Publishing
y2k3
Final Project : English 354
Spring 2003
Disclaimer
#1: Please excuse the non-linear, non-hierarchic method of this discussion.
To tell the story of the publishing world, one might be tempted to begin
by talking about successful major publishing corporations, move on to talk
about non-profits and then with any remaining space discuss other "alternatives" to
current, high-profile methods of publishing. It is an attempt to break
with this hierarchic categorization and its implicit value judgments (rooted
in capital) with which I wholly disagree.
Disclaimer #2: In its broadest definition, Bailey identifies "publishing" as
a "making public" being "as diverse as radio, television, and
'shouting from rooftops'" (1). Yet, he seems to discuss and
understand a very limited version of publishing and other forms
of publishing outside the major houses are given little time.
There are two or three instances of religious or non-profit
publication, and there are the "others" which he banishes to
the nether-regions of "obscenity". But a more intriguing approach
to the study of publishing today would look at many different
levels of publishing, each with their own distinct concerns
and relation to the publishing world as a whole.
One of the
only sources of analysis which looks at commercial publishing from an "insider" perspective
is The Art and Science of Book Publishing by Herbert S. Bailey. Although
extremely dated and ripe for social critique, it does give an interesting
view of major concerns within the study of publishing at large. Its audience
are those wishing to become publishers like Bailey, those people who want
to know what it takes to be at the head of a publishing giant or like Bailey,
a successful university press. It is also useful for those studying the internal
workings of late '70s capitalism. As a cultural document, it is filled with
stereotypes. One is that of the publisher, eminently male, who wields an
orchestration of chaos and "the illogical". Despite all its shortcomings,
it is a good description of the complexity of capitalist relations of production
inherent in major publishing houses. The relations between publisher, library,
government organizations, distributors, printers, and readers are described
in detail, with diagrams.
One point of caution with Bailey's text is that those internal and external
relations most likely have changed since the onset of post-1970s neo-liberal
strategies which have changed the way corporations are structured. Bailey's
calculations included the possibility of things like in-house printing, which
currently happens rarely, if ever. The term "brick and mortar" has been used
to describe any industry which follows the highly controlled, location-based
production which Bailey describes. The new era of globalized capitalism has
ushered in a free-floating business structure, aided by constantly advancing
communication technology. Current outsourcing techniques, and "flexible" working
conditions (read loss of job security) have been rising in the past thirty
years. Many corporations, and publishing as an industry is no different, have
a fractured corporate structure where the different parts of a single house
may occupy completely different physical locals. Until the late '70s everyone
knew the most major English-language publishing houses were located in New
York or London, and although this is still true, many "publishing" companies
are multinational and multidimensional. Publishing in this category seems to
be a part of the entertainment rather than the "knowledge," as a subordinate
role at that, usually as base material for the real moneymaker, film.
Outside the sphere of major commercial publishing there are a range of activities
which can fit under the definition of "printed culture." University publications
are one avenue through which culture is produced for mass consumption, Traditionally
their print runs are designed with an eye toward academics and consequently
are markedly lower than commercial publishing. The type of material is also
different, as university houses are not as diverse as many publishers. Another
category is the non-profit, which is defined primarily by its tax status and
secondarily by its non-commercial "service-oriented" view of publishing. As
Bailey remarks, "[m]ost if not all nonprofit publishers are subsidized in some
way, and the greatest advantage of tax exemption is their privilege of receiving
tax-exempt contributions from individuals, corporations, or foundations." (8).
These non-profits can either be affiliated with a university (as it is with
FC2 and Dalkey) or non-affiliated. A third activity is small commercial publishing
with revenues on par with non-profits. According to Robert McLaughlin,
In 1990, the IRS had granted non-profit status under 501(c)(3) to 362 publishers….
However, according to the International Directory of Little Magazines and Small
Presses, in 1990-1991 there were approximately 925 "small" literary presses
operating in the United States (6).
This part becomes a bit slippery, since there are presses who's output is quite
small (sometimes one or two books annually). We should also question why there
are more independent small publishers who have not filed for non-profit status.
The answer most likely lies in either the time and attention needed to gain
government and foundational grants and/or the perceived loss of independence
which results in the dependent relationship created by the grant process. Funding
organizations, most notably the National Endowment for the Arts, have strategically
reorganized their granting strategies to exclude independent artists and those
who may publish "oppositional" texts.
