Tag Archives: London Book Fair

Is new technology threatening editorial values?

Posted on by
1

I went to a seminar at LBF on this topic and it struck me how this question is often avoided, yet it is clearly evident in the production of e-books. The numbers of e-books which I read that have unforgivable errors and typos makes you wonder if some stages are being skipped and we are relying too heavily on technology to catch errors before we upload.

Ruth Borthwick, the Chief Executive of the Arvon Foundation claimed that publishing becomes tricky when a publishing house chooses to prioritise its marketing team over its editorial team. Coming from a marketing background I did find this hard to hear but admittedly, she has a very good point. Ruth also highlighted the importance of the marriage between both the writer and the editor. The editor should always have in mind what it means to be a writer. Freelance editors hired by companies who have disbanded their editorial team have the power to save writers who are on the brink of giving up, this is why editors should read everybody’s work, no matter how awful it may seem.

Rebecca Carter, an editor at Random House has just made the brave leap and become an agent. She realized that within a publishing house there is often more time spent writing copy for Amazon and analyzing jacket covers than there is editing. The apparent trick to editorial success is to be brave and take a risk. The success stories the panel spoke of included an author not sticking to deadlines or briefs, being tardy and having a manuscript exceed the prescribed limitations. The stand-out factor here was that the editor for this book didn’t cancel the contract even though the author had broken their terms of agreement. This is now so rare that authors have been known to lose their editors and great texts are slipping through the margins. An agent on the other hand specifically needs to give the author reassurance. This is the great aspect of Rebecca’s current role. With her editorial experience, she can step in and work with her authors if they lose their editors due to creative differences or time restraints.

There is an inevitable shift in editorial roles with the current digital adjustments, but that shouldn’t scare people off, they should see it as motivation. Skills take practice and with the different skills that are emerging it is bound to take time to adjust. With so many eager professionals in this industry I really don’t see that being a problem. I think the more people that adapt to the skill sets required, the easier the skills become to teach and transfer those skills throughout the company – like a ripple effect. It is an absurd thought that the editorial process is being shoved out of publishing and it is consistently putting pressure on agents to begin the editorial process before they even try to pitch a book to a publishing house. It definitely seems that the roles of editors and agents are becoming increasingly blurred.

We as an industry also have to take notice of self-published authors. Do their readers know they don’t have an editorial team behind them? Does this devalue their work? I think it is admirable of any author to put their work out in the market with the weight of the editorial process also on their shoulders. Publishing in whatever media is a team effort. Authors need an agent, editor and publicist at the very least to put their book on an even keel. There is always the romantic idea of the author as an isolated tormented soul but the truth is they will remain tormented and especially isolated without a team of professionals rooting for them. Authors depend on other people pointing out the obvious to them. It is too easy for authors to be lenient or blind to something that they have lovingly created – they need that external hawk eye to point out their errors and help them progress. As Blake Morrison, author of And When Did You Last See Your Father?  pointed out, Lord of the Flies was rejected a whopping 20 times before Faber picked it up. Faber had to heavily edit William Golding’s work to make it the classic novel it is today. Would Golding succeed as a self-published author today if he didn’t have an expert team behind him protecting his work?

Poet and editor Nii Ayikwei Parkes quite rightly stated that it is easy to use a broad brush in publishing and approach all authors and poets with the same attitude. Some people need editors more than others and some people can’t see their own mistakes. Authors deserve to have creative control and stand-by the key aspects of their work that they feel need to be kept in the narrative. We can’t blame digital advancements for the lack of quality control in the market. Badly written and edited books have been around for a long time – the digital progressions just mean that these books are on the market quicker. If the industry is pushing books out without taking into consideration the editorial responsibilities of the publisher then we are being disrespectful to our readers, and that ultimately is damaging to both the author and the publisher’s reputation.

We can’t hold back the future any more than we can go back to using mangles. Self-publishing is bound to survive, but there are some books out there that have been rejected for a reason. We run the risk of losing quality control by neglecting the editorial process.

