Payback time approaching fast?

As a general rule, you do not bite the hand that feeds you.  Most dogs know that, and so do most of the writers of Wales, who are sustained to some degree by a pervasive subsidy culture both inside and outside our great educational institutions.  As long as there are such things as writer’s bursaries and publishing grants, people will apply for them, and sometimes get them, and will thereafter be eternally grateful to their benefactors.  So it is not surprising that there is a broad base of support for Literature Wales, the conduit through which most funds are passed to the writing community.

I’m intrigued by the fact that the Medwin Hughes Panel, in putting together its review of Welsh literature and publishing, raised the issue of subsidies and said this:  "The Panel felt that the danger for grant funded Welsh publishing is that it becomes a cosy and complacent small-scale industry which has a minimal influence on the culture of Wales as a whole…....."


Was this expressing a concern about the future?  As I see it, that's a pretty accurate reading of the situation that already exists.

http://gov.wales/topics/culture-tourism-sport/media-publishing/publishing/support-for-literature-review/?lang=en

I have done a number of blog posts on this already, and I have been looking again at the comments received by the Panel during its consultation phase.  These comments have struck me:

"Selling books is a finer achievement than winning prizes and does more to raise the profile of writers in Wales."

"Do not pander to the subsidy-junkies because they cannot, meaningfully, provide useful large-scale employment to the publishing."

"I don't think English language fiction and non-fiction should be subsidised - they should be subjected to market forces. Whilst this would reduce the amount and nature of what is published, overall it should improve quality via proper editing and reduce the number of niche works by the same old names."

"There is a clique of the same writers who receive a disproportionate amount of support/publication subsidy."

"The funding model means most publishers in Wales are actually incentivised NOT to sell lots of copies of a book, as this would leave them with a tougher case to make for winning the next grant. The whole scene is doomed to amateurism and as a result cannot produce a product capable of selling outside of Wales, and often not even capable of selling within Wales. I know no system like it in the world."

Subsidy junkies?  Writing clique?  Amateurism?  Cosy and complacent?  The more I think about it, the more convinced I become that a little more exposure to the hard commercial world might make the Welsh literary and publishing scene both leaner and more efficient.  That could be done without in any way threatening our civilisation and our great Welsh cultural traditions. 

This is what needs to happen, and for what it’s worth I recommend it to the Minister Ken Skates while he ponders on what to do next:  

He should bring in a rule stating that if a book sells fewer than 1,000 copies in its first two years, any grants and subsidies awarded must be paid back. That means REAL audited sales, involving real money, and excluding all returns. No skulduggery and creative accounting.  No more complacency.  This would encourage writers to think much more seriously about what they should spend their time on, and encourage publishers to be much more selective about what they publish.  With a bit of luck, we might get a move away from large-scale vanity publishing by a mutual admiration society into something which concentrates on what the market actually wants.  We might also get a recognition that publicity and marketing need to be taken much more seriously in Wales by a publishing industry which has been largely protected from this nasty thing called commercial risk.

Welsh publishing's subsidy culture

 

 

Independent Review of Support for Publishing and Literature in Wales.

from P56, on English-language publishing in Wales

The Panel recognised that some of the small publishers supported by the WBC have had a sprinkling of prize-winning or prize listed books over the years, but have never looked remotely like becoming self-supporting operations. This is not to blame them. It seems that, as long as funding is only available specifically to publish new Welsh writing, then that is what they will continue to do, as a grant is far more reliable than simply relying on sales. If these publishers, or indeed anyone wishing to set up as a literary publisher in Wales, wanted to be self-supporting, it is highly unlikely that they would build their business model exclusively on publishing new writing from Wales.
…………….

The Panel felt that the Welsh Government should consider whether they want to continue, as now, funding publishers of Welsh literature or – and this would be more expensive in the short term, but potentially only in the short term – helping to set up publishers based in Wales to publish internationally, both in terms of the authors they publish and the markets into which they seek to sell.

