Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Richard Scheiwe's avatar

The BCIC is clearly an extension of the merging of publishing houses into larger media conglomerates. And if I'm not mistaken, Reese Witherspoon acquires the movie rights to the books she promotes in her book club, so her focus is arguably less literary merit than popular (and potential) movie appeal. It's unfortunate.

Chandler Klang Smith's avatar

"If an author’s last book sold poorly, the retail accounts will say they’re not buying many of the next book. It isn’t merely a matter of risk-averse editors."

But don't you think that retail booksellers make this call because they know that publishers don't have any real strategies for promoting their own products? Like I agree, Barnes & Noble is not going to want a second book from someone whose debut sold poorly, because that is the only data point Barnes & Noble has. But if the publisher demonstrated that a ton of muscle was going behind a different, innovative marketing strategy for that author, and that strategy sounded like it made sense, I think it's at least possible that Barnes & Noble would factor that into its calculations.

The problem is that publishers don't have any levers they feel like they can pull besides picking somebody who is already famous, who is connected to one of these book clubs, who has a great sales record for a past book, or even who has a great sales record for self-publishing this one (as we saw with that one recent acquisition). So the track record basically *is* destiny, not because Barnes & Noble is unimaginatively assuming that, but because they know the publisher will treat it that way too. If I'm literalizing the metaphor of "track," this is less like the trolley problem and more like one of those old-timey movies where the woman is tied down with a locomotive coming straight at her -- not so much a calculation as a foregone conclusion.

16 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?