New York Times
A Crumbling Ivory Tower: Are the Humanities Becoming Irrelevant?
February 27, 2009
Add new comment
by Auburn Rutledge
One of my favorite childhood stories was (and remains) The Neverending Story, the tale of a young outcast boy named Bastian who is drawn by proxy into the fantasy world of the book he is reading. What draws him there is a being known as the Childlike Empress, who lives in a literal ivory tower on high. Her role in the story, however, depended on which version you were most familiar with—Michael Ende’s book, or Wolfgang Petersen’s film adaptation (more later).
I bring up The Neverending Story, and more specifically the Childlike Empress, as a metaphor for the study of humanities—of which most authors have had some form of intimate encounter with over the years. I read an article by Patricia Cohen in the New York Times on the humanities in colleges, entitled “In Tough Times, the Humanities Must Justify Their Worth.” Cohen’s article suggests—in fact, outright states—that in our current global crisis, the humanities must fight for its very validity and continued existence:
questions about the importance of the humanities in a complex and technologically demanding world have taken on new urgency. Previous economic downturns have often led to decreased enrollment in the…“humanities”… Many in the field worry that in this current crisis those areas will be hit hardest.
In essence, why should we continue to study the theoretical, insubstantial, and creative elements of human nature and history when they give us no tangible skill set for dealing with reality?
Any writer could tell you why: because humanities are the backbone for our existence as complex creatures, the study of what it is to be human. And the arts, writing perhaps most profoundly, are created on the basis of this question. Fiction, nonfiction, biography or romance, horror or tragedy, self-help or satire, all great books rely upon the ability to find new answers or to ask new questions. I wax poetic, but the truth remains. Without humanities, writing becomes lost in translation.
This is not to say that a person studying engineering, or biology, or computer science, or a person who has never pursued higher education, cannot read and comprehend books. But school curriculums strive to place as much importance on humanities as sciences, occasionally even favoring the former. (While my classmates complained about major requirements, I happily signed up for two semesters of studies in Shakespeare—but I’m a book-reading nerd).
But the humanities have over the years come to represent something less tangible and more intellectual, something that exercises the brain but has no bearing outside of the circle of said intellectuals, growing ever-smaller with time. Cohen notes that the number of students pursuing degrees in the humanities has gradually shrunk since the 1960s, and the number of colleges hiring for positions within these fields of study is declining as well.
And here I finally return to my metaphor of the Childlike Empress in her tower. The outdated model of the study of humanities is like the Empress of the film, locked in her tower, a distant, mysterious and disconnected creature. She is the main element of the plot and yet she feels irrelevant—the very problem that students and their families, college administrators, and even professors themselves are finding with humanities today. Her book’s counterpart, however, recognizes the need to escape the tower and forge her own path, replete with danger and self-doubt, but inevitably the only way to save herself. And Cohen presents this as the humanities’ only option as well—to force its way into the world, to adapt its curriculum to tie classroom lessons in with real job opportunities, and to make the world understand why there must be a necessary unity between the arts and the sciences.
What are your thoughts on the subject? Has humanities-based intellectualism become a luxury? Will liberal arts colleges recover from the stress put on their programs by the economy? What elements of humanities are still important and relevant today?
Tags:
A Bestseller by Any Other Name
January 19, 2007
by Tanya Hall
To very loosely paraphrase the Bard, what’s in a bestseller?
That which we call a New York Times bestseller by any other name (such as “underground bestseller,” or “Amazon bestseller”) would smell as sweet—well, maybe not.
As the number of books published each year continues to skyrocket upwards, we face an onslaught of “bestseller” claims. We see the word on marketing materials and press releases, on book covers and websites, and, at Greenleaf Book Group, on many submission forms each week. If this bestseller crown has not been awarded by one of the major publications, such as the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, or USA Today, what kind of bestseller is it? The publisher may be partaking in sensationalist marketing—or just a stretch of the truth.
Whether the claim will benefit them or not depends on whom the publisher is targeting with this information. If the publisher intends to woo the consumer with bestseller claims on the book cover, yes, there’s some chance it could help—although once your happy customer discovers the “bestseller” isn’t as well-known as she thought, there may be repercussions. However, and this is a HUGE “however,” a trumped-up claim of bestseller status could seriously hurt that publisher’s reputation in the eyes of wholesalers, distributors, agents, and other parties in the tight-knit publishing industry, and that harm could result in books not getting on shelves. Note to all small publishers making larger-than-life bestseller claims: you’re not pulling the wool over the industry’s eyes.
