Comments on: Let the meteors fall where they may? The pitfalls of Jon Evans’ publishing scenario http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/let-the-meteors-fall-where-they-may-the-pitfalls-of-jon-evans-publishing-scenario/ News & views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:23:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Rob Preece http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/let-the-meteors-fall-where-they-may-the-pitfalls-of-jon-evans-publishing-scenario/comment-page-1/#comment-515695 Rob Preece Mon, 03 Sep 2007 12:53:46 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=7046#comment-515695 Hi Robert, Excellent comments. Yes, I suspect that 100% hagiography is an exageration. How much of an exageration, I'm not sure. Rob Preece Publisher, www.BooksForABuck.com P.S. excellent point on painters. On a related note, digital content seems to have opened more opportunities to photographers, at least from what I've seen at iStockPhoto and other stock art places. I truly hope that we can continue with that model and somehow avoid universal pirating. Hi Robert,
Excellent comments. Yes, I suspect that 100% hagiography is an exageration. How much of an exageration, I’m not sure.

Rob Preece
Publisher, http://www.BooksForABuck.com

P.S. excellent point on painters. On a related note, digital content seems to have opened more opportunities to photographers, at least from what I’ve seen at iStockPhoto and other stock art places. I truly hope that we can continue with that model and somehow avoid universal pirating.

]]> By: Robert Nagle http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/let-the-meteors-fall-where-they-may-the-pitfalls-of-jon-evans-publishing-scenario/comment-page-1/#comment-515634 Robert Nagle Mon, 03 Sep 2007 11:56:30 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=7046#comment-515634 Rob, you are exaggerating slightly. There's a lot of countercultural/subversive/underground literature that flourishes despite lack of financial support in any society. Even during the Ancien Regime there was Marquis de Sade --he didn't rake in the mullah, though it's true he won a "Bastille grant for writers". (See Robert Darnton's excellent book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Forbidden-Best-Sellers-Pre-Revolutionary-France/dp/0002558351/ref=sr_1_2/105-2593697-0238804?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1188819806&sr=1-2" rel="nofollow">Forbidden Best-Sellers of Pre-Revolutionary France </a>). Admittedly Sade is not a example of literary excellence. Still, it would be nice for writers not to need to depend on public funding or institutional support. Once a genre needs this kind of support, that's a sign the genre is becoming moribund and no longer relevant to contemporary society (because of format or ideology or style). On the other hand, an argument could be made that painting --the genre most vulnerable to corruptibility (because of dependence on a few donors or wealthy buyers)-- hasn't suffered that terribly over the centuries. Sure, painters had to do a lot of portraits of kings and wealthy families, but it was expected that painters would paint a variety of subjects. (Another difference is that making a painting takes less time than making a novel, so a skilled artist can crank these things out more easily). Rob, you are exaggerating slightly. There’s a lot of countercultural/subversive/underground literature that flourishes despite lack of financial support in any society. Even during the Ancien Regime there was Marquis de Sade –he didn’t rake in the mullah, though it’s true he won a “Bastille grant for writers”. (See Robert Darnton’s excellent book Forbidden Best-Sellers of Pre-Revolutionary France ). Admittedly Sade is not a example of literary excellence.

Still, it would be nice for writers not to need to depend on public funding or institutional support. Once a genre needs this kind of support, that’s a sign the genre is becoming moribund and no longer relevant to contemporary society (because of format or ideology or style).

On the other hand, an argument could be made that painting –the genre most vulnerable to corruptibility (because of dependence on a few donors or wealthy buyers)– hasn’t suffered that terribly over the centuries. Sure, painters had to do a lot of portraits of kings and wealthy families, but it was expected that painters would paint a variety of subjects. (Another difference is that making a painting takes less time than making a novel, so a skilled artist can crank these things out more easily).

]]> By: Rob Preece http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/let-the-meteors-fall-where-they-may-the-pitfalls-of-jon-evans-publishing-scenario/comment-page-1/#comment-514648 Rob Preece Sun, 02 Sep 2007 14:52:17 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=7046#comment-514648 One thing about patrons--they get what they pay for. If you want lectures on morality, hagiographies of the rich and famous, or inspired justifications for why the rich should get richer, you'll love patron-funded literature. The author/publisher model is a model that lets readers decide what they want, rather than forcing them to read what someone else thinks is good for them. Giving up on the model just because we have a new technology that might actually overcome many of the traditional problems with this model seems counter-intuitive. In terms of free books, I have no problems at all with my authors giving away books for free. Because most authors have more than one book in one, a free book can become a loss leader, encouraging sales of others. Something interesting to note in Jon Evans's case--the book he wants to give away went through the publishing/editing process. That is, it was selected by professionals, edited to improve the quality, and released. The quality of such a work can't really be compared to a typical self-published work, published by an author without the resources a publisher brings to the table. I admit I'm biased, but I think the author/publisher model, modified, of course, to reflect technology, has a lot of life left in it. Rob Preece Publisher, www.BooksForABuck.com One thing about patrons–they get what they pay for. If you want lectures on morality, hagiographies of the rich and famous, or inspired justifications for why the rich should get richer, you’ll love patron-funded literature.

The author/publisher model is a model that lets readers decide what they want, rather than forcing them to read what someone else thinks is good for them. Giving up on the model just because we have a new technology that might actually overcome many of the traditional problems with this model seems counter-intuitive.

