Tomorrow's E-Utopia? [Part 2 of 4]
Here’s the second section of the paper I’m preparing for the Iceland Literary Festival. Click here for part one. The third part will go up later today, and the fourth over the weekend.
Let me back up a bit to give a broader context for how e-books hold some promise to revolutionize the business of publishing literature in translation. Most likely you糖心传媒檙e already familiar with the dismal statistics about the publication of literature in translation in my country. According to a number of studies from the past half-dozen years, approximately 3% of all books published in the U.S. have been translated into English. And to be honest, that number is probably a bit of an exaggeration.
A couple years ago, I started a Translation Database on our blog/review site Three Percent. Because all of the 糖心传媒渟tudies糖心传媒� of translation production in the United States were simply numbers糖心传媒攏o details of which books were included, where they came from, who published them糖心传媒擨 thought it would be useful to create a database to track all the original works of fiction and poetry that came out in translation. So starting in January of 2008, I started reviewing hundreds of catalogs and websites, getting in touch with translators, associations, foreign governments and the like. For the sake of my sanity (which, granted, is already a bit suspect), I did put some limits on this: I only collected info on adult books that had never before been translated into English. So, no picture books and no tenth retranslation of Kafka糖心传媒檚 Amerika made it onto my list. By themselves, the numbers are a bit staggering, or, well, to put it more accurately, depressing.
According to this database, in 2008 only 362 original translations were published in America. And in 2009 that number has dipped to 326. (Thank you, multinational banks and your corrupt money-making schemes.) This number is so low that I can envision a retired somebody being able to read all of these books over the course of a year.
I can糖心传媒檛 bring myself to believe that there are only 350-or-so titles from around the world that are worthy of publication in any given year. From my last visit to Iceland, I came back with at least a dozen really promising recommendations that (with unlimited resources) I糖心传媒檇 love to publish. But in 2008 and 2009 a grand total of 6 Icelandic books were published in the United States. (Several of which are mystery novels. I糖心传媒檓 not saying, just pointing out.)
Whenever I visit another country and talk about the state of translations in America, people wonder why it is that we糖心传媒檙e so fucking provincial. Why don糖心传媒檛 we simply publish more literature in translation? Is it because editors don糖心传媒檛 read Icelandic? Are we just stupid? Should Icelandic authors try and write more like Stephanie Meyer?
Well, it糖心传媒檚 kind of all of those things and none of them. On a very simple level, it糖心传媒檚 all about money. Or money and perceived audiences and the long tail concept. Here糖心传媒檚 a brief anecdote: This past summer I was on a panel at BookExpo America with Errol McDonald, a famous editor at Pantheon Books who, once upon a time, brought out a few volumes of Abdelrahman Munif糖心传媒檚 Cities of Salt quintet. (After Schiffrin was forced out of Pantheon, McDonald wrote a famous smackdown op-ed piece for the Times about how publishers are entitled to make money and that Schiffrin loyalists were pathetic in their 糖心传媒渟upport of the welfare mentatlity.糖心传媒�)
Nowadays, McDonald糖心传媒檚 not much of a foreign lit supporter. Aside from falsely claiming that there糖心传媒檚 no press in America that can survive publishing only literature in translation (cough, Open Letter, cough, Archipelago Books, cough), he also made the grand, and very telling, statement that a corporate publisher like Pantheon views literature in translation like foreign movies糖心传媒攖he work may be high quality, but there糖心传媒檚 just not an audience for it. At least not a large enough one to make it worthwhile to spend tens of thousands of dollars to have a book translated, published, and promoted.
This is a perfect example of the vicious self-fulfilling cycle of economic censorship at work. Sure, there is an additional cost to publishing a book originally written in another language. But that said, in contrast to advances paid to American authors, the amounts publishers offer for foreign works are a dime on the dollar. (With a few notable exceptions, like The Kindly Ones, and a handful of megastar authors.) But, in a way, not spending enough money is part of the problem. Here糖心传媒檚 the typical progression of a work of literature in translation at a corporate publishing house (like Pantheon): an editor falls in love with Bulgarian book X and recommends it to the publisher; publisher agrees reluctantly, but only if they offer a low advance because the book is 糖心传媒渞isky糖心传媒� (ALL BOOKS ARE RISKY); with such a low advance the marketing, sales, and publicity departments assume this book isn糖心传媒檛 糖心传媒渋mportant,糖心传媒� or at least not as important as book Y, which they paid $2.5 million for; so this Bulgarian novel gets little love from the promotions area of the publishing house, only advancing a few hundred copies into a couple hundred bookstores across the country, getting very little push with the media, and, as a result糖心传媒攊n spite of some booksellers absolutely loving the novel糖心传媒攕ells pretty poorly; thus, the publisher糖心传媒檚 hesitation about 糖心传媒渢hose international books糖心传媒� is confirmed.
The situation would be different if we lived in a culture that valued long-term sales growth and editorial quality over quick hits and blockbusters. But that糖心传媒檚 an issue for a different speech.
This whole long digression糖心传媒攁nd trust me, we糖心传媒檙e working our way back to the e-book promised land糖心传媒攊s to illustrate why it is that small, independent, and university presses are the ones doing the bulk of literature in translation. According to my database, over the past two years, the big corporate publishers have brought out fewer than 20% of all the fiction and poetry translations published in the U.S.
And unlike those big presses, these indie, small, university presses (I糖心传媒檒l just call them independent presses from now on to make things easier) don糖心传媒檛 have the same level of sales representation, or the same sort of supply relationships with the various bookstores in the U.S. (Another topic for another speech: why bookstores all over the country all tend to look the same, with similar piles of similarly shitty books.) This is糖心传媒攖o the ire of independent bookstores everywhere糖心传媒攚hy indie presses tend to love Amazon.com. Sure, Amazon.com tries to screw you discount-wise, but at least the books are available and everyone in America (and the UK and Canada) can order are receive the books easily and in a short period of time.

Leave a Reply