The Other NBA

For those of you that missed it (either in person or via the #nba10 Twitter hashtag), the 61st annual National Book Awards were presented last night in New York City. While yours truly was neither a winner (they have yet to institute a blogging category) nor an in-person attendee, I had fun following via the Interwebz and am pleased to announce this year's winners:

Lifetime achievement award: Tom Wolfe (whose speech apparently went on forever).

Young people's literature: Mockingbird by Kathryn Erskine (NOTE: while her writing may be superb, her website is an example of what yours should not look like). (Other finalists: Paolo Bacigalupi, Ship Breaker; Laura McNeal, Dark Water; Walter Dean Myers, Lockdown; Rita Williams-Garcia, One Crazy Summer.)

Poetry: Lighthead by Terrance Hayes. (Other finalists: Kathleen Graber, The Eternal City; James Richardson, By the Numbers; C.D. Wright, One with Others; Monica Youn, Ignatz.)

Nonfiction: Just Kids, Patti Smith. (Other finalists: Barbara Demick, Nothing to Envy: Ordinary Lives in North Korea; John W. Dower, Cultures of War: Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima, 9-11, Iraq; Justin Spring, Secret Historian: The Life and Times of Samuel Steward; Megan K. Stack, Every Man in This Village Is a Liar: An Education in War.)

Fiction: Lord of Misrule, Jaimy Gordon. (Other finalists: Peter Carey, Parrot and Olivier in America; Nicole Krauss, Great House; Lionel Shriver, So Much for That; Karen Tei Yamashita, I Hotel.)

Suffice it to say, I have four more books to add to the "to-read" pile, including the new Hayes (of whom I'm a big fan, & was rooting for to win—not that I didn't/don't love the other finalists). If anyone's interested, my picks were: Terrance Hayes (poetry), Barbara Demick (nonfiction), and Nicole Krauss (fiction). (I don't read enough children's literature/YA to have an informed opinion.) Congrats to all, however, winners and finalists alike!

What about you, meine Autoren? What do you think of the finalists/winners and their books?

The Never-Ending Battle Continues

As I mentioned last month, there's a battle going on for control of Barnes & Noble (BKS). Leonard Riggio, chairman and largest stockholder of the company, wants to retain control; Ron Burkle, billionaire and founder of the Yucaipa Companies, llc, wants to seize it. Until recently, that was all there was to say about it.

Last week, however, Institutional Shareholder Services, a major proxy advisory company to stock investors, endorsed Burkle's plan to seat three of his own nominees (including himself) on the company's nine-member Board of Directors, as well as rewrite Barnes & Noble's shareholder rights (or "poison pill") plan, a measure designed to prevent hostile takeovers. Apparently, Burkle believes that BKS is "significantly undervalued" and a change of management is necessary to restore the company to fiscal health. Among his chief complaints is that Barnes & Noble waited too long to introduce the Nook, thereby handicapping the bookseller in the digital media/e-book market.

Not everyone agrees with ISS, however: three major advisory services (Glass Lewis & Co., Egan-Jones Proxy Services, and Proxy Governance Inc.) are on Riggio's side, a position somewhat strengthened by the fact that a Delaware judge ruled against Burkle's legal assault on BKS' poison pill defense. Shareholders are scheduled to vote on the proposals at the end of the month.

What does this mean for the industry and for you as authors, readers, and consumers?

Again, I doubt this battle will much affect Barnes & Noble's bottom line in the short term. An ultimate victory by Team Riggio will probably result in little substantive change for the company; a victory by Team Burkle could be game-changing, as his vocal desire to move BKS further into digital media and Yucaipa's successful history of leveraged buyouts could indicate a plan to convert Barnes & Noble into a more direct competitor with Amazon (more emphasis on e-books and related content, reduction of physical title stock, more money allocated to .com business, and so on). The times, they are a-changin', mes auteurs.