One group within the world of printed text, which "makes public" printed material
is constantly underrepresented. As one zine distributor put it, "zine writers
and DIY artists are a credible contribution to society and should be respected
as such. I feel that zines have been largely marginalized through most of their
existence."(Microcosm Publishing) There are many reasons for the decision not
to include this phenomenon within the range of discussions about publishing.
One aspect of zine culture is that it should be done (relatively) independently
of major channels of cultural production. Ideally, it should be done DIY. In
fact, do-it-yourself culture is an integral part of zine production. If we
do not count printer fees, zines rarely, if ever contribute to the relations
of production within the "knowledge industry." This is one impediment to being
recognized within those larger cultural instructions that have every reason
to squelch this type of anarchistic (independent), "subversive" production.
Looking to Bailey, these are the types of materials which represent "questionable
material" and the "unpopular ideas" which the dominant culture needs to suppress
or contain, based on its prerogatives and the perceived threat they represent.
One of the best forms of control, in this case, is simply ignoring and excluding
the practice from any discussion.
The non-profit press as well as the non-commercial press are in agreement on
at many points. Both see their operation as fulfilling a cultural void created
by major commercial publishing. Bailey's insistence that profit equals "risk
taking" is a teleological argument unsupported by current realities. If "profits" in
any way suggested "risk" we would be living in the riskiest times of the past
fifty years and publishers would be exploring every subversive tangent possible.
By their very existence many non-profits prove that there are risks major publishers
are unwilling to take; risks made more damaging by the organization's very
economic position and precarious relation to society. Notice Bailey does not
mention that one of the benefits of being either non-profit or non-commercial
means greater ability to print controversial material. He wants us to believe
that risky texts are the prerogative of large corporations who can absorb the
shock of a failed book. This is why he argues for the culturally responsible,
controlled sort of risk, which is arguably not even risk at all. For this reason,
it is not surprising that Mclaughlin characterizes this production site, saying
its "defining activities are best undertook in contrast to commercial publishers" (6).
There is indeed a visible opposition that develops toward commercial enterprises
in this sector, no doubt compacted by the meager annual revenue generated by
non-profits. Both non-profits and non-commercial organizations agree that their
reason for existence is a cultural service. We can see this in the "founder-led" presses
like New Directions and Black Sparrow Press (among a host of others) which
see themselves engaged in a mission of "enculturation" or simply trying to
be that which breaks the cultural floodgates and induces change in opposition
to the status quo.
Besides a general interest in learning about other "scenes" within the U.S.
and abroad, there is constant discussion in zines about the idea of selling-out.
It is a general preoccupation that is expressed in these publications. The
contributors try maintaining and defending their "edge" and stance of critical
attachment (meaning these writers rarely feign "objectivity"). One way this
preoccupation shows itself is in the recent acceptance of zines within major
outlets like Barnes and Nobel's and Tower Records. Calling other zines "sell-out" is
a recurring theme, as one columnist quipped that Punk Planet is too mainstream.
It is also seen in the supposed "threat" of the Internet. Who will sell-out
first? Who will embrace the Internet and give up the culture of print. Zines
who have websites usually provide disclaimers as to their intentions (i.e. "this
is not an e-zine"). A good example of one of these Internet-related disclaimers
is given on www.punkplanet.com.
One way publications take advantage of their authors is by pretending that
the web and print are the same thing. We refuse to do that. Unless we can get
more cash together, or I get permission from every author for each of their
stories, you won't see stuff from the magazine online.
That we are looking at a distinct portion of the spectrum of publishing in
Bailey infuses the whole book, even to the very interpersonal relationships
between the different segments of the publishing house. Working conditions
in Bailey's ideal house are absolutely prescribed by the demands of capital.
Thus it doesn't strike us as odd when he states:
A publishing house should be slightly understaffed, always under pressure and
scrambling to get the necessary work done. This is a matter of balance and
judgment; one shouldn't make impossible demands, and prolonged pressure is
bad for morale and may lead to sloppy work. But most people work best under
pressure, and a staff that is challenged can take pride in its achievement.
Underlying this is the unstated thesis that the "achievement" of the production
crew in part determines the profits of the publishing house (mainly investors,
CEOs). Any arguments that the workers might benefit personally and socially
from their achievement are unthinkable. Their compensation comes in the form
of a monthly check, which does not accurately record the true monetary value
of their labor. This is especially apparent when the publisher is ready at
any moment to slash workers to maintain the "understaffed" environment which
is the most agreeable to profits.
