Writers Discuss the Future of Publishing – Round 6

Publishing is in the throes of a revolution, and all the old rules are being put to the test. As CEOs, senior editors, agents and booksellers all scramble to guess at how they’ll participate in the future market, Lauri Shaw asks a panel of writers where they see this business going – and how they each expect to contribute to the wave of change that is, for the time being, the only certainty in sight.

LS: Please describe the publishing industry you would LIKE to see evolve in the next few years, and what it would look like.

Paul Fenton: From a writer’s point-of-view, I’d like to see more open communication between publishers, agents, and the writers that supply their product. In every other industry I can think of, a retailer will tell its suppliers what it wants to sell. If the publishers aren’t communicating their wants to agents, then they should. And agents should openly communicate what kind of books they know are in demand. Writers will write what they enjoy writing, but it’s easy to learn to like new things if the motivation is there.

If POD can be set up as a viable stock top-up system in the big houses, I’d like to see more variety in the stores. There’d be no need to stock a hundred copies of the new John Grisham if additional copies could be ordered within a week.

Max Dunbar: I’d like to see publishers turning away from bland and increasingly unprofitable “safe” fiction and taking more risks. There should be an end to publishers and agents saying ‘This is really good and talented but we don’t think it will sell/appeal to the right demographic.’ The truth is that no one knows what will sell. We’ve seen completely esoteric and off-the-wall titles like Life of Pi, Longitude, and The Wasp Factory become critical and commercial successes.

But publishing takes a lot of criticism that should be aimed at public sector agencies. Arts Council England won’t fund writers unless they already have ‘professional buy-in’; i.e. already have an agent or book deal. Meanwhile they waste public money on X Factor-style poetry slams that no one’s interested in.

There should be a grants system that unpublished writers can apply for. Writers would submit 10,000 words of a projected novel plus synopsis and a panel of judges (composed of published novelists, poets, editors – trust me, lots of them would do this, they need the money!) would decide whether to award a grant, based on the quality of the work and the seriousness of the proposal. I believe a similar system operates in Canada. 

Lexi Revellian: I would like to see an industry where, if you write a good book, you will get published.

Carl Thomas: Something that is reader and writer driven, with no brick walls stopping any story finding its readership, no matter how large or small for any given book may be. Something fairly automated too so that writers don’t have to spend huge amounts of time plugging for sales.

Erik Hare: The publishing industry has to see us as the means of production, and they have to invest in us. That means, to me, a system of identifying and developing talent akin to the minor leagues. This will increase both the relevance and the excitement around books. Ideally, this will come with the development of online systems that allow self-publishing with a simple laser printer that break through the constraints of existing presses, etc.

Jason Pettus: I’m pragmatic enough to acknowledge that audience members will always want “experts” in the arts. They will always seek official “approval” of certain projects from one trusted group or another. This is why so many people keep turning to the New York Times, to use one excellent example, whenever they want to know the latest in what they consider “the news,” despite there now being 50 gajillion blogs all reporting their version of “the news” as well.

I would like to see the publishing industry, then, become more of a gentle guide and partner for their audiences – not a stern voice saying, “This is what to read, and everything else is crap,” but more like, “There’s a ton of interesting stuff out there, and here’s some of it. Oh, and in this case, better written and edited and proofed and designed than most others too.”

Audiences are getting smarter and smarter every day, especially now that so many of them create artistic projects as hobbies on their own. They no longer need an artistic gatekeeper to patronizingly hold their hand, nor do they need a huge corporate bureaucracy churning out middlebrow crap and then relying on massive advertising budgets to cram it down their throat. I would like to see the publishing industry by and large scrub itself entirely of both these attitudes.

Elizabeth Jasper: As part of a growing computer-literate population, writers are already streamlining the production of a book by means of self-editing and, through this, taking on basic tasks previously the preserve of a publisher’s editorial department.

Fast and easy electronic communication facilitates easier research by writers, and is another contributor to a more streamlined production process. A more equal partnership between publishers and writers would be a fairer reflection of the efforts taken by the writer to produce a publishable work.