If, however, the real aim is – as it traditionally has been – to make sure that Welsh writers get a fair opportunity - that talented novelists from Wales will indeed find a publisher, then we need to consider whether that really needs market intervention. That is to say are talented Welsh writers really likely to be ignored by the London publishing establishment or not?

The Panel noted that it seems quite telling that the three books shortlisted for the English language section of the Welsh Book of the Year in 2016 were all published in London, by Faber & Faber. It is possible to identify Welsh writers who have been talent spotted by Welsh publishers – e.g. Cynan Jones and Rachel Trezise – and have gone on to be published in London. Would they have found a London publisher without getting their start in Wales? Probably but not necessarily. What is clear is that publishers in Wales are unable to fully support a publishing career – no author who hopes to make a living from their work is likely to stay with a Welsh publisher as things stand.

The Panel felt that the danger for grant funded Welsh publishing is that it becomes a cosy and complacent small-scale industry which has a minimal influence on the culture of Wales as a whole. However, it needs to be said that - given the current level of funding – and given the wider context of publishing in the UK – that is probably all one can reasonably expect.

==================== 

This is all very interesting, and a little disappointing. There seems to be a weary acceptance on the part of the Panel that Welsh publishing MUST be heavily subsidised if talented writers are to emerge and be given a fair chance of succeeding in the wicked commercial world.  An issue that the Panel fails to address is the issue of all those untalented Welsh writers who think they are terribly good, and who mop up subsidies simply because they are there.  Both the mainstream Welsh publishers and Literature Wales connive in the writing and publishing of a stream of books that nobody really wants and hardly anybody buys. As the Panel notes elsewhere, sales figures are notoriously difficult to come by -- and that in itself is extraordinary, given that the great majority of books in Wales are published with the aid of public funds.  There is no requirement for accurate reporting of commercial success or failure.   The situation is then portrayed as demonstrating "a vibrant literary culture in Wales".  THAT is what the Panel really should have addressed much more aggressively.  Do the benefits of the current publishing scenario actually justify the costs?  I am quite convinced that they do not.

Let's just repeat this:  The Panel felt that the danger for grant funded Welsh publishing is that it becomes a cosy and complacent small-scale industry which has a minimal influence on the culture of Wales as a whole. 

Dylan Moore said this in 2012 in response to one of the tirades from columnist Julian Ruck:  There must be countless books published in Wales over the last decade that would not exist but for the financial support given to publishers through the Welsh Books Council. These books may well have pitiful sales figures by mainstream commercial standards. This is not something that can be dismissed out of hand. If the writing and publishing community in Wales takes itself seriously, it can not on one hand point to Ruck’s publication through a vanity press as evidence to discredit his views whilst propping up a system that is merely an elaborate, state-sanctified version of a vanity press. 



 

Welsh writers - silenced and emasculated

 Cartoon: Ian Waugh

Following on from my last post about the Welsh Academy and its virtual demise, I have been pondering on the current strength of the Welsh literary community.  How big is it?  And what capacity does it have for speaking with a common voice and influencing the course of events?

First, size.  Well, there are reputed to be 3,000 people on the Welsh Academy database, but that database was rendered unreliable years ago when more and more people were admitted to membership in spite of having no track records as writers.  TV people, publishers, editors, journalists, commentators, readers and politicians joined because they wanted to support the writing community.  That was laudable in a way, but while the Academy's reach and its income were both enhanced, its focus as an organization for professional writers was lost.  The Medwin Hughes Panel which reported on the support mechanisms for literature and publishing in Wales gave (as far as I can see) no estimate of the number of working writers in the country, but I saw somewhere an estimate of around 600, so let's run with that figure. 

And does the community use its numerical clout and its corporate expertise to influence "literary policy" in Wales?  It seems not.  In the Report of that big review commissioned by Minister Ken Skates, the writing community makes virtually no appearance, from which we can assume that the Welsh Academy made no representations and had no meetings with the panel members. 

