Book Clubs and the Future of Publishing
- Posted by: Anne Trubek
- on September 4, 2009 at 6:00 am
When it comes to books, we Americans have author loyalty (I can’t wait to read the new Lorrie Moore novel), and bookstore loyalty (I will only shop at local independent bookstores, like Visible Voice or Mac’s Backs). Both forms of faithfulness offer perks, often intertwined. You can, for instance, hear your favorite author read at your local bookstore, buy a copy and have him sign it (and if you are really lucky, join him in a book club discussion of his novel, as Clevelanders can with Dan Chaon’s Await Your Reply).
But we do not have publisher loyalty. I have no idea who is publishing the new Lorrie Moore novel, or who is putting out E.L. Doctorow’s Homer and Langley, just published to great reviews. This hazy disappearance of the producer of books from reader consciousness does not happen in most other forms of culture and entertainment. We often connect movies with studios (especially ones like Dreamworks or Pixar), television with stations (think Bravo and HBO), music with labels (Deutsche Grammophone), visual arts with galleries (Leo Castelli). But only the most in-the-know publishing insiders can tell you what makes a piece of fiction a “Random House title” as opposed to one from Scribner’s, say.
Small, independent presses, which should have more cultish followers, lose out as a result. Few of us identify as an “indie book” sort of reader, though we all know those who say they are lovers of indie film or music. I would wager that people would be happy to have a convenient shorthand for their literary tastes as well. (Interestingly, a new form of brand identification is rising: platform loyalty. Do you read on a Kindle, Sony e-reader, use Scribd or refuse to do any of the above? This question will be asked more and more.)
Book clubs, however, are a time-tested way that readers identify with a larger reading community. Back in the day, leading critics and writers like Lionel Trilling and W.H. Auden selected books for a club called the Reader’s Subscription (for more about this interesting experiment, read this excellent book), and wrote newsletters about their choices. That club appealed to a more literary community than do the Book of the Month and Oprah’s Book Club, both of which are still popular today.
One way publishers might generate interest and brand loyalty is to offer a subscription model that works like a book club. McSweeney’s has done so successfully, and they are the one exception to my rule. “I read McSweeney’s” is a fine way of telling someone about your taste while flirting at a coffee shop. (And by the way, the next title in McSweeney’s club could not be more exciting—a big furry edition of Where The Wild Things Are!)
Powell’s Books is also trying out the model with their recently launched subscription club called Indiepensibles. For $39.95 every six weeks, they send you a signed first edition of an independent title. They add in some bonus materials too—always a surprise (log on to their blog to find out how they assemble each shipment). Indispensables makes me even more of a fan of Powell’s, but again, they are a bookstore—not a publisher.
Perhaps publishers could use the economic downturn and the supposed death of print to their advantage, and convince consumers to band together into a subculture based on retro-cool cache, akin to the revival of vinyl. Book club selections, after all, would be delivered via the post. How fun might it be to sit around waiting for the mailman again? I can see the Penguin T-shirts now.
DISCUSSION: 10 Comments
Great shout out to Mac’s Backs, I have been to Cleveland Heights numerous times on business and often find myself in there while stopping for a bite at Tommy’s.
I’m interested in whether there is value, long-term, in publishing houses. Their role in life seems very akin to the record labels (ie, sourcing new talent, supporting production and then promotion). As a variety of forces have rendered the labels obsolete (cheaper production, grass-roots online promotion etc.), so different forces are leaving publishing houses obsolete. Why doesn’t the next Dan Brown publish his book through Amazon (delivered via print on demand, or directly to a Kindle), and promote it via myspace/ facebook/ twitter/ PR? The next Dan Brown would be left with a much bigger slice of the pie than she/he would get in the traditional model. This post suggests the publishers find a new role in life, as a recommendation service… that’s all well and good, but up against Oprah, facebook groups, services like iLike etc., I don’t like their chances.
Fascinating that Sebastian Buck (Head of Strategy at Good, apparently) is so down on print. Ironically, the magazine you guys publish is by far the best thing you’ve ever done. I keep trying to give your website a chance, but I’m disappointed every time I come. Sorry to be so critical, but I rarely find anything new posted here. And instead of meaningful interaction, comments are largely written by your staffers. Maybe the Head of Editorial should weigh in next on the fate of print…
Why do you publish a magazine if you don’t believe in the future of print? Is there something you’re not telling us??
I don’t think anyone here is down on the medium of print, its the current business models behind it that are in desperate need of an overhaul.
Personally, I find this to be an informative bit of information that gives pause for thought; publishing houses are doing horribly these days, and they are going to have to pick up the pace to stay in the race. My heart bleeds for the poor indies out there. Also, Sebastian has a point questioning whether the next DB wouldn’t do better on their own; with thousands of writers trying to break into publishing, and the market not being what it used to, getting published just got ten times harder. Introducing Kindle really blows for publishers especially if it takes off. We are in a transition time with electronic books vs. hardcover and it is important to look toward the horizon and wonder about other venues. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out in the next ten years, where the trends will go, and how creative writers will get as far as getting themselves published, and how creative publishing houses will get as far as re-creating or re-designing the next hard cover, maybe not so bulky, wasting so many pages, sleeker editing, and the name of the game for the future; a cheaper product so as to compete with the electronic version. Uber relevent.
Ilove – thanks for your comment; as Casey said, I’m not down on print per se, I’m down on the structure of the industry. Time and again, the internet has effectively removed middlemen (’disintermediation’ in dotcom-era language), and that’s no bad thing when middlemen have acted as oligopolistic gatekeepers. About the utility of our site; we’re working hard to make it more useful. But one point that’s relevant here – we can reach millions more people online than we ever could via the magazine. It’s tough to argue that we, or the print industry can afford to ignore that.
here’s an interesting article … Dan Brown’s new book is selling better on the Kindle than in hardback http://paidcontent.org/article/419-dan-browns-new-book-selling-better-on-kindle-than-in-hardcover-via-amaz/ How reliant on Doubleday was he for those sales?
You mean, selling better… on Amazon.
Octopus Books, a small press here in Portland, already works on a subscription model. For $56 a year you receive every title they publish. Of course you can still buy the titles individually. I’m sure they aren’t alone if one really looked into this approach.I think the crux of what you are getting at has merit. Publishers needn’t try to be everything to everybody, that mode is largely becoming obsolete in every arena of life. But niche press’ can foster a following and loyal customer base that will trust in their ability to print quality titles, and therefore feel more comfortable in the subscription model.The comments though get at the larger point. Would this just be one of the last breaths of an industry being strangled by the efficiency and immediacy of digital?