It would be a disservice to humanity if art making was limited to only a select few voices. What would culture look like if we had never been given The Raven by Edgar Allen Poe? How would english classes around the globe be different if there were no Frankenstein by Mary Shelley? To safely assume, one could argue that our culture would look significantly different than it does today. Especially if we had never been given pieces of literature that have since been canonized. Admittedly, nuances of these famous pieces of works may be outdated – but their presence is enough to attach significance.
To further pull apart this narrative, one must address the metaphorical elephant in the room: what voices could have impacted humanity – but were never given the chance? We can only surmise what could have been and what the suppressed voices could have contributed to the world. Thus, a true calamity has risen, which has been contributed to by those who are the intermediaries between the writer and the consumers of said art. Those intermediaries of course being big publishing companies. But intertwined through this mess of systemic racism and corporate greed are small, independently run publishers of literature magazines, who work to shake up that narrative.
In a New York Times article titled, “Inside the Push to Diversify the Book Business," Pantheon editor Lisa Lucas describes the publishing industry’s slow move to diversify. Further, Lucas’s experience as a black woman in a white dominated industry, has brought to light the racist underbelly of the publishing world. Author Marcela Valdes states,
Until recently, almost all the people who wielded the stamp of approval in book publishing were white.”
That inequality proposes another question: what gems have been lost to history because of this long running, narrow-mindset of an industry that should be, instead, interested in the production and distribution of art.
Nonetheless, the issue of suppression continues, even post-2020 and in the shadow of the George Floyd movement. Valdes explains that after the waves of protests that swept across the country in response to Floyd’s murder, the numbers of non-white publishing employees increased significantly. Unfortunately, with a dashed sense of hope, Valdes also states,
Veteran nonwhite publishing professionals regarded these changes with hope — and skepticism. Many of them know that two waves of previous efforts to diversify the industry created little lasting change.
Considering this general apprehension towards the big publishing companies and their motivations to appear tolerant, seems to not bode well for the industry. As Valdes implies, it seems that these publishing companies were just riding a wave to protect their reputation. Also considering writers who just want to get published – along with the industry professionals who genuinely want to streamline those processes – the systemic racism that saturates the literary industry is a difficult one to navigate.[1]
Editor Lucas also notes the hoops that professionals in the publishing industry must jump through to publish books that publishing houses deem non-marketable. In Lucas’s experience, that opposition has weighed heavily towards prominently white authors. One glimmer of hope, however, is the fact that some authors are willing to go through the self-publishing route.[1]
Valdes describes a phenomenon where publishing houses pigeonholed black authors into, which was a sub-genre known as “Street Lit." Valdes explained that this sub-genre, unfortunately, had short lived success. Though this genre created an entire self-publishing market for black authors, once online bookstores (like Amazon) entered the game, the market essentially vanished. However, this narrative does maintain that traditional publishing is not the only avenue to get work recognized. Independently ran literature magazines, for example, mirror self-publishing, in which editors don’t have to comply with rigid standards of marketability and branding.[1]
Literature magazines such as 805 Lit + Art is a magazine that just recently became independently run, offering simultaneous submissions to aspiring and established artists (writers included). These are important qualities, as it opens submissions up to writers who may not be established yet; this makes it more accessible for artists to submit pieces of works. Additionally, 805 Lit + Art is not run by typical traditional publishing hierarchies. 805 Lit + Art is run and edited by librarians, students, and instructors who are not necessarily using the magazine as their sole income. This is an important distinction to recognize, in that these are people who (seemingly) are curating this magazine to support artists – rather than to make a buck. [2]
Another literature magazine worth mentioning is FIYAH, which is a publication that is dedicated to representing black authored, science fiction. FIYAH’s mission states,
“This is Science Fiction’s new Golden Age. That is what they would have you believe. Short fiction markets are better than ever before, exploring ideas of equality, gender, sexuality, neurodivergence, disability, and most of all what it means to be human.”