 

Author of the Day – Bi Feiyu interviewed by Rosie Goldsmith

Posted on by
Reply

I headed over to the PEN cafe on the second day of the London Book Fair because I had heard that Chinese author and screen-writer Bi Feiyu was going to be interviewed. I first heard about Bi from a friend who I work on the Society of Young Publisher’s magazine InPrint with. I hadn’t considered quite how packed it would get in the relatively small cafe area so I was pretty pleased I had got there so early to grab a decent seat as most people had to stand. I pretty much wrote down as much as I could and because Bi had a translator with him as he doesn’t speak much English, I hope that what I did manage to scribble down is accurate. I’ve tidied it up as much as I can as my notebook would have made any doctor proud.

Arts and current affairs journalist Rosie Goldsmith interviewed Bi Feiyu, and this is what was said.

R.G: Twenty-one authors were invited to take part in this year’s Chinese Market Focus at the London Book Fair. You have spent over 20 years writing and you have produced ten novels, two of which have been translated into English. Why have you decided to get involved with the international market now?

B.F: It is a good time for me to be known. If you had met me earlier in my life and read my stories, I may not have been mature enough. My writing wouldn’t have been as developed as it is now. I wouldn’t have been good enough to meet you.

R.G: Your story Three Sisters explores the psychological impact of the cultural revolution on a family. Can you tell us more about why you chose to write about that topic?

B.F: There are two reasons why I decided to write Three Sisters. The first is that it is literature. After the revolution it became fashionable to write countryside novels, which often lacks a portrayal of characters. I wrote Three Sisters and then some other stories before I realized that whatever you write you cannot take the characters away with you. The second reason was politics. It is a new century for us and young people barely remember anything. I’m a post-cultural revolution author. I didn’t go through the revolution and I believe the youth shouldn’t have forgotten about it so fast. There are authors who write about WW2, why can’t they write about what happened with us? Three Sisters was made into a play, at first I was worried that it wouldn’t be accepted or liked by people but the result was really good and it opened a new chapter for me.

R.G: Your books explore both empathy and psychology, but there is also a lot of sex in your stories. Was that a conscious decision?

B.F: Three Sisters is about the cultural revolution. To the outside reader they might view our economy to be the real disaster, but for us, it had an impact on our bodies too. Sex was a shameful word in that period. Sex aside, if I talked to a girl when I was in school it was seen as improper, it was similar to medieval Europe. We were made to feel the features of our body were ugly, as was long hair. It was a huge strain on the human body and humanity. Sex is so great because it can’t really be restricted. You can control sex but inside people’s hearts there is always a storm going on. I hope the sex in this book comes through because it is important. from beginning to end. No matter about the politics – sex is great. We currently have a sexual freedom in China that I don’t think you experience even here in the UK.

R.G: You write in a very cinematic way. Do you write deliberately in that visual way with the hope of more film adaptations?

B.F: Not really. When I collaborated with a director in the past for the film Shanghai Triad he told me to write the way I liked in the screenplay. Then he took a look at what I’d done and deleted most of it.  I wasn’t paid well because of it.

 R.G: In total you have written 10 novellas, 4 long novels and short stories. If you could chose one more to be translated into English, which one would it be?

B.F: I wish that all my books and stories were translated into English. I sound greedy but I’m not. If you want to understand an author, reading one of his novels is not enough. I would like Chinese Massage to be translated into English. It was published in 2008 and is about a society of blind people. From start to end, every character is blind. China has a huge population and a large number are blind. For a long time, blind people were neglected by society. When I wrote this book I wanted to pull the readers in to the dark side of society. Metaphorically, an author shouldn’t embody himself with an image for his reader. What a character symbolizes is more important. Shakespeare’s work isn’t about how great Shakespeare is, Shakespeare symbolizes Britain and it’s readers who read Shakespeare.

R.G: Do you feel free to write what you want?

B.F: There isn’t any author who can really write what they want. Everyone can read from a very young age and build their own perspectives of the world. A serious and responsible writer should respect his own interests. Regarding which part is not free, I’m not sure. I am free but I have my own ideas and will express them my own way. Never underestimate the power of an author to express themselves.

R.G: What is your reaction to controversy surrounding the China Market Focus at The London Book Fair and the 21 government approved authors who have flown over to the fair?

B.F: Controversy is good. It is inhumane to stop other people criticizing you. China felt that the Chinese Market Focus was the right thing to do. It is always good for a family to invite close friends over. But it is also good to invite new friends over too. I will still come to Britain even if the British people don’t want me. I will walk or swim if I need to.

