Bruce Sterling's pessimism on publishing

[dadioflex]

Edit.

[iterati]

The only trouble if publishing business is deteriorating is the probability of people losing their jobs. Otherwise, in terms of content producing it’s insignificant. Actually, the age of information is becoming the age of noise largely, therefore less but of better quality content is perhaps desired. That applies to bookshops. If some large ones go out of business then other ones, smaller but more flexible and agile will appear. Also, I think that with the expansion of internet we’ve reached a point that publishers, as the middlemen they are, are becoming less needed.

[Moejoe]

Great article, thanks for the link.

[bill_mchale]

I am not sure it is snake oil, though I do have some reservations about his comment that the Novel is not part of the public discourse. My first thought is that he is saying this in the wake of the Harry Potter and the Twilight series... Books that have elicited quite a bit of public discussion.

My second thought on it is, that it reflects the amazing pretentiousness that authors and indeed other artists have; that their work needs to have a major impact on the public. It always amazes me that such authors can ever write a good novel. The best novels, IMHO, are out to tell a good story first and foremost. If the novel also is socially relevant, then that is great, but authors who are more worried about social relevance are more likely to not write good novels (IMHO).

--
Bill

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

I am not sure it is snake oil, though I do have some reservations about his comment that the Novel is not part of the public discourse. My first thought is that he is saying this in the wake of the Harry Potter and the Twilight series... Books that have elicited quite a bit of public discussion.

My second thought on it is, that it reflects the amazing pretentiousness that authors and indeed other artists have; that their work needs to have a major impact on the public. It always amazes me that such authors can ever write a good novel. The best novels, IMHO, are out to tell a good story first and foremost. If the novel also is socially relevant, then that is great, but authors who are more worried about social relevance are more likely to not write good novels (IMHO).

--
Bill

Couldn't agree more. I see the novel as first and foremost a piece of entertainment, after that its up to the fates and the time to decide upon what merits, if any, it might have. You can't consciously create relevance.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by iterati

That applies to bookshops. If some large ones go out of business then other ones, smaller but more flexible and agile will appear.

Smaller is never "more flexible" in a bookshop--smaller means less space, less activity, less range of selection. Several small bookshops in Berkeley--a college town--within blocks of the university have shut down in the last few years.

They can't compete with Amazon.

There are people who loved them, who tried to shop more, but that doesn't overcome the problem that casual shoppers are now browsing online as much or more as they do in person... and if the one book they want isn't available in a store, they're likely to go home & order it. (Some stores do manage to get customers to order books from them. But the customers who come to the desk and ask, "do you have this?" are a smaller number than those who browse the shelves and never tell anyone what they were hoping to find.)

Publishers are trying to kill the midlist; they want Stephen King and the next JK Rowling, and they're willing to drop a hundred Jacqueline Lichtenbergs or SP Somtows to get them. The publishing industry is competing with the web for people's reading time, and it's panicking. It's trying to cut costs & increase profits without thinking too much about what's actually changed in people's lives in the last decade.

While I believe that pbooks are NOT becoming obsolete (I can count on one hand the number of people I know who use ebook readers, and I live in a high-tech city and work in a high-tech office), I do think the publishing industry will go through some drastic changes over the next decade.

[Greg Anos]

I chuckled. "I don't write for the sweaty, hamburger-eating masses." And then he wonders why the novel no longer drives public discourse. Look in a mirror, Bruce.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Smaller is never "more flexible" in a bookshop--smaller means less space, less activity, less range of selection. Several small bookshops in Berkeley--a college town--within blocks of the university have shut down in the last few years.

They can't compete with Amazon.

It's a mistake for a small book shop to even attempt to compete with Amazon. What the small shop can do - and still do very successfully - is specialise in one particular field, and be more knowledgeable in that field than the Amazon's of this world can ever hope to be. I have a friend who runs a very successful SF book shop here in the UK on that basis.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's a mistake for a small book shop to even attempt to compete with Amazon. What the small shop can do - and still do very successfully - is specialise in one particular field, and be more knowledgeable in that field than the Amazon's of this world can ever hope to be. I have a friend who runs a very successful SF book shop here in the UK on that basis.

I agree, and that's what's keeping The Other Change of Hobbit alive in Berkeley--a collection of used books, many of which are out of print, almost as large as their new books for sale, staff recommendations, and author signings.

But that's not "more flexible;" it's "catering to a niche market."

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

I chuckled. "I don't write for the sweaty, hamburger-eating masses." And then he wonders why the novel no longer drives public discourse. Look in a mirror, Bruce.

Well, I think it depends on how we look at that statment (Though I would point out that Bill Gates is actually suppose to like a good cheesburger)... if it is looked at as consious snobbery... i.e., most people are not smart enough or good enough to read my books... then it absolutely is part of the problem. On the flip side though, one of the joys of print fiction is that it doesn't have to be entertainment pointed at the lowest common denominator. You don't have a need in an action novel to add a romantic subplot to keep the interest of the reader's S.O. for example.

--
Bill

[catsittingstill]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

On the flip side though, one of the joys of print fiction is that it doesn't have to be entertainment pointed at the lowest common denominator. You don't have a need in an action novel to add a romantic subplot to keep the interest of the reader's S.O. for example.

Bill

Or you don't need, in a perfectly good historical fiction novel, to add in an action subplot to keep the interest of the reader's S.O.

Except, of course, that books with complex, varied plotting attract and hold a larger variety of readers, including readers whose tastes run to more complex books with many points of interest.

And "sweaty hamburger eating masses?" Wow. I guess authors are free to write only for vegetarians who never walk or bike anywhere, (indeed never even go outside, at least in summer), but personally I don't see the point in limiting your audience that much. To each their own, I guess.