Despite its conveniences, the 21st century does have weak points, at least to many. One of these is the drift of all life toward corporatization. Many people object to a world in which what ought to be made with passion is increasingly made with passion for nothing but a product's profitability. An exception to faceless corporate publishing, independent book publishers reflect the tradition of boutique houses each trying to find their own voice.
The ultimate difference between independent and corporate owned publishing is that the former has at its core someone who got into the business out of a genuine love of books. Still better would be someone driven by a real love of literature, but maybe one should not demand too much. This gives some hope that more thoughtful decisions will be made about which books get published and which do not.
Many of those who run these houses are graduates of our country's Master of Fine Arts programs. These programs have the traditional role of carrying on the teaching of the craftsmanship needed for the finest work in various arts. Conventionally, these graduates might have hoped for careers teaching their art as a college professor or perhaps high school teacher. This would pay the bills while the degreed artist grew steadily more renowned among his or her peers.
With the growth in MFA graduates, there simply are not nearly enough teaching jobs to create any reasonable expectation of an academic career. This situation is compounded by the deepening crisis of the shrinking audience for the fine arts overall. It has become increasingly obvious that the arts must be fought for in the public sphere.
More and more graduates are looking at the economics of the arts squarely and concluding that the real front lines of the arts lie in the means of their production. If only poets read poetry, it is an open question whether poetry truly exists. Increasingly, MFA programs themselves offer their students training in how to publish a magazine or run a book publishing house.
Much of the difficulty comes from the online world. On the one hand, it has made arts available at the click of a mouse. On the other, it has proved difficult to monetize online work, and without monetization there is no way for artists and poets to make a living.
Some have warned of a possibly enduring result of modern electronically enhanced, big budget art, a result that should warn of a possibly grim future. There is evidence of a general fraying of the attention span, a decrease in the patience to focus. The grand, slow pacing of 1960s and 1970s films, those remembered for their cinematography, is lost on many young people. A three movement symphony simply has no chance to win someone with such over-stimulated nerves.
21st century technology takes, but it also gives new opportunities, some with great potential. Indie publishers might like to hearken back to the 1920s, and its heroic little magazines. Meanwhile, the future of the arts might belong to the self-publisher, building his or her book entirely online, who might not even have an MFA.
The ultimate difference between independent and corporate owned publishing is that the former has at its core someone who got into the business out of a genuine love of books. Still better would be someone driven by a real love of literature, but maybe one should not demand too much. This gives some hope that more thoughtful decisions will be made about which books get published and which do not.
Many of those who run these houses are graduates of our country's Master of Fine Arts programs. These programs have the traditional role of carrying on the teaching of the craftsmanship needed for the finest work in various arts. Conventionally, these graduates might have hoped for careers teaching their art as a college professor or perhaps high school teacher. This would pay the bills while the degreed artist grew steadily more renowned among his or her peers.
With the growth in MFA graduates, there simply are not nearly enough teaching jobs to create any reasonable expectation of an academic career. This situation is compounded by the deepening crisis of the shrinking audience for the fine arts overall. It has become increasingly obvious that the arts must be fought for in the public sphere.
More and more graduates are looking at the economics of the arts squarely and concluding that the real front lines of the arts lie in the means of their production. If only poets read poetry, it is an open question whether poetry truly exists. Increasingly, MFA programs themselves offer their students training in how to publish a magazine or run a book publishing house.
Much of the difficulty comes from the online world. On the one hand, it has made arts available at the click of a mouse. On the other, it has proved difficult to monetize online work, and without monetization there is no way for artists and poets to make a living.
Some have warned of a possibly enduring result of modern electronically enhanced, big budget art, a result that should warn of a possibly grim future. There is evidence of a general fraying of the attention span, a decrease in the patience to focus. The grand, slow pacing of 1960s and 1970s films, those remembered for their cinematography, is lost on many young people. A three movement symphony simply has no chance to win someone with such over-stimulated nerves.
21st century technology takes, but it also gives new opportunities, some with great potential. Indie publishers might like to hearken back to the 1920s, and its heroic little magazines. Meanwhile, the future of the arts might belong to the self-publisher, building his or her book entirely online, who might not even have an MFA.
About the Author:
You can visit whitebirdpublications.com for more helpful information about Independent Book Publishers Reflect The Tradition.
0 comments :
Dí lo que piensas...