The Publishing World Post #7: "....um??"

While other weeks’ publishing news has stirred me into introspection or analysis of some important element of publishing or another, this week I’ve seen three articles in Publisher’s Weekly that made my jaw drop (for one reason or another). First, they ran an article (sort though it was) about possible plagiarism in two cookbooks for children. The brief article shows the similarities and differences between a few of the recipes. I wonder though how many cookbooks build, play or blatantly use time-old tricks that could be considered “plagiarizing” if not noted correctly or if printed under conditions that implied that the recipes were new or innovative. Since both books focus on healthy, tasty, and traditional food for kids (grilled cheese, pancakes, macaroni and cheese), I can imagine that the article is right in saying that there can only be so many ways “to inject a dose of healthiness into mac and cheese.” I will love to see how much of a stink this ends up making in the industry. Plagiarism is terrible and newsworthy, but when two cookbooks recommend adding carrot puree to a muffin to make it healthier, I am just that much more inclined to actually try it. Moving from the small and odd to a nationwide scandal, comic book retailer Gordon Lee is finally going to trial for “two counts of distributing material depicting nudity or sexual conduct and five misdemeanor charges of distributing obscene material to a minor.” I found reference to this newsworthy topic in both the New York Times and Publisher’s Weekly—though the Times’ article was from May of this year. The actual distribution happened two years ago today at Halloween party in Georgia: Lee gave a minor a free copy of the graphic novel The Salon which depicts Picasso in the buff. From the way both articles read, the novel is less “obscene” than the graphic (metaphorically and literally) version of Lady Chatterley’s Lover and quite possibly more tasteful than Playboy. It brings up the age old argument about the fine line between artistic sexual content and pornography. The ridiculous part—to me—is that the case has dragged on this long with such fervor from both sides. Hasn’t someone determined whether this novel is actually NC-17? Should I assume that the tone of both articles is turned toward the defense of poor Mr. Lee when the courts truly have a good case on their hands? I believe strongly that nudity and sexual content are much less damaging to a child’s mind than the violence aired on the nightly news and Saturday morning cartoons; but then, who am I to go against the whole FCC? Yet another article that inspired incredulity on my part will probably thrill many Bostonians and members of the Red Sox Nation world wide. An instant book is being printed about the Red Sox’s 2007 Championship series and according to Triumph Books of Chicago, 110,000 will have hit shelves by today. Now, I love the Sox and was one of the million people on the streets yesterday watching the Rolling Rally, but turnaround that short on a book that is that specific makes my head spin. The book is a text-and-photograph trade book, not a mass market paperback; how exactly did they manage to get it together so quickly? According to the article, another text-only book was “originally scheduled for spring 2008, [but] because of the Red Sox win Triumph will ship [it] within a week.” That’s a six-month shorter production time, and they’ve already decided to run 300,000 copies for the all-text hardcover. Triumph is also printing a book for Rockies fans, despite the painful series sweep. The market is certainly there, and I understand the desire to print quickly to catch the largest possible amount of interest, but I can’t imagine the amount of time and money spent in the last few days to finish these projects. Maybe these articles caught my eye because I’m not used to seeing the gory details of the publishing world—the fast (production), the furious (lawsuits), and the plagiarized. All three articles bring up very serious issues in valid contexts (though the cookbook plagiarism is debatable with out more facts to argue with), but for some reason, the details just keep me from really getting my head around them.

Or maybe I'm just tired...