The Economist Parses Publishing

Papyrus

(photo: wikimedia.org)

So much has been written about the various pieces of the book publishing dilemma lately it was delightful to be pointed to this article from The Economist that assembles the whole juicy pie. If this is all you read about this topic, you’ll understand more than most people.

The title of the essay—“From Papyrus to Pixels”—suggests the editors stance. The conveyance of written information has evolved from the earliest days of this form of communication and continues to do so. Still, “the digital transition may well change the way books are written, sold and read more than any (other) development in their history, and that will not be to everyone’s advantage,” the authors say.

Industry players caught in the last paradigm, notably independent booksellers, have been seen the changes reduce their financial viability, as did the papyrus manufacturers of Ancient Egypt. Meanwhile the large publishing houses still mostly see increasing profit margins, despite Amazon’s fierce competition. About this massive e-tailer, The Economist quotes English novelist, Anthony Horowitz: “They really are evil bastards. I loathe them. I fear them. And I use them all the time because they’re wonderful.”

Moreover, despite all hand-wringing to the contrary, books themselves, as a technology “developed and used for the refinement and advancement of thought,” continue to thrive.

Naturally, this being a story about the economics of the industry, with many nifty charts (be sure to view the projected timeline of the rise of ebooks internationally), it gives only passing attention to the plight of individual authors, caught between downward pressure on ebook prices and conventional publishers’ obsession with blockbusters. The Economist quotes one industry analyst who suggests that while consumers may have more books available to them, fewer people may be able to make a living as full-time writers or publishers.

In addition to lots of juicy databites and useful, even-handed perspective, the article gives you a chance to test Spritz—a new small-screen application that smoothly displays one word at a time, at the pace you set. It’s way faster than regular reading because your eyes stay in one place, not having to wander across and down the page. And, potentially, glancing off the page entirely and out the window or over to the refrigerator. Spritz’s “most immediate application is to allow longish text to be read on smallish screens,” The Economist says, “such as those of watches.” Just as you bonded so completely with your iPad.

Talk about an Income Gap!

Hudson News, airport news stand

(photo: wikimedia.org)

Let’s call a temporary moratorium on grousing about how little money most aspiring book authors make—90 percent make absolutely $0—and peep through the keyhole at how the rich fare. Forbes last month published a list of the world’s top-earning authors and it includes some newcomers who demonstrate the appeal of “young adult” lit for people of all ages. Maybe this shouldn’t be a surprise since American adults, on average, read at the 8th grade level.

We all know that royalty checks arrive by the cartload to James Patterson—presumably shared generously with the humming hive of workerbees who help him produce 14 books a year—and brought in the top figure, around $90 million last year, June to June. In a laggardly second place is Dan Brown, with $28 million.

Three women writers complete the top-earning five: Nora Roberts ($23 million), Danielle Steel ($22 million) and Janet Evanovich ($20 million). Suzanne Collins, who hit it big with The Hunger Games, had to be satisfied with a measly $16 million. Speaking of falls-from-financial-grace, I’ll be a snob and confess my delight that E.L. James’s Fifty Shades of Grey scam netted her only $10 million last year, precipitously down from the $95 million of the previous year.

She was beaten out by young adult author Veronica Roth, a recently young adult herself at age 26, who earned around $17 million from print and ebook sales of the Divergent series over the past year—not counting income from the film adaptation. John Green, author of The Fault in Our Stars, received some $9 million from U.S. book sales, plus more from last summer’s movie. He ties for 12th place with Gillian Flynn, author of Gone Girl (a review of that movie posted here Oct 6).

J.K. Rowling had $14 million in earnings, putting her in 8th place. Others in the double-digit list are John Grisham, tied with Stephen King at $17 million, George R. R. Martin ($12 million), David Baldacci ($11 million), and Rick Riordan ($10 million).

OK, enough wallowing in piles of filthy lucre. Back to reality.

Gone Girl: The Movie

Gone Girl, Gillian Flynn, Ben Affleck, Rosamund Pike(No spoilers!) I was so up for the Gone Girl movie (trailer) because the book was one of my “Best Reads of 2013.” The movie could have disappointed in so many ways, and it did not. According to the credits book author Gillian Flynn wrote the screenplay–here’s what she says about that–and in the few places the movie departed from the printed page, it didn’t make a big difference.

