Independent Thinking

I'm at at an author web day, organized by the Independent Alliance of publishers.

Just had an interestin' conversation with Ben from Fabers.

I think we maybe both believe publishing is going to change much more rapidly and radically than some of the other authors and publishers here.

If music and films can be grabbed from the web for free, then why not e-books?  ( Dunno why I've gone to italics - not because i think what I'm saying is so fascinating..) No reason at all.

Contrary to what our bosses are telling us, territories are going to be impossible protect. The part of British publishing which is about distributing big American authors, for example.

So... we'll focus on our own creativity more, and try to make sure we get world rights.

And the sensibility is changing from a supermarket sensibility to an internet one. i believe that in a year's time, publishers will be asking themselves 'is this an internet author?' in the same way that now we ask ourselves 'Is this a supermarket author?'

Yesterday I had lunch with Frank Skinner in my role as his editor. He asked me if I think that all authors are mad? I wanted to say that I think that being a celebrity tends to make you mad. That being a celebrity infantilzes you. That our celebrity-obsessed culture makes us all a little mad to some degree.

One of the things that makes being a celebrity very unhealthy these days is the new form of consciousness that is evolving with the web. We don't nurture our own private mental space the way we used to - we share the the same mental space. Someone like Frank who puts himself out there is very open to attack.  People think they have a right to him and that he has no right to privacy.

To some extent even just writing a blog puts any of us at risk, and adds to the danger that any self-generated sense of self is eroded and replaced by a sense of self derived from others.

Frank sense of self seems very self-generated, though - and I wonder if it comes from his catholicism?

Comments

[The Future]

I'm interested in hearing your description of what makes someone an "internet author" vs. a "supermarket author" or any other kind of author?

Is it that the writer is simply an active blogger and therefore comes to the publisher with a built-in web audience which the publisher can hope to exploit, ahem, leverage? And, if so, what value does the publisher add to this equation?

More specifically, if we're talking about a technology-driven change in the future of publishing, then we're talking about one that ultimately will be dominated by next generation Kindle-like e-book reading products, which eventually will be as thin as a single sheet of electronic paper upon which users/readers will be able to wirelessly download content. Such E-fiber-based paper already exists, although it's still very expensive, but it even feels just like real paper. Soft, supple, and every bit as tactile as the familiar stuff we love so much. We also now have advance OLED lighting and juiced up wi-fi is on its way, not to mention nano computing, so all of the elements are in place or on their way.

So, to get a glimpse of what the future will be like, you need only imagine yourself holding a small paperback book that looks and feels like a real paperback book, and with nothing more than a cover and perhaps a single page inside of it, which also looks and feels exactly like a real sheet of paper. The thing is that the cover image and interior content will change as you download whatever it is that you wish to read, from today's London Times to a new fictional work that has drawn your interest. In other words, you won't need to take a trip to the local mega bookstore, or small independent bookshop, businesses which, sadly, are doomed perhaps even far more than publishers.

In any event, if you don't like a paperback format, you might opt to buy a simple scroll of electronic paper instead, which you'd conveniently tuck in your pocket and unscroll whenever you like to download whatever you like. Thus, rather ironically, humanity will go back to the future by reading from scrolls once again!

This may all seem far-fetched, but the fact is that this technology is not all that far removed from where we are now. Give it about thirty years or so. No matter. Even in the present time, a Kindle-driven future or something along those lines beckons. But then, this being the case, why wouldn't authors directly sell their own content themselves (sans publishers) via any number of Internet outlets, from Amazon to Ebay to new online vendors TBD? What do you propose that publishers might add to the equation, even in the upcoming years? Will they simply become glorified proofreaders? Will they offer nothing more than good publishing-housekeeping seals of approval? Or will they merely offer marketing consulting that specializes in wireless e-publishing?

My best guess is that if publishers continue to exist in any capacity, it will still have everything to do with the exercise of good taste. I'm not sure if you've read many books on the future of the information age (I have), but even if you knew nothing about this subject you could probably guess that there's one thing we all can expect: More information. And more information beyond that. Too much information, in fact, for any one person to digest. This is exactly why from the very inception of the Internet all of the scholars, academics, and expert prognosticators have predicted that "information agents" will be of ever increasing importance. That is, "agents" being those people who possess the ability to furnish their customers with the exact sort of information that they want and need.

It is no accident that such people long ago predicted the need for search-and-find features on the Internet, and then, voila! Within years we had Google. And so, I personally would suggest that the surviving publishers of the future will be those with a nose for what people want to read, and so they find it for them, or develop it, and thus, it won't be remarkably different than what it is today. When you thing about it, what are today's publishers but "content agents?" So, I don't imagine this will change, even if content delivery formats change. However, I do believe that the best publishers will be those who don't merely possess good taste, but those that come up with the best interface for discovering (searching and finding) the exact taste of their readers.

However, perhaps I've altogether misconstrued what you were describing when you referred to someone as an "internet author." Perhaps you see this as having more to do with the quality of the writing itself? Is that the case? If so, what are those qualities vs. prior forms of writing? Is it merely a matter of putting LOL at the end of a sentence and that sort of thing? LOL. If so, then you might want to start working on the world's first line of text-messaging novels!

More seriously, is this all a matter of addressing the relatively short attention spans that the Internet inherently invites but which books inherently shun, or God forbid, worse, the opposite - as good writing actually serves to increase attention spans? In which case, won't those two markets split at some point? After all, I'm sure you'll agree, some content simply cannot be communicated through text messages! What is more, and what so few publishers realize at present (no doubt in their haste to meet this year's profit goals), is that an increasingly complex future demands longer attention spans and books that develop them!

As for people owning their own mental space, why on Earth would you think this is the case? As someone who has spent vast amounts of time online at various sites, listservs, forums, clubs, and blogs, I would suggest it's quite the opposite. What I mean to say is that, looking at it on the bright side, vast numbers of people have discovered a whole new realm of self-expression, BUT, it is one which mandates that one engage in some level of self-reflection before one ever "posts" one's thoughts to be shared with others. Of course, in the past, people have never needed the Internet in order to be reflective, but there's no denying that online forums definitely have provided a huge incentive for such behavior.

Meanwhile, on the dark side, it must be admitted that you routinely encounter people online who clearly have all too much of their own mental space and seem relatively incapable of dialogue, just like in the real world, and unfortunately, no outer thoughts or out reality shall ever penetrate their inner sanctums, if you will. But either way, the online community and online world shows every evidence that, more than ever, people are quite capable of living in their own mental space, even if they are likewise sharing this space with others.

Now, if you're talking about things like pornography and the like invading people's mental spaces, that's an entirely different matter, and one which I personally would largely chalk up to the fact that for better or worse, we moderns have left ourselves open to such invasions of our mental space, if not foolishly invited these intruders with an oversized welcome mat. But that's a whole different discussion.

Finally, I'm a bit curious as to why you should think that Catholicism would make any person's sense of self more or less "self-generated?" Most people would argue the opposite inasmuch as they see the thoughts of Catholics as being driven by the Church and his Holiness. I don't personally ascribe to such notions whatsoever, but I am curious as to why you would imagine that the opposite might be the case, that is, Catholics being relatively more inclined to defining or generating themselves from within rather than from without?