Entries Tagged as ''

Book Selling

I have a publisher, Zeitgeist Press, that is small and has not the resources a huge publishing house might have, but they have the freedom to publish work that they like, not just work they think can sell a boatload of copies. Because they cannot send me a $10,000 advance and put me on the John Stewart show, I have to do some of the work if I want my book to sell. And I do want to sell copies of my book, as well as copies of any other books I might write in the future. In the traditional publishing model, or at least the most recently dominant model, I would try to parlay the reputation gained early in my career, via small but prestigious presses, into a contract with a larger publisher. This larger publisher would then print and distribute my later books, set up publicity campaigns, and so forth; in return, I would get a small percentage of the profits of each sale, called a royalty, as well as positions on the boards of poetry journals, increased reading fees, and so forth. The internet, however, has made the exchange of media so easy that this old model is dieing (thankfully). A number of new models have cropped up, most being variations on marketing models that predated the big publisher model, and these new models allow for greater author control over their work and a much larger share of the profits for the author as well, but lack the resources large publishing houses can muster. For example, large publishing houses can offer a dedicated editor to help shape a written work; because it is so easy to make one’s book available as a pdf, say, or via print-on-demand publishing, a lot of not-so-polished work is offered to the reading public using these forms of distribution, and a lot of just plain shitty work, too. So, finding excellent writing is harder under these new distribution models, the argument goes, because there is so much more crap to wade through. Of course, much of what was published under the old model–most of what was published, perhaps–was also crap, albeit crap polished to a high gloss, and finding alternatives to the shiny turds offered by big publishers was much harder. The biggest problem a new author faces under new models, like the street performer protocol, is gaining enough name recognition, enough core readership, to make releasing further works economically feasible.

Most of these new marketing models have risen up around music and software production, I’m not sure how many authors have tried this with written work. I know that strayform, for example, has a text area, and my own book, and eventually podcasts of readings, will be available as Creative Commons copyrighted material, but I need to spend the next few days trying to find out what other resources exist. I will post what I find.

Right Out Out Of Greek Tragedy

Though I feel bad for his wife, and even a bit for the man himself, I can’t help but feel a little giddy about the whole Spitzer fiasco. The epic rise and fall, the ridiculously obvious hypocrisy of an ethics reformer with an immoral habit; it couldn’t be better scripted. People who study the brain and how we pay attention to things often analyze how we separate foreground and background, and one way to make people focus and respond to something in the visual field is to have a stark contrast between an object in the foreground and those in the background. Same with sound, I would think, and smell and in fact all our sensory tools. The Spitzer case is intriguing because, like in Greek tragedy, the central character has a tragic flaw, a characteristic that creates an almost grotesque set of contrasts within the character, a set of contrasts that make observers both entranced and confused, since most of us will feel a need to try and resolve the contradictions: how could he think he would not get caught? Which leads, again to Greek tragedy: just as Oedipus had no choice, his fate was sealed, how much of Spitzer’s activity was the result of conscious choice? Of free will? And how much was compulsion… Roy Baumeister recently addressed the question of various stages of free will in the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science; that journal is a behind a firewall, but this quote from the abstract provides a glimpse:

 ”Human evolution seems to have created a relatively new, more complex form of action control that corresponds to popular notions of free will. It is marked by self-control and rational choice, both of which are highly adaptive, especially for functioning within culture. The processes that create these forms of free will may be biologically costly and therefore are only used occasionally, so that people are likely to remain only incompletely self-disciplined, virtuous, and rational.”

Baumeister, Roy F. “Free Will in Scientific Psychology.”Perspectives on Psychological Science 3 (1), 14-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00057.x