From what I’ve seen, too many promising literary manuscripts get published when they’re…still just promising manuscripts. THIS is a problem. Just O.K. literary (and midlist) fiction gets pimped out as if it rivaled Middlemarch. The bean counters have little appreciation for the value added by editing, and so a whole lot of half-baked books get placed on store shelves when they’re not ready for primetime. It’s hoped the audience won’t know the difference (not if they dress the book up right, hence the ever longer, ever more ecstatic jacket copy we’re seeing these days — a sure sign of nerves, in my opinion). This — among other numbskulled business practices, but that’s a story for another day — is what is bleeding big publishers dry. Those Maxwell Perkins wannabes who end up shepherding manuscripts through production have to meet acquisition quotas. They apportion editing time on a triage basis. And sometimes they don’t even know how to edit — there’s no time to teach them, after all. (It’s assumed the craft will be picked up by osmosis. I know this because I was one of those minions.) Suffice it to say the current situation has me very, very excited about the opportunities for new small presses.

After reading everyone’s comments, my two cents are, “The times they are a changing.” In the end it is all about change and accepting that change. You can decide to buy a car or you can keep your horse and carriage, but whatever you decide to do, the change will happen.

The bottom line for any kind of book is that it needs to be “good” and “entertaining” which does not mean “easy” or “trashy” or “amusing” to the exclusion of “thought provoking” or “challenging” or “lyrical”. “Good” and “entertaining” for me include all of these and more which is why I read across all genres, categories, and boundaries.

Thank you again, Kassia, for this thought provoking commentary.

I am one of those Ms Krozser mentioned (I think it was her): I read fairly well across the board. I read classics as a child and still do. I read romance, fantasy, historical fiction and non-fiction, research and literary works, and enjoy them as I find them. I’m a published romance author, and my agent is currently sending my ancient historical literary work to publishers.

I’m not American. I’m an Aussie living in Switzerland. But I guess I’m pretty representative anyway. I didn’t finish university; I attended a blue collar school in Sydney. I educated myself in that I read Little Women and Heidi and such books from a very young age and my hard working, blue collar parents always bought me a new book when I wanted it, or I walked to the local library. I discovered genre fiction at 15 when I got tired of my English teacher waxing lyrical over Shylock, the Plantagenets and Mr. Darcy. I fell in love with Tolkien first, then stretched out to other kinds of books in genre fiction, but have always returned to the classics.

Some in all genres are wonderful. Some – well, Kafka’s life as a cockroach didn’t appeal (I preferred the Monty Python approach)…and I don’t like sheikh books either. It’s just personal taste and what that makes me is neither one of the great unwashed lowbrows or a literary snob.

It makes me human.

To me, it seems simple: the facts are there for us all to see. The industry will be squeezed like everything else with the current financial crisis; it’s been going on for a while. There are less pieces of the pie, and all the indignation, abuse and/or snobbery in the world won’t change it.

So why attack literary or genre fiction, and their readers? If people want to escape their lives for a few hours by reading something that takes them away to exotic destinations or alien worlds, rather than one that might conceivably change their world (or bore them to tears if it’s not to their taste), it’s their right. Just as much as it is for some to choose Brick Lane or The Kite Runner instead of genre fiction because that bores them. And publishers, bless their New York mentality hearts, know that well. They might be living in 1933 in some ways and want to be a reincarnation of famous editors, but then has human nature changed that much? Only in that some are more open about what they want to read.

I didn’t like The Da Vinci Code; I’ve never read one Harry Potter and don’t intend to; I’ve never read a Danielle Steel at all. Does that make these bad books? No. The last 12 books I purchased were non-fic for research, or literary works – I’m in that phase. And I’m enjoying it. But at a recent conference I received a few free Victoria Alexander historical romances. I loved one but not the other. Will I buy more of her books? I’d think about it, definitely. I also read and write category romance. Does this negate me as a person? Why should it? I like category fiction if it is well written (and many are, though their shelf life is short and they won’t become classics) and touches my heart. Just as books like The Year of Wonders touched my heart.

