The past few weeks, publishers have taken a bit of a beating here at sparksflyup. First, many people read my post on excessive book advances as an attack on publishers. (It wasn't, really, but more on that in a second.) Then I criticized a publisher for putting a photograph of a white girl on the cover of a book narrated by a black girl.

While it's easy to demonize publishing companies, I think that we--as writers and as readers--chronically underestimate their value. The truth is usually more complicated than our vitriol.

TRUTH: Authors should not have final control over their book covers.

Letting authors control their cover designs is just bad business. As an author, I feel qualified to make the following generalization about authors: A lot of times, we are pretty stupid. Also, as a rule, we are poor graphic designers.

I do think authors should be consulted about covers. Penguin has always given me a seat at the table in conversations about my book covers, and they've always listened to me when I didn't like a design, and I doubt they would ever print a cover without my approval.

But I'm not a graphic designer or an art director, and if I tried to act like one, it wouldn't help get my books to readers.


TRUTH: Publishers are not to blame for the crap state of the book business.

It is true that for years publishers have spent too much money on too many books. But authors and agents are equally responsible for that.

I would argue that the core problem is ultimately not that publishers are aggressive about trying to acquire books that will sell well, but that agents and writers and publishers all wrongly view money as something we take from each other, when it should be something that we make together.


TRUTH: Not everything that goes wrong with a book's publication is the publisher's fault

We all have a habit of totally overlooking how good publishers sometimes are about getting books to wide readerships. Twilight is a can't-put-down book with uncommonly compelling world-building, so it might have succeeded regardless, but Little Brown got that book into all the right hands in the weeks before its publication.

On a smaller scale: Penguin's launch of Paper Towns was absolutely masterful. They got fantastic bookstore placement for a contemporary realistic novel at a time when contemporary realistic novels weren't in vogue. Everyone was extraordinarily well-organized and diligent, and every opportunity was capitalized upon. And as a result, the book did 1000% better in its opening weeks than either of my first two books.

But what if the book hadn't done well? I know from experience that sometimes a publisher does everything right, and an author works tirelessly, and the book just doesn't take off. At those moments, one wants to blame the publisher, or the cover, or the lack of a publicist, or the lack of a tour.

But the truth is that not all books have huge audiences. Fortunately, a novel's success is not measured only in copies sold.


TRUTH: Publishers make a lot of good books and do a really good job of getting those books to people.

This is actually quite amazing when you think about it. There were maybe two good TV shows created last year, even though thousands of people spent gajillions of dollars creating hundreds of TV shows.

But there were hundreds of good books--really, legitimately good--published last year. Authors were responsible for some of that work, but by no means all: Without Julie Strauss-Gabel, Paper Towns would have been a boring and self-indulgent novel with far too much information about the history of post office boxes. Without book designers and art directors, it wouldn't have had the cool package. Without publicity and marketing and sales, Paper Towns would have reached far fewer people than it so far has.

But forget me. Let's look at a better book, like The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing--a long and gorgeously written but at times challenging historical novel written in 18th century dialect with a largely African American cast. Not the kind of thing we think of as having "teen appeal."

And yet Candlewick got that book onto the New York Times' bestseller list. And while people still line up to say, "Teens won't like that book; it's too smart for them," Candlewick is still there, proving the doubters wrong.