Subject: (urth) GW sightings

From: MBS 808 <mbs808 at yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:43:38 +0000

While websurfing at work, I do not always have time to
read articles of interest that I happen upon so I
print them out to read on my train ride home...
usually no more than a handful of items, from a wide
range of sources from pop culture stuff to news to
tech to whatever...

Anyway, rare is it to find one GW reference, let alone
two, so I thought I'd share them...

First - from a music review site that occasionally
veers into other topics.   This was one of those
occasions and the author had suggestions for the final
two Harry Potter books.

http://www.furia.com/twas/twas0445.html

GW reference: Half the revolutions are for laughs.
Only half, but at least half. This isn't Beezus and
Ramona, but neither is it Frodo and Sauron. Re-read
Lloyd Alexander and The Princess Bride, not C. S.
Lewis and Gene Wolfe. This will be the trickiest part
of the final two years. Six and seven will make four
and five seem frothy and untroubled, by comparison,
but this is still a franchise built on adventure and
awe. 

Second, a review of a graphic novel, (another volume
is briefly reviewed in this week's village voice).

http://www.ninthart.com/display.php?article=251

GW Reference:  While this is the major plotline of
"Sin-Eater," it's hardly the entire story. The most
important character in the novel isn't Jaeger or the
Grosvenors, but Anvard itself. Like Thomas M. Disch's
334 or Gene Wolfe's BOOK OF THE NEW SUN, FINDER
creates a fully-realised world that exists as both a
fascinating, detailed future world and as a sly
commentary on our society. 

I also stumbled upon a third this morning, from a more
likely source, an editorial from Night Shade Books.

http://www.nightshadebooks.com/corona/corona12.html

GW mention: In today’s climate, an acknowledged master
like Gene Wolfe would never have gotten a second or
third novel published. In fact… I would hazard to say
that without David Hartwell, most of Gene Wolfe’s work
would not be in print today. As a senior editor at Tor
Mr. Hartwell has done a great job of advocating for
quality material. And Patrick Nielsen Hayden -- who
oversee's the Orb line of classic reprints -- has
helped ensure the genre’s history won't be lost. But,
at the end of the day, even senior editors at one of
the largest SF/Fantasy/horror publishing houses find
themselves at the mercies of big media accountants and
marketing types that insist a book is only as good as
its initial six months of sales. 

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

--

---

From: Matthew Weber <mweber at library.berkeley.edu>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:47:35 +0000

>http://www.furia.com/twas/twas0445.html

Glenn (the proprietor of The War Against Silence) is a formidable intellect 
and a tireless reviewer of pop music.  He's been a presence on the Loud 
Family list for as long as I can remember, and his column is usually worth 
reading whether you're interested in what he's reviewing or not.

Matthew Weber
Curatorial Assistant
Music Library
University of California, Berkeley

We went through fire and through water.
         The Holy Bible (The Old Testament):  _The Book of Psalms_ 66:12

--

---

From: Lisa Schaffer-Doggett <harlekin at earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 02:57:09 +0000

> its initial six months of sales.

Don muses:

Technology will change this, I think.  Just like with the music 
industry, it is becoming less and less expensive to do things yourself 
with a good degree of quality.  And as the world becomes smaller and 
smaller (barring apocalyptic calamity) marketing becomes cheaper as 
well.  It's only a matter of time before the myth of literature 
existing  only through the graces of a publishing house loses it's 
meaning.  Almost everything prior to the twentieth century was self 
published and I think it will go that way again, with the added benefit 
(or curse depending on your view of the masses) that those of small 
means can find the funds to bring their cherished works to print 
without interference from anyone on high.  Still, I would dearly love 
to see a leather bound, single volume edition of BotNS as well as UotNS 
and the rest.  Of course, that's not likely to happen unless GW prints 
them himself.  (I for one would pay the exorbitant price to add those 
to my library.)

--

---

From: matthew.malthouse <matthew.malthouse at guardian.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 07:47:32 +0000

On 14/08/2003 03:57:09 Lisa Schaffer-Doggett wrote:

>to see a leather bound, single volume edition of BotNS

<screams>  It's too big!  Two volumes, yes.  But one would be too prone to 
damage in reading.  (Unread books are not books, even "prestige" 
editions.)

>                                                       as well as UotNS

Well there was (is?) that Vance complete works.  I was tempted but at the 
time couldn't guarantee having usd 1,000 or whatever it was available when 
it would have been needed.

