Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Huge congratulations to Kiran Desai for her book winning the Booker Prize. We were, of course, sad for Teddy St Aubyn but the judges had a really tough job and I'm sure, judging by her speech, that Ms Desai is a great person as well as a great writer. I'm off to India this morning and I have no doubt the country will be celebrating yet another national hero.

I should have known that this particular title would win when, earlier in the evening, I was asked whether Macmillan was committed to publishing literary books. I asked what is meant by a literary book. Apparently it is a work of fiction which loses money. It seemed rather an odd definition and I tried to argue that publishing companies tend to do a better job when they are solvent. In addition I'm not quite sure why literary publishing should deserve more support than, say, educational publishing in Zimbabwe. That said, of course we are committed to literary publishing and to the continued growth of Picador in all its markets - UK, USA, Australia, South Africa, India and most recently Asia. But I should not want to leave future publishers at Macmillan with an inheritance of loss whatever the definition of literature.

During the 1990s the foundations were laid for the terrific success of the Nature Publishing Group. The strategy was to launch the highest-quality 'sister' journals in subjects close to Nature's core expertise and audience. This resulted in many top life science journals being launched - Genetics, Medicine, Cell Biology etc. The group was begining to be seen purely as a life science publisher. This is changing and the recent launch of Nature Nanotechnology prompted me to ask Jason Wilde, its publisher, to describe what is happening in the Nature world of physical sciences.

What a difference a year makes

Over the past year Nature Publishing Group (NPG) has quadrupled its portfolio of physicals science journals by launching three new titles: Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Physics and Nature Nanotechnology. These launches came on the back of Nature Materials (our first physical science research journal) which was launched in 2002 and has become the number 1 research journal in the physical sciences.

 

The reason for these launches is simple; it is to ensure NPG is at the forefront of serving all of science including the physical science community. Ten years ago NPG expanded its program from just Nature to include 7 primary research journals in the biomedical and life sciences. These became essential titles for each of their fields and ensured that NPG was seen as a leading publisher in the life sciences.

 

Many people have forgotten that Nature is as strong in the physical sciences as it is in the life sciences publishing a number of firsts including: The discovery of X-Rays (1896); the development of the particle accelerator (1932) and the production of the first LASER (1960). More recently Nature has led the way publishing research on: the formation of C60 (1985); the first paper on electronic ink (1998) and only last year new research from INTEL on LASERs made from silicon.

 

The launch of Nature Materials, Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Physics, and Nature Nanotechnology ensures we continue this tradition and that NPG provides the physical science community with the same high quality journals that the life sciences have enjoyed for the past decade.

 

Not only have we launched new titles but we have also expanded our editorial operations to include Asia. The decision to have one of the editors for Nature Nanotechnology in Tokyo reflects the strengths of the Asia-Pacific region. Japan is second only to the US in terms of investment in nanotechnology research, and South Korea is ranked fifth in the world. China is also emerging as a force in nanotechnology and scientific research.

 

#    |  Comments [7]  | 
10/12/2006 7:52:49 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Richard

Your story about Literary Books reminds me of the bookselling equivalent of distaste for "popular" authors. We had one shop in which the fiction buyer refused absolutely to stock Jeffrey Archer's books on the grounds that they were "popular". He was a very good, extremely well informed literary buyer who commanded enormous respect among his peers and kept the most wonderful collection of fiction and this was not a straightforward discussion. On that particular day, however, I was travelling with a rather gauche and unpleasant director of WH Smith who looked astonished and said "do you mean Waterstone's only stock unpopular books?"

I reflected then that we, as an industry, and the media that explain us to the public are victims of our own rather careless use of language; this is unbecoming and a touch imperialist. But we love it.
10/12/2006 10:43:34 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Tim

In those days of course there was still a net book agreement and it therefore made sense for Waterstone's and indies alike to stock 'popular fiction' - I used to say it paid for the poetry.

Now of course for most of us indies, and probably for Waterstone's too if they were honest and stopped trying to compete with the supermarkets, it makes no sense whatsoever.

And yes, it's a pleasure to wake up and think I don't have to stock Jeffrey Archer.
10/13/2006 2:38:43 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Jonathan, One of the reasons that many people find independent bookshops intimidating is the perceived superiority of individuals working there an dthe elitism which can pervade. I'm delighted that this seems to be changing but your last remark makes me wonder. All best Richard
10/13/2006 8:20:22 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Richard

I know many indie bookshop proprietors, only a few could be described as having airs of perceived superiority : there's nothing elitist about the manner in which most of us run our businesses. We work bloody hard (7 days a week) to try and ensure that our loyal customers get offered a broad selection of stock.

With the abolition of the NET book agreement, and current rampant cover price inflation of certain populist titles, then we are forced (by economic necessity) to leave that part of the terrestial trade to the supermarkets.

Day after day new customers in my shop say how nice it is to find a bookshop which offers such a broad catholic selection of interesting books, and not just the heavily promoted.
10/13/2006 8:59:37 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
First sale of the day was a copy of Pam Ayres poetry : if that is being an eltitist stockist with superior atttitudes then perhaps I should relocate to Berwick Street market.
10/13/2006 9:39:07 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
And also some good words from Tony Long on the other side of the pond

http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,71933-0.html?tw=wn_index_2
10/14/2006 1:08:44 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Clive, I agree entirely that there is a market for non-promoted wide range bookselling an dthat's what independents do. Hooray. What sticks in the craw is the anti-Archer arrogance of some booksellers. They've made stacks of money out of him over the years and didn't have any moral qualms then! Bah.