Last night’s LBC party at the Slipper Room was a resounding success … Nearly 200 people stopped by for drinks, book talk and door prizes … It was an eclectic mix of readers and tastes and truly was the best party we attended all night … We also stopped by the New York Times party where we bumped into Sam Lipsyte (thank God for that or we’d still be standing solo in the corner), and everyone’s favorite Old Hag … We ended up at the Soft Skull Party before heading home, tired and happy indeed.
Today’s been given over mostly to appointments with publicists and editors, talking about the upcoming releases and chatting a bit about LBC … We didn’t have to have the “what’s a blog?” conversation once all day … Progress, indeed.
We only attended one panel today – The Hybrid Young Editor – and as always, we start with complaints. The gang from CSPAN was most arrogant, poorly organized bunch I’ve ever seen, shoving people around and rudely manhandling an already full room with total disregard for both attendees and panelists. We’ve seen this sort of thing too much in our Film World life – give an asshole a camera and he becomes, well, an even bigger asshole …
To make matters worse, BEA seems to have no sense of scope in its panel scheduling, cramming popular events into tiny rooms while huge rooms sit empty. This room, like yesterday’s 18-to-34 panel, overflowed with SRO attendees.
As for the panel, it was moderated by PW reporter Steve Zeitchik, who was joined by Kate Travers, director of trade paper for Houghton Mifflin; Loren Stein, FSG non fiction editor; Chris Jackson, senior editor at Crown; Liz Nagle, editor at Little, Brown and the late arriving Gillian Blake, Bloomsbury.
The panel was enough to make us decide not to attend any further panels. They’re just not that interesting or informative and all tend to tilt too heavily to sturm und drang … all about how hard everything is … how hard to make money … how hard to find readers … how hard to get books noticed. Well, at the risk of seeming reductive, better books would be a good start. Herewith a sampling:
SZ: Asked about how plugged into pop culture these editors were … Was it necessary to be so, and if so, what does that mean for publishing?
KT: Also talked about walking into a book store as a normal consumer (as others have this weekend) and the importance of doing that … Felt it’s important to know what ordinary readers are connecting to.
CJ: Sees value in combining from other media (He works with the Boondocks books) and bringing them into books. Sees smart thinkers and good writers in other media. Touts Danielle Smith as an example of someone connecting pop culture (music) and literary fiction.
SZ: Talks of using blogs as conduits to new writers. Mentions Lipstye (who seems to be the blog success story of the weekend).
LS: Doesn’t think blogs can help sell hardcovers (which earns him the weekend’s Stupid Prize and shows how little he knows – or at least how out of touch he is for a so-called “Young Editor”).
GB: Discusses the concerns that the whole country is really only discussing the same few books. Discussing lengths she goes for her books, tells how she hand distributed 500 post cards for Meadowlands to commuters.
SZ: Editors are having to do more marketing and not able to edit?
LS: Feels it’s always been the same, editors have always had to push books.
LN: Discussed the vidlit success in marketing Yiddish with Dick and Jane. But feels lions share of time is spent looking for new books, not with marketing.
SZ: Asked about trade paperbacks. Better for first novels to be in trade?
KT: Thinks future is in trade paperback originals. Compares hardcover to Marcia Brady (the glamorous older sister); backlist is Cindy (always there, always cute, always sustainable). Trade paper original is Jan – awkward misfit middle child. Thinks they deserve more respect and attention. Asking “how can we do it successfully” is part of her acquisition consideration.
GB: Worries about the economics of trader paper, suggests that 60K advance needs to move 60K copies (a dollar a copy is the model); feels there need to be smaller advances for trade paper to work.
LS: Says “It’s criminal how little we paid for [ Home Land
SZ: Is it the responsibility of young editors to cultivate young readers?
LN: Hopes it’s not her responsibility since she’s going to be an old editor one day … Aims her books at older readers.
KT: Takes an industry-wide look at the problem … Worries that late 20s are hotter for a new video game than a book, and they’ll wait for paper since they can’t afford costs of hardcovers.