To be clear: this is all speculation on my part, and I don't know what Burkle is planning to do any more than any other moderately interested third party; I only know what's being reported in the news. I also have no real preference regarding control of the company; it's all the same to me whether it's run by a rich guy from New York or a rich guy from Los Angeles. I am, however, intrigued by the repercussions of either's victory, and I'm curious to see where this will take Barnes & Noble over the next five years.

What about you, gentle readers?

An Apple a Day Keeps the Pirates Away

If you missed me yesterday, 1.) you read too many Internet blogs (or, at the very least, too much of this one—not that I don't appreciate it!), and 2.) it was because much of the industry (unlike most used car salesmen) had President's Day off, so I wasn't in the office.

So!

As we all probably figured would be the case, publishers are already becoming wary of Apple's shiny new iPad and iBook store. Some are wary of Apple's hesitance to share consumer data, but most of those publishers are newspaper publishers, so their opinions don't really matter. I mean, come on, I don't even remember the last time I read a physical newspaper.

All kidding aside, though, there are some hang-ups in the real (read: book) publishing world as well. (Okay, now all kidding aside.) Apple plans to employ its tried-and-true FairPlay DRM in the iBook store in an attempt to ward off piracy. Whether this will be a permanent affair or whether it will eventually be phased out à la Apple's game plan for music remains to be seen.

What do you think, gentle readers? Should book DRM be run the same way as music DRM? Would (or do) you subscribe to e-magazines and e-newspapers? And when Apple and Amazon engage in the clash of the titans that will PROBABLY END THE WORLD, whose side will you be on?

And Then There Were Three

(Image courtesy of Gizmodo)

In the continued battle over the price of e-books, Hachette has joined Macmillan and HarperCollins in adopting Apple's agency model over the existing wholesale model. (You can read their letter to agents here.) That leaves Simon & Schuster, Penguin, and Random House (not pictured) as the odd men (and women!) out.

First, I've received a few e-mails from you asking what, exactly, the agency model is. In short, it's a sales model predicated on the theory that the publisher is selling directly to consumers, and that any agent (oftentimes a retailer like Amazon) conducting a sale on the publisher's behalf is entitled to a commission on that sale (under Apple's model, roughly 30%).

The wholesale model, on the other hand, is based on the theory that the retailer is the only one selling directly to customers, so publishers are essentially out of the picture once they sell their goods to said retailer (usually at a 50% or so discount). This means that the retailer can then turn around and sell their books at pretty much whatever price they want (in Amazon's case, $9.99). Amazon lost money under this model because they were buying new e-books from publishers at roughly half the retail price ($15 or so). This was fine with Amazon, since they were selling books as loss-leaders for their Kindle devices and building significant mind and market share while doing it.

While there are some, like TechCrunch blogger Paul Carr, who believe the agency model is an anti-competitive throwback to the UK's Net Book Agreement of 1900, most believe that with publishers earning more money per sale and shelling out less in terms of overhead (printing, binding, shipping, &c), the agency model could translate into significantly higher profits for houses and, in turn, higher royalties for authors (no guarantees as yet, though).

What do you think, mes auteurs? Is the agency model the way of the future?

Borders Revisited

There have been a few changes since we last visited Borders back in August. They've got a new (interim) CEO to replace the outgoing Ron Marshall (who took over for George Jones about a year ago), they're in danger of being delisted by the NYSE (last I checked, their stock was trading at $0.92 a share), their holiday sales are down 14% year-on-year, they may be in deep water if Apple and Barnes & Noble have paired up over the much-awaited "iSlate" (due to be unveiled today), and the Internet backlash initiated by their destruction of unsold books has been great enough to cause them to change their minds (the books will now be donated or recycled instead of destroyed).

Competition with other major brick-and-mortar retailers (like Barnes & Noble) and Internet megastores (like Amazon) has made an already rough economic climate even rougher for Borders. They were forced to close 200 Walden store locations this month, freeing them from burdensome leases on mall space but further contracting their sales base and general visibility in the market. Even if the Borders chain emerges from this dip relatively unscathed, it's not clear how their mall stores (Borders Express and Walden) will fare.

