Chomu Press

[Nemonymous]

Again, I really think there are so many classic 'internet forum' misinterpretations on this thread and that slippery slope, and it makes me genuinely sad.
Quentin and Mark are indisputably great creative writers of our time. They should go to the pub together to sort this out amicably, and leave their counterparts on this thread to attempt some form of Internet Pax.
des

[Nemonymous]

Quote Originally Posted by Sand

that doesn't licence an absolute equation between us and our TLO identity.

Exactly my point.
des

[rhysaurus]

Quote

After 12 years heavily involved in discussion forums on the internet, I find there are differing protocols, misinterpretations, slippery slopes to arguments - and very little point in inviting people to other threads, as that tends to put them off. Face to face is always different and invariably more communicable of feelings.

Sometimes, "face to face" actually ends up with a double-sided stiletto blade through a set of ribs, with a padded coat wrapped around the left forearm, while the stiletto of the loser drops onto the cobbles with a shiny clatter...

Quote

"The meaning of a word is its use".

Indeed. And Wittgenstein, who popularised that statement more than anyone, once fought a duel with Karl Popper on the question of whether there were genuine problems in philosophy (Popper) or only puzzles (Wittgenstein). This duel happened on October 25th 1946. In other words, the two great men had a disagreement, and instead of insulting each other from a distance, they came to blows "face to face". Thank goodness!

The truth, of course, is that they never really fought a duel. There was just a bit of poker shaking, but I prefer the scenario of the duel. The meaning of an anecdote is its use.


The truth (and it's a very unfortunate truth, but true nonetheless) is that rational, mature, gentle disagreements aren't much fun.

[qcrisp]

This is clearly a downward spiral, so I'm going to withdraw from all comment on this thread for a week.

[Justin Isis]

Hello my name is Justin Isis and I have registered on here in response to being discussed!

Sand (Mark?), thank you for your interest in my book I WONDER WHAT HUMAN FLESH TASTES LIKE. I hope that you'll buy multiple copies of this book in order to support my career.

In general I agree with your points re: LITERARY STYLE. I also like your use of "macaronic." In fact, your use of this word inspired me to have Kraft Macaroni and Cheese for lunch. I looked up "macaronic" in the dictionary and was disappointed to find that it didn't actually mean "resembling macaroni." I think there should be a word for the difference between what a word means and what it looks like it should mean. Perhaps there is already a macaronic word for this word?

I also like Baron Corvo - he was the best G.I. Joe villain of all time, much better than Cobra Commander. I think when I was five years old I had the Baron Corvo Underwater Assault Vehicle, or something like that.

[Nemonymous]

Quote Originally Posted by Justin Isis

I think there should be a word for the difference between what a word means and what it looks like it should mean. Perhaps there is already a macaronic word for this word?

As in insects or the quincunx in Astrology: a disjunct?

[Justin Isis]

Quote Originally Posted by Nemonymous

As in insects or the quincunx in Astrology: a disjunct?

I don't know what quincunx means but it sounds like it should be between a girl's legs. Hold on I'll look it up:

Okay, I was disappointed with its actual meaning as well.

In third grade my friend Chris thought "carnage" meant an arrangement of flowers and didn't believe me when I said it referred to "butchery, massacre, slaughter," etc. I feel like it should probably actually mean what he thought it meant.

[tartarusrussell]

Quote Originally Posted by brendanconnell

I think Quentin's point about big publishers being "risk averse" is a very interesting one. My own take is that most of the small publishers are also risk averse. Most of the little publishers of so-called weird literature have, in recent years, begun replicating each-other ad infinitum. All this has created in environment where authors are forced into cliques, as a form of self protection—publishers require “clean prose” “story arcs” “believable characters” and so forth, completely ignoring the fact that we are in the year 2011, not 1811 or 1911. Everyone is scared to take risks. So, when a press comes along willing to embrace the sharp edges, they should be supported.

In my experience all publishers take risks, because no book is guaranteed to sell. Publishers can make it easier or harder on themselves by offering books that their customers do or don’t have a preference for, or expectation of...

One could argue that POD presses are taking less of a risk because their financial outlay is so much smaller, but I entirely accept that a cash-strapped POD press may be risking a higher proportion of its assets publishing an “edgy” book than an affluent traditional, mainstream press.

(I’d like to suggest that the argument about clean prose, story arcs and believable characters is a spurious one. All publishers want brilliant manuscripts. A fine writing style is never a substitute for a great story, good plotting won’t make a pointless novel worth reading, and engaging characters aren’t required if the writing itself convinces and carries the reader forward.)

It seems to me that it all comes down to taste. Popular taste is for thrilling, relatively undemanding fiction about sympathetic characters. Some of us are willing to put in a little more effort as readers to enjoy a book, but that doesn’t mean that the writers we gravitate towards are any better than those successful in the mainstream.

Chomu is publishing books that appeal to the taste of its commissioning editors, which is entirely the right policy. If enough people share their taste then the press should succeed (and I sincerely hope that it does). Chomu has published/will be publishing authors I greatly admire, and whom Tartarus and other small presses have previously published: Quentin, Brendan, Reggie, Mark Samuels, Daniel Mills and Rhys. I'm not sure how this means that Chomu are taking more risks than other small presses in the field?

[brendanconnell]

Hi Ray,I am sorry if my conversation with Mark Valentine came off as a swipe at Tartarus. It wasn't meant to be. I think when discussing which authors or books are better or worse it is difficult. But I do think some things are better than others. James Joyce was a better writer than Stephen King. King might for some be a more enjoyable read, but I think Joyce is a more nurturing figure--his prose gives much more back for the effort.A book that you published that I think is one of the best books published in the last 10 years is your Jean Lorrain book. For me this volume, though a translation of old material, truly did grasp the "sharp edges". A real masterpiece. I also know you were taking a risk by publishing it, as these old fellows are not as popular as they once were. But I am truly grateful that you took this risk.

[Nemonymous]

I wouldn't say James Joyce is a better or worse writer than Stephen King.

My favourite Quincunx is the Avignon one by Lawrence Durrell.