The acting throughout is terrific. Ben Affleck, is a natural playing everyman Nick Dunne caught in snares of lies. Rosamund Pike (An Education), amazing as Amazing Amy. In a radio interview director David Fincher said that after watching clips of so many actresses over the years, he can get a read on them and their acting tricks pretty quickly, but when he saw Pike’s clips, he couldn’t “read” her. It made him think she’d be perfect for the Gone Girl, and he was right.

Also liked Tyler Perry as defense lawyer Tanner Bolt and Kim Dickens (Treme’s chef Janette Desautel) as Detective Rhonda Boney. (By the way, do you know your spouse’s blood type?) Everybody’s manipulating someone, except maybe Nick’s sister Margo (Carrie Coon). The omnipresent TV talk show hosts commenting in the background are too realistically sleazy to be all that entertaining. The movie website is as Fox News might have produced it.

If you like a suspenseful story, you’ll like the twists and turns of this one. If you haven’t read the book, there’ll be more surprises, but even if you have, it’s an exciting tale. There remains a weak spot at the very end, but there’s so much else that’s laudatory, it’s easy to forgive. Rotten Tomatoes critics rating: 87%; audience score 92%. A lot of the reviewers, while giving it a pat on the back with one hand seem to want to stab it in the back with the other. They give, but then they take away. Puzzling.

A Reading Future: 5 Under 35

5 under 35, National Book Awards, Redeployment, Panic in a SuitcaseHere’s another item to add to the long list of not-happening life events—after riding in a helicopter and becoming a triathlete—being a National Book Foundation’s 5 under 35 honoree. The books of this year’s selection of five distinguished young writers are an exciting foretaste of our reading futures. The honorees, selected by past National Book Award winners and finalists, are:

  • Yelena Akhtioskaya, Panic in a Suitcase, two decades in the life of a Russian immigrant family in Brighton Beach, Brooklyn
  • Alex Gilvarry, From the Memoirs of a Non-Enemy Combatant, a young Filipino immigrant steeped in New York’s fashion world finds himself accused of participation in a terrorist plot
  • Phil Klay, Redeployment, a novel of the wars of Afghanistan and Iraq still being waged in the minds of our returning soldiers
  • Valeria Luiselli, Faces in the Crowd, three narrators’ overlapping stories of love and loss
  • Kirsetn Valdez Quade, Night at the Fiestas, intense and darkly humorous stories that cover the range of human desires “to escape the past and to plumb its depths”

Reading them can definitely go on my list of happening things.

The Soul of Wit

scissors, blood, editing

Editing Done (photo: c2.staticflickr.com)

One of the best career moves I ever made was a freelance gig I designed for myself in which I wrote weekly columns about health policy that I self-syndicated to newspapers. This was back before health issues became a constant drumbeat when few news outlets had a regular health correspondent. I lived in Washington, D.C., I had access to experts and government officials, these topics interested me, and I believed people needed to know more about them. From a content perspective, totally correct; from a business income perspective, hopeless.

I never made much money at it—the largest-circulation paper to pick up the column was the Cleveland Plain-Dealer—but I what I learned was pure gold. Not about health policy. About saying what you have to say in 750 words or less. Medicare, Medicaid, care organization, mental health—these are complicated issues. 750 words (or less). It’s helped my writing every day since. Extra words and long-winded phrases still drive me crazy, and Twitter’s easy.

That makes me the perfect cheerleader for Mandy Wallace’s excellent blog post on “cutting the fluff from your fiction”—though anyone who writes as much as a memo can benefit from at least some of her advice. She links to other helpful resources, and I’d bet you’ll find some pet phrases (I did!) in the appalling catalog of redundant phrases. Interestingly, the first of her “5 powerful techniques” connects to an essay on “Thought” Verbs that definitely will not produce a shorter text, but a more meaningful one, shorter only by elimination of empty words. Another good outcome.

The Trip to Italy

Steve Coogan, Rob Bryden, Trip to Italy

Rob Bryden & Steve Coogan in The Trip to Italy (photo: sundance-london.com)

If you saw the well-received 2011 movie The Trip in which British comedians Rob Bryden and Steve Coogan (who surprised in his straight role as the journalist in Philomena) play themselves on a restaurant tour in northern England—neither one supposedly knowing a thing about haut cuisine—you know what to expect from The Trip to Italy (trailer). Both movies are edited versions of the pair’s television sitcoms, and both were directed by Michael Winterbottom. In Italy, they are doing the restaurant thing and pilgrimaging to places where the Romantic poets lived, died, and are buried.