It's not all bad news in Ann Arbor—Borders has reduced shelf space for less profitable merchandise and revamped their rewards program—but, as you can see, they're far from out of the woods yet.

What do you think, fair authors? Will Borders regain their footing as the economy recovers? Do you think mall-based book retailing is still effective? Do you shop at Borders regularly, and if not, why not? If so, why?

The 6... Er, 500 Million Dollar Man

I found the comments in yesterday's post particularly enlightening, so thanks to all of you who posted about where your industry news comes from. I'm pleased to report that I've added Bookslut and Author! Author! to the blogroll section of PMN. (Sidebar: please feel free to always recommend new news sources to me, since I'm constantly looking to learn as much about this crazy industry as you are.)

If you haven't been reading the New York Times recently (and honestly, who could blame you? It's effectively turned into a lifestyle magazine), they've got a nifty article on the book machine that is James Patterson. Some fun facts, in tried-and-true patented Bullet-O-Vision™:

· Since 2006, one out of every seventeen novels purchased in the U.S. has been written by James Patterson. This includes 51 NYT best sellers, 35 of which went to #1.

· His recent book sales (in dollars) exceed those of John Grisham, Dan Brown, and Stephen King. Combined.

· According to Forbes magazine, Patterson apparently earned $500 million dollars for Hachette over the past two years. (The publisher disputes these numbers.)

· Patterson's current average: nine new hardcovers per year.

· In order to keep up this manic pace, Patterson has a stable of co-authors (at least five) whom he pays out-of-pocket to write many of his books (based on his outlines, of course).

Now, before you rush off to build your own sprawling media empire, it's important to note two things:

1.) You are not James Patterson. Repeat after me: "I am not James Patterson."

2.) Patterson has been steadily building his own massive media presence over the past 35 years, and while he did start off quite modestly, he has succeeded because he's been so relentless about marketing himself.

If you read the article, you'll see just how far Patterson goes and has gone to promote himself and his books: he's involved in virtually every step of the process, effectively serving as a member of his own publishing team. While you almost certainly won't be expected (or even necessarily allowed) in your own publisher's marketing and sales meetings at first, I cannot stress enough the importance of taking interest in the financial aspect of your career. Think about your current day job: do you ignore your paycheck, your stock options, your 401(k) statements? Being a writer who desires to make a living as such but eschews the business side of the job is no different.

In short: writing is art, ladies and gents, but if you want to make a living doing it, it is also necessarily a business. Be relentless. Take an active interest in the advertising, sales, and marketing aspects of your book(s). I'm not asking you to let your writing take a back seat to the, shall we say, "pimping"—I'm just asking you to be on your own publicity team.

Happy Martin Luther King, Jr. Day!

I have the day off work today, mes auteurs, and so PMN will be taking a one-day hiatus as well. Feel free to frolic in the comments, and I'll be back tomorrow!

Battle for the Future of E-Books

Since e-books came up in yesterday's comments and I have yet to talk about our upcoming E-lysium/new e-reading devices this year, I figured I'd take a moment to tell you what I really think the future is: this.

Now, before I accidentally incite a PC/Mac war, let me be clear: I'm not necessarily putting my money on Apple as the leader of the New World Order (Microsoft will be a contender, along with the canonical trifecta of Amazon, Google, and Walmart). What I am saying is this: as much as we hear about eyestrain and the doom associated with backlit screens, this is not a dealbreaker for all of us, and further, I'm fairly certain the all-in-one package will soon beat out the dedicated device.

Imagine it: a Mac or PC tablet that integrates full-color books into the existing super-device that is the smartphone (Internet browsing, calling, texting, app...ing, you name it). My bet is that this model will be far more popular than a black-and-white device like the Kindle that only serves one purpose. Sure, Apple (or whoever becomes the Tablet King) will have to overcome obstacles like existing market/mindshare, infrastructure, DRM, &c, but they're a smart bunch. As a result, I don't think Amazon will be quite as monolithic in the e-book industry in five years as they are now.