Second, the effectiveness of the writers' lobby.  Various things have happened which have negatively affected the ability of writers to present common positions on matters of interest.  The transformation of the Welsh Academy into Literature Wales has to a degree left writers out in the cold, since the new organization has been tasked with promoting Welsh literature and not with looking after writers.  So it has become a marketing and promotional organization, working with Government, the Arts Council and Visit Wales to show the world what a vibrant literary culture we have in our country.  Yes, it does boast of its role in stimulating and facilitating literary endeavour; and yes, it has distributed almost half a million pounds in bursaries to more than 100 writers since 2011 (see Note below).  But last year it distributed only £70,000 in bursaries out of a turnover of £1.2 million, while expending around 75% of its income on staff salaries and ancillary costs and in other in-house expenditures. 

Literature Wales, according to some commentators, has become an organization devoted to ensuring its own survival and to extending its reach into fields such as the arts and tourism.  As its aspirations have increased, its sense of entitlement has also grown, and this conceit was remarked upon by the Medwin Hughes panel members.  The staff and working panels of Literature Wales appear to be accountable to nobody, and although they are no doubt committed, highly motivated and hard-working, in a very subtle way they have come to see themselves as "the professionals" and as "the experts" who determine which writers will be supported in their careers, and which ones will be ignored.  That is a profoundly dangerous scenario, but to our eternal shame we, the writers of Wales, have allowed ourselves to slip into an acceptance of it.  The rise and rise of the subsidy culture has created a generation of writers who measure their status not by the reputation and commercial success of their published outputs but by the number of bursaries they have received.  Weirdly, they see themselves as "artists" rather than craftsmen.  The literary culture to which they belong is dominated by Literature Wales, playing the role of the benefactor, with writers lining up each year with their begging bowls and then expressing eternal gratitude whenever a few goodies come their way.  Even more distressing is the sight of respectable academic writers and talented new authors using social media to say that the receipt of a bursary of maybe £2,000, and the receipt of a modest amount of mentoring help,  has given a sudden boost to their self-esteem and has somehow "vindicated" or "validated" them as writers.  They appear to be blissfully unaware of how demeaning the whole relationship has become...........

Perhaps that is a travesty of the real situation, and perhaps the writing scene in Wales is a great deal more healthy than I think.  Let's hope I am wrong in my assessment.  And I admit that very occasionally the writing community does know its strength and uses it.  For example, early in 2016, a powerful lobbying campaign was mounted to counter a proposed 10.6% cut in the Welsh Government subsidy paid to the Welsh Books Council.  A highly publicised letter to Minister Ken Skates was instigated by poet Kathryn Gray and signed by 200 writers.  Under the sheer pressure of this lobbying campaign, the Government backed down and maintained the funding level.  The list of signatories was interesting, including senior academics, first-time writers, researchers, established novelists and historians, poets, translators, editors and publishers.  They all felt outraged, not so much because they thought that the work of the Welsh Books Council might be negatively affected, but because the level of subsidies might be reduced and because there might be a corresponding reduction in the number of titles published.  The underlying assumption was that Welsh publishing is incapable of being commercially viable without vast state support, and that the number of books published is in itself a sign of a healthy literary culture, no matter what the quality and the sales potential of these books might be.

"Don't you dare take away our begging bowls!"  What was I saying about the disappearance of self-confidence?

http://www.senedd.assembly.wales/documents/s48463/Correspondence%20on%20behalf%20of%20Welsh%20writers%20academics%20and%20significant%20figures%20re%20Proposed%20cuts%20to%20We.html?CT=2

================

Note:  This is how the Medwin Hughes review summarises the Literature Wales mission:  

LW represents the interests of Welsh writers both inside Wales and internationally and encourages people to enjoy others' writing and to write themselves, through a programme of workshops, courses, festivals and competitions. LW services include mentoring, writers' bursaries, information and advice, and independent manuscript assessment. LW aims to place literature at the heart of the well-being, literacy, employment and skills agendas and strives for literature to be seen as a vital part of a balanced, engaged and healthy life.

Whatever happened to the Welsh Academy?

