Posthumous publishing and the Dead Authors Society
While I was discussing with a publisher the other day, he speculated on the possibility of coming on to the market.
If they were around, he would like to see them, principally to understand why Salinger chose not to publish while apparently still writing. "Writers", he remarked, "have egos. They want people to read their work."
If the manuscripts exist, and if they ever come to the market, they are likely to become the next posthumous publishing sensation - regardless of how good they are. Of course, posthumous publishing is not new: novels by Jane Austen were published after her death, including . But I am told by publishers that they sense a growing trend.
Recently books by Vladimir Nabokov, and have captured a great deal of attention. And in the near-future, two of the most hotly-anticipated new books come from authors who are no longer alive: a new Roberto Bolano following the success of 颅 and David Foster Wallace's .
But that is the tip of the beyond-the-grave publishing iceberg. Tens of thousands of books by authors long-since dead - and correspondingly out of copyright - will be available this spring in a new initiative of the . Readers will be able to see 65,000 books from their collection, 35-40% of them unique to the library. This can be for free using Amazon's Kindle device - I am told they are talking to other suppliers - or as a purchase of a print-on-demand physical book from Amazon.
Meanwhile Google is driving forward its , which is the subject of an ongoing wrangle between retailers, executors, publishers and lawyers. The debate centres on Google's ambition to digitise the millions of books that are out-of-print, but crucially, still in copyright. Google presents the plan as a public service and as a revenue-generator for authors and their estates. that it may be monopolistic and market-distorting.
We may be looking at a new boom in publishing, though some think there are already too many books published each year; it will be interesting to see the effect on new novels by new authors.
An arts journal by 
Comment number 1.
At 8th Feb 2010, Graphis wrote:I have mixed feelings about both the British Library's and Google's plans: on the one hand, it's great that thousands of hard-to-find texts may be available again to interested readers. On the other, an awful lot of second-hand bookshops are going to go under, as well as small publishers who make a living from reprinting old books. While the market for First Editions is unlikely to disappear, many old books are expensive simply due to scarcity, and the bottom will drop out of this market very quickly. Google's plans go too far, I feel: they should stop at works that are out of copyright.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 21st Feb 2010, BluesBerry wrote:In respect to posthumous writers, if there is a clear instruction as to what should occur with unfinished, unpublished works, this instruction ought to be carried out. Anything less is disrepectful. If you鈥檒l pardon me, it鈥檚 like raping the author鈥檚 memory. His/her memory should be left intact in accordance with his/her wishes.
e.g. 鈥淭he Original of Laura鈥 鈥 unfinished when Vladimir Nabokov died in 1977, Nabokiv had wanted it burned. Instead it was placed a Swiss bank vault until November 17, 2009, when Nabokov's son Dmitri Nabokov had the work published.
麻豆官网首页入口2 quote pending publication: "likely to be the literary event of 2009."
Upon publication, critics were not kind; in fact, they were most downright cruel.
One can only be happy that Nabokov was dead at this point because he was a perfectionist, and 鈥淭he Original of Laura鈥 would have insulted his perfectionism. He most certainly would not have wanted it as his final legacy.
This first issue is totally separate from the issue of books by authors long-since dead and correspondingly out of copyright and Google's Book Platform.
The only issue I have right now (I don鈥檛 know a lot about Kindle2) is cost, which I read is @ $259. The Kindle DX is worse, retailing at $489. Of course Kindles cannot be given away free, but the price tells me (similar to the price of a computer) that some will have access & some will not. This issue should be addressed. The inherent bias against the poorer members of society is worth considering soon because for the very first time, Amazon e-book sales overtook hard-copy on Christmas Day of 2009.
I agree with you that the e-book, Kindle, Google Books platform is 鈥渢he subject of an ongoing wrangle between retailers, executors, publishers and lawyers鈥. Money/profit is pushing quick decisions that will be repleat with mega-problems. This is so typical of our generation; it sees a buck and it just cannot wait to grab it. This is generally known as impulsivity and greed. 鈥淲e may be looking at a new boom in publishing鈥, but we are certainly looking at publishing geered towards the elite that comes with so many inherent bugs that the whole endeavour is likely to come to a screaching halt upon the order of some (thankfully) sane judge.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)