Industry types have access to such fabulous tools as Nielsen’s BookScan to research your sales history, and they will certainly consult them (amongst other resources) to corroborate your claims before making a decision to support your title. BookScan is a point-of-sale reporting service thought to reflect sales from approximately 70 percent of booksellers nationally. BookScan uses weekly data from over 6,500 retail, mass-merchant, and non-traditional outlets in combination with a statistical weighting methodology to present the most accurate information on sell-through available to the publishing industry. Certain notable accounts are missing, including Wal-mart, Sam’s Club, airport bookstores, and Christian book retailers. Still, BookScan is a great gauge of sell-through, and as such, it is becoming increasingly influential in how sales are measured and bestseller lists are compiled.
While BookScan offers great insights into overall sales numbers and trends, it is not used exclusively (or sometimes at all) in building the prestigious bestseller lists. The holy grail of bestseller lists is the one published by the New York Times. The methodology behind how this list is built is kept rather hush-hush. But most reports on the subject agree that the New York Times sends out a list of preselected trade titles (meaning titles you would find in a bookstore, not the boring academic titles like medical and law books that generally outsell them) to a selected group of close to five thousand retailers and wholesalers for them to record the books’ weekly sales numbers. There are allegedly blank lines for the recipients of this survey to write in titles not included on the form. That’s a quaint thought, but from what I know about inventory managers, highly unlikely to come into practice often.
With any bestseller list, it’s important to note that it’s a measurement of velocity of sales, not life of sales. A book that moves five thousand copies in one week is likely to make some list in some capacity when that week’s numbers are run; however, a book that sells five hundred copies a week for ten weeks straight probably won’t make any list at all. Lists also differ in how they categorize titles. For instance, the New York Times sorts by category (fiction, nonfiction, children’s) and format (hardcover, trade paper). On the other hand, USA Today’s list lumps them all together, from 1–150 by sales numbers, period. This means that a book listed at number one on the New York Times hardcover fiction list could be ranking in the triple digits on the USA Today list. Amazon.com’s ranking system is a whole separate article in itself.
Differences in list-building aside, the notable bestseller lists are meant as a barometer of American culture. No list is 100 percent accurate, and none purport to be. Still, bestseller status on a major list is highly coveted, highly profitable, and highly protected specifically so that the word “bestseller” does not become meaningless. Use your sales history to support your efforts to expand your publishing endeavors, but be wary of making unsubstantiated bestseller claims lest you earn the wrath of industry types. Star-crossed lovers or not, that kind of behavior can bring a plague on all your houses.
Tags:
HarperCollins Decides Not to Publish O.J. Simpson's Book
November 21, 2006
by Aaron Hierholzer
I think it's safe to say that we are all relieved to know that News Corp. has decided not to publish O.J. Simpson's controversial book If I Did It and that it will not air Judith Regan's Fox interview with Simpson. Several bookstores, including Border's, had decided to donate all proceeds from the sale of the book to charity. Erin Crum, a spokeswoman for HarperCollins, said today that some copies of the books have already been shipped to stores. Those books will be recalled and destroyed, she said. The New York Times reported yesterday why executives at News Corp. decided to pull the plug on the project. Read the NYT article at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/20/business/21simpsoncnd.html?ref=media.
Tags:
Is Sony's Reader the Beginning of the End for Paper Books?
October 13, 2006
by Aaron Hierholzer
The reviews for Sony's Reader came out this week in the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal and while the reviews are favorable the end of paper books is not close at hand. The New York Times review of the Reader made several great points on the pros and cons of the e-book reader:
Pros:
1) Size: At slightly smaller than 5 inches by 7 inches and weighing in at 9 ounces, it can easily be taken with you on vacations and business trips.
2) Technology: "The Reader employs a remarkable new display technology from a company called E Ink. Sandwiched between layers of plastic film are millions of transparent, nearly microscopic liquid-filled spheres. White and black particles float inside them, as though inside the world’s tiniest snow globes. Depending on how the electrical charge is applied to the plastic film, either the black or white particles rise to the top of the little spheres, forming crisp patterns of black and white. The result looks like ink on light gray paper. The “ink” is so close to the surface of the screen, it looks as if it’s been printed there. The reading experience is pleasant, natural and nothing like reading a computer screen."
3) Power: You never have to turn the Reader off. The only time the Reader uses electricity is when you turn the page. And with one charge good for 7,500 page turns, you can read almost 16 books before having to charge the Reader back up.
Cons:
1) Lighting: Unlike a laptop where you can view the screen in bed with the lights out, Sony's Reader needs ambient light.
2) Search: Sony's Reader does not offer a search function, video or clickable links.
3) Price: Coming in at $350 and the price of the e-book you would like to read, which can run you anywhere from $8 and up, it might be an expensive gadget to buy when you can spend about 2% of that on a paper book at your local bookstore.
We all love gadgets, but there's something to be said about curling up in your favorite chair, reading a great book and turning those paper pages to see what is going to happen next.
To read the New York Times review on the Sony Reader go to http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/12/technology/12pogue.html.
Tags:
