Independent Publishing CorporationAn independent publishing company
Paternity books: Complaining for publishing
Over the last few years, global publishing has been like the worm in the myth of La Fontaine. In one fell swoop, this publishing behemoth devoured five living, independent publishing companies. However, it was important that these five publishing companies were completely inconsistent and occupy completely different editorial areas. First of all there was the time-honored general publisher Cassell, the editors of Winston Churchill and such acclaimed writers as Nicholas Monsarrat and Eric Ambler.
For some, this clumping of prints seemed strange, but buyers thought they had made a serious purchase into the UK publishing world. It would be nice to be big, and the sleepless publishing community in Britain would tremble before them. He was a general publisher, specializing in others who needed special technologies to distribute and commercialize their work.
Back then, most publishing companies in Britain were private property and mostly ruled by high-ranking individuals: autonomous men, but often not always those with a broad cultural and intellectual ardor. Its publishers were undercapitalized. However, they were supported by the beliefs that a good product would go on sale and their judgment was what the deal would do or do.
One of these publishing icons was a man who sparked a genuine upheaval. We had no head of distribution, no marketing-stategy. During the 1960' the publishing employees were classified into two categories - men and "players". In the 70s, outside parties wanted to buy publishing companies. The publishing industry seemed to be a "sexy" shop to be invested in, and there were willing vendors.
Hart-Davis Rupert, McGibbon and Kee, Barrie and Jenkins, George Harrap, Allen and Unwin: The schedule is inexhaustible. Bloomsbury's publishing company would be a current example. Going into publishing was no longer "fun". The publishing industry has stopped being a final education. Now it seemed like a serious one.
Indeed, in order to be able to sale a work, it seemed to be "like something else". It was nice to be independent. It had little to do with the calibre of the books you wrote. Is the independent publishing house able to outlive in today's climat? You have to be really independent, which means you have to own yourself.
A lot of so-called independent people are not like that. There' s no need why small independent publishing houses should not buy, distribute and support best-sellers. In Duckworth Beryl Bainbridge's novel Master Georgie and John Bayley's moving memoirs of his late Iris Murdoch I released last fall. As a result of the drop in the sale of individual titles (especially due to the disastrous downturn in the librarianship market), the publisher was commissioned to publish more and more of them.
A recent report by Professor Roger Scruton's Intelligent Person's Guide to Modern Culture, the critic dedicated a whole section to the author's lamentation and more of his editor because he cited Byron's "The Assyrian came down like the will on the fold" in the text in the absurd wrong way. Luckily, there are many brilliant samples of this kind of responsible editor today.
Then as Bertelsmann and Random House have just done, they will devour each other. At the end, the prepayment means that the entire license fee obtained from the sales of the books is prepaid. It also means that a portion of the publishing profits is passed on to the authors.
Is there any more books that are selling because they're good in themselves? I had organized an advertising trip for her when I released her novel A Far Cry from Kensington. An independent review of the publishing sector was recently released.