm humid New York kind of day and I failed to dress appropriately for the venue she selected, which was the NY Women’s Republican Club. Go figure. Because of me, we were not allowed to eat in the main dining area and were exiled to a side-room. I apologized for being “dressed down”, and she expressed her honest view that I should have known better. She was right. That and a cluster of similar experiences finally disciplined me to dress well. It became a habit to wear nice slacks and a collared shirt on days no meetings were scheduled, and a suit if I had appointments. Now I live and work in the countryside, and dress accordingly.

Back to Regan. With the speed of a comet, she became the “It Girl” at Simon & Schuster, and then seemed to be given a piece of the lease at Harper & Collins, where it was made clear that iconic Rupert Murdock personally liked her a lot. The rest is history. She made a lot of money for everyone, whereas most editors don’t. She hired her own publicist and became a celebrity, whereas many editors may not even recognize themselves in a mirror. She published books of so-called high cultural value and books that some people considered repulsive. Most of them made money, whereas most books that get published don’t.

Ms. Regan wasn’t a criminal and was a proven rain-maker beyond compare. So what was the problem? The answer to that loaded question is stuffed with years of bruised egos, resentments, dramatic interactions, steamy sexuality, and not always unreasonable concerns. I don’t have the inside story, but the trajectory of her Ms. Regan’ nine-figure law suit will surely uncork a rash of lushy gossip-geyse