Image from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn

 

And there you have it. Although what Bi Feiyu said was translated he was very personable and he came across very well. His translator was excellent and made the Q&A transitions seamless. I will definitely be visiting the PEN cafe again next year!

 

 

A slice of April

Posted on by
Reply

Wowzer what a month April has been! The London Book Fair kicked off with a buzzing start for its fortieth year  and Earls Court was heaving. I went along on the Sunday to set up our stand and  to be honest I was doubting that it would all be ready for the Monday morning opening. It felt like one of those horrific Changing Room episodes where hammers are flying in all directions and the carpets not laid and the family are pulling up on the driveway. However I was relieved on Monday morning when I found Earls Court transformed from a manic building site into a swanky international exhibition centre. I managed to get an hour off on Tuesday to attend the Graphic Novels for Boys seminar held in the Children’s Theatre, where a panel of authors, publishers and illustrators discussed the most effective ways  of encouraging young boys to read. The guests included representatives from SelfMadeHero and Panini/Marvel and Eoin (It’s pronounced Owen) Colfer, author of the Artemis Fowl series which has since been adapted into a best-selling graphic novel. The panel mainly discussed the process of adapting classic novels and the best ways in which to launch graphic novels on to a competitive market. It would seem young boys are pretty hard to impress and unless you dangle a ‘gross-out factor’ ie, torn limbs and boggling eyes, in front of their faces, comics are unlikely to hold their attention let alone encourage them to read a sequel. Most notably the panel also suggested that young girls are similarly drawn into reading fiction through first following graphic novels, in particular the Manga publications.

I think what I find most intriguing about graphic novels is their accessibility. Any age group can still embrace graphic novels without the sometimes judgemental social stigma that was once associated with comic strips. Now consumers can either go to their newsagent or bookseller, order online, or download an app allowing them one-tap access to hundreds of graphic novels.  I for one read on my Android phone as well as ordering novels from Amazon. I think it is this tranferable nature of the graphic novel that makes them so popular and such a great starting point for the younger generation. Anthony Browne once said ‘Illustrated books are for everybody at any age, not books to be left behind as we grow older’ and I whole heartedly agree.

London Book Fair Market Focus SYP

Posted on by
Reply

On a mild March evening members of The Society of Young Publishers met at Pushkin House, Bloomsbury Square to drink a glass of wine and to discuss the accelerated development the Russian publishing market. It was fascinating and one of those times where you are alerted to the fact that you know nothing about much, including Russian literature and the incredible path it has taken over the last 20 years.
Five guest speakers came along:

Andrew Nurnberg : Founder of Andrew Nurnberg Associates
Lynette Owen: Copyright Director of Pearson Education Ltd.
Amy Webster: International Key Accounts Manager at the London Book Fair

Zinovy Zinik: Russian-born novelist and writer of the soon to be launched History Thieves  

Rosamund Bartlett: translator, lecturer and writer of Chekhov: Scenes from a Life

Amy Webster led the discussion by first explaining that the London Book Fair has held a market focus for the past 8 years and focuses on emerging economies,  increasing trade links and international relations. This year the focus is of course Russia and 2012 will be focused on China, a powerful presence on the international market. Call me ignorant but I did wonder why they had chosen Russia, as the only literature I was aware of were the classics, but that was my error and their exact reason for choosing such a creative country. The London Book Fair is helping to launch 50 publishers, and 40 Russian authors onto the centre-stage of the Western market. Russian literature currently gets the least British investment and yet has so many talented authors, so the book fair seems the perfect place to showcase these talents and open up the minds of our sometimes culturally complacent audience. The long standing tradition of highly recognised works of literature has now been handed down to a fresher, energetic market and I for one will be milling around the London Book Fair and exploring the vibrant marketplace.

Although I thought I knew about the Soviet Union and its subsequent collapse in 1991, I had never considered the impact liberation had on literature and other modes of creative output. Andrew Nurnberg gave fantastic accounts of his experiences not only with the Russian government but also with the big cheeses that now run the ever-expanding industry. The State ran publishing houses that didn’t agree to advances based on copies sold but on the thickness of the book: the more you wrote the more money you made. Not a great model for those that were unable to write what they wanted. Print runs were and still are limited as resources will always be expensive, but they are no longer controlled by the State. The collapse opened up the floodgates and allowed new waves of writers, publishers, editors and designers to roll around Moscow and St. Petersburg, free from censorship and finally able to publish materials they knew people would buy and cherish. However, the initial surge of interest in the industry soon subsided as people realised publishing is not the industry where you sit on mountains of gold. Only a few were left to construct the marketplace and build committees, setting the path for future generations – these people of course made mountains of gold (and will quite happily pay extortionate amounts of money to entice a best-selling yet loyal author away from their local independent publisher).

