Chekhov's Mistress

When a Publisher Loses Sight of their Purpose: The Case of Harcourt

by Bud Parr

From Mark Bauerlein’s "What We Owe the New Critics" in The Chronical of Higher Education:

“His wonderment turned to dismay with the next answer he received. He asked Harcourt Inc. for permission to reprint an essay by Blackmur entitled “A Critic’s Job of Work,” and Harcourt came back with the outlandish price tag of $2,350. That sum was 23 times what New Directions had asked for a Pound essay [for Pound’s “How to Read,” which New Directions owned, he was charged $100 for inclusion.]. That must be a mistake, he thought. Blackmur’s essay has no commercial value, and, as far as he knew, no for-profit press planned to reissue Blackmur’s works. The Ohio press is small and will be happy if the volume sells a few hundred copies a year…”

“That puts Harcourt in a powerful position. That The Kenyon Review only charged $50 underscores the former publisher’s irresponsible guardianship. Harcourt is a commercial press that aims to maximize its profits, but Blackmur is a midcentury critic whose writings have little commercial value. They do possess, however, significant historical and scholarly value. In owning the work, Harcourt has an obligation to acknowledge that and weigh what it does in terms of audience and preservation. Davis won’t make any money off the project. He wants to sustain a legacy of literary thought. Harcourt gave that goal no consideration at all, nor did it consider the memory of American criticism, nor did it even accept maintaining the readership of one of the works it holds.”

comments

No Comments
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

This site employs rank-denial and other anti-spam measures.
Your link here will do nothing for your rankings or traffic. Off-topic comments will be deleted.




Next entry: Poet of the Year
Previous entry: Letter from Brooklyn: Ghosts and Heroes

« Back to main

About this Post




Barack Obama Logo