I wonder if it's beome customary for a publication like the L.A.Review to charge for submitting a book for review. It's not a large sum, but I'm a bit puzzled. Newspapers don't do that, do they?
No, that's something new, and notice that it's only the self-publishing authors who have to pay. I also don't think it's the best way of covering a beat, to put it mildly. But newspapers these days need every source of income they can get. Of course, if they had done more to get publishers to advertise when both were in their heydays neither might be where they are today regarding book coverage. The best idea is to regard all books as being born equal and look through the self-published ones and if one catches your eye take a closer look. After all, Leaves of Grass was self-published and so, for all practical purposes, was Ulysses.
I wonder if it's beome customary for a publication like the L.A.Review to charge for submitting a book for review. It's not a large sum, but I'm a bit puzzled. Newspapers don't do that, do they?
ReplyDeleteNo, that's something new, and notice that it's only the self-publishing authors who have to pay. I also don't think it's the best way of covering a beat, to put it mildly. But newspapers these days need every source of income they can get. Of course, if they had done more to get publishers to advertise when both were in their heydays neither might be where they are today regarding book coverage. The best idea is to regard all books as being born equal and look through the self-published ones and if one catches your eye take a closer look. After all, Leaves of Grass was self-published and so, for all practical purposes, was Ulysses.
ReplyDelete