After reading Robert McCrum’s piece in the Observer a few weeks ago, Stop The Bean-Counters Ruling The Fiction Roost, you might be forgiven for thinking that we had now witnessed the final nail in the coffin for books as we know them. It’s long been known that sales departments dictate what gets published, but for a publisher to renege on a deal because of sudden sales wimpishness is another order of ugh.

My grasp of economics, I admit, is not always great, but whenever I try to explain the books industry to people who work in media, finance, or the law, or any other industry for that matter, they don’t get it either, so I feel slightly more justified. ‘But that doesn’t make sense at all,‘ they say, and I can only throw up my hands and shrug. I am clearly not alone in trying to make sense of the Morlocks vs Eloii circus that the vexed publisher/author relationship so often, sadly, appears to be.

Here’s a good piece about the money side of things: Why Life’s A Tough Gig For Writers. I also well know that authors, now more than ever, have to get real, and I’ll be getting on to that in another post.

Anyway, this is my fantasy land:

Publishing houses would get rid of both their sales and their publicity departments, outsourcing the work to companies that actually need the business and therefore have to work for it. Imagine the scene: ‘Right, here are the 10 books we’re doing next season, and we’ll pay you lot X to sell them, and we’ll pay you lot X to make sure they get out there.’ Boot firmly returned to other foot, and suddenly, there would be a new mobility of vision – wouldn’t there?

Like I said, just a fantasy. Experts, please explain why this wouldn’t work.