What do you think?
Rate this book
Literary Publishing in the Twenty-First Century
Gutenberg’s invention of movable type in the fifteenth century introduced an era of mass communication that permanently altered the structure of society. While publishing has been buffeted by persistent upheaval and transformation ever since, the current combination of technological developments, market pressures, and changing reading habits has led to an unprecedented paradigm shift in the world of books.
Bringing together a wide range of perspectives—industry veterans and provocateurs, writers, editors, and digital mavericks—this invaluable collection reflects on the current situation of literary publishing, and provides a road map for the shifting geography of its future: How do editors and publishers adapt to this rapidly changing world? How are vibrant public communities in the Digital Age created and engaged? How can an industry traditionally dominated by white men become more diverse and inclusive? Mindful of the stakes of the ongoing transformation, Literary Publishing in the Twenty-First Century goes beyond the usual discussion of ’print vs. digital’ to uncover the complex, contradictory, and increasingly vibrant personalities that will define the future of the book.
Bringing together a wide range of perspectives—industry veterans and provocateurs, writers, editors, and digital mavericks—this invaluable collection reflects on the current situation of literary publishing, and provides a road map for the shifting geography of its future: How do editors and publishers adapt to this rapidly changing world? How are vibrant public communities in the Digital Age created and engaged? How can an industry traditionally dominated by white men become more diverse and inclusive? Mindful of the stakes of the ongoing transformation, Literary Publishing in the Twenty-First Century goes beyond the usual discussion of ’print vs. digital’ to uncover the complex, contradictory, and increasingly vibrant personalities that will define the future of the book.
295 pages, Paperback
First published April 12, 2016
21 people are currently reading
220 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
January 15, 2018
Excellent collection of essays which gave me a lot to think about, a lot to hope for, and a renewed excitement about literature and the future.
Read
April 30, 2016Back in the August 2013 issue [of THE PRACTICING WRITER], this newsletter featured a brief review of PAPER DREAMS: WRITERS AND EDITORS ON THE AMERICAN LITERARY MAGAZINE (Atticus Books). Edited by Travis Kurowski, the book impressed me as "a goldmine."
So when I saw that Kurowski had a new anthology out - this time co-edited with Wayne Miller and Kevin Prufer - I was quick to order it. And I'm very glad I did so: LITERARY PUBLISHING IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY (Milkweed Editions) was a worthwhile read for me both as a writer and as someone working in the publishing industry today. It may be similarly worthwhile for you.
A few of the essays in this volume - such as Daniel Jose Older's "Diversity Is Not Enough: Race, Power, Publishing" and Richard Nash's "What Is the Business of Literature?" - were familiar to me from prior publication online. But most of the contributors were "recruited" for the book.
As the editors note in their introduction, this has resulted in a book that contains "essays on contemporary publishing from the perspective of literary journals (Sven Birkerts of AGNI, and Jessica Faust and Emily Nemens of THE SOUTHERN REVIEW), small and university presses (Donna Shear of the University of Nebraska Press, John O'Brien of Dalkey Archive, Daniel Slager of Milkweed Editions, and Emily Louise Smith of Lookout Books), major New York presses (Gerald Howard of Doubleday), international journals (Gabriel Bernal Granados, Kristin Dykstra, and Robert Tejada of MANDORLA and Megan M. Garr of VERSAL), book critics (Jessa Crispin of BOOKSLUT), digital publishers (Richard Nash of Cursor, Byliner, and Small Demons), and literary agents (Chris Parris-Lamb, interviewed by Jonathan Lee). Other included essays address the increasingly prominent publishing of comics and graphic novels (Douglas Wolk), the effect Amazon has had on the current publishing and bookselling climate (Steve Wasserman), questions of diversity and inclusion in today's publishing world (Erin Belieu, Daniel Jose Older), the increased prevalence of writing contests in the publishing of poetry and short fiction (Kevin Larimer), and various business and operational strategies employed by literary publishers (Matthew Stadler and Jane Friedman)."