This statement is interesting, because FIYAH comments that this “. . . new Golden Age,” is limited to mostly white authors. This is also significant because it proves how traditional publishing is limiting. Though this publication is not free to read, it does offer a necessary platform for authors who do not fit the traditional authorship mold. The mold, which FIYAH presumes to be white. [3]
Further, the emergence of literature magazines, such as 805 Lit + Art and FIYAH, is made even more significant during the rising book-banning epidemic across U.S. public schools.[4] More than ever, it seems that having accessible, and racially tolerant sources of art publications, is a necessary commodity for society. 805 Lit + Art, for example, not only publishes “. . . debut and emerging writers . . .”, but they also publish poets and artists.[5] This is important to recognize and commend, as the artists being accepted are not pigeonholed into a niche field of creatives. Because 805 Lit + Art includes artists alongside writers and poets, it creates a space that is open to differing perspectives, ideas, and backgrounds. As well as skill and ability. 805 Lit + Art’s mission statement also separates itself from the bulk of publishing professionals, who are expected to only advocate for established writers that will be marketable. [6] FIYAH also makes this separation, in that it challenges the previously held belief of what has been historically sellable in the literary world.[7]
805 Lit + Art’s about page also states that the magazine is run by writers and librarians, implying that those in control of submissions are inherently advocates of writers; 805 Lit + Art is independently run, so there is more autonomy over accepted submissions and editorial choices. 805 Lit + Art’s mission not only aligns itself with the rising pushback to traditional publishing, but is also represented through an authentic team behind the volumes. As previously mentioned, the editorial team of 805 Lit + Art is made up of students, librarians, and instructors. It could be assumed that these are individuals who have entered this industry because they generally appreciate – and understand – the importance of the written word.[8]
And many would agree this appreciation for the written word is needed more than ever. According to American Libraries, “Ten Reasons Libraries Are Still Better Than the Internet” by Marcus Banks, librarianship ethics include advocating for free and authentic sharing of ideas, without the threat of censorship. This code of ethics also speaks volumes to the importance of free discourse and the distribution of knowledge.[9] If we start censoring places that were once American salons for the curious and, possibly, the rebellious, where will our future youth go to learn without restriction?
This idea of censorship also resonates with FIYAH’s mission statement, and their insatiable desire for representation. FIYAH states,
“There is Black excellence out there waiting to be discovered and not tokenized. Octavia Butler is our past and she is an amazing ancestor, but she should not be our only storyteller.”[10]
A singular story should be avoided at all costs. For example, what if we only had Henry Thoreau and not Fredrick Douglas? What if we only had Henriette Beecher Stow and not Toni Morrison? It would be boring, to say the least. But to say the most, it would be sickly, homogenous.
Book banning is getting us closer and closer to this homogeneous reality. Angela Haupt’s, “The Rise in Book Bans, Explained” article states,
“. . . there were 1,586 instances of individual books being banned during the nine-month period from July 1, 2021, to March 31, affecting 1,145 book titles,”
according to a report by PEN America [11], [12] . Those numbers are striking, and they circle back to Valdes’ article and the struggles Lisa Lucas had as a black woman working as an editor at Pantheon.[13] As more and more books are removed from shelves, voices are being lost; the voices that were once, finally, starting to be heard, are being silenced once again.
Those staggering book banning statistics also reinforce the necessity for free, accessible publications – like 805 Lit + Art – that can fight against the suppression of artistic voices. Book banning is also why publications like FIYAH are also necessary, as they provide the important commentary on black lives and of black peoples. Though it is lofty to dream that small, independently run literature magazines could dismantle the pervasive racism and prejudice within traditional publishing, it is comforting to know that emerging writers and artists can be represented through other avenues, which are not limiting to creative freedom.
Bibliography
805lit. “805 Lit + Art Magazine | Litmag.” Accessed September 15, 2022.
Adams, Ol. “Is It Hard To Get a Book Published? The Process Explained - Letter Review,”
October 1, 2021. https://letterreview.com/is-it-hard-to-get-a-book-published/.\
Banks, Marcus. “Ten Reasons Libraries Are Still Better Than the Internet.” American Libraries
Magazine, December 19, 2017. https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2017/12/19/ten-reasons-libraries-still-better-than-internet/.
FIYAH. “The Mission,” July 28, 2018. https://www.fiyahlitmag.com/the-mission/.
Haupt, Angela. “The Rise in Book Bans, Explained.” Online Periodical. Washington Post,
PEN America. “Banned in the USA: Rising School Book Bans Threaten Free Expression and
Students’ First Amendment Rights (April 2022).” PEN America (blog), April 7, 2022. https://pen.org/banned-in-the-usa/.
Valdes, Marcela. “Inside the Push to Diversify the Book Business.” The New York Times, June
22, 2022, sec. Online Periodical. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/22/magazine/inside-the-push-to-diversify-the-book-business.html.
Notes
[1] Valdes, “Inside the Push to Diversify the Book Business.” [2] 805 Lit + Art, “About” [3] FIYAH. “The Mission” [4] Haupt, “The Rise in Book Bans, Explained.” [5] 805 Lit + Art, “About” [6] Valdes, “Inside the Push to Diversify the Book Business.” [7] FIYAH. “The Mission” [8] 805 Lit + Art, “About” [9] Banks, “Ten Reasons Libraries Are Still Better Than the Internet.” [10] FIYAH. “The Mission” [11] Haupt, “The Rise in Book Bans, Explained.” [12] PEN America, “Banned in the USA.” [13] Valdes, “Inside the Push to Diversify the Book Business.”
Comments