From the always-informative Bookslut, I learned about Tyler Cowan’s article on Slate about the value of independent bookstores. In What Are Independent Bookstores Really Good For? Not Much, Cowan argues that “Our attachment to independent bookshops is, in part, affectation—a self-conscious desire to belong a particular community (or to seem to). Patronizing indies helps us think we are more literary or more offbeat than is often the case. There are similar phenomena in the world of indie music fans (”Top 40 has to be bad”) and indie cinema, which rebels against stars and big-budget special effects. In each case the indie label is a deliberate marketing ploy to segregate, often artificially, one part of the market from the rest.”
Cowan makes some valid points. But I would still argue that indepents are a crucial, absolutely essential part of our publishing and book buying industry. More on this topic later…
Scott: I look forward to hearing what else you have to say about Cowan’s piece. For what it’s worth, I think he’s especially weak when discussing the “boom” in POD and self-publishing. Consider the following quote from Slate:
“Amazon reader reviews, blogs such as Bookslut, and eBay—the world’s largest book auction market—all are flourishing and are doing so outside the reach of the major corporate booksellers. Print-on-demand technologies and self-publishing are booming. Along with Google and other search engines, they will allow niche titles to persist in our memories for a long time to come. This is the flip side of the same computerization that elevated Wal-Mart and Borders: Information technology brings more voices into book evaluation and supply.”
Note the placement of the first and second sentence of this paragraph. While it is true that the internet has enabled the development of readers reviews, blogs and e-tailing, the second sentence is simply misleading. Print-on-demand (POD) publishing is “booming” because it is an accessible form of photocopying and semi-professionally binding one’s work. Similarly, self-publishing is doing well because — well, because it’s always done well … at least, in the sense that a certain percentage of aspiring writers have always taken this route.
In other words, the success of self-publishing has had more to do with the success of those who print the books. A more nuanced argument would have discussed not POD and self-published books, but their *market*. It would have asked: is this market getting bigger? If so, how much? And are the books selling? Again, how much? And to whom?
But Cowan doesn’t ask these questions because he isn’t interested in the details. However, it is knowledge of the details that are essential to making sense of the POD and self-publishing phenomenon. Instead, by saying this area of the book industry is “booming”, Cowan is content to imply it is an effective means for writers wishing professional success. But as you know, nothing could be further from the truth. Both POD and self-publishing are options that still have lightyears to go before they reach that stage … if they ever do.
p.s. the above is taken from a post at my own site. Sorry for quoting myself, but I thought this might interest you because it ties in with the very interesting comments thread that developed at a previous post of yours about self-publishing.