As we’ve talked extensively about the importance of distribution in the comic book industry, this article offers unique insight into the production aspect of book publishing but I’m also curious about the distribution process (from the perspective of a small press) and the types of challenges it may run into.

This is a very unique and quirky reason! It certainly makes the brand identity that much more personable with its audience.

This brings us back to our class discussions about how diversity remains a prevalent issue in publishing today and the minimal action taken (from the top) to address it.

I don’t agree with this notion completely and the example that comes to mind to counter this is author, Rupi Kaur. She built a platform and readership for her poetry on Instagram which is “really where she publishes”. Arguably, the success of her self-published title Milk and Honey can be addressed as a black swan event but nonetheless, she achieved commercial success via unconventional and alternative means.

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/fashion/rupi-kaur-poetry-the-sun-and-her-flowers.html

I don’t necessary agree with this. ABC’s The Good Doctor has been well received by the public and is one of the most watched shows in the US. Although the main character may not be representative of the entire autistic community, it’s not fair to suggest that it “isn’t true to life”.

In the UK, the lack of diversity in publishing remains a prevalent issue and is “estimated that around 8% of UK publishing staff came from a BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) background”.

Link: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/06/uk-publishing-industry-remains-90-white-survey-finds

Another way of saying tokenism.

I don't understand why it wouldn't? The lack of representation and diversity in publishing is evident and supported by statistics and various reports such as: "Spread the Word, which drew attention to how intransigently white, middle-class (and further up the ladder, male) it remained, from literary festivals and prizes to publications and personnel".

Link: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/dec/09/diversity-publishing-new-faces

I think it's an important conversation that needs to be had rather than being swept under the rug.

As a class, we've previously discussed how one can only speak from their own experiences or interpretations of the world around them. On this note, is the role of a sensitivity reader benefiting authors or is it stifling literary creativity?

I wonder if this was for her recent novel Small Great Things and if so, did the feedback and criticisms from sensitivity readers actually cause a New York Times best selling author to rethink her writing? And to what extent?

This is definitely a reoccurring topic in our class discussions. Digital technology has certainly opened new avenues for content production and distribution, ranging from comic books to podcasts. More importantly, it provides consumers with the option to choose (outside of corporate influence and the mainstream).

It makes sense that distributors and retailers have somewhat of a say in content as they have a financial stake in the comic book's commercial success. And with the serialized nature of comic books, publishers would have to appease such interests in order to reach the marketplace.

This is interesting - could WNV also be considered a black swan case?

This category is a small segment of the technology adoption curve. Is the medium, in which podcasts share content, also its limitation when thinking about audience and access.

What’s interesting to me is the apparent focus on the individual rather than the greater collective and subsequently, the circulation of zines help build unique communities of support for women and girls.

Because zines are personal forms of creative expression, does it then only encourage participation from niche communities and alienate others? More importantly, are zines designed to be all-inclusive?

This is interesting - I’ve read about the Riot Grrrl Movement in the 1990’s which aspired to make girls and women more involved in the predominantly white, male alt-rock/punk scene. Alongside music, this movement used zines to communicate and empower women to control their own voices and artistic expression.

In order to achieve this, I wonder if this means gaining financial backing from large corporations - as we’ve seen with The Women’s Press in the 1970s. We’ve learned that corporate ownership has serious limitations, such as the loss of editorial independence, and I’d be curious to know if this would be the same case for DIY feminist publishers and distributors.

Similar to the Femme Shark Manifesto we read last week, zines are also a tool for communication and self-expression that aimed to reclaim condescending discourse in its rejection of the mainstream media.

So in a way, the ideals of DIY culture, self-empowerment, and defiance or independence from authority are key features of zines and what it represents.

This is an interesting point because you would think distributing zines online would have a greater audience reach but in this case, it could be seen as more separatist rather than inclusive. This brings us back to last week’s discussion about: who is the intended audience the publication is trying to reach and how it can reach them in this digital era.

I think the Internet has threatened the structure of traditional publishing and has left it open to new challenges of an open market, such as self-publishing. But why is this being positioned negatively - isn’t giving more power to the author a good thing ie. Rupi Kaur’s self-published Milk and Honey?

This passage resonated with me because it’s basically stating that people have become desensitized to the problem. So much so that it’s not even registering as an issue anymore.

