With
the growth of good desktop document processing software and the
universality of good, free Unicode fonts, it is now entirely feasible
for an individual to produce excellent camera-ready copy of an academic
book for themselves, with modest effort over a modest period of time.
With services like Lulu and Createspace,
the transition from a PDF on your computer to a hard-bound, published
book sold online and through Amazon, Barnes & Noble, etc., is also
very easy and cheap. I mean, less than about $100, total cost. I did a
book with Lulu a couple of years ago (my father's memoirs), and I paid
$60 to cover distribution through Amazon and all other big bookshops and
online services. Everything else was free. The book is large, 650
pages, and costs about $50 for hardback, with free shipping in the USA
(e.g., Amazon, B&N). I also made the PDF downloadable directly from Lulu at $12.
What does all this mean?
What
it means is that publishers are no longer necessary for performing the
traditional roles of book production and distribution. Authors can now
do this satisfactorily for themselves at marginal cost, high quality,
and with international distribution.
What
remains? What I call "Gatekeeping" services. With today's deluge of
free online resources, what we all really do need is someone to take
responsibility for guaranteeing high intellectual quality.
Trustworthiness.
Traditionally,
this was also a role performed by some publishers, especially the
university presses. A book on Buddhism from Cambridge University Press
*should* be of a different calibre from a book on Buddhism from, say, Harlequin or Mills & Boon. The good academic publishers acted as gatekeepers, offering an implicit guarantee of intellectual quality.
But if you look more closely at this arrangement, the university
presses rely heavily on the free services of university staff for
refereeing, book acquisition, series curation, and sometimes even
content-editing and copy-editing. In-house copy-editing was usual,
however, and often of a high standard.
Another
service that a big university press provides is prestige. A young
scholar with a book published by Princeton is likely to do better at
getting a job than another with a book published with a publisher of
less prestige. This is because appointment committees are willing to
take the implied quality-guarantee of Princeton UP. But again,
Princeton only publishes books because unpaid academic referees at
universities give the thumbs-up. The process is circular.
What does all this mean?
If
books can be produced and distributed by academics themselves, and
refereed and edited by them too, what is left for publishers? Not much,
I think, unless they dramatically change their business and service
models.
What
we see going on today, I believe, are the last convulsions of a dying
industry. Yes, they're making a lot of money, but only because of the
inertia and uncertainty of academics. What used to be called FUD
("fear, uncertainty and doubt"). The upcoming younger generation of
scholars with different preconceptions will probably not be so smitten
by the prestige of old publishing houses, and will be more adept at
self-publishing.
What
remains is the need for gatekeeping, for the guaranteeing of quality.
If publishers really took that seriously, and divorced their editorial
selections and quality judgements from their need to remain profitable,
then they might salvage for themselves a genuine role in the future. I
cannot see a way in which genuine academic quality can be guaranteed by
an institution that simultaneously has to satisfy criteria of
profitability. As long as their are two goals - quality and profit -
there will inevitably arise cases of conflict and compromise. In short,
gatekeeping is the job of (publicly-funded) university staff, not a
(commercial) publisher.
The
alternative to this is that university staff take back into their own
hands all the processes of the production and distribution of
knowledge. In fact, this is the change that the major funding bodies
are pressing upon us, with the widespread requirement that
publicly-funded academic research be published Open Access. It is also
the original idea of the university press.
Here's a hypothetical model for a future academic book series.
- Author on a research grant or university salary writes a book.
- The book is typeset using LibreOffice or TeX. The university
department provides some secretarial support to help, or some money from
the research grant pays for smart word-processing by an agency.
- The book is sent to an external commercial copy-editing company to tidy up the details. A smart, accurate PDF results.
This is paid for by the university department, or out of the research grant (this is already common).
- The
PDF is submitted to a panel of academics somewhere who curate a book
series, judging the intellectual quality of the submissions. The book
is accepted as an important intellectual contribution..
- The PDF is uploaded to Lulu.com or Createspace, where it is
turned into a print-on-demand hardback book for sale internationally
through Amazon etc., and in bookshops.
Lulu are the printers and distributors.
The ISBN is provided by the university department, so they are the publishers, not Lulu.
- The
book is advertised through a prestige university website that promotes
the book as an intellectual contribution, contextualizes it as a
university-curated product, and made available for sale through a simple
click link to PayPal, Amazon, etc. The university's series name is
printed in the book, and splashed all over the website.
Ooops: high quality production, high quality intellectual
content, university curation, international sales, but no "traditional"
publisher!
Please blow holes in what I've said. There must be an elephant in the room that I'm not seeing.
(reproduced from my post to the INDOLOGY discussion list, 15 May 2013)
