Abstract
In September 2003, the independent publishing house Continuum launched a book series under the banner of “33 1/3”. These were, in the publisher's own promotional literature, “short books about classic albums”. But who decides what constitutes a classic album, and who decides which authors should write such books? Using an autoethnographic approach to analyse the curatorial thinking and strategy behind this book series, and through close analysis of the online discourse around it, the article innovates by exploring the commercial and curatorial practice of one publishing imprint in the first decade of the 2000s. By focusing closely on the work of one editor and drawing on primary data concerning book proposals that were accepted or rejected as well as reader reactions to those decisions, I illustrate how decisions are made and how editorial bias might impact the authorial voices that publishers choose to amplify. Finally, the article examines curatorial practice in publishing in light of more recent discussions of inequalities and imbalances of power (along both gender and ethnic lines) in the industry.
Highlights
This article aims to bring into the open a set of publishing decisions that were made between 2002 and 2009
The article will use as its case study a book series called “33 1/3” – a collection of short books published by the New York and London based Continuum International Publishing Group, each one of which took as its subject an album of recorded music ranging from Dusty in Memphis (Dusty Springfield) and Exile on Main Street (The Rolling Stones) to Sign O’ the Times (Prince) and Paul’s Boutique (The Beastie Boys)
The aim of this study is to examine the publishing choices made during the first years of the series
Summary
This article aims to bring into the open a set of publishing decisions that were made between 2002 and 2009. Since 2016 I have had no connection with Bloomsbury or the series and nothing discussed in this article should be taken as a reflection on any previous or current employee of either Bloomsbury or Continuum, other than myself.). Much of the existing scholarship around editorial decision-making includes (usually anonymous) views from current publishing employees. It is difficult, for these research subjects to be entirely honest about their instincts and tastes as editors. With the benefit of hindsight and the privilege afforded to me by no longer working in the industry, I have the opportunity to go further here
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