Although writers should not and never could be expected to churn out books like automatons at a rate of, say, one a year, or more, a speeding up of the submission, editorial and production processes after a book is completed would help both writers and publishers to manage their workloads.

Simon Forward: I’d like to see a publishing industry that is more open to new writers – fresh creative talent. Instead of stuck in their current rut, giving established authors a free pass. Established authors do have their name and reputation going for them, but that’s also what allows some of them to let their creativity slip. If they had to actually compete with some of the new voices out there who are waiting to be heard, well, we’d have a lot more fresh and original material on our bookstore shelves – and on our shelves at home. Rather than shut anyone out, that sort of environment would oblige everyone, established or otherwise, to raise their game. Any creative outlet needs fresh ideas, fresh voices in order to avoid stagnation. A playing field that, if not exactly levelled, has been evened out a little.

So I’d like to see a publishing industry that commits to a greater proportion of new writers each year, something that would also – I would hope – incline agents to be a little more visionary and open-minded when it comes to their consideration of new talents.

Debbie Bennett: A hard one! Maybe something closer to how it used to be (impossible, I know), where staff weren’t so overworked that they had a chance to read slushpiles with an open mind. I’ve been a slushpile reader for an independent publisher and it is hard to find the needles in the haystack – but it is possible. I’d like to see an industry where the editor’s opinions matter again, and it’s more about the book and less about budgets and balancing the figures. I’m not sure I’d like a free-for-all with self-publishing, as I do feel that quality will suffer hugely, although I suspect it’s inevitable.

LS: What are you doing to support the industry that you would like to see evolve?

Max: Very little! I’m constantly headhunting for new writers and poets for Succour magazine but that’s about it.

Erik: I am working on a few ideas that would put the press in the hands of writers directly.  I think a little bit of software writing could get my idea for YouPrint off the ground, where users make their own small "books" they purchase directly from writers.

Jason: Personally, I’m doing it by being 40 and opening my own business, instead of accepting a lucrative job as an editor at a major press – which is extremely tempting every time the monthly bills come rolling in again.

It’s a life filled with more struggle, but one I feel is worth it, precisely so that I can be one of the people who is setting the tone in the arts right now. The one pioneering new concepts and projects, instead of perpetually playing catch-up like the major presses all do.

Professionally, I’m supporting the industry I want to see by practicing what I preach. By featuring and talking up self-published work by other artists at the CCLaP website as much as possible. By writing and publishing 150 analytical book essays a year there. By never taking my audience for granted. By thinking of myself as a guide to the big wide world of the underground arts, instead of a humorless professor. I try to always put artists’ concerns above the center’s, make a concentrated effort not to screw any of them over (either financially or editorially), and in general to act as much as possible as a simple bridge between them and their audiences – rather than a massively obese guard who you must wrestle in order to get around.

Lexi: POD-ing my first two entertaining but un-publishable novels with Youwriteon.

Simon: For starters, I’m lending my full support to a number of other books and authors on authonomy. Establishing something of a network of friends too as a result. Using my blog to draw other people’s attentions to the site and the books, so that more people know about some of the books they’re missing out on. It’s something I’d intend to carry on doing – very much – promoting those books and those authors in the event I did secure a key publishing contract, using that publicity and raised profile to keep things changing for the better. Oh, and I’m doing this interview to help raise awareness of some of the issues.

Elizabeth: As an unpublished writer (so far) there is little I can do on a personal level to influence the evolution of the publishing industry except by using opportunities such as this questionnaire. And discussion of the issues on writing sites, to facilitate dialogue between publishers and their raw material, writers and their buyers, and the readers.

Debbie:  I’m buying books I love. From chain store bookshops if possible, or directly from Amazon or Lulu if not. Supporting the small presses.

Paul: I buy books from my local independent store where possible, who have 100% control over the books they sell; and I buy the books that I like from the high street stores, books that sit slightly outside the mainstream – if these books are bought regularly, then I can only hope that the stores might afford them more slots in the future.

Stay tuned for the next and final round of this series, when the panel compares the publishing landscape to that of the music business.

Continue reading:

« Previous: Next: »
Bookmark and Share

Leave a Reply