Some chapters grabbed my attention more forcefully than others, and I may not agree with everything argued throughout the book. But as a thoughtful reflection on and interpretation of so many of the changes that have occurred more or less since "the turn of the millennium, back when only one in three American adults reported using email at home, [and] the editors of this volume were just beginning careers in literary publishing," this book is one that I'm glad to have on my shelf.
(originally published in the May 2016 issue of THE PRACTICING WRITER, http://www.erikadreifus.com/newsletter)
So when I saw that Kurowski had a new anthology out - this time co-edited with Wayne Miller and Kevin Prufer - I was quick to order it. And I'm very glad I did so: LITERARY PUBLISHING IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY (Milkweed Editions) was a worthwhile read for me both as a writer and as someone working in the publishing industry today. It may be similarly worthwhile for you.
A few of the essays in this volume - such as Daniel Jose Older's "Diversity Is Not Enough: Race, Power, Publishing" and Richard Nash's "What Is the Business of Literature?" - were familiar to me from prior publication online. But most of the contributors were "recruited" for the book.
As the editors note in their introduction, this has resulted in a book that contains "essays on contemporary publishing from the perspective of literary journals (Sven Birkerts of AGNI, and Jessica Faust and Emily Nemens of THE SOUTHERN REVIEW), small and university presses (Donna Shear of the University of Nebraska Press, John O'Brien of Dalkey Archive, Daniel Slager of Milkweed Editions, and Emily Louise Smith of Lookout Books), major New York presses (Gerald Howard of Doubleday), international journals (Gabriel Bernal Granados, Kristin Dykstra, and Robert Tejada of MANDORLA and Megan M. Garr of VERSAL), book critics (Jessa Crispin of BOOKSLUT), digital publishers (Richard Nash of Cursor, Byliner, and Small Demons), and literary agents (Chris Parris-Lamb, interviewed by Jonathan Lee). Other included essays address the increasingly prominent publishing of comics and graphic novels (Douglas Wolk), the effect Amazon has had on the current publishing and bookselling climate (Steve Wasserman), questions of diversity and inclusion in today's publishing world (Erin Belieu, Daniel Jose Older), the increased prevalence of writing contests in the publishing of poetry and short fiction (Kevin Larimer), and various business and operational strategies employed by literary publishers (Matthew Stadler and Jane Friedman)."
Some chapters grabbed my attention more forcefully than others, and I may not agree with everything argued throughout the book. But as a thoughtful reflection on and interpretation of so many of the changes that have occurred more or less since "the turn of the millennium, back when only one in three American adults reported using email at home, [and] the editors of this volume were just beginning careers in literary publishing," this book is one that I'm glad to have on my shelf.
(originally published in the May 2016 issue of THE PRACTICING WRITER, http://www.erikadreifus.com/newsletter)
April 6, 2020
Some essays were really interesting and informative, others were condescending or pedantic.
November 17, 2017
Essential reading for any serious writer.
May 27, 2016
Excellent collection of essays on the state of literary publishing today. With the speed things are changing, it will be outdated soon, but for now it is packed with relevant insights, particularly for small publishers.
October 19, 2016
I'll be honest, I skimmed the last two articles but only because I needed to finish quickly to do my assignment!
This is probably one of my favorite assigned textbooks for college, I learned so much and feel like I have a better general understanding of the publishing world today.
This is probably one of my favorite assigned textbooks for college, I learned so much and feel like I have a better general understanding of the publishing world today.
May 14, 2024
Like all books of essays, this one was uneven in tone and consistency. Unfortunately, most of the essays felt out of date, even though the book is only 8 years old. Some of the background information on how Amazon got its start was interesting, but the fact that they made seriously wrong predictions in several places, such as anticipating the downfall of Barnes & Noble (which, as of my writing has rebounded because they--wait for it--went back to what they do best, i.e. just selling books) only underlines the central problem the book doesn't address. The publishing industry is behind the curve, in a radical way. Traditional publishing takes far too long and does not serve most Marvel/Walmart/Mcdonalds slop consumers. But I don't think this problem is necessarily new, it's just being highlighted (or rather, someone is cranking the image's "contrast" up so every difference is more noticable). We probably are at about the same rate of people who care about "real" art and "real" literature as any other time in history, but it's only become more tempting to indulge in the fake stuff.
