Home
Warren Ellis - Print Is Not Dead [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Warren Ellis

[ website | warrenelliscom ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| warrenellisdotcom myspace badsignal ]

Print Is Not Dead [Aug. 5th, 2008|02:47 pm]
Previous Entry Add to Memories Tell a Friend Next Entry

Don’t be daft. Of course print isn’t dead. I make a reasonable living off it. Over in the world of words-and-pictures, I can write 44 pages that do little more than fetishise the English longbow and make a profit. The peculiarities of distributing comics through a firm-sale system — one that is actually open to sf magazines, too, though I don’t doubt the process is difficult for them — have kept the Anglophone medium alive in all its weird breadth for almost thirty years now. Additional distribution systems are of course required, because that market is dependent on new stories opening faster than old stores die, and that’s not a trick that’s yet been pulled off to anyone’s satisfaction. And, you know, I could list a dozen other things wrong with it. And have. But when everyone else is muttering that Print Is Dead, comics continues to quietly move millions of units a month. Last month, I wrote a comic that did in excess of 100,000 copies on firm sale. And while it’s true that some stores may well be stuck with them, the others have created a reorder velocity requiring Marvel to go back to print on the book.

Neal Stephenson wrote a book that was more than 3000 pages long, that had to be released in three volumes and then eight smaller volumes, and they still let him in the door. THE WIRE, possibly the most fascinating and annoying music magazine on the face of the planet (where else would a music reviewer stop in the middle of a piece to start jabbering about fucking Marx?) is still plugging away, and THE BELIEVER (a print magazine about print books, in the 21st Century? Surely madness!) seems to be going from strength to strength. Christ, SONGLINES just passed its fiftieth issue, and I never would have predicted that. British newspaper sales, as a whole, average an annual slip of around 3%, but some quality Sunday papers post continual rises — the Observer gains something like 5% per annum, I think. And, of course, newspapers like The Guardian have embraced the modern hybrid operation, running a very strong website.

All of which is to say: when I run the sf magazine figures, I’m not saying that Print Is Dead. I’m not even saying that No-One Wants Short Fiction. I’m saying, I’m afraid, that something is wrong with those magazines. Not even, necessarily, with the content. That’s entirely subjective. The objective view seems to me to be inescapable: the packaging and marketing just isn’t working. And I think it’s probably too late for them now. So, now, I wait for new entrants to take their place — be they a resurgent print magazine like WEIRD TALES, or an emergent leader from the web space.

And that, most of you will be glad to hear, will probably be my last thought on the topic. (Unless someone pokes me with a sharp stick.) I don’t see myself running these numbers next year, unless something wildly dramatic happens. From here, it looks like Game Over.

(Automatically crossposted from warrenellis.com. Feel free to comment here or at my internet church at Whitechapel. If anything in this post looks weird, it's because LJ is run on steampipes and rubber bands -- please click through to the main site.)
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: [info]grumpygrafx
2008-08-05 01:55 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Thank you. As a print designer that statement annoys the shit out of me.
Print encompasses so much these days. Look at Coilhouse they're doing fine as an online magazine but they still want a print version .

Advertising, posters, trade shows, direct mail all of that crap is print.
Its still cheaper to install a big piece of paper than a giant vidoe screen.

Thank you Warren.
[User Picture]From: [info]untoward
2008-08-05 02:04 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Well, and it is nice to have a physical object, isn't it?
[User Picture]From: [info]kragore
2008-08-06 04:20 pm (UTC)

(Link)

As a fellow print designer, I'm right there with you. Plus, it's still easier to ship flat, dead-tree print graphics into a different country rather than all the equipment needed for a digital display.

(She says, gritting her teeth while arguing with a FedEx Minion about the rules and regs of shipping into Brazil from the States...)

- k.
[User Picture]From: [info]sixswordsamurai
2008-08-05 02:06 pm (UTC)

I might be missing the point, but

(Link)

Could it be that a wave of cynicism has washed over the populace? a lot of people aren't interested in "the future" anymore because technically we're living in it (21st century and all that jazz) and a lot of that wonderment is gone. Replaced, in it's entirety , with an instant gratification culture (at least in the states) where the future is far far away, and you need to fix everything in your life "NOW!"

I think people are sick of the future, because the promises of the ages before us have ultimately come to naught. It's not star wars, it's not back to the future, shit, it's not even blade runner, although it's closer to blade runner than anything else.

We're at a point where I believe people can see the future, and the amazing lack of progress has left people hollow and drained of hope for a new gizmo that will change the world, or make all life easier.

There is nothing wrong with the magazines, themselves, I think. I think that the future seems hopeless, and people don't want to see stories about the same Jet Packs, and Ray Guns we were promised 50-60 years ago.
[User Picture]From: [info]charlycrash
2008-08-05 02:14 pm (UTC)

(Link)

You know - not that I mean to go all Wolfie Smith on your ass, but it strikes me that saying "print is dead" is a little bourgeois. Believe it or not, not everyone on Earth has a computer these days, in large part because some people can't afford one or didn't get the opportunity to learn how to use them growing up for one reason or other.
[User Picture]From: [info]warren_ellis
2008-08-05 02:19 pm (UTC)

(Link)

I think you just heard me say Print Is Not Dead.
[User Picture]From: [info]charlycrash
2008-08-05 02:25 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Heh, it wasn't pointed at you. Although in retrospect it reads that way. It was directed at anyone who might argue that it is.
[User Picture]From: [info]schrathe
2008-08-05 02:34 pm (UTC)

(Link)

When will this longbow work be on sale? Will there be variants?
[User Picture]From: [info]lamuella
2008-08-05 02:35 pm (UTC)

(Link)

it was out last year. It's called Crecy and it's fantastic.
[User Picture]From: [info]warren_ellis
2008-08-05 03:40 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Like the guy says. CRECY is available through any decent comics store or through Amazon.
[User Picture]From: [info]lampbane
2008-08-05 02:47 pm (UTC)

(Link)

The amount of free printed shit you can get in NYC is a testament to the fact the print is most definitely not dead.

(The New York Press, the Village Voice, The Onion, L Magazine, Vice, and Foul, as well as commuter mainstays am New York and New York Metro... and those are all just what I remember off the top of my head.)
[User Picture]From: [info]jeffreyab
2008-08-05 03:33 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Vis a vi "Asimov's," "Analog" and "F&SF" its too bad "SF Age" and "Amazing Stories" did not make it as they were markedly different in the way they presented themselves.

How come you don't also publish figures for "Realms of Fantasy?" Is it because Year's Best doesn't publish them?
[User Picture]From: [info]warren_ellis
2008-08-05 03:35 pm (UTC)

(Link)

ROF numbers are usually a year out of step for some reason.
[User Picture]From: [info]cajun
2008-08-05 04:07 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Where's my digital paper? Don't even think about directing me towards Amazon's Kindle either.
[User Picture]From: [info]donnaricci
2008-08-05 04:38 pm (UTC)

(Link)

There is something about that tangible paper in your hands. I am really looking forward to picking up issue one of Coilhouse. I know it will look amazing and feel great as I riffle through it over coffee.
[User Picture]From: [info]leborcham
2008-08-05 09:27 pm (UTC)

(Link)

But but...PLAYGIRL just went web-only!

More seriously I agree -- print is not dead, but it does need vitamin supplements.
[User Picture]From: [info]warren_ellis
2008-08-05 09:28 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Oh god yes. Massive Vitamin C overdoses and enough Vitamin B complex to make its piss flourescent.