However the idea might be sound: a subscription edition with intended 
print over-run.  The runs sold on and any consequent profit on the 
production returned to the author as royalty and initial subscribers as 
refund.  Copyrights might be a headache though.

Matthew

--

---

From: Michael Buice <mabuice at uchicago.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 15:29:41 +0000

On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 09:57  PM, Lisa Schaffer-Doggett 
wrote:

> published and I think it will go that way again, with the added 
> benefit (or curse depending on your view of the masses) that those of 
> small means can find the funds to bring their cherished works to print 
> without interference from anyone on high.

But if all of 300 million people in the US alone had 12 self-published 
novels, how would one decide what was worth reading?  A hierarchy will 
still present itself with, perhaps more difficult, obstacles to 
obtaining an audience.  One could easily imagine that publishing houses 
would simply become marketing houses for literature, with the same kind 
of standards.  Given that anyone near a Barnes and Noble can publish 
something for a small fee, I guess this is already beginning.

Michael

--

---

From: Chris <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:50:50 +0000

>On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 09:57  PM, Lisa Schaffer-Doggett wrote:
>
>>
>>Technology will change this, I think.  Just like with the music industry, 
>>it is becoming less and less expensive to do things yourself with a good 
>>degree of quality.  And as the world becomes smaller and smaller (barring 
>>apocalyptic calamity) marketing becomes cheaper as well.  It's only a 
>>matter of time before the myth of literature existing  only through the 
>>graces of a publishing house loses it's meaning.  Almost everything prior 
>>to the twentieth century was self published and I think it will go that 
>>way again, with the added benefit (or curse depending on your view of the 
>>masses) that those of small means can find the funds to bring their 
>>cherished works to print without interference from anyone on high.
>
>still present itself with, perhaps more difficult, obstacles to obtaining 
>an audience.  One could easily imagine that publishing houses would simply 
>become marketing houses for literature, with the same kind of standards.  
>Given that anyone near a Barnes and Noble can publish something for a small 
>fee, I guess this is already beginning.
>
>Michael

And there's the rub. Nietzsche lamented the coming of universal literacy and 
advanced printing methods (whether he was serious or joking, I couldn't tell 
you) because he foresaw something like this coming. And it's been happening 
for a long time; the number of books out there is staggering, and even 100 
years ago you could probably count on many of them being garbage to your 
taste. We cope with it by relying on a kind of consensus/trust system: we 
trust that if X publisher put the book out it may be in a subject we're 
interested in, and that it has at least some minimum standard of quality; we 
trust that if a lot of people are buying it, it must have at least some 
charm; on a more direct level we trust readers we know who have similar 
tastes, and if they recommend it we have a reasonable expectation that it 
will be worth reading. A self-published author is obviously at an enormous 
disadvantage, as he can only rely on the last of these methods to start 
with.

But the internet *is* making it easier to do this, and quickly - it *has* to 
just to make itself navigable, because it has an even greater explosion of 
information than exists in the printed world. Thus you have portals, 
filters, networks of people who share trusted sources of information and who 
in turn link with other networks of people... So I think it's very possible 
that a self-published writer could establish a buzz in this day and age. But 
it doesn't sound like a great solution for someone who depends on writing 
for their living, because god knows how long it would take to get 
profitable.

Civet

_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

--

---

From: Allan Lloyd <allan-lloyd at lineone.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 18:25:46 +0000

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Buice" <mabuice at uchicago.edu>
To: <urth at urth.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: (urth) GW sightings

Michael

There is a middle way here. I see the future of quality science fiction and
fantasy in the emergence of high quality small press and print-on-demand
books. In England, Big Engine started to produce interesting and quirky
books, but has unfortunately now run out of money; but the most exciting
publisher that I have seen so far is Golden Gryphon in the US.

I've just taken delivery of Jeffrey Ford's collection "The Fantasy Writer's
Assistant and other stoies", and the stories look quite Wolfe-like. (This is
only a first impression; I look forward to reading some tonight).

They also publish story collections by Howard Waldrop, Michael Bishop, Andy
Duncan, Ian Watson, Richard Lupoff, to name just some of my favorites, and
are now publishing an anthology to celebrate there 25th publication. They
are very nicely produced books, with a print run of two to three thousand, I
think, and I find them addictively attractive. Have to stop myself spending
money.