Some critics prefer the earlier film, but I liked this one at least as well. For one thing, I knew not to feel like I’m on pause, waiting for the plot to start. There isn’t one. Or not much of one. In The Trip, the food scenes involved visiting posh restaurants with hushed, museum-like surroundings serving unbearably pretentious foams and essences and portions that might satisfy a wee fairy. It was funny, but it was more or less a single joke. Still, with these two, mealtime is never a bore. Coogan and Bryden make terrible scenes at every dinner, usually with their dueling impressions. In The Trip, there was a long hilarious sequence of each man’s “definitive” way to do Michael Caine at different ages. In The Trip to Italy, they take on a large cast, and we get The Godfather.

You have to listen closely because the jokes just keep coming, as the two plunge into various socially awkward situations, yet maintain a plausible fiction of two prickly friends on a simple driving tour. But beneath la dolce vita is a strong current of middle-aged angst and, as the movie progresses, an increasingly strong thrum of death—which culminates in visits to Pompeii and the giant ossuary that is Naples’s Fontanelle Cemetery caves. This juxtaposition sneaks up on you and makes their pursuit of life that much richer and more grounded. These aren’t just two overgrown showoffs on an expense account. Thankfully, Winterbottom has a light touch with all this, and you’ll walk away thinking you’ve seen a comedy. Rightly so.

The scenery alone is worth the price of the movie, and the glimpses of the Italian restaurant kitchens and their chefs at work—fantastico! I guarantee you’ll leave the theater wanting to drive right to the nearest restaurant—“how about Italian?” Rotten Tomatoes critics rating: 87%.

Banned Books Week

Mark Twain, Huckleberry Finn, banned books

(photo: wkipedia.org)

This is Banned Books Week, that annual opportunity to contemplate the perils of censorship, with Huckleberry Finn right up there as an exemplar of that folly. Here are some ways to make this national event significant in your own reading life.

Publisher Hachette provides a list of its banned and challenged books (including The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie, Naked by David Sedaris, The Catcher in the Rye, by J. D. Salinger, and, yes, Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird). On its Facebook page, author Janet Fitch has posted a picture of herself with her favorite banned book—Henry Miller’s Tropic of Cancer—and invites others to do the same.

Similarly, Simon & Schuster’s call for Twitter users to photograph themselves with their favorite banned book has led to a collection of cute pictures with the hashtag #BannedBookSelfie. (1984, Animal Farm, The Hunger Games, Perks of Being a Wallflower). Last month I gave my friend J a bracelet made up of covers of banned books—she should tweet a picture wearing it!

Macmillan has seemingly thrown together a webpage for the week that showcases its twitter feed and features rotating anti-censorship quotes from people as varied as Dwight Eisenhower and Lemony Snicket. It also includes nice descriptions of two of its formerly banned books—The Book of Three by Lloyd Alexander and Annie on My Mind by Nancy Garden.

The Huffington Post asked teachers whether they include any banned books in their classes, and, if so, why, using the #TeachBannedBooks hashtag, which has received an enormous Twitter response.

An epicenter of BBW activities is The American Library Association and its Office for Intellectual Freedom. Its staff created a 50 State Salute, with YouTube videos from each state showing how Banned Books Week is celebrated locally with Read-a-Thons and other activities.

Powerful Theater

Antony & Cleopatra, Shakespeare,  McCarter, Esau Pritchett

Nicole Ari Parker and Esau Pritchett in Antony & Cleopatra (photo: nj.com)

Last week we saw McCarter Theatre’s production of Antony & Cleopatra, directed by Emily Mann. It stars Esau Pritchett (who gave such a moving performance last year in August Wilson’s Fences), Nicole Ari Parker (Showtime’s Soul Food), and a strong supporting cast. Their performances, combined with a single stripped-down set for fast scene changes, gorgeous Cleopatra-wear, and an unexpected percussion accompaniment perfect in every beat add up to a whole greater than the parts.