That said, I'm still interested in the new e-ink models coming out this spring. Sure, you can't watch a video on them or use them to look up that obscure literary reference you just read, but some of them (such as the Skiff and the Que) look pretty sweet. I don't think they'll last in the long run, but I think they're a key part of the ongoing print-to-digital (r)evolution (analogous to Zip disks, laserdiscs, HD DVDs, and so on).

Basically, it comes down to this: I think the Kindle and other dedicated e-readers are necessary to the future of publishing, but they are not going to be carrying the torch for very long; e-books will outlive these types of e-readers by a significant margin.

Next up: dozens of angry commenters who got or gave Kindles for Christmas thronging the comments section! Details at 11:00!

Copyright, Schmopyright

Yes, copyright, that fancy set of U.S. laws (other countries have them, too) that protects you (and your publisher) from having all your (their) intellectual property stolen by some crazy hack. In case you haven't been keeping up with all the PubHubbub this week, the question of copyright has once again been raised in the mini-debacle over the third installment in the late Stieg Larsson's bestselling mystery series. The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest is already available in Ye Olde United Kingdome, but won't be released in the United States of Awesome until May of next year. In order to compete with on-line retailers like Amazon.co.uk, independent retailers in the U.S. have begun importing and re-selling the U.K. versions. The problem is that the U.S. publisher (Alfred A. Knopf) has already paid for the right to do this, and so anyone who imports the U.K. edition and sells it here in the States is in violation of U.S. copyright law.

Now, I'm all for independent book stores and applaud virtually any means by which they can stick it to The Man (whoever that actually is). However, I am also a fan of the law, and while I sympathize with the situation independents like Murder by the Book are in given the encroachment of Corporate America onto their turf, I can't condone illegal actions. If we bend the copyright rules to level the playing field for indies just this once, what's to stop us from doing so in the future? It's the slipperiest of slopes, bros and she-bros, and I think the eventual solution will have to be a greater international awareness in copyright (and other) law as The E-pocalypse draws ever nearer. Questions on everything from first print rights to electronic distribution will have to be re-thought in the coming decade, and I think cases like this one are an indication of how complex the issues involved will be. What do you think? Will we need some kind of international copyright law to police international sales/Teh Internets? Will e-books make this easier or harder? (I tend to think harder, but then again, I'm afraid of pirates.)

You Can't Spell "MWA HA HAAA" Without "MWA"

We all know how I feel about self-publishing, so it likely comes as no surprise to you that my reaction to Dellarte Press (originally known as "Harlequin Horizons") is largely negative. I'm not the only one crying foul, though, mes auteurs: the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, Mystery Writers of America, and Romance Writers of America have objected to the project, with the latter two de-listing Harlequin as an acceptable publisher due to their violation of both organizations' "no vanity press"-type rules. (These reactions, as well as others like them, are what lead to Harlequin Horizon's changing its name in the first place.) Edit: I've been informed that the SFWA has also de-listed Harlequin as an eligible publisher for the same reasons as the MWA and RWA, but books published by Harlequin are still eligible for the Nebula award because no prohibition exists against granting it to self-published works.

The source of the brouhaha (at least, as near as I can tell) was that Harlequin was talking out of both sides of their collective mouth: on the one hand, they were saying that your manuscript wasn't good enough to be published by Harlequin Harlequin, but—but!—for the low, low price of $599.00 (packages run from $599.00 to $1,599.00), Harlequin Horizons would make you into a Real Live Author™! (Tragic character flaw not included.) The solution to this contradiction? Change "Harlequin Horizons" to "Dellarte Press." Et voilà! You no longer have a traditional book publisher playing a weird joke on you by asking you to pay them to publish your book because they didn't think it was good enough for them to pay you.