“the ancestors were sharks”

I’m interpreting this as a tribute to the women who spearheaded the feminist movement in the 60’s in the fight for women’s issues ranging from reproductive rights to sexual violence, and what the Femme Shark Communique deemed as “the fight [against] oppression and bullshit”.

“Femme sharks were there when Frida Kahlo hooked up with her girlfriends”

Frida Kahlo is a celebrated Mexican artist for her attention to Mexican and indigenous culture and by feminists for her depiction of the female experience and form. Her art often explored questions of identity, postcolonialism, gender, class, and race in Mexican society.

Similar to other readings from the past few weeks, this is another example of publishing used as a platform to challenge the status quo. The formation of the CLDC was a politically motivated response to the implementation of Section 98 and more importantly, it created a sub-culture that was radical and revolutionary. Are there any present day examples of similar organizations or movements that serves a similar purpose?

Seminar Leadership Discussion Questions: Chapter 2

“Crucial to the emergence of a distinctive black feminist voice since the 1960s has been the concept of authenticity – the belief that representations of black women and their experiences should be self-determined, cast in their own language and should posit black women as their dominant point of view.” (Pg.23)

Q1. The Women’s Liberation Movement is often criticized for focusing on the narrative of an exclusive population of women - being pre-dominantly white, middle-class – which suggests that all women experience the same oppressions. In your opinion, do feminist presses promote a participatory culture for all women? What is the importance of authenticity in the context of feminist publishing? Aside from publishing, are there any other cultural industries in which authenticity is deemed significant?

“To that end, Kitchen Table was run democratically, prioritised employing women of colour and – despite criticism from some feminist quarters – published only writing by black and third-world women” (Pg.29)

Q2. In previous weeks, we’ve explored and discussed the ways in which publishing platforms are used as a tool in unifying marginalized groups to counter the dominant narrative. In reference to Kitchen Table, do you think its approach in feminist publishing promotes racial diversity or separatism?

“Feminist publishing enterprises took as their first premise the conviction that publishing was an industry dominated by white, middle-class males, and that the publishing decisions made by an industry so dominated would reflect the interests of the privileged group. By extension, presumably a feminist publishing industry in which white (and generally tertiary-educated, middle-class) women occupy decision-making levels will be to a greater or lesser degree removed from the central concerns of women of colour.” (Pg. 23)

Q3. Can a feminist press staffed predominantly by white women accurately identify issues of vital concern to black women’s lives, and market its books so as to reach this audience successfully?

Similar to the reading in Week 1, we talked about how published works can reinforce negative stereotypes and perpetuate the idea of “the other”. What stereotypes of the First Nations people are being communicated in this excerpt?

From last week’s class discussion, this is another example about how conversations tend to focus on the external appearance of a woman. "The ascetic look generated an imperiousness that would become her trademark” further reinforces that a woman’s appearance holds more weight than her more commendable accomplishments and contributions.

Earlier in the article, there was mention of a “women’s beat” in journalism, and that it did not concern itself with a more serious business of reporting from the front. I interpreted this as: women contribute no value to serious journalism. On the contrary, it appears that female journalists offered a different narrative and effective approach in framing conflict in the Spanish Civil War. In the field of war journalism, they were able to make these stories more relatable - or as the article states “emotionally affective”.

It’s interesting to note the use of male names like “Jean” and “Jim” within these particular circles, which further reinforces the reoccuring theme of gender inequality in politics and society, at large.

Interesting to learn that an illegal distribution system opened up the rigid French market to competition and the dissemination of knowledge and ideas - in the form of books.

the notable difference between early modern publishing and publishing today is the absence of copyright laws.

published “quality literature” does not challenge but instead, reinforces and aligns with the state’s ideologies - the very definition of censorship.

print publications are a site of ambivalence - a tool for slavery and subsequently, freedom.

Negative connotations are likely ascribed to those that are viewed to be foreign or different - “the other”. This raises an interesting point in how print can be a powerful tool in shaping public perspective of an individual or a group of people.

Very powerful statement. Print publications served to be the voice that fuelled the culture of slavery through the white man’s interpretation, narrative and depiction of “blackness”.

Arguably, are photos more impactful than print in conveying and framing the identity and lived experiences of African Americans in the 19th century? Can this also be said for the 21st century?