The future of the novel: discuss amongst yourself

EXCERPT FROM A PIECE FROM TIME MAGAZINE ONLINE DATED WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2009.

"We think of the novel as a transcendent, timeless thing, but it was shaped by the forces of money and technology just as much as by creative genius. Passing over a few classical and Far Eastern entries, the novel in its modern form really got rolling only in the early 18th century. This wasn't an accident, and it didn't happen because a bunch of writers like Defoe and Richardson and Fielding suddenly decided we should be reading long books about imaginary people. It happened as a result of an unprecedented configuration of financial and technological circumstances. New industrial printing techniques meant you could print lots of books cheaply; a modern capitalist marketplace had evolved in which you could sell them; and for the first time there was a large, increasingly literate, relatively well-off urban middle class to buy and read them. Once those conditions were in place, writers like Defoe and Richardson showed up to take advantage of them.

"Fast-forward to the early 21st century: the publishing industry is in distress. Publishing houses--among them Simon & Schuster, Macmillan, HarperCollins, Doubleday and Houghton Mifflin Harcourt--are laying off staff left and right. Random House is in the midst of a drastic reorganization. Salaries are frozen across the industry. Whispers of bankruptcy are fluttering around Borders; Barnes & Noble just cut 100 jobs at its headquarters, a measure unprecedented in the company's history. Publishers Weekly (PW) predicts that 2009 will be "the worst year for publishing in decades."

"A lot of headlines and blogs to the contrary, publishing isn't dying. But it is evolving, and so radically that we may hardly recognize it when it's done. Literature interprets the world, but it's also shaped by that world, and we're living through one of the greatest economic and technological transformations since--well, since the early 18th century. The novel won't stay the same: it has always been exquisitely sensitive to newness, hence the name. It's about to renew itself again, into something cheaper, wilder, trashier, more democratic and more deliriously fertile than ever."

The author's ultimate point is that the internet is changing everything--that more and more people will self-publish online and that the novel itself may be dispersed in a more electronic form. What do you think? Is this a good thing? A bad thing? Whatever?

Some thoughts on the current state of affairs in publishing

I meant to post something last night, but I got distracted by the Packers/ Bears game which lead me to make the following observations:
1. The Bears were beyond lucky to win.
2. Aaron Rodgers cannot catch a break.
3. I would never ever ever ever sit outside anywhere to watch a game if the weather was as bad as it was in Chicago last night.

Okay. Now that I've got THAT out of my system, I want to talk about the World of Publishing Today--which is kind of depressing, actually. As you probably know, a number of big publishers have cut jobs recently. All of us who write (or edit) feel shaken by these developments. Where are we all headed? And the answer is that I don't know. I'm not sure anyone does. So how does that affect what I write?

I've given this a lot of thought and in the end I just keep on coming back to what I've always maintained--a person should write the thing he or she wants to write. Fantasy in a post-Harry Potter world is still hot, hot, hot. Does that mean you should write fantasy? Only if that's what you really want to do. Life is too short and writing is too hard to take on a project you don't love.

Anyway. Just a thought or two . . .

Publish or Perish

That's what it says on the cover of a notebook given to me by my friend Lisa Adams. And it's true that sometimes we writers think we absolutely WILL perish if we. don't. get. something. published. I'll be honest. I LOVE to see myself in print.

But here's the deal. After doing this for years (and having some success on the publishing front), I've learned that there are things that are way, way, way more important than publication. When I'm really feeling the love, I'll even say stuff like "I have five kids and twelve books to my credit, but I'd rather have twelve kids and five books."

Which isn't true. Twelve kids would kill me. Especially the laundry and feeding part. But still. I mean it while I'm in the moment.