So yes, I applaud you, MWA (to whom I ascribed the mysterious laugh in this post's title), as well as the RWA, SFWA, and the countless other members of the industry who voiced concerns over this less-than-honest move by Harlequin. Yes, I think self-publishing produces absolute bilge 99.999% of the time. Yes, I think authors who self-publish are more often than not shooting themselves in the foot (feet?) if they want to ever make money doing what they do. BUT. I also think that those self-publishing companies have the right to do what they do so long as they're being honest about it, and most of them are: they're not offering book deals or literary stardom, they're offering to bind your book for you. When a traditional trade book publisher, however—you know, the fancy advance-and-royalty kind—starts getting in on the game, it's no longer clear where traditional publishing ends and self-publishing—dare I say "vanity publishing"—begins.

Sure, Harlequin can take their name off the press to prevent confusion, but if they've got to take their brand off a product in order to sell it, what is that really saying about them and their enterprise?

Rightsizing is the New Downsizing

There comes a time in every young Sith apprentice's life when he or she must decide to turn on the master and kill him/sell him out to the Jedi/decimate his sweet Google Analytics stats by diverting web traffic to her new blog. That time is now: Laura has just started her own blog, Combreviations, where she will talk about... whatever she wants. Fear not, gentle readers: she'll still be doing the weekly round-ups here at PMN. You just have significantly more content to read every week. Hooray for you, and congratulations, Laura!

Speaking of Laura's new blog—or, more specifically, the content of her first post—if you haven't heard, Walden is being "right-sized" to 130 stores (down from around 330). Now, it'd be easy to go a little nuts and declare this another nail in the Borders coffin (for those not in the know, Borders owns Walden), but I don't think this is the case. Here's why:

· While I think decreased foot traffic through malls (vis-à-vis the recession) has been partly responsible for the decision, you have to realize that these stores have been on their way out for nearly a decade. Borders has been steadily reducing the Walden store count since 2001 in an effort to increase efficiency and profitability, and if pushing the count down to 130 stores helps them do this, then I encourage it—although I am sorry for anyone losing a job due to the restructuring. My good thoughts are with you (yes, I occasionally have good thoughts).
· Theoretically (and according to the company), this "right-sizing" will allow Borders to finally fully integrate Walden into their computer system, which will be a huge relief for everyone in the industry currently having to juggle the separate (and oft-incompatible) Borders and Walden systems. This alone will contribute considerably to increased efficiency in title (re)orders, getting titles listed in the computer system, and so on.
· Barnes & Noble is making a similar move with their B. Dalton mall stores, which indicates to me it's more of a "mall book store" problem than a chain-specific one. With the rise of e-books imminent and the current print-book market currently split between the the superstores, Amazon, mass merch retailers, and large independents, there's not much room left for the mall folks, and that limited space is shrinking fast. I'm not even sure I know anyone who buys books in a mall anymore.

What do you think?

It's a Book! No, It's a Vook! No, It's a... Nook?

As Joseph L. Selby pointed out in yesterday's comments, Barnes and Noble just unveiled the Nook, and I must say, it is a handsome device indeed. And with its dual screens, Wi-Fi capability, an open format, and (GET THIS) a "book lending" feature, I think it's my new favorite reader. (Sorry, Sony... we can still be friends.) And what are you talking about, Kindle? We were never anything at all.

With the e-reader market exploding and some even more promising technology on the way, I feel I must reiterate my position that e-books are absolutely the future of reading/writing/publishing. Don't get me wrong: there will be challenges, and there are some of you who will only surrender your printed books when AmaGoogleMart.com pries them from your cold, dead fingers, but I think change is in the air (and has been for awhile) and while e-books certainly won't spell the end of publishing, they're going to be game-changers. Industry professionals who can't keep one step ahead of said game (or at least keep up) will be left behind.

Which brings me to today's question: has Barnes & Noble's e-reader changed your opinion about the technology in any way? Are you more likely to buy a Nook than a Kindle?

This Week in Doom: Walmart.com

Thanks to everyone who left feedback in the comments section of yesterday's post; I'll be checking it for a few more days, so if you've got a question or request, feel free to chime in. Answers soon to come!