This is the play about which some say, if all Shakespeare’s plays but one were lost, save this one, because it has passionate love (and a Romeo and Juliet-style ending), war, betrayal, tragedy, and Romans. Even some humor. It’s hard to judge the play itself, as its four-hour run-time was substantially cut, as so often happens, but the resulting production is fast-paced and emotionally rich. And this play is not often produced, so here’s your chance! Through October 5.

Wittenberg, David Davalos, Shakespeare Theatre of New Jersey, Jordan Coughtry, Anthony Marble, Erin Partin

Erin Partin, Anthony Marble, and Jordan Coughtry in Wittenberg (photo: STNJ)

There’s only one more week to catch The Shakespeare Theatre of New Jersey’s production of Wittenberg by David Davalos. Directed by Joseph Discher, this highly entertaining play set in 1517 at the eponymous university and town stars Jordan Coughtry as Prince Hamlet, a student, Mark Dold and Anthony Marble as Hamlet’s professors, the ideologically opposed Martin Luther and John Faustus, and wonderful Erin Partin as whatever lady is needed onstage at the moment.

Witty and fast-moving—great body language from Marble (Faustus), who is a would-be 16th c. rock star—it has modern touches that aren’t intrusive and numerous Hamlet references and puns. Faust’s office—Room 2B. If you’ve never seen a tennis match on stage, this is how it’s done, a nice metaphor for the lobbing back and forth of Hamlet’s budding worldview by Luther (God’s will) and Faustus (a man decides his own fate). Again, perfect set and costumes. We admired Erin Partin’s recent performance as Ariel in The Tempest, and a local review correctly noted about this performance that she plays each of her characters “with such veracity” that it seems multiple women are in the cast.

The Blacklist: Under Covers

TV, NBC, Blacklist, James Spader, magazine cover

(photo: AP/NBC)

Since the ads on network television drive me crazy, it’s ironic that ads have persuaded me to watch the second-season premiere of The Blacklist, Monday, September 22 on NBC. If you’ve watched the show, you know it’s an American crime drama starring James Spader, Megan Boone, Ryan Eggold, and Harry Lennix. The premise is that Spader, a high-profile fugitive—Raymond “Red” Reddington—emerges from the shadows to make a deal with the FBI. He’ll help them capture a series of hard-to-nab global criminals, but only if they let him use a young profiler (Megan Boone) “fresh out of Quantico” to help.

The show last season received pretty strong positive reviews from the critics, and in a recent Chicago Tribune interview about the upcoming twists, Spader said, “once you start taking all those backroads, the backroads become much more interesting than the destination.” Spader pursues those intriguing backroads with his characteristic intensity—which led Rolling Stone to call him “the strangest man on TV.”

But what about those ads? The first one I noticed was the inside back cover of this month’s Wired, which showed Spader in a typical neon-drenched Wired explosion, with mock-cover headlines like “Get with the Program: Red’s Shocking Next Move” and “On the List, Off the Grid: Tracking the Criminals Still at Large.” Clever. Then I spotted a fake cover in the 9/8 issue of The New Yorker, drawn by popular cover artist Mark Ulriksen (who drew the recent Derek Jeter cover), and you may have seen similar cover spoofs in GQ, Rolling Stone, Time and six other magazines. Spader’s undercover under covers. Ok, I’ll watch once, anyway. (Did. Not an immediate fan.)

Reading is Sooo Good for You!

reading, book

(photo: c1.staticflickr.com)

GalleyCat recently recycled a nifty infographic from Canada’s National Reading Campaign and CDC books showing what you probably already know—reading is good for you! Not only does it increase physical, mental, and emotional health, it’s a better stress reducer than drinking a cup of tea, going for a walk, or playing a video game (six times better than that last activity). Although some of the data are from Canada, most of the findings apply equally well everywhere.

This website has talked about how reading (good stuff) contributes to better writing. But research has shown many cognitive benefits of reading, as well, including its ability to provide mental stimulation, improve memory, and strengthen analytic thinking, focus, and concentration skills. Lana Winter-Hébert cites these and other benefits as reasons people should read every day.

Not to understate the case, the folks at WhytoRead begin with the premise that “reading books will save your life.” Their top 10 reasons repeat many of those above, adding “it makes you interesting and attractive.” OK. You can stop there. Sold!