Once upon a time, prior to 2011, there was a membership-based writers’ society called Yr Academi Cymraeg or the Welsh Academy.  It was founded in 1959.  In 1998 the organization took on a much enhanced role when it won a franchise from the Arts Council of Wales to provide a Welsh National Literature Promotion Agency. This new Agency was named Academi. The much-changed and enlarged Academi which emerged delivered literary provision across Wales until 2011, when it joined with Tŷ Newydd Writing Centre to form a new "national company" known as Literature Wales. To quote:  "The Welsh Academy, as the national Society of Writers in Wales, retained its unique identity within Academi. This identity continued to be safeguarded when the Academi was developed to be Literature Wales. While Literature Wales does provide administrative support to The Welsh Academy, a management relationship does not exist between them and both organisations’ decision making processes, management and activity are independent of each other.”  The truth of the matter was that the Welsh Academy became a client or subsidiary organization, entirely dependent upon Literature Wales for its continued existence.

http://www.literaturewales.org/for-writers/the-welsh-academy/ 

Some years ago the Welsh Academy had about 600 members, and it operated in a reasonably democratic fashion, lobbying on behalf of the writing community where necessary and providing a range of services for members.  It did not have a very high profile, but it was there when you needed it.

Now, however, it is a strange animal, with a presence on the Literature Wales web site but with its own committee and membership list and a somewhat mysterious way of operating. It has its own constitution, adopted on 25th April 2015. But what is its status?  Is it an independent registered charity, or a membership organization with its own articles of association? How does it communicate with members?  What does it actually do for its members? Where are its accounts? Where are the minutes of its meetings? It appears that members are “approved" by the Committee, but the process by which Committee and Management Board members are appointed is very mysterious.  There are currently 11 Board members.  But there are no elections, so who makes the appointments?  Who decides who will be deemed full members, honorary members, and fellows of the society?  (All the names are on the web site, here: http://www.literaturewales.org/for-writers/the-welsh-academy/members/)  Who decided that Bobi Jones and Gillian Clarke should be Presidents? (I have no objections to them at all, but what was the process?) Somebody needs to sort all this out, to define much more clearly what the relationship between Literature Wales and the Academy actually is, and to define the separate functions of the two organizations. A “Memorandum of Understanding” signed in June 2016 goes some way to clarifying the relationship, but leaves a host of questions unanswered.

One of the excellent features of the old Welsh Academy was its web-based membership database, which could be consulted by anybody who wanted a CV or list of publications for a particular writer, or who might be looking for a speaker for a literary festival, for a school visit, or for an evening talk.  This old database worked well, but was at last (about a year ago) taken down because it was effectively beyond repair! There was no clear separation on a list of around 3,000 names between Welsh and English-language writers, fee-paying members and non-members of the Welsh Academy, and active writers and people just vaguely interested in writing or reading. The method for sending personal info in and then loading it onto the database was also incredibly cumbersome, as I remember only too well. The information about some people on the list was many years our of date, and some were even dead…….

In spite of many promises from Literature Wales, the writers’ database has not been revamped or replaced, and one doubts that this is anywhere near the top of the list of priorities, at a time of great uncertainty.  LW staff say that if anybody wants a speaker they will recommend one who might be appropriate, and that requests for information about a particular writer will be handled efficiently.  That is all very well, but how do we, as Academy members, know that LW will be genuinely impartial and will not promote or favour certain writers over certain others?  That is, to put it mildly, a deeply unsatisfactory state of affairs.

So what is to be done?   For a start, the Welsh Academy should be much more transparent about its modus operandi.  It is, after all, owned by its subscribers or members — or it should be.   Then it should use its subscription income (maybe about £12,000 per year?) and whatever other monies it has, to set up a new database of Welsh writers -- only open to those who pay for membership. It should devise a template easy for writers to use online, communicate with all its members and fellows about its proposals, and get on with this as quickly as possible. It should abandon forthwith the practice of "inviting" approved writers to become members, since that dates from some ancient era of clubby elitism which is long gone. It should encourage membership applications from all bona fide writers in Wales.  It should not accept readers, politicians, publishers, critics and other interested parties into membership, but there is no reason why Literature Wales should not keep another mailing list for supporters, politicians, booksellers, publishers and all others who want to be kept abreast of new initiatives and receive newsletters etc.  In all probability it has such a list already.