Our opinion? It feels like a race to the bottom – wanting to ring the financial bell so desperately that any title will do if it succeeds. As we’ve said, BEA is a trade show and publishing is a business but the consuming urge seems to be toward hitting those financial marks, and not enough about publishing worthy books. (Although to his credit, Stein did say that that’s where he’d like to focus his energies, and the books he’s handled that have done poorly were the books he thought others would like.)
Finally, Zeitchik asked what do they want to see take place in the next 10-15 years?
KT: Community. Wants to see communication openly between players.
LS: Artsy fartsy literary publishing needs to find a way to fulfill old mandates – to publish books that won’t profit but that will endure.
CJ: Contact as an editor with readers. Wife opened a book store which transformed his understanding of his own job. Got to see what flips the switch for a reader. (He should read more blogs.)
LN: Similar – to see what it’s like “out there” seeing what readers see. That and raising all salaries.
GB: We’re punished for our success … Corporations require repeat performances; and you pay huge sums to keep author around. Would like to see a way for publishers to be able to enjoy successes that don’t create future problems. (SZ suggests tilting money from advance to royalties.)
Ok, we’ve got a quiet dinner planned tonight and then tomorrow is a jam packed day of more meetings and parties … Posts as events warrant.
Hi Mark,
Thanks so much for your dispatches from the BEA. I know it's tough transcribing on the fly. Just wanted you and your readers to know that Chris Jackson was referring to
Danyel Smith
http://www.randomhouse.com/crown/catalog/results.pperl?authorid=36288
all the best,
AC
Posted by: Adrienne Crew | June 03, 2005 at 07:03 PM
Mark, You're tired and jet lagged to be sure, but this is some your best reportage to date. Great job.
David
Posted by: David Thayer | June 03, 2005 at 07:47 PM
You need to show that the LBC sold more than a few hundred copies of Case Histories before you start handing our stupid prizes.
Posted by: jake | June 03, 2005 at 08:58 PM
I just read your remarks about the 18-34 panel at BEA which I watched Sat. morning on BookTV! Thanks for your on-target comments! I am a former teacher and school librarian and now write children and YA books. I have often commented that the whole publishing industry needs to change some of their antiquated policies. For instance, one audience member said that nowhere in retail are items returned if they don't sell as books are returned to publishers. (And books are given such short shelf lives too!) The other major thing that needs to be changed in the publishing industry is publishing hardcovers followed by soft covers a year or two later IF the hardcovers have done well. As I said, I am a former librarian, so I know that most school, university, and public libraries buy hardcovers. But most individuals purchase the less expensive soft cover editions. Why not publish hardcover and soft cover simultaneously? Sometimes I want a book desperately, but I don't want to spend big bucks on the hardcover. But by the time the softcover comes out, I've forgotten about that particular title! I realize a few companies are publishing hardcovers and soft covers simultaneously, but I'm hoping the time will come for all publishers to do that. And I hope that the new young editors and publishers in publishing companies, large and small, will change some of these old policies--such as sending authors royalties EVERY SIX MONTHS!!!!!!!!!! And please don't acquire silly books on "Lazyness" and "Messiness", two books mentioned in the BEA panel discussion. If you are an author, you will be interested in my article "Gone Are Gone With the Wind Days" on Independentpublisher.com. Author of THE JOURNAL OF DARIEN DEXTER DUFF, AN EMANCIPATED SLAVE, THE DIARY OF SLAVE GIRL, RUBY JO, THE JOURNAL OF LEROY JEREMIAH JONES, A FUGITIVE SLAVE, and PIRATES by Karen McWilliams
Posted by: K.J. McWilliams | June 04, 2005 at 09:01 AM
Yes, I think you are definitely right. The answer to the publishing malaise is to publish better books. Defining them, finding them and promoting them, however, will not an easy. And with the publishing industry tethered to the bottom line, I'm afraid the necessary creativity isn't there. The task may well fall to the bloggers.
Posted by: Patry Francis | June 04, 2005 at 12:37 PM
I saw this on Book TV and when I heard Stein's comment about Homeland I wanted to hurl. Talk about demoralizing.
Posted by: Jim Ruland | June 06, 2005 at 07:23 AM