As you may have heard over the past few days or weeks, there's a price war going on between Amazon and Walmart in the wond'rous (and occasionally terrifying) arena of cyberspace. Both retailers are vying for the much-coveted title of Lord of the Lowest Prices—otherwise known as The Biggest Loser, since both parties are buying their books from publishers at traditional discounts and selling them at a loss—and with Target now getting in on the action, it's going to be a very interesting fight indeed. Popcorn, anyone?

In all seriousness, though, this series of (perhaps soon-to-be unfortunate) events has just about everyone in the industry worried. While publishers aren't losing any money on books at the moment—on the contrary, increased sales of the selected $8.99 hardcovers are only going to boost publishers' sales—they are concerned about the long-term implications of what Walmart, Amazon—and now, Target—are doing. Here are a few of the problems:

· None of these retailers are specifically book sellers, so they can afford to lose money on books while making an overall profit through the sale of other goods. Major chain stores like Barnes & Noble and Borders, as well as smaller independent book stores, can't afford to do this and may either be substantially downsized or actually driven out of business by these sales tactics.
· Should Amazon and Walmart achieve the majority of the large publishing houses' market share, they will eventually be able to collectively demand that publishers sell to them at a steeper discount (such that they can continue to sell books at low prices without hemorrhaging money). If you remember the Walmart/Rubbermaid debacle of a decade or so ago, this won't seem too far-fetched. This could further decrease publishing houses' already slim profit margins.
· Even if Amazon and Walmart don't push for increased discounting, their potential statuses as the country's largest book retailers will make it more difficult for publishers to secure promotional space on their websites (or, in the case of Walmart, brick-and-mortar stores) simply because publishers will be competing not only with other houses, but retailers of completely different goods and services.

Walmart already has a stranglehold on our tupperware, our Kraft dinners, our small kitchen appliances, our dorm furniture. Will books be next?

Speaking of Our Benevolent Overlords

Hot on the tail of our discussion of Oprah yesterday—which confirmed my theory that, just as you are not largely controlled by Dan Brown, neither are you totally swayed by the powers of Oprah Winfrey—is the news that the DOJ has rejected Google's book deal.

For those of you just tuning in, some background may be in order. You can find a good rundown here and a timeline here, but I'll provide it in trademark Bullet-O-Vision™ for the link-averse:

• December 2004: Google conceives the Google Print Library Project, the precursor to today's Google Book Search.
• September/October 2005: the Authors Guild of America and Association of American Publishers independently sue Google, citing copyright infringement. Google objects, citing fair use.
• August 2006 - July 2007: Over the course of a year, a bunch of university libraries announce they'll be partnering with Google in the Book Search venture.
• March 2007: Microsoft jumps on board the litigation bandwagon. This isn't surprising, since Google and Microsoft are rivals (Chrome vs. IE, Google search engine vs. Bing, &c.)
• October 2008: A settlement is reached in which Google agrees to pay $125 million to remunerate all copyright holders whose rights were infringed, cover all legal fees, and create a public Book Rights Registry. Ever since, the terms have been under negotiation, with a ruling expected next month. However, as mentioned above, there's been a bit of a setback.

The main problem, at least as far as I can see, is this: Google believes they are allowed to keep full scans of any book—even those still under copyright—in their database, so long as they only permit public access to books that are already in the public domain; most copyright holders disagree, particularly publishers who are 50% legitimately worried that permitting one private company to effectively control the majority of the world's printed word is dangerous and 50% terrified of technology in general.

My take: I am 100% in favor of Google maintaining a database of public domain works, as are, I think, most people—except possibly public libraries, who may go by the wayswide if and when e-books come to power, meaning Google + Amazon = Your Reading Experience™. (In case you couldn't tell, I really love that little "™" symbol.) However, I am not in favor of Google maintaining a database and book registry for copyrighted material for the following reasons:

• Security. Book piracy isn't really a problem yet, but once e-books are commonplace and Google's got a massive (ostensibly private) database of copyrighted material all in one place, it will, I think, be very attractive to e-pirates who don't want to pay full price for electronic books.
• Accountability. Depending on the nuts and bolts of your contract, the copyright is either in your name or your publisher's, yet Google's holding onto it without your permission. But don't worry, they'll pay you if people are accessing your copyrighted material through them.
• Destruction of competition. With everything centralized and controlled by one entity, it seems to me healthy competition (e.g. from publishers, other electronic book databases, libraries, &c) could be stifled.

