I’m just on the train back from a very interesting (if you are a publisher) Q&A session with James Daunt of Daunt Books and Waterstones (I really miss that apostrophe) fame. In it I learnt three things that got me thinking about the way that we, as publishers, approach publishing, and have come to the conclusion that we may be doing it Poorly.
What follows is a short summary of those three points, followed swiftly by my horribly utopian vision of a better way of doing things (perhaps). I’d really like to hear your thoughts on this, so please do give them to me through comments below, or via Twitter (@robbieguillory). Continue reading →
In the first of a new series of posts by Freight authors, Iain Maloney
– whose debut novel First Time Solo will be published on 23rd of June – writes a response to a recent article by Will Self (link below).
How the Dead Write
On May 2nd in The Guardian, previewing a lecture given on May 6th, Will Self announced the death of the literary novel. At least that’s what the headline stated: ‘The Novel is Dead (this time it’s for real)’. I’m going to give Self the benefit of the doubt and assume it was an over-eager sub-editor who came up with that piece of click bait. Continue reading →
An article on my RSS feed recently caught my attention, a post by Swapna Krishna on the Book Riot blog entitled On the Perils of Feeling Dumb While Reading. This has now been latched on to by the Guardian, who are doing an open comment feed about Which books make you feel stupid. I think that to some extent Swapna is conflating the issue of not being ‘clever’ enough with not enjoying a book that everyone else seems to rave about, but the main thrust of her argument rings very true with me – for many people the act of reading is not just a pleasurable activity, it is an intellectual exercise. Last week my colleague wrote about the comments of Lynn Shepherd, who among other things said that people shouldn’t read Harry Potter because they should be reading something ‘more stimulating for grown-up minds’. Now, I am in the camp of people who don’t like the wizarding series, but that doesn’t stop me from seeing that this is simply rubbish. Reading is an intellectual act, yes, but it is an intellectual act no matter what is read – the intellectual bit is in the translating of squiggles on a page into brain pictures. This rang small bells inside my head about something I’d read earlier in the year, about people lying about the books they have read. I searched onwards.
In September 2013, the Guardian conducted a poll of 2000 people to discover the books people claim to have read but actually haven’t, with 1984, War and Peace and GreatExpectations at the top of the rankings. This in turn seems to be copying (ALLEGEDLY) a poll conducted on Book Riot in July of last year of 828 readers, where Pride and Prejudice, Ulysses and Moby Dick triumphed as being the most unread books listed. The one that I find particularly odd is the listing for Ulysees, as I’m pretty sure having pretending to have read that requires you to also pretend to have a solid grasp of about seven European languages, as well as a firm footing in ancient Greek and Latin, and to know your myths like the back of your hand. That would take a whole lifetime of blag. But why do people feel like they have to lie about these things? What is it that we are supposed to think about a person who has read 1984, and what should we think about them if they haven’t? Continue reading →
The Luminaries, by Eleanor Catton, published by Granta. This book is a whopper and no mistake. At 832 pages it is certainly in the awkward to read in bed category, but would probably keep you afloat if you happened to be shipwrecked off the coast of New Zealand in the 19th century. This doesn’t happen in the book, despite it being set in New Zealand in the 19th century and concerned in large part with boats and the sea, but has proved a useful bridging sentence to the content. However, I’m not interested in this bridge, because I haven’t finished talking about the length of this book. It is important. The bridge can wait. Continue reading →
Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon involving a stimulus (an image or a sound) wherein the mind perceives a familiar pattern of something where none actually exists. Common examples are perceived images of animals, faces, or objects in cloud formations.