A Case for Literature The effectiveness of subsidies to Australian publishers 1995 – 2 0 0 5 Report prepared for the Literature Board of the Australia Council by Dr Kath McLean and Dr Louise Poland with additional research by Jacinta van den Berg on behalf of the Writing and Society Research Group University of Western Sydney M a y 2 0 1 0 1 T h e U W S Protocol Number for this project is H7046 Contents 3 Executive summary and recommendations 5 Introduction 6 Methodology 7 An overview of publishing subsidies 1995–2005 9 What the publishers say 22 What the books tell us 33 Conclusions 3 6 References 3 8 Appendix A: Case studies 6 3 Appendix B: Interview schedule 6 4 Appendix C: Publishers interviewed 6 5 Appendix D: Case study template 66 Appendix E: Major literary awards 2 Executive summary and recommendations This is a report of research that examined the fiction subsidised; the majority of supported non- effectiveness, both critical and financial, of fiction was in the genre of life writing, in many Literature Board publishing subsidies to Australian significant cases by Indigenous and migrant publishers over the ten years 1995 to 2005. It was authors. The benefits in this case were clearly carried out by Dr Kath McLean, Dr Louise Poland social as well as literary. and Jacinta van den Berg on behalf of the Writing The large number of first-time authors assisted and Society Research Group at the University of meant that the subsidies also made an important Western Sydney for the Literature Board of the contribution to starting literary careers, as well as Australia Council for the Arts. maintaining the careers of those mid-list authors Individual interviews were conducted with eighteen whose merit was widely recognised but whose publishers who were active in Australian-based books do not sell in commercial quantities. These book publishing companies in the period and who established authors were particularly under threat had experience with Literature Board publishing during the period as the priorities of the larger subsidies. Their views on the uses of subsidies and publishers shifted to front-l ist titles with proven on their efficacy were sought. Detailed case studies commercial appeal. of sixteen books assisted into publication in the Of the books assisted into publication with period by publishing subsidies were also prepared, Literature Board subsidies in the period, almost 10 to examine their reception, including critical per cent won major literary awards, and a further reviews, sales, rights sales and performance in 1 5 per cent were short-listed. In total, almost a literary awards; the case studies also examine the quarter of all of the books subsidised in the period role of the subsidised books in the literary careers either won or were short -listed for major awards. of the books’ authors. The full value of the subsidies in terms of critical In the period 1995–2005, the publication of 8 8 4 esteem and the growth in reputation of both the books was subsidised – 34 per cent were works of author and the publishi ng house take time to fiction; 25 per cent were poetry books; 14 per cent become apparent, which is why this report sets its were non-fiction life writing titles; othe r n o n -f i c t i o n terminal point at 2005. The choice of case studies works made up 10 per cent of the total; 6 p e r cent was determined in part by this consideration, and were anthologies; and 11 per cent were playscripts. offers as significant examples supported titles that Sixty-four publishers participated in the subsidy enjoyed both critical esteem and public acclaim. scheme in the period; most were independent Many of the publishers interviewed suggested ways Australian -owned companies. in which the Literature Board support of literary The value of the financial contribution made by publishing in Australia might be improved. Weighing subsidies to publishers depended on the size heavily in all these suggestions was a concern that and profitability of individual companies. Subsidies the subsidies had diminished in va lue – n o t o n l y were essential to the continued existence of many historically, but during the period in question – and small publishers, and the scheme was particularly that they should be increased, or replaced by a valuable to publishing companies starting up with different and more substantial form of funding to little or no capital and no backlist. While the publishers. In the light of this and their other stated subsidies played a much smaller part in the concerns, we make the following recommendations: economies of the larger publishing companies, 1 . That the funding to support literary publishing in they did provide an incentive, or background Australia be substantially increased, not only to encouragement, for a commitment to literary titles bring the funding in to line with contemporary that they might otherwise have not published. production costs, but to allow publishers to apply In the interviews, publishers identified and some part of their funds to strategic infrastructure discussed the various benefits of subsidies, chief development, including editorial capacity, among which was that they allowed the publishing conversion to digital formats, marketing and o f new, innovative and experimental writing, and promotion. This recommendation envisages that e n c o u r a g e d the taking of risks with works for block grants, for an extended period, made in which markets were small or uncertain. Poetry in recognition of the value of the publisher’s l i t e r a r y particular was not only encouraged, but also p r o g r a m , would offer a more effective form of sustained as a genre by the subsidy scheme, as support than the present scheme of annual was the literary essay and the literary anthology. subsidies for individual titles. First works of fiction comprised the majority of 3 2 . That greater flexibility be built into the funding 4 . That the interests and expertise of Australian criteria to: literary publishers be more strongly represented in the Literature Board’s deliberations on its a) extend eligibility to titles by multiple authors; fundin g policies and priorities. b) allow extended timelines for the publication of particular titles; 5 . That the Literature Board undertake a campaign to promote public awareness of its support for c) allow variations on the 1 0 per cent royalty Australian literary publishing with a focus on the requirement; and use of its logo as a sign of literary quality, and o n d) v a r y p r i n t -run requirements and conditions the books, authors and publishers it has assisted. with respect to particular modes of publication. 3 . That consideration be given to restructuring the acquittal process in order to make the acquittal form and the period of acquittal more appropriate to book publishing. 4 Introduction This report describes the findings of a research What follows is not a comprehensive evaluation of project that examined the effectiveness, both the publishing subsidy program against its aims. critical and financial, of Literature Board publishing The report does not examine in detail subsidies for subsidies to Australian publishers over the ten years the publication of playscripts or drama in the 1995 to 2005. The project was undertaken by the period, although it does include drama publications Writing and Society Research Group at the in its consideration of the total number of books University of Western Sydney with funding from assisted. It should also be noted that our the Australia Council for the Arts’ Literature Board. assessment of the financial effectiveness of Since its inception in 1973, the Literature Board subsidies is necessarily limited due to the historical has been providing subsidies to Australian-based difficulty in obtaining accurate, or even in some publishers to assist with the publication of books cases estimated, sales figures from publisher s. by Australian authors – books of fiction, non -f i c t i o n , Unfortunately, from the point of view of researchers, poetry, playscripts and anthologies of Australian this information is often considered commercial- literature. In doing so, it has carried on, and greatly in-confidence. expanded, the work of its predecessor, the There have been several previous research works Commonwealth Literary Fund. on the Literature Board, including two histories, In assessing Literature Board subsidies to the first by foundation member and former director Australian -based publishers of Australian literary Thomas Shapcott (1998), who detailed the work works during the period in question, the project of the Board from 1973 to 1985. Irene Stevens sought to establish the extent to which the Board’s (2004), also a former Literature Board officer, publishin g-subsidy program had been effective in continued the history of the Board’s work to the maintaining quality and creating value in its support end of the twentieth century with A Short His t o r y of the publication of Australian literary titles. It is of the Literature Board: 1986–2000. anticipated that the findings of this research will In 1994, Rhonda Black, then a freelance inform the continuation of the publishing subsidy consultant, was commissioned by the Literature p r o g r am and will contribute to its ongoing Board to carry out an evaluation of the book appropriateness and efficacy. publishing subsidies program. The evaluation The timeframe for the research – 1995 to 2005 – sought to assess the ‘efficiency, effectiveness and was selected to provide a substantial sample of appropriateness’ of the Program Grants system assisted titles and publishers, while allowing time (introduced in 1991 to replace the Block Grants to assess the impact of subsidy rounds, since it and Specific Title Grants systems) ‘in relation to often takes several years – o r m o r e – for a literary the Board’s stated aims and objectives’ (p.