Somebody else’s crisis: Feminist publishers and midlist books

Abstract

L ike "midlife crisis," the term "midlist crisis" legitimatizes a wide range of specific problems. It seems to render as scientific and technical something we thought was just our private misery. "That's what's wrong," we can pronounce; "this is just a midlife (midlist) crisis and here I was thinking it was something I (we) had done" As a new term fades towards buzzwordom, it becomes a more and more widely accepted substitute for describing what is actually going on in one's life or publishing company. Although "midlist crisis" seems to be the trendy scourge of the publishing industry, the term is rarely heard in small press circles. Not only is there no sense of crisis on the issue, there is little sense of "midlist" as a concept. Feminist presses, a distinct group of small publishers, reflect the small press experience with particular clarity. My findings are based on interviews with and questionnaires filled out by representatives of nine feminist presses: Cleis, in Pittsburgh and San Francisco; Crossing Press in Trumansburg, N.Y., Feminist Press in New York City; Firebrand Books in Ithaca, N.Y.; Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press in New York City; Metis Press in Chicago; Naiad Press in Tallahassee, Fla.; Seal Press in Seattle; and Spinsters Ink in San Francisco. "Midlist" seems to be used by trade publishers in both a chronological and a quantitative sense. The crisis has to do in part with books that are no longer new. Books that are not "hot off the press" or "just released" may be harder to market successfully. The assumption is that, like bagels and apples and eggs, books have a limited shelf life. If they do not sell when they are fresh, they may biodegrade towards worthlessness. The crisis has also to do with books that are neither bestsellers nor deadweight. Books that continue to sell at a reasonable but unexhilarating rate must be kept in print and, if overhead is reasonably high, they may cost a publisher more than they earn. Clearly both aspects of the problem mean something different if you publish 4 books a year than if you publish 40 or, unimaginably for most feminist presses, 400. As Elaine Gill of Crossing Press remarked, "It's only when you do 40 or 50 books a year that you can afford the notion of midlistY