Friday, July 10, 2009

Great to find an intelligent discussion in a blog space. Until now, I never learned anything on a blog that I needed to know. However, my continuing interest in books in and by hand makes your blogspot an oasis. Long may we read. J.K.

Thanks, J.K., happy to have input. Long live books, even if book publishers are drinking much more these days.

So, I have played out the partnership thing between author and publisher farther than I wanted , and so far no writer has objected. In theory, that is... Bridge Works's next contract will incorporate my new idea and we will see which author puts publication higher than not spending some money up front. I'm betting it will work.

In the meantime, today I have another idea. It is already in use and has astounding possibilities, but it also has many weaknesses. Called Books on Demand, the idea is that a publisher or an author who wants to selfpublish can send a draft of his/her work to certain specialized companies who will churn out as many finished books digitally as author or publisher wants or needs. By bypassing storage and warehousing of conventional books, book people can save money. They can also save time. Currently, under the conventional publishing method, it can take up to a year to go through the process of book production. Writers hate to wait so long to see their babies in print and for a publisher, if she has a hot number about politics, world affairs or gossipy celebrity info where time is a factor and in six months hence the topic would be as dead as a yesterday's newspaper, publishing on demand is a super idea. It takes only a matter of weeks to get out the finished books. Sounds good? It is, however...(More on However next time).

Question for the day: what do the classics and zombies have in common?

Barbara Phillips

Reply to