Everyone has the right to choose – and those of us who write for a living know that all the rants in the world against our competition won’t change the truth. And won’t stop publishers releasing books that they love and believe others will love too. Sometimes they get it wrong. As do we all.

And authors, no matter where in publishing we write, have to write better, write faster, write stronger. The romantic days of starving in a garret as we squeeze drops of sweat over every word are gone. The times are what they are, with all their convenience and their inconvenience.

I’ve really enjoyed reading this article, and the responses…it’s taught me a lot. Big thanks to those who’ve enlightened me, such as Ms Krozser, Mr Nash et al. Your thoughtful insights about the industry are greatly appreciated.

Smaller publishers such as Medallion Press have been doing the “share the risk” model from the get go. It is easier to take a chance on new, untried talent that way when it gets right down to it. That’s how I got my first (and soon to be second) books published.

I also completely agree that readers of nonliterary fiction (and other kinds of books as well) will be the determining factor in the success or failure of the publishing industry, as well as said industry’s ability to “roll with it.” In the past two weeks, I purchased six commercial titles (three romances, a mystery, and two nonfiction “how to” grammar “Dummies” books–just for fun), not to mention the several textbooks I purchased last month. That is not an unusual practice for me. Literary fiction makes up a small piece of my pie, although I do occasionally read it. But for a darn good time away from the high stress of my daily grind, I read books for entertainment and relaxation, or to understand what is going on in the world or what other people are thinking or how to get things done. I read literary fiction when I’m drawn to a compelling tale and have time to wrestle with new ideas–which, let’s be honest, like most Americans, is a lot less time than I’d like to these days. So the percentage of literary fiction I purchase will necessarily be smaller than the total sales. When NY is bewailing the decline in sales, they need to look around and see what is REALLY selling. And boy, I’d love to be able to afford a Kindle for the days I travel and can’t pack all my favorite books in my suitcase because I don’t want to pay the airline’s extra baggage weight charges!

Anyway, loved your rant, and thought it was spot on.

TJB

Instead of being encouraged by these signs of openness and increased exposure to audiences and trying to capitalize on it, publishers are busy sighing over literary fiction being no longer an exclusive club of upperclass whites. That the writer thinks his magazine’s audience is only interested in literary fiction — and that what’s literary fiction is easy to define — is symbolic of the not very accurate complaint that publishers are the upholders of refined culture, laid waste by the barbarian demands of their corporate owners. Essentially, publishing keeps partying like it’s 1933.

And it’s time to stop. Readers don’t want just entertainment. But what they define as more than entertainment may not always agree with the outmoded definition.

What do I know? I am just a small niche publisher having a blast becoming a classic!
________________________________________

If it’s entertaining, it’s an escape, it’s relaxing, we imagine ourselves in a meadow of flowers, no need for dictionaries, sometimes we giggle. No need to do anything but crank back with a big o’ tub of chocolate ice cream and spoon, stuff and read. It’s just like going to the movie or watching American Idol, where you just stuff your face and stare.

If it’s NOT entertaining, you read the first two sentences, spot a word you don’t know, don’t own a dictionary and even if you did, you wouldn’t look it up, and you realize you don’t understand a thing that’s going on from the very first paragraph.

Therefore, David Foster Wallace’s Infinite Jest would NOT be published today, because not only is it FAR too long (Danielle Steel’s books are just right!), but in the second sentence it also has the phrase “consciously congruent.” Oh dear God. If I wanted to read a book like that, I’d have to be forced to read it in school, and even then, I’d just read Cliff’s Notes. Maybe.

So we just need two sections in the bookstore: ENTERTAINING and NOT ENTERTAINING.

And then let the market decide, by God! Isn’t this America? Survival of the stupidest!