Then again, I'm the cautious (some say conspiracy theorist) type, so it could all be unnecessary hand-wringing. But I know if it were my copyright and my livelihood involved, I'd be damned sure no one was exploiting my work or stealing from me while citing free exchange of information.

It Was Under the Couch Cushion the Whole Time

First of all, thanks to everyone who voted for PMN on the Book Blogger Apprecation Week awards page, and a big round of applause for the winners. As you can see, I totally got Ben Kenobi-ed by Nathan. Looks like he really DID become more powerful than we could ever imagine! (I mean, the man helped forge a blog that wasn't even his own. Without him, PMN literally wouldn't exist.)

In all seriousness, though, hats & Sith Lord life-support helmets off to you, Nathan, and the rest of the winners as well. More than well-deserved.

But there's always next year...

As you may have heard (unless you've been stuck on a deserted island for the last five months), Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol came out yesterday. It's already taken the UK by storm (they're in the future, you know) and I'll be updating this post later today with US info and news reports. So far:

• Tesco (a British grocery store/general merchandiser) was selling 19 copies PER MINUTE;
• Asda (a British supermarket) sold 18,000 copies before 4:00 PM;
• Rumor has it that one of the Manhattan major chain stores (just ONE STORE) sold 400 copies by 2:00 PM. By my rough calculation, that's about one copy every minute. Heavens to Murgatroyd.

Now, being an enterprising young man, I've acquired Mine Very Owne Copie of the book and am already a third of the way through it. (The font is huge.) Now, WITHOUT SPOILING ANYTHING AT ALL, I PROMISE, my reaction is as follows:

I once accused Dan Brown of writing the same book twice (Angels & Demons and The Da Vinci Code). I'd like to formally retract that.

He has written the same book three. Different. Times.

Now, if you really liked those other two books, you'll definitely like this one. I think the writing is better and the pacing is as good as ever. He does have a lot of characters/shadowy organizations/plot points that are annoyingly similar to his previous books, though, and there are times (roughly every other page) where I get the impression he just keeps a giant Crazy Conspiracies Mad-Libs that he fills out every few years and turns into a book. (Maybe that's exactly what he does.) That aside—it's pretty entertaining. To sum it up as only the British can (courtesy of the Guardian link, above):

The Lost Symbol charts similar territory to The Da Vinci Code, with the hero decoding puzzles and going on the run from shadowy forces, this time Freemasons. Some reviewers branded The Lost Symbol "moronic, derivative and clunky" .

Others applauded Brown's ability to give his millions of fans what they want. For the publishing industry, the book's strengths and weaknesses were only being measured in numbers.

And those numbers are going to be intense.

It wouldn't be a true PMN post without a healthy dose of doom, however, so before I go, these parting words (again from the Guardian) and a mini-Prithee-Inform-Me:

Baggaley said it remains questionable whether the soaring sales of Dan Brown books will have a beneficial effect for publishers of other books. "In Tesco this morning the book was on display, not in the book section, but as soon as you walked in, so it is not as if you are going to be drawn into buying other books as well," he said.

I've been warning that books going on-sale around this time will be cannibalized by Dan Brown rather than see a boost from his generating additional foot traffic. Prithee, inform me: do you think the DB phenomenon will increase or decrease the sales of other books in the stores?

Sexy Friday Round-Up

Book worshippers and novel pimpers alike, gather round: today is Judgement Day, on which I judge your suggestions for book-based faiths. I present to you the one true way, the Church of the Rye Catcher, brought to us by the Apostle MattDel, follower of the prophet Holden Caulfield. Phonies, repent! Or at least get out of my personal space.