In terms of free books, I have no problems at all with my authors giving away books for free. Because most authors have more than one book in one, a free book can become a loss leader, encouraging sales of others. Something interesting to note in Jon Evans’s case–the book he wants to give away went through the publishing/editing process. That is, it was selected by professionals, edited to improve the quality, and released. The quality of such a work can’t really be compared to a typical self-published work, published by an author without the resources a publisher brings to the table. I admit I’m biased, but I think the author/publisher model, modified, of course, to reflect technology, has a lot of life left in it.

Rob Preece
Publisher, http://www.BooksForABuck.com

]]> By: David Rothman http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/let-the-meteors-fall-where-they-may-the-pitfalls-of-jon-evans-publishing-scenario/comment-page-1/#comment-514615 David Rothman Sun, 02 Sep 2007 13:47:09 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=7046#comment-514615 Robert: On the whole, the big boys still have more QC than the small guys, but, yes, your examples are cogent. I can't get through Dan Brown. Horrible. And as for Ann Coulter, I almost ended up using her as an example of how the current publishing system is far from perfect. Furthermore, as shown by <a href="http://www.teleread.com/blog/?p=7014" rel="nofollow">my recent writeup of Drollerie Press</a>, I would encourage readers and writers to look beyond the large houses. That said, size can count. See the <a href="http://www.teleread.com/blog/?p=7047" rel="nofollow">just-posted item on problems with e-publishers</a>. - David Robert: On the whole, the big boys still have more QC than the small guys, but, yes, your examples are cogent. I can’t get through Dan Brown. Horrible. And as for Ann Coulter, I almost ended up using her as an example of how the current publishing system is far from perfect. Furthermore, as shown by my recent writeup of Drollerie Press, I would encourage readers and writers to look beyond the large houses. That said, size can count. See the just-posted item on problems with e-publishers. – David

]]> By: Robert Nagle http://www.teleread.com/copy-right/let-the-meteors-fall-where-they-may-the-pitfalls-of-jon-evans-publishing-scenario/comment-page-1/#comment-514563 Robert Nagle Sun, 02 Sep 2007 12:34:17 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=7046#comment-514563 One issue is quality control. How much more would consumers be willing to pay for a book that has the publisher's imprimatur (and thus, is more professionally edited and designed)? The problem is that many books coming out of the major publishers just don't have that commitment to quality anymore. With Random House (just to pick an example), they or their subsidiaries brought out books by Ann Coulter, Dan Brown or Pervez Musharraf, trivial books in the grand scheme of things (although bestsellers by dint of Random House's marketing & celebrity-making apparatus). Yes, these kinds of books have professional typesetting and no punctuation errors, but they are not profound or interesting or even succinct. Contrast that with insomniac press (with <a href="http://www.wowio.com/users/searchresults.asp?nPublisherId=47" rel="nofollow"> many free titles available from wowio </a>). A smaller press with a lot of intriguing and artsy titles. If I were to pick a random book by Random House and a random book by Insomniac, chances are that I would find the Insomniac more interesting. When I <a href="http://www.teleread.com/blog/?p=6922" rel="nofollow">looked at the Sony Connect ebookstore a few weeks ago </a>, what struck me most was not the high prices of ebooks but how few titles by the majors seemed original or interesting or unusual (or maybe I'm just jaded). In high tech, the Oreilly brand means quality; if given a choice between 2 titles from different publishers, many geeks would go for Oreilly no matter how much it costs (because time is money). The same applies to free vs. paid. If I had a choice between a community-edited book about python and an Oreilly book teaching how to program in python, I'd probably go for the Oreilly book. The Oreilly book is likely to cover the subject in a unified way better suited to learning. It's worth noting btw that one of more significant python books, <a href="http://www.diveintopython.org/" rel="nofollow">Dive into Python </a> started out as a free open source book and later was sold commercially--in fact I ended up buying it!). The fiction market is a a different beast though. One issue is quality control. How much more would consumers be willing to pay for a book that has the publisher’s imprimatur (and thus, is more professionally edited and designed)?

The problem is that many books coming out of the major publishers just don’t have that commitment to quality anymore. With Random House (just to pick an example), they or their subsidiaries brought out books by Ann Coulter, Dan Brown or Pervez Musharraf, trivial books in the grand scheme of things (although bestsellers by dint of Random House’s marketing & celebrity-making apparatus). Yes, these kinds of books have professional typesetting and no punctuation errors, but they are not profound or interesting or even succinct.

Contrast that with insomniac press (with many free titles available from wowio ). A smaller press with a lot of intriguing and artsy titles. If I were to pick a random book by Random House and a random book by Insomniac, chances are that I would find the Insomniac more interesting.

When I looked at the Sony Connect ebookstore a few weeks ago , what struck me most was not the high prices of ebooks but how few titles by the majors seemed original or interesting or unusual (or maybe I’m just jaded).

In high tech, the Oreilly brand means quality; if given a choice between 2 titles from different publishers, many geeks would go for Oreilly no matter how much it costs (because time is money). The same applies to free vs. paid. If I had a choice between a community-edited book about python and an Oreilly book teaching how to program in python, I’d probably go for the Oreilly book. The Oreilly book is likely to cover the subject in a unified way better suited to learning. It’s worth noting btw that one of more significant python books, Dive into Python started out as a free open source book and later was sold commercially–in fact I ended up buying it!).

The fiction market is a a different beast though.

]]>