The rallying cry to "Keep them Overworked" is just evidence of Bailey's unquestioned
support of the capitalist model of labor exploitation and the underlying ideology
which makes it possible ("they work well under stress" and the "balance and
judgment" of the capitalist to exact exploitation reasonably). This infusion
of the ideology of capital is even more subtly apparent when we look at his
other suggestions. But before we continue, it might be good to keep in mind
a discussion of ideology and production.
the reproduction of labor power requires not only a reproduction of its skills,
but also a reproduction of its submission to the rules of the established order….
and ensures the subjection to the ruling ideology. It is in the forms of ideological
subjection that provision is made for the reproduction of the skills of labor
power. (Althusser)
We see this "established order" when we look at the function of "reputation" for
large publishing houses. We see that "the publisher acts…as a means of maintaining
and improving professional standards in [a] field…achieving recognition as
a source of important books" (16). The desire to produce better quality books
should not be looked down upon, but it is obvious that we find reputation as
a thread linking the achievement of recognition and the "severe and ramifying
repercussions" of books that are failures. Reputation is one of the keywords
in Bailey's argument which ideologically reproduces (in theory) the means of
production and creates for the potential (or actual) publishing aspirant reading
this text the high capital returns he or she seeks.
A quick counter-example can be found in the way Bailey treats the design department.
He states that
Design is an art, and designers as artists tend to be individualistic, which
may also trouble a publisher. In general, designers do not fall into administrative
patterns easily. [I]t tends not to be an organized department at all but a
collection of individual designers.…This situation…can be avoided or minimized
if the designer works closely with the editor and with the marketing department
from the beginning.
You can see Bailey cringe here as he describes the "outsiders" within the system.
They are not under same level of control and discipline as other parts of the
publishing house, and not subject to the same ideological interpellation as
other workers. The only way to control this tendency is to re-incorporate those
individualistic laborers under either the editorial department (the story and
cover must be equivalent) or the marketing department (the "art" the designers
produce must be sellable).
There are consequences of not selling-out, either to Internet publication or
to institutional or corporate sponsorship. Censorship is alive and well when
one looks at the way patterns and costs of distribution are conducted. Zines,
whether done by an individual, through the cooperation of individuals, or through
small organizations, are constantly beset by monetary concerns. One way to
counter this is a lifestyle which values freedom (and most importantly, freedom
of expression) over monetary gain or social status. One zine publisher said
this:
I pay myself a very small wage every month. Most is spent on food, then housing,
and maintaining my bicycle. I buy all of my bike parts from the bike co-ops
in town…. When I buy groceries I buy them from the damaged food store or from
the closest thing to a family owned store. I also dumpster a large amount of
my food and eat at food not bombs regularly.
Another option for maintaining low overhead is through living in a "punk house." Maximum
Rock and Roll, I have heard, offers room and board in lieu of payment for work
on the zine. Yet even this acetic lifestyle cannot counter the problems inherent
in mass distribution. AK Press, a publisher of radical thought as well as a
zine distributor expressed that
AKPress Distribution does not and could not rely solely on traditional distribution
through the booktrade (or the internet). Chain bookstores are not comfortable
with revolutionary anti-authoritarian thought, and we can't afford to buy space
on their shelves anyway. (AK Press website)
One way distribution works in zine culture is through the formation of "tabling" where
interested supporters of independent publishing can purchase books and zines
at bulk rates (from a distributor) to sell at shows or other events. It is "a
network of tablers and activists around the country - there are bands, roadies,
travelers, students... who are involved in this grassroots distribution" (AKPress).
The disciplinary system of the major publishing house, since the 1970s, has
changed. The control and reproduction of the laborer's work-power has undergone
restructuring. During the time of Baileys writing there was, according to Hardt
and Negri a "mass refusal of the disciplinary regime" (274). Neo-liberal companies
have reorganized themselves to counter this kind of refusal. This only means
that different ideological strategies have been implemented to continue profiting
on that labor power. One example is the "various projects for 'participation'
at the work place, the 'people's capitalism'… the effect of [which] simply
being to guarantee the decision-taking power of the elites and at the same
time create the illusion to the rest of society that they have some 'say' on
its running" (Fotopoulos and Gezerlis).
