University Presses Urged To Expand Their Reach

American university presses, holding their annual meeting this year in Toronto, were urged, in keeping with the international location, to cultivate a global view and to step into areas of literary culture where commercial publishers were falling down on the job.

The Association of American University Presses drew more than 650 people to the gathering in Toronto's Colony Hotel June 16–19 and the atmosphere was predominantly cheerful, despite what executive director Peter Givler said had been "not a good year," with bookstore problems and returns that had "spiked" both last fall and this spring.

It was also an occasion for two wide-ranging plenary sessions that attempted to chart new directions for scholarly publishers, who were repeatedly told they must move away from the faculty monographs that still, for many of them, take up much space on their lists.

In the first of these, moderated by Philip Pochoda of the University Press of New England (see sidebar), author/critic Jay Parini and New York Times cultural correspondent Margo Jefferson both offered their visions of what UP publishing could be.

Parini's view was that UPs had "an extraordinary opportunity" because commercial publishing, both in the U.S. and the U.K., had fallen into the hands of corporations that were "ruining the book culture." There had probably been no "golden age," but it was certainly much easier to do quality books 30 years ago, Parini said, and now, "I see wonderful books going begging every year." He joked: "If Alfred Knopf were alive today, he would be turning in his grave." It is time for university presses to "seize the day," Parini declared, and offered a "wish list" of how they could take advantage of the situation.

"I'd like to see them pursuing fiction, poetry and good nonfiction. Every press should have a poetry list. As it is, the handful who are publishing poetry are keeping it alive." They should also look to publish good local fiction and essays, now "limping along," could be a good source of UP collections. It was essential that UPs become "proactive" and separate themselves from the tenure dependence on publication, which meant they published far too many books that didn't deserve to see print. "University press editors should put their foot down and refuse to publish books they can't understand." Parini concluded: "This is an age of corporate censorship, when economic prerogatives are dominant; if university presses cannot see this as a mandate, we are in a very deep crisis indeed."

Jefferson urged her listeners: "Expand your vision of what writers can do, and the sort of audiences you can reach." Intelligent readers, members of book clubs and reading groups, "often don't know your books," she said. As with the revival of poetry readings, it is a good idea to get actors and musicians involved as part of literary "performances." UPs should also look at the possibility of more translations from cultures like the Muslim world that have large populations in the U.S. but little access to their own contemporary literature. "World literature is going to become increasingly important, the opposite of the regionalism many of you cultivate successfully."

As for midlist authors, they are often being published by commercial houses to an almost complete lack of attention. "This is where you could step in. I think authors are looking to be well published rather than just for that big advance and then oblivion."

The presses' role in an era of increasing globalization was the theme of the second plenary, in which Colin Day, new director at Hong Kong University Press, urged "globalism" rather than "globalization"—defining it as an intellectual exchange between equals. As it is, he said, international scholarship is evaluated for its significance to the American market, rather than being valued for what it is. UPs must attempt, said Day, to nurture publishing industries in the developing world, which are already too much under the influence of developed ones, e.g., African publishing dominated by London. "Much brilliant scholarship in other cultures and languages is being lost to us," Day declared.

Cynthia Enloe, a professor at Clark University and a well-known media critic, took a similar tack, noting that there are now new networks of international scholars who still find difficulty in being published. Globalization, she said, could mean "Time Warnerism," but it could also mean a real flowering of international scholarship. She suggested that UP-edited volumes of such scholarship in translation could help presses reach out to "a wider world." In response to a suggestion from the floor that it was even difficult for a developed country like Canada, for instance, to maintain its cultural identity in the face of U.S. hegemony, Enloe noted that the U.S.-backed World Trade Organization actually opposes national support of local publishing industries.

A number of panels were held on aspects of electronic publishing, but one on business models, moderated by University of North Carolina Press director Kate Torrey, was particularly suggestive of the wider issues. Torrey noted that so far there was probably no press where electronic publishing was an integral part of the program, and "it's an understatement to say it's an immature market," with erratic distribution, no clear pricing structure and no clear sense of what the public wants.

Representatives from Princeton, MIT and California then outlined their presses' progress. Princeton's Digital Books Plus is a program that publishes a work in electronic form first, then opens chat rooms to online feedback that will help shape the final printed book. MIT was a pioneer, with its City of Bits title published online six years ago; it was free then, and eventually went on to sell 17,000 in printed form. The press is also at work on a huge online Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science and is busy digitizing backlist and OP titles under a Hewlett-Packard grant.

California made its first strategic plan for e-publishing in 1993, anxious not to be left behind, but probably started too early, without a clear sense of the market; early titles were on floppy discs, but there was no adequate distribution. The press is enjoying a positive cash flow from NetLibrary, to which it has licensed nearly 1,700 titles. Its experience has been that there is no disadvantage to follow rather than lead, and smaller presses should depend on aggregators and outside suppliers to do much of the necessary work of putting material online.

A research team at Fordham University, led by Albert Greco, associate professor of communications and media management, and funded by a Mellon Foundation grant, has been looking into comparative title production and pricing in a number of scholarly fields by both UPs and commercial scholarly publishers, and reported preliminary findings.

The team, which has been working with Yankee Book Peddler as its prime source of information, reports that UP title output almost doubled, to 12,000, in the past decade, while that of commercial presses has risen from just over 20,000 to a little over 40,000 in the same period. As of last year, the average price over a range of scholarly titles was $59 for the commercial houses, compared to $42 for UPs. These prices varied in different fields, however, with UP prices higher in history, and commercial presses much higher (and with many more titles) in law; UPs, on the other hand, are far ahead in titles in literary history, and prices are about even. Commercial presses are way ahead in sociology titles, and their prices here are lower.

Greco insisted that the findings, though suggestive, are still preliminary, and a lot of work needs to be done.

At the head of the AAUP board, Willis Regier of Illinois was succeeded as president by Harvard's William Sisler. In brief luncheon addresses, both spoke of the importance of teaching a new generation and hailed a new AAUP education program for young press people. "New and diverse blood is needed," declared Sisler. "It's been a lousy year, but we can learn from each other how to cope." As a last rhetorical question, he asked, "Can we put Borders on hold?"