It is these same phonies who don't realize how hard book blogging can be. But if you hope to be a successful book reviewing blogger, you should follow this advice. Part of it says to be professional, which was clearly inspired by my conduct. You didn't know I do reviews? Well, if you send me your book and fifty bucks, I'll give you top notch reviews in my diary. Unless your book sucks, in which case I will keep your cash and fulfill a beloved aphorism, parting fools and money. But I promise I'll read the whole thing, even given the joys of half finishing novels. I might even read it while walking, a method I am not particularly good at (thank you, girl on the street, for stopping me from walking into traffic while reading the other day), but that I hear can be quite fabulous.

Another thing I hear is fulfilling: sex. At Smart Bitches Trashy Books there's a discussion of the type of sex possible with a Sony Reader and with an iPhone. Don't worry, my office procrastinators, it's SFW. And, sexy sexy, the iPhone has a ton of bookish apps. Kindle sex isn't mentioned here, but it turns out if you lose your Kindle you can't track it back down, so you probably should just stick with it and not cheat.

Maybe directly referencing boning is in poor taste—and, in fact, literature may be swinging back toward sexual modesty (hey, if Twilight can sell Wuthering Heights when it's free at Project Gutenberg, anything is possible). Although I'd prefer it if literature would swing toward steampunk romance.

I think steampunk romance would be good. And Lev Grossman (whose new book looks great, btw—Lev, read my review policy above! Top billing in my diary if you send me your book!) tells us that good books don't have to be hard. But then we heard that they don't have to be easy either, and Andrew Seal writes that Grossman could learn a little something about promoting himself by postulating theories from other writers. Honestly, I only link to all of these things because Grossman responds to all the hubbub, sums up all the arguments people have been throwing at him, and writes, "I'm not actually a dick." I say that all the time. And while I'm usually lying when I say it, I believe Grossman is, in fact, not a dick. Tintin, on the other hand, is a racist dick, and is getting sued.

Also dicks: book pirates. Among the top ten most pirated books are the Kamasutra and The Complete Idiot's Guide to Amazing Sex. Also, the Madoff sex book is selling really poorly—no one wants to read about old man sex. I. Am. Shocked.

Why is everything in book news this week about sex? Are these the book morals we're teaching our children? And killing off Reading Rainbow was low—butterfly in the sky, children will no longer fly twice as high. We will be teaching them to appreciate the written word in one of two ways: a point system, based on a numerical interpretation of art, or the hippie "read your feelings, not the classics" method. What's so wrong with forcing children to read classics they won't appreciate until their twenties, if ever? Kids today. Can't even walk barefoot through the snow to school.

On that depressing note, I take my leave. No contest this week (I'm only so creative, people, and I had no Internet all week, which crippled my soul and my contest-thinking-up brain lobe), but I really loved this post on what editors eat while they read. What have you been eating while reading? Let me know in the comments!

Finally, the Fame & the Glory

After all the blood, ink, and tears I've put into this blog and my job as a sales assistant in the wild and crazy world of publishing, CBS has decided to air a show about my life. And by "air a show about my life" I mean "air a show about the world of book publishing":

The project, tentatively titled "Open Books," has received a pilot commitment from the network. It revolves around book editor June and her circle of friends.

"Books" is inspired by the time Lerner spent as a temp in the publishing world at the beginning of her career and by the experiences of her sister Betsy, who worked as a book editor for 15 years before becoming a literary agent.

I have no idea how accurate or entertaining this show will be, but I think it's worth seeing the pilot. No word on a date for said pilot, but I'll keep you posted. On the one hand, I'm hopeful that a really good show about the publishing world will not only make for great TV, but will also educate people about how the industry works and, to some extent, get people excited about reading. On the other hand, if it's mega boring, it might do more harm than good. Thoughts?

This Just In!

PMN? On a Saturday? Quel fromage!

If you're into free books (and I know you are), head on over to the Barnes & Noble e-book store to download their free reader and select six free books!

(Yes, these books are available from Project Gutenberg, so they're technically already free, but let's not split hairs here.)

Have a great weekend!