Here are the two best articles on publishing of the Year of our Kindle MMXI

1. Does anyone understand what Seth Godin is doing?

   • First book is Godin’s own, not that he’s up front about that

   • Unsolicited submissions are, as with vieille formulation publishing, pissing in the wind. Plus he can steal your ideas

   • Functionally a vanity press for anyone with the historical misfortune of failing to be Seth Godin

2. A simply boggling piece of writing, “Making Friends,” which you have to look at via Instapaper these days because the writer for some unknown reason killed his darling now restored.

   I was sitting about five feet from Frank Chimero on Friday and… I failed to ask him the one question I wanted to: Why is there a fancy cover, special editions, macaroni art, etc., instead of a written book? […]

   One need only look at the struggles of Merlin Mann’s nebulous Inbox Zero to wonder if a great blogger can finish a book. Frank can take a shit in a pretty cover and ship it, and you all just funded it. Frank just pocketed 67 grand [nope: 112] because he’s Internet Famous.

   Many people call that a community, but I call it a collaboration of fools. Where are the fire-starters? Why are we reading directionless ships like Cognition? Does Andy Clarke really come up with compelling speeches 175 times a year? […] Zeldman used to fight for standards, now he posts gym pics on Twitter….

   Why did you guys buy a book that doesn’t even have a chapter outline? […] Where’s the design book that says stop doing this, please?

   What qualities do we seek in leadership these days? […] That they did something 7 years ago that was really great? That they speak at the same conferences? What qualities do we find great in these people? Where do we go to find new, interesting producers? Inquiring minds want to know.

   I for one reject the author’s retrospective self-flagellation.

Something else that’s wrong with publishing

Academics and a small press want to put out a mere three books a year, stretching from 2009 all the way to 2015, on a topic that should be banged out by the dozens in E-book form: Queer films that intellectuals approve of. It’s a 1990s concept to begin with, and the shortlist is almost a joke. It’s as if they’re specifically excluding Parting Glances (which ideally would be covered in a twin volume with its intertextual successor, Billy’s).