What has the publishing industry done to account for this? If these essays are any indication, literally nothing. The essay on literary magazines was especially telling. They bemoan that no one reads them, they use statistics to point out how no one reads them, and they conclude by arguing that if they can't pay their staff, that shows how unjust the economic system is. But that's simply wrong. As I pointed out above, this has always been a niche market, and it always will be, so expecting otherwise (and assuming you can "fix" it by some sort of political or economic legislation) is a pipe dream. The reality is that only a minority of readers will ever enjoy the avant-garde, experimental stuff, and that's not only fine, it's to be expected. If it was popular, then it wouldn't be avant-garde, and vise versa. The problem they might actually address is that us pretentious people don't put our money where our mouths (or rather eyes) are, and that's why they're so famished. We, like all contemporary consumers, are spoiled, and we're too used to not paying for media. But I think the lesson is that we should re-allocate our budgets and remember that where we spend our money tells us a lot about our priorities.
It's the same with the VIDA essay, complaining about how many men versus women get published; alarmingly, at one point the author of that essay admits she doesn't even know the stats on how many men vs women are submitting work (108), which basically renders null her entire argument. The whole thing feels like a tired, worn out dead end, bemoaning statistics which don't line up the way you wish the world was, and then blaming the system. We could, of course do what Poetry Magazine does, where they are up front about their bias and have quotas for which categories they want to publish. The problem is that none of the stuff they publish sounds like it has an individual voice; it all feels like so many heads of the same pretentious hydra, all spouting the required ratio of faux-offensive randomness and place names and brand names and political slogans. It's really sad to see the greatest poetry publication in English become such a pile of refuse.
What VIDA and others don't see is that the literary publishing world is by necessity horribly inbred. Of course people are going to vouch for their friends, that's what friends do. Of course the result is that the industry will homogenize around certain cliques, and trends will emerge. There's already a very small number of people who fit the expectations of these publications, so things will remain insular. The internet has shown that even with unprecedented technology such as social media, we still just group ourselves in unproductive ways, and once again, I don't see that changing anytime soon.
Overall, meh.
What has the publishing industry done to account for this? If these essays are any indication, literally nothing. The essay on literary magazines was especially telling. They bemoan that no one reads them, they use statistics to point out how no one reads them, and they conclude by arguing that if they can't pay their staff, that shows how unjust the economic system is. But that's simply wrong. As I pointed out above, this has always been a niche market, and it always will be, so expecting otherwise (and assuming you can "fix" it by some sort of political or economic legislation) is a pipe dream. The reality is that only a minority of readers will ever enjoy the avant-garde, experimental stuff, and that's not only fine, it's to be expected. If it was popular, then it wouldn't be avant-garde, and vise versa. The problem they might actually address is that us pretentious people don't put our money where our mouths (or rather eyes) are, and that's why they're so famished. We, like all contemporary consumers, are spoiled, and we're too used to not paying for media. But I think the lesson is that we should re-allocate our budgets and remember that where we spend our money tells us a lot about our priorities.
It's the same with the VIDA essay, complaining about how many men versus women get published; alarmingly, at one point the author of that essay admits she doesn't even know the stats on how many men vs women are submitting work (108), which basically renders null her entire argument. The whole thing feels like a tired, worn out dead end, bemoaning statistics which don't line up the way you wish the world was, and then blaming the system. We could, of course do what Poetry Magazine does, where they are up front about their bias and have quotas for which categories they want to publish. The problem is that none of the stuff they publish sounds like it has an individual voice; it all feels like so many heads of the same pretentious hydra, all spouting the required ratio of faux-offensive randomness and place names and brand names and political slogans. It's really sad to see the greatest poetry publication in English become such a pile of refuse.