Speaking of Jeffrey Ford, I've just read "The Portrait of Mrs Charbuque" and
enjoyed it very much. Has anyone else on the list read it. There are some (I
think) knowing references to Gene Wolfe in the book, including an underworld
character called Mr Wolfe, and an embedded story told by Mrs Charbuque about
her mother's involvment with or abduction by a possible were-wolf. The book
is full of disguises and imposters, and is an extremely well-researched
portrait of late nineteenth century New York. I thought it the most Wolfeian
novel that I have read for a long time, even though Ford has said that he is
tired of being compared to Wolfe.

I'm now trying to find his previous three books, starting with "The
Physiogomy". Any opinions about these out there?

Allan

--

---

From: James Wynn <crushtv at hotpop.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 19:19:52 +0000

Civet said:
 > So I think it's very possible
Crush responds:
Probably not much longer than it takes for a writer to find a publisher in
today's market. While a lot of lousy books are blocked out of publishing
companies, a lot of lousy books a greenlighted because the publisher thinks
he can sell them. There *is* a market for crap out there.

Nietzche didn't like the increase in literacy and publishing for the same
reason he didn't like democracy. He thought the result of both lacked
nobility -- that they churned out mediocracy. But Nietzche (while right) was
wrong (about so much). There is no guarantee or even likelihood that
limiting access to power (whether political or literary prominence)
increases the probability that those who gain it will be of higher quality.
This is because there are so many different ways of judging "quality", and
who judges the judges? There's no guarantee that an established noble class
won't produce well-educated, yet inbred, corrupt, and lazy leaders. (Aside:
Enron drew all its officers and employees from the very apex of the
meritocracy -- top 10% of the top schools). Nor is there any guarantee that
publishers won't largely choose to publish the literary equivalent of
"Baywatch".

New Publishing will probably take the place that literary mags like
"Amazing" and "The New Yorker" used to have. A writer can self-publish and
still seek an established market for the same work. An obscure
self-publishing author that makes very little money is arguably better off
than an obscure author that can't find a market for his work. True, in the
overwhelming din it will be difficult for a single author to become a
superstar, but it will be easier for more good writers to make a living at
their craft and to develop it putting it in front of readers.

Also, there will be more literary jobs in supporting industries. Consider
the potential future market for reviewers in this new world. Think of the
increased prominence of peer awards. How else will the bookstores be able to
weed the marketable crap from the unmarketable? Consider the potential
market for experts from the publishing industry to advise self-publishers.
Actually, as in the California Goldrush where most of the wealth was made by
selling shovels to prospectors, more money in new publishing overall will be
made by the supporting industries. Yet, consider the potential for a strange
work to to have success that no one could have anticipated. And more jobs
for illustrators of course.

-- Crush

--

---

From: Lisa Schaffer-Doggett <harlekin at earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 03:16:17 +0000

On Thursday, August 14, 2003, at 10:50 AM, Chris wrote:

[lots of snipping]

> But the internet *is* making it easier to do this, and quickly - it 
> *has* to just to make itself navigable, because it has an even greater 
> explosion of information than exists in the printed world. Thus you 
> have portals, filters, networks of people who share trusted sources of 
> information and who in turn link with other networks of people... So I 
> think it's very possible that a self-published writer could establish 
> a buzz in this day and age. But it doesn't sound like a great solution 
> for someone who depends on writing for their living,

(Don isolates this part)

>  because god knows how long it would take to get profitable.
>
> Civet
>

But you see, writing isn't profitable as it is.  Harlan Ellison had to 
work in TV.  GW was an engineer.  Most writers have to work other jobs, 
as teachers, editors, critics,  painters, plumbers, salesmen or 
whatever.  And I mean published writers.  It's almost a guaranteed vow 
of poverty.  There's often no rhyme or reason to who gets published, it 
takes a god's day for an accepted work to go from manuscript to printed 
book, and I have found a lot of nice books for my library for $9.98 on 
the remainder shelf at the local bookstore.  On top of that there is 
the pressure to make a book marketable because "You just might make it 
someday and be a real writer."  I say good riddance to the whole 
parasitic structure.  One of my great pleasures is picking up an 
unknown book and being surprised by how good it is.  The Book of the 
New Sun  blew my mind out of both ears when I read it the first time.  
It was like being a kid again and reading Lord of the Rings - simply a 
transcendent moment.  One I fully never expected to have again.  But I 
digress (I love writing that. It makes me feel like a supervillian. 
:)). If everyone self publishes, the writers will get much more of the 
profit, the lousy books will languish unread (but still exist to stroke 
the writer's ego) and word of mouth will spread for good books just as 
it did in the past.  In my decidedly biased opinion, of course.

Don

--