The status and fate of the Welsh Academy are matters that escaped the attention of the Independent Review of Support for Publishing and Literature in Wales, recently reported on by Prof Medwin Hughes and his Panel.  That’s a pity, since unless they assert themselves, Welsh writers will remain a part of a begging-bowl culture, subservient to large and powerful bodies like the Welsh Books Council, Arts Council Wales, and Literature Wales (if it continues in existence after 2017).

Wales deserves a fully functioning “society of Welsh writers”, and I hope that Tom Anderson (the current chair) and his Management Board can find a way forward by restoring a degree of independence from Literature Wales at a time of great change in the Welsh literary and publishing scene.

================

Here are four organizations / templates for writers databases in England, Ireland and Scotland.  No point in re-inventing the wheel.........
http://www.societyofauthors.org/Our-Members/Author-Search
https://writersguild.org.uk/find-a-writer/
http://scottishbooktrust.com/author-search
http://www.irishwriters-online.com/casey-philip/

Wales Book of the Year discriminates against self-published writers

The exclusion of self-published books from the "Wales Book of the Year" competition is a serious issue which deserves attention.  I have now written to the Chief Exec of Literature Wales to ask for a change in the rules -- with copies to other interested parties.  I see no reason for keeping this letter private -- and every reason for making it public.  So here it is, as an Open Letter..........


=========================

Lleucu Siencyn
Chief Executive
Literature Wales

28th July 2017


Dear Lleucu

Apologies if you have received this before — I tried to send it about a week ago while on holiday, and the message disappeared without trace. It may have been sent, and maybe not…...

I’m writing to make a positive suggestion on an issue which should be of concern to all those who belong to the literary community in Wales. I hope you will give it serious consideration. I am also copying this letter to other interested parties, and hope that they will be supportive of the points raised.

I refer to the Wales Book of the Year competition for 2017. This is an opportune time. I note that the review commissioned by LW is now complete, and that the points raised by the consultants will be looked at in the near future, together with those raised by Prof Medwin Hughes and his panel, reporting to Minister Ken Skates.

Rule 6 in the “eligibility criteria” for the competition states that all books entered MUST be “published by an established publishing house, which is here defined as a house that publishes a list of titles by a range of authors and distributes its books through recognised booksellers. Self-published books are not eligible.”

In my view this rule is discriminatory and elitist, and should be done away with immediately. It is out of tune with the spirit of the times, given the vast changes that have occurred in Welsh publishing over the past 20 years. It also suggests that LW is unsure of the difference between vanity publishing and self-publishing -- that’s somewhat surprising, given that it promotes itself as the literature agency for Wales.

I have researched the main literary competitions in the British Isles, and I think I’m right in saying that Wales is the only country that bans self-published titles from competing for its most prestigious literary award. I fail to see the logic of this.

I well understand that some of the books that are self-published are rubbish. However, it is also a fact that many others are peer reviewed, carefully edited, produced to a high standard, distributed through WBC and sold through the Welsh book trade. Some of these titles sell in tens of thousands, attesting to their popularity and their quality. I fail to see why, as a matter of principle, self-published titles are deemed less “worthy” than the books produced by the established publishing houses of Wales.

If we look at the bulk of titles submitted as entries for WBOTY, we see that many of them are in effect vanity publications, written and published as a direct consequence of the Welsh subsidy culture which must be the envy of the rest of the world! Many of these books have very limited market appeal, and sell only a few hundred copies. They are published without commercial risk, so that writers and publishers can feel good, and they are used quite deliberately to sell the message to the world that Wales has a vibrant and prolific literary culture. A vast exercise in vanity publishing, paid for with taxpayers’ money? This might be too cynical a question, but as you know it has been asked in all seriousness by other commentators over the past few years.

