What Does Alastair Reynolds’ Contract Say About the Publishing World?

So, the SFF publishing world is drooling in envy at Alastair Reynolds’ new contract for 1 million pounds for 10 books over 10 years. I’m curious – what does this say about the publishing industry? It’s often all doom and gloom that ebooks will put the publishing world out of business, that novels are dying, that people don’t read, that the recession will kill books, etc. Frankly, I don’t buy all the ‘sky is falling’ arguments that come out from time to time, and when I see a SFF author get a contract like this, it makes me think that the publishers don’t actually think things are as bad as they say they are. Or is this just business as usual?

So, a lot of people who read this blog know more about this industry than I do – what do you guys think?

Just How Much Do You Like Author Blogs?

I have to say that I love author blogs - I like the greater connection that I feel when I read there thoughts on whatever they choose to blog. I like that I can interact directly with them in a way that simply wasn't possible even a few years ago. I think it's good for the author in a business sense as well. And I also think that many, many people also like author blogs.

But, what do you feel about the potential for unintended consequences? How do you feel about it be written into contracts that authors must blog __ amount of posts per __ amount of time? Does that make you feel uncomfortable? (I sure do) Well, this is exactly what seems to be happening.

This is news to me (but not entirely suprising) and I found out from a reference on Orbit's own blog. A new author of theirs (Jeff Somers) has started to meet his contractual requirement by blogging - and it's quite entertaining. Here's the blog where he talks about being required to blog - it sounds awefully tongue-in-cheek, but there is also some real bitterness there.


Thoughts?


PS - Also, what are the implications of even clicking on the link to the blog? Seems to reinforce the requirement to me? Isn't life simple?

PSS - I've read a bit of his blog - it's hilarious, really you should go and read many of the entries. And now I want to read his book - see I'm a sheep now.

PSS - Of course I really wonder if he's contractually obligated or not. It's certainly an entertaining way to frame his blog - maybe I'm not a sheep, perhaps a goat.

Sad News It would Seem

Well there is no official announcement, but it the rumor mill is reporting that the Science Fiction Book Club is being disbanded and their two, long-time editors are now out of a job. While I'm not a member, even I can recognize a blow to the SFF publishing world. Best of luck to all those adversely affected.

And to give a short update on goings-on around here - well, I'm just insanely busy with real life. Work is averaging 12-hour days right now and thing at home are hectic as my wife and I prepare for our first new addition to the family later this year. So, reading time is being impacted a bit. Anyway, expect my review for Brasyl sometime soon over at Scalpel and I'm about 200 pages into Acacia at the moment. I plan to read Red Seas Under Red Skies next (it's been taunting me for far too long now).

Orbit Books in the US

Orbit Books will be launching their US imprint later this year and right now they are running a great contest where you could win their entire first year's lineup. Authors include Brian Ruckley, Ian M. Banks, K.J. Parker, Kevin J. Anderson, and number of new authors. The contest is here, and the rules here – basically US residents 18 and older.

Cover Art - an Article and a Plea

Laura Resnick has posted this 5-part article about cover art that was originally published around 10 years ago. It is a fascinating and troubling look into cover art and its importance to a writer’s success. A writer’s career can be made or unmade by cover art, and they have very little control over it – of course do they have any true understanding of the market and how it works?

As interesting as it is, I have to think that this article is out of date. As I say here, cover art has almost no impact on my buying a book (the title is probably most important to gaining my initial interest). Either I’m very rare, or I reflect a new trend in the market. This is the world of the internet, on-line buying, blogs, endless reviews of books easily accessible with a computer, and fewer and fewer actual book stores (and it seems that more often they actively hide everything but the best sellers).

I believe that publishers, art directors, and marketers need to give us readers a bit more credit when it comes to cover art, and realize that to us end purchasers – the cover may actually be the last thing we see when we choose to buy a book. The buyers for the big bookstore chains need to get with the times as well – STOP JUDGING BOOKS BY THEIR COVERS! The out-dated model of reliance on cover art may be a reason for declining sales of books (among others of course). Work on a good title, a good jacket description, get the book out for reviews in traditional and non-traditional sources, and good cover art – but remember, in an on-line world, it’s the words that matter.

It’s a whole new world out there and I believe its past time for some evolution here…

…but what do I know, I’m just a guy who buys a lot of books.

Lecture Me Not

I recently bought a collection of short stories that was published by a small, independent outfit. In the back, after the ‘about the author’ entry is a ‘note to the reader’ that gives me a lecture. The tone of this short letter is non-threatening in an effort to not come across too high and mighty, but it failed, leaving me a bit peeved off. This letter reminds me that I should not buy used books, sell my books to used books stores, visit libraries, and it cautions me to not even lend my books to a friend or colleague – unless they would likely buy that book or others.

The intent of this letter is to remind me as a reader that authors don’t get paid unless you are buying a new book. In the chain of money, when a new book is purchased the publisher is getting money, which eventually makes its way to an author. When a book is bought used, that money is not going to the publisher – they’ve already had their cut for that book. And clearly, no profits are made when a book is lent by individuals or libraries.

Authors generally don’t make much money, most need a day job. This letter implies that it is my duty as a reader to buy new books to support authors and publishers. That somehow I have sinned against an author when I buy their books used, or god forbid, check out a copy from the library.

I will admit that I hadn’t previously thought much about buying used books, and how that money is not trickling back to the author. I do see the point in supporting these authors, especially authors who don’t have big contracts, and are not as widely read. And I agree that authors need money to function in society, just as I do (which the letter was kind enough to remind me of). However, the inclusion of this letter leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. Who are these people to lecture me on how I should spend my money. They know nothing of my finances, of how much I spend on books, on how often I buy new books versus used books.

The more juvenile side of me wants to boycott this publisher and to never buy a new book again. The realist in me knows I already spend too much on books, and if anything, I should not be buying books at all at the moment. My tax dollars pay for the library, I should use it more. But things are never simple.

The truth is I want to buy new books – hardback books at that. But this is just unrealistic considering my financial place in the world. I’m relatively secure and should appreciate it more, but can I afford to spend $30 for every book I buy? Now consider that I’ll buy about 100 books in an average year; that’s $3000 per year on books (not counting taxes). Sure, I can cut that down a bit by sales and such, but the point remains whether I’m spending $500, $1500, or $5000 on books in a year. That is just a lot of money – especially considering that all too often the quality of the book binding is just not what it once was. I’ve had books fall apart after two reads, and I’m not that hard on books.

Yet another factor is the already rampant consumerism in the western world and how it relates to the production of books. Not enough books are constructed out of recycled materials, most books require the death of trees and all the consequences associated with deforestation and yes, global warming. Right now, reading a used book (or recycled book in this context) is much more environmentally conscious than reading a new book. I suppose I could always read an e-book, but what that does to my eyes and sanity deserves an article in its own right – let’s just leave it at I’m not a fan of e-books.

So, in the end, I’m quite irritated that some small publisher, whom I did buy a new book from, had the audacity to print a lecture telling me that it is unethical to buy used books and that I need to think twice about lending books to friends. Yes, it’s a bit of an overreaction, but then I’ve never been very good with condescending lectures from anyone about anything. I entirely sympathize with authors, especially the majority of whom don’t earn a lot of money. I too have to work for a living and can certainly relate, but I can’t agree that this justifies the printing of this letter in its current form.

So, has this letter from the publisher managed to alter my buying habits? Only in one small way, I am now less likely to buy a book from them in the future – new or used. Not their intent I should think.

EDIT: Due to popular demand, the name of the publisher: Yard Dog Press