Ex Occidente Press

[Joel]

Ligotti is a good example of a writer who has maintained a strong presence in magazines and anthologies over the years. I started reading his work in the small press magzines of the early 1980s – most notably Nyctalops and the BFS journal Dark Horizons. More recently, a run of brilliant stories in Weird Tales alerted me to his continued development as a writer – without that, I might have assumed that he was still writing the Noctuary kind of stories, which I liked rather less.

I have to admit I don't value Internet presence or online reputation, or read fiction online. I blame the Internet for the destruction of the bookselling and book publishing trades, and regard its impact on the quality of our literary culture and our lives as a catastrophe. The fact that I regularly visit forums like this is a contradiction that reflects my lack of conflict resolution skills, but I'll spare you introspection on that theme.

If we no longer have magazines and anthologies to give writers a means of building and renewing their reputation, we will no longer have a weird fiction genre. I'm not wholly averse to the concept of online publication, but I have to keep reminding people that BLOGGING IS NOT, REPEAT NOT, PUBLICATION. If I read something down the phone to a friend, that is not publication. It may or may not be an enjoyable phone call for them, but that's another question.

[Nemonymous]

Doesn't 'publication' mean making it 'public'?'

[Evans]

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

I have to admit I don't value Internet presence or online reputation, or read fiction online. I blame the Internet for the destruction of the bookselling and book publishing trades, and regard its impact on the quality of our literary culture and our lives as a catastrophe. The fact that I regularly visit forums like this is a contradiction that reflects my lack of conflict resolution skills, but I'll spare you introspection on that theme.

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

If we no longer have magazines and anthologies to give writers a means of building and renewing their reputation, we will no longer have a weird fiction genre.

No offence meant but how are people who don't have a hugely literary circle of friends supposed to find about any of these writers or publications? Even with the internet it is hard enough to tract things down. I understand your complaint about the internet reducing the productivity of things like small scale magazines but without it a huge number simply will not have heard of many of these things.

Without the internet how would many people hear of publishers such as Ex Occidente Press and the like?

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

If we no longer have magazines and anthologies to give writers a means of building and renewing their reputation, we will no longer have a weird fiction genre.

While that may be true the internet has massively increased the sheer number of books easily available to the public. People have a far wider variety to chose from these days. Without the internet I would never have been able to read Thomas Ligotti or Mark Samuels simply beacuse I don't think I would have been able to get the books otherwise.

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

I'm not wholly averse to the concept of online publication, but I have to keep reminding people that BLOGGING IS NOT, REPEAT NOT, PUBLICATION. If I read something down the phone to a friend, that is not publication. It may or may not be an enjoyable phone call for them, but that's another question.

Very well but that will have to cut across the board. If S.T Joshi (I'm just using Joshi because he is the critic I know most about) releases a review online then it should be as much discounted from being a review beacuse of its medium as anyone elses. It might be more read and taken seriusly but the no reviews on the internet rule would have to apply to it as well.

[Joel]

Hi Evans.

I've never actually relied on friends to recommend books to me. I rely on finding good stories by new or established writers in magazines and anthologies, which I buy because they serve that purpose. Both Ligotti and Samuels came to my attention by that route.

Also, I'm not saying publication on the Internet is not publication. I'm just saying that blogging is not publication of any kind. If I phoned you up to say something, that would not be a published statement. There are indeed valid Internet publications, but they are not blogs. They are edited online journals. It's not the same thing.

My sense of fandom (or connoisseurship, to be a little more poncey about it) is rooted in the experience of going to a specialist bookshop every week or two and buying new magazines and anthologies, then collections and novels of those writers who look good. I read reviews only to see what the current level of opinion is regarding books I have read. I try not to read reviews of books I haven't read. The eclipse of specialist bookshops and bookshops in general, along with literary magazines, can be blamed on the Internet. And I do blame it thus. With bitterness and rage.

None of this, needless to say, is directed against you or Des or anyone else who finds the benefits of the Internet to outweigh the harm it does.

[Nemonymous]

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

None of this, needless to say, is directed against you or Des or anyone else who finds the benefits of the Internet to outweigh the harm it does.

I don't think I would claim that. I'm just accepting the inevitable and making the best of it.
It's like Television. I hate most of it. But I do try to wring meaning from even the worst of it.

I think a blog is a publication just as much as, for example, Terry Lamsley's early books were publications. Some blogs will be good. Others bad. But they all are publications, ie making universally public and accessible some material (that a private phone call doesn't do).

[Evans]

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

Hi Evans. I've never actually relied on friends to recommend books to me. I rely on finding good stories by new or established writers in magazines and anthologies, which I buy because they serve that purpose. Both Ligotti and Samuels came to my attention by that route.

In my opinion the good thing about book references from friends is that they can not only tell you if the book itself is good but whether it would suite your tastes or not. I'm certain there are many, many books in the world that are critically very good but just wouldn't suite my reading tastes

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

Also, I'm not saying publication on the Internet is not publication. I'm just saying that blogging is not publication of any kind. If I phoned you up to say something, that would not be a published statement. There are indeed valid Internet publications, but they are not blogs. They are edited online journals. It's not the same thing.

I would view a phone conversation as a closed discussion about a book between two people. An online review (particularly a blog) could be seen as a sort of open, self replicating debate.

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

My sense of fandom (or connoisseurship, to be a little more poncey about it) is rooted in the experience of going to a specialist bookshop every week or two and buying new magazines and anthologies, then collections and novels of those writers who look good. I read reviews only to see what the current level of opinion is regarding books I have read. I try not to read reviews of books I haven't read. The eclipse of specialist bookshops and bookshops in general, along with literary magazines, can be blamed on the Internet. And I do blame it thus. With bitterness and rage.

Fair enough. I can only say I don't really have much experience with those kind of book shops to judge.
I tend to buy books and magazines off the internet as matter of necessity than any particular preference.

Quote Originally Posted by Joel

None of this, needless to say, is directed against you or Des or anyone else who finds the benefits of the Internet to outweigh the harm it does.

Don't worry I didn't take it that way, I'm sorry if I came across overly antagonistic about things.

[MadsPLP]

Thanks for some very interesting comments about reviews, criticism, et.al.

Back on topic:

Bloody Baudelaire by Ray Russell and The Terrible Changes by Joel Lane are shipping. My copies arrived today. Bloody Baudelaire is the best looking EO book so far.

The Reggie Oliver collection should be down to its last copies. I recommend it very much.

I finished reading the Jean Ray volume some days ago. I don't have time for writing anything more detailed at the moment, but anyone who has a love for Machen, Blackwood and Stevenson with a touch of the contes cruel and a kindly/good-humoured-sardonic (I think that fits Jean Ray very well) tone in the narrator's should give it a chance. Very peculiar, and much recommended.

[Evans]

I'll take heed of the tactful nudge back on topic.

Quote Originally Posted by MadsPLP

Bloody Baudelaire by Ray Russell and The Terrible Changes by Joel Lane are shipping. My copies arrived today. Bloody Baudelaire is the best looking EO book so far.

On the subject of Bloody Baudelaire it was mentioned in the nice little leaflet that came with the my Tartarus Press purchase. I hope it gets reprinted. The description on Rusell's website makes it sound really gothic. (strange way of enthusing about something but that was the impression it gave me)

Quote Originally Posted by MadsPLP

The Reggie Oliver collection should be down to its last copies. I recommend it very much.

Curses! I was really hoping to get an Oliver collection but I don't think I'll be able to make it for this one. Any idea if Mark Samuels's collection is nearing full pre-order? If so I'll go for that now instead of The White Hands.