What VIDA and others don't see is that the literary publishing world is by necessity horribly inbred. Of course people are going to vouch for their friends, that's what friends do. Of course the result is that the industry will homogenize around certain cliques, and trends will emerge. There's already a very small number of people who fit the expectations of these publications, so things will remain insular. The internet has shown that even with unprecedented technology such as social media, we still just group ourselves in unproductive ways, and once again, I don't see that changing anytime soon.
Overall, meh.
August 25, 2017
Literary Publishing in the Twenty-first Century is required reading for an literary author looking to see their words in print. For a science-fiction author like me, it was a fascinating look into the world of publishing through the lens of the "literary."
After all, whatever you write, the kingmakers of literary fiction will determine whether your book is a cultural commodity worthy of the most respected book reviewers: upmarket. So ignore this world at your own peril.
Literary Publishing is comprised of twenty-one short essays by publishers, editors, book critics, essayists, and interviewers. There's an article about Amazon. There are several essays on race and diversity in general. There are essays on innovation and the business of literature. I'll not try to be exhaustive here.
As an author looking for a place in the publishing world, I learned a lot from this book. And it was easy to read: the prose was tight throughout; the typography was artistic and understated; the ideas were well-elucidated.
The book is clearly written in the context of much hand-wringing, as you read in the background of this quote from Nash's What is the Business of Literature?:
As an autodidact, bureaucracy iconoclast, and virulent opponent of debt and the university/capitalist system that creates rank, I was horrified by the overwhelming credentialism that Howard claims dominates literary fiction in The Open Refrigerator:
And it's clear that I'm not a "literary" author as I read the book. Thank God. I don't want to live in a world where I have to pay to submit my work to magazines or poetry contents; where those who submit work don't necessary subscribe; and where the surest way up the ladder is through an accredited MFA program.
The essays on diversity are key for majority identities understanding the struggles of minorities in publishing. As Daniel José Older puts it in Diversity is Not Enough: Race, Power, Publishing: “No one is demanding more tokens, though. We’re talking about systemic upheaval.” But at the same time he says, "We can love a thing and still critique it. In fact, that's the only way to love a thing."
After reading, it seems to me that "literary" publishing clearly creates and sells itself to a market that has little appetite for anything but the top of its field. I'm so glad I write commercial fiction.
After all, whatever you write, the kingmakers of literary fiction will determine whether your book is a cultural commodity worthy of the most respected book reviewers: upmarket. So ignore this world at your own peril.
Literary Publishing is comprised of twenty-one short essays by publishers, editors, book critics, essayists, and interviewers. There's an article about Amazon. There are several essays on race and diversity in general. There are essays on innovation and the business of literature. I'll not try to be exhaustive here.
As an author looking for a place in the publishing world, I learned a lot from this book. And it was easy to read: the prose was tight throughout; the typography was artistic and understated; the ideas were well-elucidated.
The book is clearly written in the context of much hand-wringing, as you read in the background of this quote from Nash's What is the Business of Literature?:
"By defining books as against technology, we deny our true selves, we deny the power of the book. Let’s restore to publishing its true reputation—not as a hedge against the future, not as a bulwark against radical change, not as a citadel amidst the barbarians, but rather as the future at hand, as the radical agent of change, as the barbarian. The business of literature is blowing shit up."
As an autodidact, bureaucracy iconoclast, and virulent opponent of debt and the university/capitalist system that creates rank, I was horrified by the overwhelming credentialism that Howard claims dominates literary fiction in The Open Refrigerator:
..."MFA programs groom and showcase top-tier literary talent for the New York publishing houses. There are these days about as many uncredentialed walk-ons in our literary fiction as there are walk-ons in major league baseball."
And it's clear that I'm not a "literary" author as I read the book. Thank God. I don't want to live in a world where I have to pay to submit my work to magazines or poetry contents; where those who submit work don't necessary subscribe; and where the surest way up the ladder is through an accredited MFA program.
The essays on diversity are key for majority identities understanding the struggles of minorities in publishing. As Daniel José Older puts it in Diversity is Not Enough: Race, Power, Publishing: “No one is demanding more tokens, though. We’re talking about systemic upheaval.” But at the same time he says, "We can love a thing and still critique it. In fact, that's the only way to love a thing."
