A book of mine will be published
in the United States next month. Two cheers for me. Pegasus, the publisher in
question, is a devoutly independent operation. This is no small feat in any
part of the world. In New York, it’s tough to achieve. That deserves another
cheer.
The
book and its successor were issued by Mainstream, an Edinburgh publisher that
in recent years has managed to be both independent and a partner of Random
House, the gigantic and loveable multi-national. Random House has its towering headquarters
in New York, but is owned in turn by Bertelsmann, the German media
conglomerate. So where does that leave me?
Here
I am, a Scot, writing a couple of fat books about an American within what Hugh
Andrew would probably call an Edinburgh-corporate-New York “nexus”. I am also a
Scot who will be voting for independence the minute the doors open. According
to Mr Andrew, I’ll be endorsing something that “represents the worst of
all worlds for our writers and culture”. Professionally speaking, I’ll be
cutting my own throat.
Should
independence befall us, says the managing director of the publisher Birlinn, I
and everyone else in the scribbling game in these parts will become “foreign”,
trapped behind an “artificial wall”, cut off – it seems for all time – from the
London action. I’ll email Claiborne in New York this instant to tell him the
sad news. Perhaps he can arrange food parcels.
Mr
Andrew offers his prophecy via the Think Scotland web operation. If he’s right,
the chaps – such a plethora of chaps – who put the thing together should really
change the name. If they want to be “vibrant” within “a UK open market”, Think
Britain would probably do the trick. The usual contributors to the site would
find that no wrench.
Amid
his thoughts on nationalism, Mr Andrew has plenty to say about the failure of
the SNP government to support the Scottish book business. He has a point. But
he would have had a point when Labour was in power, when Tories governed the
country, or when the old Scottish Arts Council was first established. For most
of the 20th century the literature of Scotland was not exactly enhanced by the
Union. Ask the writers.
Perhaps
that’s why so many of them refuse to blink at the prospect of independence.
Some have long memories and plenty of experience of that “UK open market”, the
one that treated Jim Kelman as a barbarian at the gates when he won the Booker,
the one that reacted with a kind of astonishment when Irvine Welsh published Trainspotting. The sub-text was never
hard to decipher. But look: some of those
Jocks even write books.
Scottish
writers and publishers have always – always – been close to last in line for
public funding. The publishers are not thriving just at the moment (though
Mainstream’s decision to shut its doors next year had nothing to do with
profitability). So how are the poor writers coming along? Any that people might
have heard of beyond the Great Wall of Nationalism?
Mr
Andrew names no names. He concedes, however, that the crime novels written here
are “full of Scottish features and details” and yet “they fit into a much wider
cultural nexus”. Indeed, he corrects Ruth Wishart for enthusing recently over
the Scottish tint of the Edinburgh Book Festival. “Ruth,” it seems, “was
celebrating the strength of British identity and how successful Scots are
within that cultural nexus.”
Seriously?
That’ll be McIlvanney or Rankin, then: “Scottish features and details”. Mr
Andrew should have come out and said what he meant: “local colour”. I’m fairly
confident, though, that neither of those gentlemen would recognise themselves
in those terms. Birlinn’s MD seems truly to believe that there is no such thing
as an inescapably Scottish form of what he calls “genre” fiction.
If
independence were to give us an SNP government, meanwhile – of that there is no
guarantee, but Unionists refuse to believe it – we risk ending up like the
Irish, treated as “foreign”, shut out by London and its single market.
Apparently Scottish writers have never been excluded in this manner before.
This will be news to some of them.
Publishing
in Scotland is a fraction of the size of “London” publishing. Like differences
in population, this is perfectly true, but it hardly counts as a revelation.
Some Scottish publishing requires more public subsidy: also true. It happens
also to be true of publishing in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, where
precisely the same complaints are made over inadequate funding, but where there
is no SNP to blame. The detail escaped the notice of Mr Andrew.
The
arrival of the 21st century might also have passed him by. Like any staunch
Unionist, he cannot help but regard London as the centre of the cultural
universe. The fact is, nevertheless, that we only have Scottish literature and
Scottish publishing because perverse types refused to take that view. Regardless,
Mr Andrew believes that Scottishness itself is only viable within his “nexus”.
So
what is that exactly? What is “London” in modern publishing? Random House
(German) is one of the so-called Big Six along with Hachette (French),
Macmillan (German), Penguin (still part-British, but now 53% owned by
Bertelsmann), Simon & Schuster (American) and HarperCollins (Planet
Murdoch).
Mr
Andrew advocates an official approach recognising “that an enhanced growing and
profitable publishing industry in a symbiosis with London represents the best
option for Scottish writing and Scottish culture. It is an approach that
recognises that ‘British’ is part of the heart of ‘Scottish’.”
So
note the list offered above. There are many more than six publishers in London
and the UK, of course, but as in the United States those half dozen multi-national
giants have more, comfortably more, than 50% of the market by sales. So what’s
British about them? Close to sod all.
It
could be that I’m not the sort of Scottish author Mr Andrew has in mind. I did
once turn down an offer from HarperCollins, it’s true, but that had a lot more
to do with odour of Murdoch than with nationalism. Perhaps I’m not the
symbiotic type. It’s fascinating, though, to still come across the sorts of
Unionist who believe their whole world will come to an end if loyalty to London
falters.
Robert
Louis Stevenson knew all about the British cultural nexus. He also abided by no
one’s stereotype. But Louis did not once misunderstand himself. He rebuked tedious
S.R. Crockett from the other side of the world after receiving a letter with a
bizarre but then-popular return address. “The name of my native land,” wrote
Stevenson, “is not North Britain whatever may be the name of yours”.
I
could cringe on Mr Andrew’s behalf, but he’s doing just fine without my help.
(All right, then, if you insist. The
first volume is Once Upon a Time: The
Lives of Bob Dylan, the second Time
Out of Mind: The Lives of Bob Dylan. Stocked by all good bookshops etc.)
No comments:
Post a Comment