Although China is currently the biggest fish in the water, releasing  210,000 titles a year, Russia is catching up, producing no fewer than 100,000 new titles – it would seem the race is on!

There is a big problem with piracy in Russia, a threat that was touched on at the SYP Question Time. Although it doesn’t seem to be a big deal over here, in Russia it is very common and mostly free, people don’t want to profit from scanning in books, they just want to share the novels. A very noble thought, but not a structure the publishing industry can hope to cling to.

Lynette Owen discussed the decline in educational book sales after the Soviet collapse. The immediate reaction of many people in Russia after 1991 was to buy exciting books that they had never before been able to read – much like a child in a sweet shop, they went nuts for fiction and abandoned their long love affair with academic books, and the industry felt this change in tides. New publishing houses didn’t want to produce books that would require specialist staff and result in a slow return on investments, they wanted to produce best-sellers and fast. The international market also felt the pinch as the Russian market clamped down and revelled in its own local writers.
Now however, the tides are changing again. Russia is opening its doors to the world’s trade and is beginning to pick up an interest in non-fiction textbooks, particularly economics, business management and surprisingly, self-help guides.
Further more, the luck has changed for British publishers and authors as Russia has finally updated its copyright clause. Moving from the Life+ 25 years to the more widely accepted Life+ 75 years Russia is now playing fairly.

Rosamund Bartlett gave us a fantastic insight into the mind of Anton Chekhov who has been an invaluable influence on her academic career. From a Russian degree at the University of Durham to becoming a lecturer and teaching Chekhov to her students, Rosamund explained that she came to see Chekhov not just as a Russian writer but as a great writer. Among her vast publications include the translated letters of Chekhov, his stories and a biography of both Chekhov and Tolstoy, both of which I will definitely be reading. Not only that but she told us the wonderful story of the fall and rise of Chekhov’s home in Yalta.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Yalta was absorbed by the Ukrainian boundaries, and the once government-funded house and museum came under disrepair as the Ukrainian government turned its back on the cornerstone of Russian literature. Writing his biography, she visited the house and was devastated to see it had fallen from glory, the modest house now resembled a mouldy hazard. Campaigning to save Chekhov’s house has been the ambition of Rosamund for years.  By hosting fund-raisers such as Chekhov Anniversary Readings at Hampstead Heath and by finally receiving backing from the Ukrainian government, Rosamund Bartlett has been able to see Chekhov’s house slowly but surely return to the author’s home.

Our last and by no means least, guest speaker was Zinovy Zinik, who raised the unexpected topic of emigration. He suggested that emigration can be used as a literary device for authors, explaining that you can only truly write about your homeland once you have left it behind. The past becomes the novel and you as the author are able to view your past with refreshed eyes. Zinovy explained that he sees himself as a Soviet citizen, yet as he left in the 1970′s, trading a one-way ticket for his Soviet passport, he can no longer return to his country has it technically no longer exists. Just as, he explained he considers himself Jewish, having moved to Israel, he does not attend a synagogue or consider himself a Jew. Even more fascinating was his suggestion that identity is often a fictitious product of our minds. Our past is wrongly imposed on us as strangers ask where we originate from and what profession we trade in. Further questions were raised of Russian authors who had fled the Soviet control, are they still free to write about their homeland after so much has changed? Are they aware of the newly liberated and culturally conscientious society? Or are they burdened by their memories of Russia’s past and unable to move on? Zinovy’s new book The History Thieves concentrates on the assumed identities of individuals and how they make connections with the rational and irrational, reality and imaginary. Zinovy argues that fabricated memories occur when our present selves look back on our past, often in a nostalgic light recreating the past as we wish to remember it. Another book I shall have to read soon!

Well that’s it for another SYP event, the countdown to the London Book Fair begins!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...