feedFlight | Check it Out
Good lord, but the news business has gone all to hell.
Here's a quote from the books editor of the Rocky Mountain News regarding the seeming dismissal of the release of Sherman Alexie's new book, Flight, because it was published in trade paper rather than hardback.
In fact, she asked me about the line in question before it went to print. We agreed that it was highly unusual for a publisher to opt for paperback when it could inevitably sell copious hardbacks from a big-name author such as Alexie. I felt it was a reasonable guess, one that would have been hard to confirm. (No publisher in his right mind is going to admit that he was concerned with a book's quality and opted for paperback.)
As it turns out, we were wrong. And in a letter and phone interview, Alexie's publisher, Morgan Entrekin, filled me in on the facts — thankfully without any expletives.
Eek. Oh no, we could never get a publisher to tell us the history of a book and how it ended up being one way or another, and absolutely must be correct in our assumption that they published it this way because the novel was a disappointment.
Stupid. Just call the publisher. Find out if they have a different story or not. Please.
See, the not-so-apologetic editoral linked above, Ms. Thorn seems to believe the problem stems from the fact that they were wrong in their assumption. But no, this ain't true at all. The problem stems from the fact they made an assuption in the first place, that they made no attempt to verify that assumption, and that now, of course, it seems they are attempting to quel the blogosphere with derisive ire, even ending the editorial with the following:
And now, here's hoping we can all shake it off and get back to work. Note to blogosphere: fight finished.
Well, guess what. Fight ain't finished until I say it's finished.
I'll grant you that Mr. Alexie didn't happen to help his cause by the choice words he had for your darling newspaper. I would use entirely different choice words... such as careless and inaccurate and overtly defensive.
Oh hell, it's likely not a good idea for me to be a pain in the ass to any newspaper's books editor, but as I recall, I received such scant attention from the newspapers when my books came out that I'm probably not doing myself much of a disservice. The books section of almost every newspaper in the country is so miniscule that it takes a much higher prescription eyeglass than mine to even find it.
Where was I?
Oh yes. Um. Fight still ain't finished. Though I doubt very much this here post will mean much in the long run. In the short run it seems important to reinforce the appreciation I have for those reviewers and editors who <i>do</i> take the time to "check it out" before going to print.
I'll end there. Check it out. And have a great weekend.
Labels: blogs, books, newspapers