If the self-publishing exclusion is removed, would there be a loss of “status” by WBOTY? Emphatically not. I would argue that a vibrant self-publishing industry, involving writers who are committed, competent, and prepared to take commercial risks, is far more accurate, as an indicator of the health of literature in Wales, than a long list of titles with no sales figures attached. Self-published writers should be recognized, not excluded.

I hope that you will see the merits of my proposal and remove Rule 6 from the eligibility criteria for WBOTY as soon as it may be convenient. I hope that this might also meet with the approval of other interested parties including the Welsh Academy, Arts Council Wales and WBC, given that in the future they will have an increased influence over the nature of the competition.

With all good wishes,

Sincerely,

Brian John

PS. I have no need to declare in interest here. Although I count myself as a reasonably successful self-published writer, I have no titles in the offing that might be entered for WBOTY. I simply hope that a change in the rules now might help to improve the status and the sense of inclusion of the next generation of self-published writers in Wales.

How much does Literature Wales spend on itself?

I have been doing a little research on this contentious question, as it lies at the heart of another question -- Does Literature Wales represent good value for money?

In the Medwin Hughes Review, on page 63, it states that 75% of the LW budget is spent "on its own staff's salary costs."   Prof Damian Walford Davies (the chair of LW) is furious about this, and claims that the real figure is 47%.  On that basis, he accuses the Review Panel of being incapable of examining the facts and drawing proper conclusions from them.

So what is the truth?  If we examine the Literature Wales annual accounts (which are not published on its web site, and are rather difficult to get at), we find the following figures for the  financial year ending in March 2016.

Total income for the year was £1,200,000.  Almost £100,000 was spent on "raising funds." Around £302,000 was spent on "administrative costs" and a further £51,000 on "governance costs."  Wages and salaries and associated costs totalled £541,000.  A lot of those costs are included under the heading of "charitable activities."  Grants distributed equalled about £112,000.  There are lots of other "charitable activities" listed on the accounts, including literary tourism, general audience, children and young people, fieldwork, courses, training and development, Welsh Academy, and services to writers. Under all of those categories, it is impossible to tell from the accounts how much money was spent "in house" and how much was actually spent on buying in services and products from outside.

However you look at it, the conclusion is inescapable that over £900,000 of LW's budget has been spent on staffing and associated "in house" costs, and that a remarkably small percentage of the budget has actually been disbursed "in the field" to help the writers of  Wales, in the form of grants, bursaries and other activities. 

I think the Review Panel has got its figure just about right, although it should have made it clear that the 75% figure referred to "salary and staffing costs and other in-house expenditures."

To come back to the original question, any organization that spends such a large proportion of its income on itself deserves detailed scrutiny.  After all, Literature Wales is a charity, and its income comes almost exclusively from public funds.  LW should have been better governed.  It should not be surprised if a suggestion is made by a panel (such as that chaired by Prof Medwin Hughes) that in future there might be a better way of spending £1.2 million per year on supporting literary activity in Wales. 

Ken Skates slams personal attacks on Literature Review Panel members

It looks as if the coordinated and very aggressive response from the literary establishment to the Medwin Hughes Review has been ultimately counter-productive.  Minister Ken Skates, who appointed the Review Chairman and panel, and who commissioned the Report on Support for Welsh Literature and Publishing, has made a new statement which is itself pretty forthright:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-politics-40656396

This is also reported in The Bookseller.  Essentially, the Minister accepts that Literature Wales and its friends have a right of reply to the direct criticisms contained in the Report, but he says that that process should have taken place behind closed doors. Instead, there has been a pointed and very personal attack on Medwin Hughes and his colleagues in the social media by people intent on obtaining maximum exposure and publicity.  That, he says, has "not been helpful" -- and he pleads for a period of calm assessment in a manner that respects the protocol of such things.

He who pays the piper calls the tune -- and we can probably assume that the things that Prof Medwin Hughes and his colleagues said in the report were the things that the Minister wanted to hear.  All in all, the future is not looking bright for Literature Wales.  I wonder how long it will be before staff members start jumping ship?