After reading, it seems to me that "literary" publishing clearly creates and sells itself to a market that has little appetite for anything but the top of its field. I'm so glad I write commercial fiction.
January 31, 2020
Interesting collection of essays, that range from the thoughtful and thought-provoking to the less interesting/engaging. It was published just as Amazon was trying its hand at publishing, so there’s a lot of “death of the book/bookstore/literature spins, some of which is now irrelevant or not relevant in the ways the authors expected. Standout essays include the ones by Daniel Jose Older and one of the publishers from Outlook Press.
October 4, 2025
super super informative, i read this for my publishing class, and we got to interview a few of the people who wrote essays for this book, including daniel slager. most of the essays and interviews were super informative but some pissed me off. overall i enjoyed what i learned from it though
November 9, 2017
Read for class
November 25, 2016
Uneven quality in the essays--some were great, some not so much.
March 12, 2022
I read this in chunks for what has arguably been my least favorite class in grad school so far, and while I'd recommend it as a resource to skim, I would not recommend it as just a book to read. I guarantee no one not getting their MFA is ever reading this collection of essays.
July 30, 2016
I was surprised to enjoy this as much as I did. I am a librarian but literary publishing is not a subject I know much about and it was interesting to get the different perspectives provided in these essays. Several were already a few years old, which was perhaps the main drawback but I still felt those essays gave a sense of the trends that was useful.
The summary states: How do editors and publishers adapt to this rapidly changing world? How are vibrant public communities in the Digital Age created and engaged? How can an industry traditionally dominated by white men become more diverse and inclusive? Mindful of the stakes of the ongoing transformation, Literary Publishing in the 21st Century goes beyond the usual discussion of 'print vs. digital' to uncover the complex, contradictory, and increasingly vibrant personalities that will define the future of the book." There are thought provoking and informative answers to these questions in this book.
Here is the table of contents that gives a sense of the ground covered:
The summary states: How do editors and publishers adapt to this rapidly changing world? How are vibrant public communities in the Digital Age created and engaged? How can an industry traditionally dominated by white men become more diverse and inclusive? Mindful of the stakes of the ongoing transformation, Literary Publishing in the 21st Century goes beyond the usual discussion of 'print vs. digital' to uncover the complex, contradictory, and increasingly vibrant personalities that will define the future of the book." There are thought provoking and informative answers to these questions in this book.
Here is the table of contents that gives a sense of the ground covered:
Reading the tea leaves : notations on the changing look of the literary / Sven Birkerts --
The ends of the book : reading, economies, and publics / Matthew Stadler --
The Amazon effect / Steve Wasserman --
The self-hating book critic / Jessa Crispin --
The view from a university press / Donna Shear --
Poetry in translation : hemispheric perspectives / Gabriel Bernal Granados, Kristin Dykstra, & Roberto Tejada --
VIDA: an interview with Erin Belieu / Erin Belieu --
19 things : more thoughts on the future of fiction / John O'Brien --
Hold the damn door open : idealism is no currency / Megan M. Garr --
Diversity is not enough : race, power, publishing / Daniel José Older --
Comics publishing / Douglas Wolk --
The art of agenting : an interview with Chris Parris-Lamb / Chris Parris-Lamb & Jonathan Lee --
The open refrigerator / Gerald Howard --
A culture of competition : some notes on writing contests & literary publishing / Kevin Larimer --
Coming to Milkweed Editions / Daniel Slager --
The overnight success of Lookout Books / Emily Louise Smith --
The Southern review at eighty / Jessica Faust & Emily Nemens --
What is the business of literature? / Richard Nash --
The future value of a literary publisher / Jane Friedman.
July 12, 2016
A must-read for writers taking on the challenge of getting their work published. I think, in the end, I was right about small publishers - particularly university-based presses - being the best place to find a home for our work. The days of the large houses are as numbered as ever and self-publishing still sounds like vanity press unless you're pushing genre work. Insightful, depressing but simultaneously hopeful, this book made putting together a final presentation lauding the benefits of "starting small but thinking big" when it comes to where to send your work and how to see it, not as a commodity, but as building a community of readers.
