The Literary Landfill

One of the odder quirks of publishing is that bookshops never actually buy books from the publishers - they just stock em on a sale-or-return basis. Since retailers also get publishers to pay for shelf space, you'd think that it was a lot nicer being a retailer than a publisher.

The sale-or-return idea dates back to the depression of the 1930s, where publishers introduced the idea as an emergency way to make new titles viable for retailers. Anyhow, want to guess how many books are printed then pulped? 5%? 10%? Place your bets please ladies & gentlemen. The real answer is:

"In 2005, roughly 1.5 billion books were shipped in the U.S., according to the Association of American Publishers. Of those, 465 million, or 31 percent, were returned to publishers. " - Bloomberg

Crazy, huh? As green issues rise up the agenda - and as publishers note that they're not exactly doing their businesses much good by the practice - then firm sale is likely to come in. Good for the planet, of course, but the average landfill is likely to lose a little of its former class ...

Congratulations!

Just to report, that Mark Cundy's book A Man and a Pram is out now with Apex Publishing - a small indie publisher, I've not come across before. Mark is a perfectly ordinary bloke who one day decided to up sticks and walk round the world. Which he did. I'm not quite sure who gets to pick what walking round the world actually involves. (Go to the North Pole, walk three paces south, then trot round in a circle?) In any case, in Mark's case it involved walking 5,500 miles through 3 continents. Good on you Mark and best of luck with the launch.

As ever, bloggees interested in the book should simply hyperlink themselves over here to enquire further.

Congratulations!

To Nick Clough for his A Safe Place to Kill, which is about to be published by Robert Hale. RH is a really good, focused independent that knows its trade & plies it well. I hope NC starts to build a stonking reputation. May the blood begin to flow! e-champagne all round.

The book's out in the next few days. You can buy it here.

shill, shim, shin, ship, shit

HB: if you want to find out why Simon Brooke has only this - " shill, shim, shin, ship, shit" - to say to me, then you ought to go and read the comments to my BANG! post. It's good chat.

The Future Cometh

HB: Great news. HarperCollins in the US has announced a new venture that will deal with some of the 'vexed issues' that have long plagued publishing. Among those issues: authors' advances. The new venture will do away with advances altogether, instead rewarding authors with a 'share of profits'. (The article does not say 'if any' - though most books published do not make money.)

Needless to say, I'm very excited by this development. If only it had been introduced some years ago, I'd have been able to take advantage. Of course, I'd be as thin as a string bean ... and my wife would consist only of air ... but hey, you can't have everything. Sign me up!

Piece of Cake...

TK:

BANG!

HB: You'll have guessed from my long blog-silence (blilence?) that the answer to the question raised in my last post: was "read and write simultaneously". I've been writing - and reading - like a dervish for the last week or two and enjoying it grotesquely.

Yesterday, Nule was away most of the day in London and only got back close to midnight. Usually I'd miss my wife. Not so yesterday. I churned away at the Storytelling Ape, and was vaguely disappointed when 10.00 pm came round and I needed to start thinking about bath, dinner etc. I'm REALLY loving this book - always a good sign with me. I do always enjoy writing, but this one has something pretty special; I feel it.

But let me ask you this. Words. Do you believe:

Theory 1) Apart from a few special case exceptions (onomatopoeia and word 'clusters' like lump, dump, thump, stump, hump, etc) there is no real connection between the sound of a word and its meaning. Words are, in this sense, just arbitrary signifiers.

or do you believe:-

Theory 2) Balls to all that. Of course sounds flavour words. Especially with short, physical or otherwise basic words, sound importantly flavours meaning. Or rather, whether a word gets adopted into a language (and how it gets adapted once it's there) depends very much on whether it sounds right to the ear.


Linguists tend to favour option (1) . That's the respectable option. Personally, I favour option (2), the disreputable but more poetic option. For anyone vacillating - or anyone interested in probing further - then go to Margaret Magnus' Magnificently Magical Site. I spent a long time there and had a lovely time. I think that, unless you're a dyed-in-the-wool Theory One-er, then you'll be a confirmed Theory Two-er by the time you leave MM's site.

Oh yes, and let me ask you this. Without checking a dictionary, please match up the following words to the definitions below.

Words
Leet
Lod
Lomen

Definitions
Roof truss / roof beam
Spiritual chant or incantation
Regional name for oystercatcher (small, long-beaked waterbird)

If you are a theory 1-er, then you can't say without checking a dictionary. If you're a theory 2-er (or just an ordinary English speaker) then I reckon you'll have quite a strong hunch ...

Let me know your thoughts & we'll all have a heated debate.