erin!balser

The Boston Globe published a piece today that questions that validity of the non-fiction book Bringing Down the House, which inspired the recent hit film 21, starring Kevin Spacey. (I actually just read the book this weekend, and saw the film the weekend before that, but that proves no point other than I have no real social life.)

Both the author, Ben Mezrich, and his editor stand behind his book. However, as with A Million Little Pieces and Love and Consequences before, such a claim has spurred controversy and many readers are feeling betrayed.

While Sebastian Junger claims doing so is “lying,” on Papercuts. His argument is that “nonfiction is reporting the world as it is, and when you combine characters and change chronology, that’s not the world as it is; that’s something else.”

Mezrich ever intended for his book to be educational or representational of “the world as it is.” He tells the Globe that he “took literary license to make it readable.”

The Globe writes that such non-fiction trends are

Much like reality television shows, the shift is fed by the sense that what audiences want is reality, but packaged with an excitement and drama that the original facts lack.

And does anyone get truly angry that The Amazing Race, Survivor and the thousands of other shows like them, play with the idea of “reality”? I know it happens, but never with the vigor as it does in the literary world.

Non-fiction books, like reality television, has a spectrum. Television viewers don’t put the Discovery Channel documentaries and MTV reality shows in the same box. Why are non-fiction books treated differently? What literary high ground exists so that movies and television can take extreme creative liberties with “reality” with relatively little controversy and books cannot?

While publishers and authors should never misrepresent their books (and this is totally the case in some books!), readers need to take greater responsibility in recognizing and understanding why they are reading that particular book. Are you reading it to learn something? Or are you reading it for entertainment value?

Such critical thinking could even inspire greater debate around literature, the media and more.

Image by Falcifer. Licensed via Creative Commons.

I want this book.

Titled ABC3D and written by Marion Bataille, it’s sure to please any typography enthusiast. It’s too bad it won’t be for sale until October.

The other day, HarperCollins US announced a radical shift in their publishing policies when they launch a new imprint soon. The entire Wall Street Journal article is here, if you’d like to read it, but here’s the short version:

• Authors will no longer receive large advances
• Book sellers will no longer be able to return books
• They will no longer engage in co-op programs at book stores

I think, given the radically shifting book market, these are fantastic moves to be making. While they might initially lose authors with this model, it reverses the ridiculous “wait and see” approach of publishing– that is, throwing a bunch of money at a book and wait and see if it does well. It’s a much more efficient business model.

The Wall Street Journal argues that the largest impact on the publishing industry will be the non-returnable aspect of this new approach. I can’t help but wonder what this will do for the creative element of the industry.

According to WSJ, executive Robert S. Miller “thinks he will attract major authors who have a book in the desk drawer that doesn’t fit their image, as well as up-and-coming writers.”

Without books costing publishers so much money up front with expensive advances, they will be able to publish more books. And when you publish more books, the avenue opens for more authors and more voices to enter the publishing industry, and gives consumers more content to choose from.

According to HarperCollins executive Jane Friedman, who spoke to the New York Times,

At this moment of real volatility in the book business, when we are all recognizing things that are difficult to contend with, like growing advances and returns and that people are reading more online, we want to give them information in any format that they want (my emphasis).

I wonder how such a model would work for the Canadian publishing industry. Yes, the Canadian publishing industry isn’t nearly as competitive as the American one, but I believe such an approach would further solidify the mandate of furthering Canadian cultural production as well as streamlining the business side of publishing, as well as empowering book stores and consumers to select titles that are right for them.