Why Don't More Writers Buy Books?


A new submission model—wherein writers must buy a book if they want their work to be considered for publication—is shaking up the literary world.

The publishing industry faces an odd set of supply-demand imbalances. Supply of printed books outstrips demand, which is why remainder tables get piled sky-high, publisher layoffs abound, and author advances have wilted. Supply of writers also outstrips demand for their services, which is why the statistics about getting an agent for your book are so dismal.

But wait. There is a glitch in this economic equation. If so many writers are desperate to be published, those same “so many” should also be reading books, right?—doing to unto others, and all that. Theoretically—or common-sensically—each writer is also a reader, and thus there should as healthy a demand for reading material as there are writers who want to be published. Even more, you have to read in order to write. So it should be a big traffic circle—writers to readers, readers to writers, of supply and demand. Right?

Clearly not. Literary magazines, which traditionally are great places for new writers to break in, receive enormous numbers of submissions—thousands more than they can accept. Yet these same magazines sell barely enough copies to survive. This can only be so if people do not buy the publications into which they seek entry (although some of them may be reading them at the library).

What we have is a glut of people who want to be writers, who do not buy the consumer products of the industry they are seeking to join. This is not exactly the same as everyone wanting free content online, though it is analogous to, say, thousands of wannabe newspaper reporters never shelling out 50 cents for the local paper, or graduates of magazine feature writing courses refusing to pay for magazines.

The above scenario is what I imagine has been frustrating the editors of Tin House, one of the best literary magazines in the country. Last week, they announced a stunning new requirement for anyone wishing to submit writing for possible publication: All must buy a book first. From a “real-life” bookstore. And submit a receipt: ?

"In the spirit of discovering new talent as well as supporting established authors and the bookstores who support them, Tin House Books will accept unsolicited manuscripts…as long as each submission is accompanied by a receipt for a book from a bookstore. ... Writers who cannot afford to buy a book or cannot get to an actual bookstore are encouraged to explain why in haiku or one sentence (100 words or fewer). Tin House Books and Tin House magazine will consider the purchase of e-books as a substitute only if the writer explains why he or she cannot go to his or her neighborhood bookstore, why he or she prefers digital reads, what device, and why.?? Writers are invited to videotape, film, paint, photograph, animate, twitter, or memorialize in any way (that is logical and/or decipherable) the process of stepping into a bookstore and buying a book to send along for our possible amusement and/or use on our Web site.”


While this new requirement may seem draconian and cruel to the poor, struggling writer, many literary magazines and presses have submission fees ($25, say, to read your work). Tin House is not asking writers to fund itself, but to fund the distribution centers that sell it, and, more indirectly, the writers and publishers who supply content.

In response to Tin House’s requirement, Dzanc Books launched a more philanthropic and open version of the readers’ fee. For the month of July, if you buy a (literary fiction) book from an independent bookstore, Dzanc will donate a book to a school or library. Dzanc is reaching out to readers and writers alike—one need not submit anything to the press in order for them to donate. You just have to buy a book.

These new promotions seek to redress the rising disjunction between the supply of writers and the diminishing demand for writing. We could leap to two quick conclusions: First, that writers are not reading enough, and second, that libraries (and/or book lending and online full-text publication) are doing a bang-up job. Let us hope the answer lies in number two. But in case it is number one, why not ask wannabes to help sustain the business they hope one day to join?

Photo (cc) by Flickr user Margolove

via Chela Horsdal / Twitter

Amazon's "The Man in the High Castle" debuted the first episode of its final season last week.

The show is loosely based on an alternative history novel by Philip K. Dick that postulates what would happen if Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan controlled the United States after being victorious in World War II.

Keep Reading Show less
via Mike Mozart / Flickr

Chick-fil-A is the third-largest fast food chain in America, behind McDonald's and Starbucks, raking in over $10 billion a year.

But for years, the company has faced boycotts for supporting anti-LGBT charities, including the Salvation Army, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and the Paul Anderson Youth Home.

The Salvation Army faced criticism after a leader in the organization implied that gay people "deserve to die" and the company also came under fire after refusing to offer same-sex couples health insurance. But the organization swears it's evolving on such issues.

via Thomas Hawk / Flickr

The Fellowship of Christian Athletes explicitly announced it was anti gay marriage in a recent "Statement of Faith."

God instituted marriage between one man and one woman as the foundation of the family and the basic structure of human society. For this reason, we believe that marriage is exclusively the union of one man and one woman.

The Paul Anderson Youth Home teaches boys that homosexuality is wrong and that same-sex marriage is "rage against Jesus Christ and His values."

RELATED: The 1975's singer bravely kissed a man at a Dubai concert to protest anti-LGBT oppression

In 2012, Chick-fil-A's CEO, Dan Cathy, made anti same-sex marriage comments on a radio broadcast:

I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, "We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage". I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about.

But the chicken giant has now decided to change it's says its charitable donation strategy because it's bad for business...Not because being homophobic is wrong.

The company recently lost several bids to provide concessions in U.S. airports. A pop-up shop in England was told it would not be renewed after eight days following LGBTQ protests.

Chick-fil-A also has plans to expand to Boston, Massachusetts where its mayor, Thomas Menino, pledged to ban the restaurant from the city.

via Wikimedia Commons

"There's no question we know that, as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are," Chick-fil-A President and Chief Operating Officer Tim Tassopoulos told Bisnow. "There are lots of articles and newscasts about Chick-fil-A, and we thought we needed to be clear about our message."

RELATED: Alan Turing will appear on the 50-pound note nearly 70 years after being persecuted for his sexuality

Instead, the Chick-fil-A Foundation plans to give $9 million to organizations that support education and fight homelessness. Which is commendable regardless of the company's troubled past.

"If Chick-Fil-A is serious about their pledge to stop holding hands with divisive anti-LGBTQ activists, then further transparency is needed regarding their deep ties to organizations like Focus on the Family, which exist purely to harm LGBTQ people and families," Drew Anderson, GLAAD's director of campaigns and rapid response, said in a statement.

Chick-fil-A's decision to back down from contributing to anti-LGBT charities shows the power that people have to fight back against companies by hitting them where it really hurts — the pocket book.

The question remains: If you previously avoided Chick-fil-A because it supported anti-LGBT organizations, is it now OK to eat there? Especially when Popeye's chicken sandwich is so good people will kill for it?


Oh, irony. You are having quite a day.

The Italian region of Veneto, which includes the city of Venice, is currently experiencing historic flooding. Venice Mayor Luigi Brugnaro has stated that the flooding is a direct result of climate change, with the tide measuring the highest level in 50 years. The city (which is actually a collection of 100 islands in a lagoon—hence its famous canal streets), is no stranger to regular flooding, but is currently on the brink of declaring a state of emergency as waters refuse to recede.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
via Gage Skidmore / Flickr and nrkbeta / flickr

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) dropped a bombshell on Tuesday, announcing it had over 900 emails that White House aide Stephen Miller sent to former Breitbart writer and editor Katie McHugh.

According to the SPLC, in the emails, Miller aggressively "promoted white nationalist literature, pushed racist immigration stories and obsessed over the loss of Confederate symbols after Dylann Roof's murderous rampage."

Keep Reading Show less
via Twitter / Bye,Bye Harley Davidson

The NRA likes to diminish the role that guns play in fatal shootings by saying, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

Which is the same logic as, "Hammers don't build roofs, people build roofs." No duh. But it'd be nearly impossible to build a roof without a hammer.

So, shouldn't the people who manufacture guns share some responsibility when they are used for the purpose they're made: killing people? Especially when the manufacturers market the weapon for that exact purpose?

Keep Reading Show less