June 8, 2016
I have mixed feelings on this one. Essays already feel dated, despite being written within the past five years. But some of the pieces open up discussion on how to handle book and literary magazine publishing in the future.
April 25, 2016
A terrific collection of essays about the current sate of literary publishing in the U.S.
September 9, 2024
Very interesting look into the publishing world as a whole. It was insightful about what goes on with Amazon to say the least.
April 14, 2017
A series of essays – most published originally somewhere else. A major theme of half of them is Amazon is the devil and crushing our voices. Especially Steve Wasserman’s essay (page 57) that says “Amazon ought no longer to be permitted to behave like a parasite that hollows out its host. A serious Justice Department investigation is past due.” When, ironically, Amazon is giving diverse voices a megaphone that traditional publishing has never given them. The essays like that were laughable.
Not saying that Amazon isn’t a capitalist monster. I’m just saying that Amazon is a better monster to root for. *Searches for Godzilla GIF*
Also, there’s lots of criticism of the “white male gatekeeper” in the industry in these essays. Which I liked, but their points failed miserably. They keep pointing out the speck in the publishing eye while missing the log in their own. For example: Daniel Jose Older’s essay talks about the response to the need of diversity saying: “No one is demanding more tokens though. We’re talking about systematic upheaval.”
Systematic upheaval. Hm. Says the man who publishes within the system. Gets his essay published in a book ABOUT the system. Also, I thought he was a fantasy writer? Why is he in a book about Literary publishing? I have questions.
Older goes on to say: “Maybe the word hasn’t been invented yet — that thing beyond diversity.” But I’m here to say that word has been invented. A word that will bring about/has brought about “systematic upheaval.” That word is self-publishing. Getting rid of traditional publishing by the root (READ: Black Authors and Self-Publishing and Self-publishing offers hope for diverse authors shut out by traditional publishers).
I didn’t hear much about the James Patterson effect on publishing — the capitalist damage he’s done — or the slimy grey area of book packagers. Those issues weren’t addressed in this book (READ: Why Literature is no longer Art and The New Vanity Publishing: Traditional Publishing).
Moving on.
Jessa Crispin’s essay on ‘The Self-Hating Book Critic’ is very interesting in its spastic coverage, yet doesn’t land on any clear answers: “So I will keep at it, never quite getting it right.” I feel you, but try harder.
Read the rest of my review here: https://blackandwhitepandaduh.wordpre...
Not saying that Amazon isn’t a capitalist monster. I’m just saying that Amazon is a better monster to root for. *Searches for Godzilla GIF*
Also, there’s lots of criticism of the “white male gatekeeper” in the industry in these essays. Which I liked, but their points failed miserably. They keep pointing out the speck in the publishing eye while missing the log in their own. For example: Daniel Jose Older’s essay talks about the response to the need of diversity saying: “No one is demanding more tokens though. We’re talking about systematic upheaval.”
Systematic upheaval. Hm. Says the man who publishes within the system. Gets his essay published in a book ABOUT the system. Also, I thought he was a fantasy writer? Why is he in a book about Literary publishing? I have questions.
Older goes on to say: “Maybe the word hasn’t been invented yet — that thing beyond diversity.” But I’m here to say that word has been invented. A word that will bring about/has brought about “systematic upheaval.” That word is self-publishing. Getting rid of traditional publishing by the root (READ: Black Authors and Self-Publishing and Self-publishing offers hope for diverse authors shut out by traditional publishers).
I didn’t hear much about the James Patterson effect on publishing — the capitalist damage he’s done — or the slimy grey area of book packagers. Those issues weren’t addressed in this book (READ: Why Literature is no longer Art and The New Vanity Publishing: Traditional Publishing).
Moving on.
Jessa Crispin’s essay on ‘The Self-Hating Book Critic’ is very interesting in its spastic coverage, yet doesn’t land on any clear answers: “So I will keep at it, never quite getting it right.” I feel you, but try harder.
Read the rest of my review here: https://blackandwhitepandaduh.wordpre...
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews