|
|
Anything above this line is irrelevant where the rest of this site is concerned.
Since the days of Giovanni's Room and A Single Man (around fifty years ago), gays and lesbians have been pounding on the door of the publishing industry with pieces of their lives laid out in some fictionalized detail for others to read with varied levels of success.
I think Gore Vidal should receive credit for some of the advances made since then, just because he became a popular figure based on his writing, largely about gay themes. [By the way, did you know that Christopher Isherwood dedicated A Single Man to Gore Vidal in 1965?] I don't intend to bore you with an erudite history of gay publishing but you might be interested in the industry as I see it and have followed it for about thirty years. Since I am mainly interested in fiction, sometimes considered the poor stepchild of publishing, I will concentrate on that.
I first became involved in publishing of gay fiction in the 1970s as one of the "formula novelists" of the gay mass book market. In those days one picked up a very cheaply-produced throwaway "pocket book" before a long flight, read it before landing, and left it in the seat pocket for the next passenger. Sometimes you had to search in the darkest corners of poorly-lit bookstores in rough neighborhoods to find any gay books at all.
The formula for gay "trash" novels for men that I was given by my then publisher was quite straightforward. The first page had to start with sex of some sort; this meant that the author had to become proficient in flash-back techniques, of course. Pages were counted to make sure that at least 50% included sex. Masturbation didn't count. Women were forbidden as primary characters, although mothers could be brought in cautiously for bit parts. There should be no humor; the reader was expected to hold the book with one hand while the other was busy, and he did not expect to be amused. I was sure I could write novels better than those generally available, but I recognize now that I learned a lot about writing from analyzing the failings in those rather pitiable efforts.
From the beginning I was using a pseudonym, but my publisher wanted his own "handle" for me, so he gave me the name of Barton Lewis. And so I eventually did write and publish a group of novels about a dozen before I learned that short stories were another fun format that paid better. And payment is important if the art is to survive. I like to quote Moliere: Writing is like prostitution. First you do it for the love of it, then you do it for a few friends, and finally you do it for the money.
It is this sequence that we want to discuss today. There are dozens of books published on how to hawk your work to publishers, so I won't go into all those recommended procedures. And the scene has changed recently after a complete cycle over the last few years.
In the 80s, some of the mainstream publishers dimly realized that gays and lesbians (although few recognized bisexuals) comprised a significant market of fiction readers, and began to publish gay and lesbian works, good and bad, apparently expecting to end up with best sellers (according to their definitions). In my opinion there was one major improvement that this transient emphasis produced: at least it became unnecessary that all serious genre fiction end with the death and destruction of the protagonist as the earlier novels seemed to require.
The optimism of the publishers was probably based on the simple figure of ten percent; 10% of the population was thought to be gay or lesbian (a misinterpretation of Kinsey), and in the US that is a sizable number which might produce a sell-through of the large publishers' product in the neighborhood of 50,000 to 100,000.
Well, for the most part that didn't happen, and more and more of those publishers now publish a few gay/lesbian titles each year as a token of their previous activity. But along with the peaking interest of mainstream publishers came the small press entrepreneurs, largely gay and lesbian men and women who had the wits and the courage to strike out in competition. They had the desire to do it for themselves as many gays and lesbians have shown. They had the computer savvy for small press work. They were willing to accept smaller numbers and more restricted conditions, as well as larger risks in "alternative" publishing.
Alternative is the term used by straights when they don't want to (are embarrassed to) use the more loaded but accurate words of gay or lesbian and now also transsexual (bisexuals are still being ignored for the most part). At least some of them were also sincerely interested in promoting gay literature and popularizing gay writers. And for the most part they spoke the language more fluently than the mainstream press editors.
I am still amazed sometimes by the choices some mainstream honchos make, thinking they have the ear of the gay/lesbian readers. As expected, the lesbians' and gay men's presses were largely distinct and separate, and still remain so. Perhaps that is inevitable, since a small press will usually include only a few people, usually of the same gender, and the opposite gender may not be entirely comfortable there. Judgments about quality of the work may also relate to sex of the editor and the writing.
It is also not surprising that lesbian presses have generally been more successful than gay men's presses since women (including lesbians) read more than men (and here again we are speaking mostly about fiction). Their marketing procedures also reflect their orientation; we have been informed by many lesbian reviewers that they will only review titles written by women, and reviews are an important part of marketing.
Another development occurred about the same time, also relying on expectation of increasing sales of "alternative" titles: the vanity press. "Vanity" publishing is certainly not only a gay/lesbian development, but should be described here because of problems associated with it. Vanity presses have a role in publishing, but not for commercial enterprises.
Your Aunt Cora may have scribbled poetry all her life and her grandchildren may become interested in publishing a collection of the poems as a gift to her in her dotage. Uncle Festus may have made a study of an exotic bird and may be interested in publishing it, complete with pictures, for distribution to his bird- watching friends. Publishing 50 or 100 copies of such manuscripts can be an exercise in love or appreciation as long as there are no expectations for commercialization on the part of the sponsors or the publisher, who is only performing a restricted task. Unfortunately some vanity publishers took advantage of a gullible public, promised all kinds of services they were not equipped to handle or interested in performing, charged exorbitant rates for shoddy work, and many high-cost books ended up in authors' garages, having had little exposure to the reading public.
A few years ago there were some really scandalous horror-stories going the rounds, including a few that involved gay and lesbian fiction writers. It is the legitimate small press that should receive your attention.
Our publishing work began with my desire to publish my own anthologies of gay short stories that had been sold as first serial rights to magazines. I had also been disturbed that bisexual fiction had been ignored by the usual publishing houses.
One of my earlier novels was bisexual and no publishing house would accept it because it was neither gay nor straight they had no idea how to market it (still a somewhat valid argument). So after I published my own books successfully (two anthologies and the bisexual novel), I was persuaded to consider other authors' works and the cooperative GLB Publishers was born. Subsequently I published another bisexual novel. In all we will soon publish our 30th book.
At that time, "GLB" was not a familiar abbreviation, but I wanted to encourage the combination that included bisexuality, at that time almost an afterthought. Now the term occurs frequently, perhaps most frequently as LGB or LGBT, but since the company is operated by gay/bisexual men, we put the "G" first. We even registered the trademark of GLB Publishers because of the increasing generic use of the term. We also chose the cooperative corporate vehicle because we were determined to avoid the "vanity" label, as well as "subsidy" term that had been associated with swindles. Proactively we felt it was a good opportunity to educate writers about the publishing part of their craft, make them more knowledgeable about an important part of being an author.
As we gained experience in the publishing end of the process, we could teach authors the pitfalls and benefits to be encountered in publishing. While we are generically a "subsidy" press, the author works alongside in producing the book and the final product is very much a result of a joint effort, both financially and energetically. Of course some authors do not wish to take a very active role in publishing their work, and that is OK, too. At all stages of the process, the author knows how funds are being used; there are no surprises.
One more element that may characterize the small press approach to varying degrees is the attention they are willing to direct to inexperienced authors. If a mainstream house condescends to read an unsolicited manuscript (unlikely since the author/manuscript is usually not represented by an agent), they will most likely send a rejection letter that reads something like, "This manuscript does not meet our needs at this time" or some such. Most small presses are more alert to talent which may not be obvious in a superficial glance at a story.
Depending on the personalities involved, a writer has a chance of finding an empathic ear in a small press, and such receptive editors may be willing to work with a writer to perfect the art to the point of a worthwhile and successful book. It seems to me that if you receive one of those pithy, meaningless rejection letters, you might as well forget that publisher.
We have worked with a few authors for longer than two years in order to produce a salable manuscript that was received with good reviews and reasonable sales. Perhaps that point should be stressed more. As a young or inexperienced author, do not be impatient with those who are trained and equipped to help you. Do not allow pride of authorship to interfere with the learning process that an editor may provide. Most manuscripts we receive can be improved; all our authors who have accepted suggestions and made changes with some specific goals in mind have gained from the experience. My advice is to take constructive criticism gratefully, stepping back far enough to see the forest when you have a trusted editor who will work with you.
For those on the brink of entering the swim, hang in there. Find a comfortable publisher and make the plunge. For most gay/lesbian/bisexual authors, your best bet is a small independent press.
For more information about GLB Publishers, please check out our Web Site at http://www.GLBpubs.com. We will soon be expanding our presence on the Web by publishing e-books from our Site. Authors Guidelines are available on request.
W. L. Warner, Editor and Publisher GLB Publishers
|
|
Back to the Village Times |
All Contents Copyright The Village Times 1999. Articles Featured Are The Copyright of Their Owners.