The different activities of a range of non-profit non-commercial, for-profit
organizations can be seen as unified in their similar experiences with distribution.
Both confront the situation that arises when bookstores "deal exclusively with
wholesalers." And unfortunately, "[m]any wholesalers will not be interested
in stocking a book unless they think bookstores will want to order it." (McLaughlin)
One strategy to counteract this impediment is to work through distributors.
For instance, FC2 is distributed by Northwestern University Press; New Directions
by W.W. Norton; Greywolf (as of January '03) by HarperCollins. Another even
more sustainable option is a distribution firm who caters to the non-profit/
small presses. One example is "Publishers Group West [who] represents 150 publishers" (Mclaughlin
74). An increasingly more equitable option are the grant-funded distributors
like Small Press Distribution (spdbooks.org) and Consortium who do not have
the same demands (that the commodity sells quickly and in large quantities)
to maintain their purchasing of books.
The length and "professionality" of zines range from what are essentially non-glossy
paper magazines (Punk Planet being the closest to a traditional magazine) to
one-sheet zines (folded or not). The major zines which encourage, review, and
discuss zines are MaximumRockNRoll, Punk Planet, and HeartattaCk. The audience
for these zines is mostly drawn from the various subcultures within punk. These
music-based zines are very different in scope and intent from the majority
of the zines they review. Their format is normally (from front to back) letters
people have written, columns by in-house columnists, a large amount of advertising,
and reviews of demo tapes, new albums, films, and zines. If we could describe
an "average" small zine then, it would probably be around 5'x8' (sizes range,
another common size is 8.5'x11'), it would probably be "cut and paste," meaning
objects have been physically manipulated and placed into layout by hand. The
price is usually between one and five dollars.
A massive change in major publishing is in the role given to marketing. It
has exploded since the time of Bailey and, contrary to what he believed then,
the book has become a commodity. Baileys simple conclusion that "readers don't
seek out publishers," calling for intensive marketing strategies does not work.
First, some readers do seek out publishers, and the publishers they seek out
are usually not those held by corporate interests. Despite the system of imprinting
and the illusion of choice they create, readers are generally interested who
publishes their books. Regional variety and a sense of originality are the
traits which draw people to non-profit/ small commercial presses; something
large publishing house do not offer.
Bailey rationalizes the profit-intensive nature of major publishing with the
statement that profits "provide the freedom to risk projects that are worthwhile
but may be unprofitable" (8). Yet the sense throughout the book is that no
ideological constraints are going to be loosened when a publisher seeks said
risk. The role of reputation, selection and the "gate keeping" element inherent
in the majority of for-profit cultural production creates the stifling atmosphere
that gives rise to other realms of publishing.
In his/her article "Publishing Your Own Novel Or, The Demands of Anonymity," the
author, "Anonymous" says,
There is only one way you can publish your own novel and avoid the scorn, the
embarrassment, and the humiliation that go hand in hand with vanity publishing…Publish
it anonymously using a pseudonym. Publish it in complete secrecy from friends
and relations. Tell no one (3).
The author continues to describe the pitfalls he experienced when publishing
her/his own novel. This is vanity publishing. For some, it is a choice one
makes after all the work that went into creating a novel would find no other
way to bear fruit. Since the Internet gained prominence, vanity publishing
(which encompasses print-on-demand and self-publishing services) has been steadily
increasing. These are "vanity presses" which have little or no editing capabilities,
functioning more like a printers, and to quote Bailey, "their only stipulation
is that the author pay—and he usually pays dearly (sic)." An article by a POD
victim, Jeffrey Yamaguchi, concurs, saying it is a hassle for the potential
author and is basically a way to extort money from unsuspecting writers. Traditional
vanity publishers charge more up front, but there are hidden costs in POD as
well.
Some zines use computer programs, word-processing probably being
the most common, but layout programs (PageMaker, etc) are not uncommon.
Printing consists of either photocopying or laser printing, although
many people do use commercial printers. Since traditional methods
of printing and layout can be costly (an eight-page zine can be $150
or more), more zine makers than not stick to the lower-end methods.
There are cooperatives and partnership groups which combine printing
activities to lower the cost for each individual zine. The publishing
methods of zines are molded to fit whatever techniques are readily
accessible to the producer. Content, editing, and printing are sometimes
are done by its author, as is marketing and distribution. Of course,
there are variations, and any one of these categories can have "institutional" attachments,
but if one wants their zine to be respected or read, the closer to
the DIY standard, the better.
Bailey argues that publishing's function is to "supply books to the world" (11),
but it is equally to participate in the manufacture and control of ideology.
Although he states that "in America almost anything can be published" (19),
quite the contrary is true. He says himself that the conditions for a book
not to be published are that it supports unpopular ideas, they are expected
to lose money, or contain "harmful" material. Bailey provides a better positioning
of major publishing within the nexus of cultural (re)production when he says
that
publishing is part of something else. The educational houses are part of the
educational system; the religious publishing houses are part of organized religion;
university presses are part of the activity of scholarly research in universities;
technical publishers are part of the scientific establishment; and so forth.
Bailey has just given us the magic key to cultural control. Publishing partakes
in many if not all ideology producing structures. Thus major publishing participates
in the vitally important task of limiting, through its exclusionary policies,
the field of discussion. This is the underlying reason for his ill regard toward "questionable
material" and "unpopular ideas." For the for-profit commercial publishers to
produce the means of its own existence, there must be social mechanisms like
the ones he describes to call it into being.
One major genre of zines published today is the "fanzine." This is where the
zine began, within the music subcultures of punk, and it remains a strong force
in zine publishing. There are also "personal" zines, so called because of their
expository language which centers upon the individual life of the author/producer.
This sometimes becomes fused with the political, the inane, or the obscure,
but the drive to publish the author's story or a description of the author's "scene" takes
precedence. There are literature-based zines, publishing fiction or poetry,
although these are more rare then the previous two. "Theme-based" content is
also popular, one example of which was "letters written to folks and never
sent." (MMR 238 Bleed). One interesting method of production is the "bagazine." This
is a zine which arrives in a bag usually filled with other goodies. Other topics
include: conspiracy zines, zines about parenting (rare), "religious wacko" zines
(rarer still), and "Grrl zines" (zines which are feminist/political in nature).
In terms of impact, consider that Punk Planet prints a bi-monthly, 130-page
zine. It prints 14,000 copies of which 13,000 are sold (they keep back-issues
for purchase). If you view this in terms of the production rates of many non-profits,
their contribution is significant. This also speaks to the questions of "who
is reading?" and "what is being read?" Another factor when looking at independently
produced zines (one person or small group) is that their production is not
meant for profit, it is done for sheer self-expression. One way larger zines
are able to be successful are two factors: they sell advertisements and maintain
a low overhead. Advertisements (ranging from sixty to one hundred and fifty
dollars) and are limited to independent music groups, or more precisely, those
with no corporate backing. .
As we can see, the range of publication in the United States is rich and varied.
From the "photocopier-kid" to the "anonymous self-publisher" to the "megaglomerates" of
major publishing, the field of publishing sustains a multitude of aspirations.
Yet, it also exacts its punishment. Sales and distribution of printed material
in this country have inherent controls in place to privilege certain kinds
of publishing and limit others. This is not the picture one gets from a reading
of Bailey. It is merely an ample illustration of the kind of structures in
place which organizes, limits, and controls American cultural output.
Works cited
AKPress 1 May 2003 http://www.akpress.com
Althusser, Louis. "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses'' Adapted from
the web pages of the Society of Social Research, U of Chicago:
http://w.spc.uchicago.edu/ssr1/PRELIMS/STRAT/stadd.html#ALTHUSSER
Bailey, Herbert. The Art and Science of Book Publishing Harper, New York: 1978
Hardt, Michael and Antonio Negri. Empire. Harvard UP, 2000.
Fotopoulos, Takis and Alexandros Gezerlis. "Hardt and Negri's Empire:
a new Communist Manifesto or a reformist welcome to neo-liberal globalization." Democracy
and Nature 8.2, July 2002
Heartattack 31 August 2001 Goleta, CA
Maximumrockandroll 238 March 2003 San Francisco
Mclaughlin, Robert. "Non-Profit Literary Lublishing: Theory, History, and Issues." unpublished
manuscript.
Microcosm Publishing 1 May 2003 http://www.microcosmpublishing.com
Punk Planet 30 March/April 1999 Chicago
"Self-publishing, or, The Demands of Anonymity." American Book Review.
16.5 Dec. (1994-95): 3, 30.
Yamaguchi, Jeffrey. "Print-Non-Demand" No Media Kings 1 May 2003 http://www.nomediakings.org/pod.htm