Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

"Publishing has never been in my lifetime in such a powerless state as it is now."

Posted by on Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 11:21 AM

12d3/1237400964-n2838.jpgApparently, sci-fi author Bruce Sterling (who wrote the great poli-sci-fi novel Distraction) gave a great meltdown of a keynote speech at South by South West on Monday. The title of this post is being repeated on Twitter as the big money quote. The full text or video of the speech doesn't seem to be online just yet, but he apparently declared that the emperor that is modern publishing is absolutely buck naked:


American publishing is in distress. The book stores are going, the big centralised publishers are very heavily indebted and they are small sections of the centralised American media apparatus that have lost social credibility.... People don't pay attention to novels. The socially important parts of American communication are not taking part in novels. You can write them but they are not changing public discourse... You can also say that everybody in society has moved up a notch and everybody just wants the executive summary.

Once video of this (or the full printed text of the speech) goes online, expect the inter-threads to be strumming with great hyperbole. I'll have more to say when that happens.

 

Comments (8) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Will you have anything to say when Erica's previous thefts surface?
Posted by oh, it was just this ONE time on March 18, 2009 at 11:29 AM
2
"The socially important parts of American communication are not taking part in novels. You can write them but they are not changing public discourse..."

And the really sad thing is, you can replace "novels" with theatre, the print media, even film. Is there anywhere that public discourse IS actually happening in a meaningful way? Where we can seek to change society for the better through long-form mediums? Blogs and soundbites aren't meaninful -- they're fast food thought.
Posted by Cracker Jack on March 18, 2009 at 11:32 AM
3
Maybe it's the novels' fault? It certainly is a two-way street with film. Americans like shitty films, and Americans make shitty films. Maybe art forms only have limited lifespans.

Interestingly, this is something of a golden age for non-fiction.
Posted by Fnarf on March 18, 2009 at 11:39 AM
4
Why and how does the success of publishing hinge on the importance of novels? Novels make up a fraction of book publishing nowadays. What is it, like 10 percent, presumably including trashy novels?

Yes, long-form creative writers have a lot to worry about, but it seems like Mr. Sterling doesn't know much about the publishing industry.
Posted by keshmeshi on March 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM
5
Not counting graphic novels.
Posted by Will in Seattle on March 18, 2009 at 12:09 PM
6
I'd love to see the rest of this.
Posted by mint chocolate chip on March 18, 2009 at 12:58 PM
7
Recently the New York Times posted a video clip of a John Updike/John Cheever interview from the early 80s. Cheever -- who I'd never seen speak before, and who, given his reputation as an alcoholic, disappointed me by coming across more like Thurston Howell III rather than the Mickey Rourke character in Barfly -- said something like, "Novels are the one place in America where truly informed men and women can communicate with one another." While that ideas was rather priggish, I found it fascinating. If it was ever true (doubtful), it sure hasn't been true in my lifetime. I'm in my 40s, and fiction has always been on the musty margins of mass culture. Please do post more about Sterling's speech as it surfaces. Thanks.
Posted by Cosmo McBallz on March 18, 2009 at 1:41 PM
8
Interesting notion about how Americans have "moved up" and now just want summaries.
Books, and novels in particular, have declined in importance not because there aren't any good ones being written, but because fewer people have the time to read. Think about it: if you're a driving commuter, with a family, what time to you have to read? At bedtime, when you won't remember what you've read or stay awake long enough to make a dent in the book?

Serious books are best read in longer stretches where one can devote full attention to the material. How many of us have multiple 3 hour blocks that we can spend reading a !novel! per week?

I've often wondered about people who are voracious readers. Do they remember anything about the 10 books they read last month? Do they do anything else with their time?

Books are important, but not because of the bindings and cover art. Books convey ideas. So do a lot of other mediums, like HTML Kindle & satellite radio, for example. If there were no alternative methods of expressing & sharing ideas, then a declining book industry might be a concern. With so many other options available, crying about indebted publishers starts to sound like mourning the buggy whip industry. We found something better, so let's pro-gress, shall we?
Posted by Sir Vic on March 18, 2009 at 4:20 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy