 |
 |
If we start by assuming we have/ought to wade through all of it, then we're lost. Hal "I don't necessarily agree with everything I say." --Marshall McLuhan Halvard Johnson ================ [log in to unmask] http://home.earthlink.net/~halvard/index.html http://entropyandme.blogspot.com http://imageswithoutwords.blogspot.com http://www.hamiltonstone.org http://home.earthlink.net/~halvard/vidalocabooks.html On Jun 12, 2008, at 12:22 AM, andrew burke wrote: > Ah, the vetting question I took to be about e-publishing, wading > through all > the rubbish on the internet ... It's a monumental task! Andrew > > 2008/6/12 Nathan Hondros <[log in to unmask]>: > >> I'm all excited about publishing at the moment. I think good >> writing and >> publishing has always existed to meet a demand by readers for >> quality. >> Sometimes that demand is created by the writers and publishers >> themselves. >> Publishing seems a unique business in that it fills a general demand >> (printing books) but the products offered by the industry to meet >> that >> demand are endlessly diverse (poetry, trade paperback, literary >> novels, >> cook >> books, pornography, etc, etc). I don't think we should be too >> concerned >> about vetting in the new world order, because that will happen >> amongst >> readers as a matter of course. Mark, for example, you might hear >> about a >> self-published poet or small press from someone who's critical >> faculties >> you >> respect, and then explore the backlists. >> >> I suppose the concern is that now publishing is economically viable >> for >> almost anyone, how are we as readers supposed to perform the >> function of >> editors? But I'd say that all the mechanisms that we use to make >> reading >> decisions will still be available to us. There will still be >> critics (in >> cafes, pubs and national broadsheets). And bookshops, who react >> quickly to >> the brutal commercial realities imposed on them by readers. Perhaps >> it will >> just be different people who do the vetting. If we take the part of >> the >> industry that concerns us (poetry, literary fiction perhaps), then >> I hope >> that the new economic availablity of publishing will lessen the >> commercial >> imperiative that drives editorial decisions. >> >> Apologies if I sound like I've just discovered what everyone else >> already >> knows, but I have! >> >> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:40 AM, andrew burke <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >>> yes, quite so. andrew >>> >>> 2008/6/12 Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]>: >>> >>>> I think publishing will go on--publishers as we know them may >>>> not--but >>> the >>>> means will be different. I am concerned that there will be so >>>> little >>>> vetting--there's little enough now--that it will be impossible to >>>> wade >>>> through it all to find anything of value, regardless of one's >>>> criteria. >>>> >>>> >>>> At 10:49 PM 6/11/2008, you wrote: >>>> >>>>> No, I for one really appreciate knowing the commercial equations >>>>> of >> book >>>>> publishing. It will be a sad day when minor poets and those on >>>>> their >>> 'way >>>>> up' cannot get published because of such commercial hurdles >>>>> between >>> author >>>>> and reader. (World-weary sigh here.) >>>>> >>>>> Andrew >>>>> >>>>> 2008/6/12 Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]>: >>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, folks, this exchange should have been backchannel. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> At 07:15 PM 6/11/2008, you wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Yeahm, they can get copies through SPD, but very very little >>>>>>> comes >>> back >>>>> to >>>>>>> the press. I'm beginning to think of leaving them altogether. >>>>>>> The >>>>> customers >>>>>>> I've lost to them--all of my major customers--would almost >> certainly >>>>> come >>>>>>> back to me. The economics of the industry become more and more >> dire. >>>>>>> Consider this--Amazon demands a 55% discount, and SPD and I >>>>>>> split >> the >>>>>>> difference, less my shelving costs and shipping. Which means I >>>>>>> lose >>>>> money on >>>>>>> each copy sold that way. It looks like the all-digital future >>>>> approaches >>>>>>> faster than we expected. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Long and short, I don't tell people to order from SPD and >>>>>>> neither >>>>> should >>>>>>> you. Most folks can wait a couple of months. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The books will go out by Monday. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mark >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At 07:03 PM 6/11/2008, you wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Mark: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sounds like a good trip coming up. I saw Sound-Eye list - which >> shd >>>>> be >>>>>>>> again fun. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I will be able to pay up with you soon on the remaining invoice >> for >>>>>>>> Walking Theory. I will also want to order and pay for 25 more >> copies >>>>> before >>>>>>>> you get out of town. So, if you can ship 25 that would be nice. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I assume people can still get books through SPT?? Your note >>>>>>>> might >>>>> imply >>>>>>>> not(>>) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pat Reed's review of Walking Theory in the forthcoming Crayon >>>>>>>> shd >>> be >>>>> out >>>>>>>> early this summer. Jill Jones' review in Jacket is planned >>>>>>>> for the >>>>> Fall. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Be well, Stephen >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Junction Press >>>>>>>> (c'est >>> moi) >>>>>>>> will be away from Its desk from June 28th >>>>>>>> to October Ist. Last chance to order before then is June 16 >>> (Monday). >>>>>>>> Check the catalogue at junctionpress.com, but order direct by >>>>>>>> backchannel for the usual 20% discount. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mark >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Andrew >>>>> http://hispirits.blogspot.com/ >>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/aburke/ >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Andrew >>> http://hispirits.blogspot.com/ >>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/aburke/ >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> http://nathanhondros.blogspot.com >> > > > > -- > Andrew > http://hispirits.blogspot.com/ > http://www.flickr.com/photos/aburke/