The Political Mobilization of Independent Publishers: Local and Global Demands for the Book Industry Jos de Souza

MUNIZ JR. Universidade de So Paulo (USP) Programa de Ps-Graduao em Sociologia Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, 315, sala 1063 So Paulo, SP, Brasil 05508-010 jose.muniz@usp.br Jos de Souza Muniz Jr. is a Ph. D. student in Sociology at the University of So Paulo. He earned his Master Degree in Communication Studies at the same institution. His doctoral research is on the changes in Brazilian and Argentinian publishing fields between 1990 and 2010, and especially the role played by the independent publishers. He had been working as an assistant editor, copyeditor and proofreader for the past 10 years, both in big and small publishing houses. Abstract This paper summarizes some preliminary concerns raised by a research project on independent publishers associations. Two of them will be analysed here: the Alliance of Independent Publishers, which is based in France and regroups publishers and associations from 45 countries; and the Brazilian League of Publishing Houses, composed of 99 Brazilian publishers and a member of the aforementioned Alliance. The analysis focuses on the public policies the associations support in order to promote widespread access to books and bibliodiversity. The main goal is to evaluate how these entities try to influence the decisions of elected representatives, thereby acting as pressure groups in the formulation of public policies for the book industry and on reading habits both at the national and the global level. Keywords: book publishing; independent publishers; bibliodiversity; Brazil; transnationalization. Word counting: 6441

1. Publishing, capitalism, globalization Since the 1970s, and intensifying in the 1980s, several countries have witnessed an accelerated process of internationalization, financialization and concentration of property in several economic sectors. That process has transformed the local productive arrangements, inserting subjects and institutions in global labor systems, consumption and capital generation (HARVEY, 1993). It hasnt been different in the universe of symbolic production and especially in book publishing: fusions, total or partial acquisitions, opening of branches and subdivisions, and partnerships between local and foreign companies have become frequent in several countries. Through a process of horizontal concentration, publishing houses that used to perform direct competition have become part of the same companies, reducing the diversity of information sources, in spite of the increase in number of books released. In some cases of vertical concentration, publishing houses have associated themselves with distribution and bookstore nets, besides owning printing houses and other book chain companies. Also, there are companies that function in several sectors of symbolic production newspapers, magazines, films, records, internet, etc. and in other sectors as well from banks to private education, from telephony to weapon industries, just to mention known examples of conglomerate concentration. Those strategies follow corporate policies to cut down on publishing houses premises, outsourcing and labor deregulations, inasmuch as they should lead to the reduction in production costs and to the increase of productivity (MUNIZ JR., 2010). 1

In Latin America, the entrance of foreign capital, delimited by favorable economic policies, reshaped the space occupied by publishers. Attracted by the expansion of these consumption markets, foreign companies of different origins came to dispute space with those already active in the local markets, or to incorporate them, especially in places of guaranteed return on investment. Today, some of the companies in the area are among the largest publishers in the world: Planeta, Prisa-Santillana, SM, Cengage Learning, Pearson, MacMillan, Hachette, ReedElsevier, McGraw-Hill, etc.1 The Spanish ones stand out, for they have a considerable share of certain publishing segments in those countries. At the same time, the last decades have seen emerge many small publishing companies, dedicated to different niches and public. This pulverization seems to be related to how easy it is to produce books: a microcomputer and a few resources allow the completion of all phases of the publishing of a book, until it is ready for printing. Nowadays, with the e-books, these possibilities seem to be expanding as the printing and physical distribution (which generates material and operational costs that are too high for certain companies with low capitalization) no longer are prerogatives for the activity. However, it is important to consider not only the competition imposed by the big publishing houses but also the entrance of new players in the market, such as the technology companies. This dual process concentration/pulverization turns several national editorial markets into oligopolies en frange (See MOLLIER, 2011): in the center, very few big companies, many with partial or total participation of foreign capital, which dominate profitable niches and give preference to titles of immediate return; on the sides, a large number of small/medium size companies, especially those with national capital, that invest in titles less likely to be sold, or in the balance between financial and symbolic return. Such polarization becomes clear in the Brazilian case: in the last survey carried out by FIPE (Fundao Instituto de Pesquisas Econmicas [Institute of Economic Research Foundation]), data of 2009, the country had almost 500 publishing houses2, 16 of those (3.21%) with an annual billing above 25 million dollars, and 420 of them (84.3%) had a billing up to 4.8 million dollars annually. However, it is important to notice that the classification according to the billing of a company should not lead to the automatic opposition between the two poles as described by Bourdieu (2007): the cultural industry, made up of large publishing companies and conglomerates, and the classical production, made up of small and medium size ones. In one as well as in the other, such aspects are frequently mixed and confused. It is always necessary to consider the examples that are not clearly defined according to those categories, those companies that dont fit in either of those extremes, or where editorial lines coexist. Meyer-Dohm explains: when establishing a publishers typology, the phenomenon of the identification with the groups constitutes a principle that takes into consideration different motivations, which would be better than a scheme that would oppose trade and culture (in BRAGANA, 2001:26). However, there are reasons to assume that the parallel large-industrial X small-artisan echoes in one perception, very well known, that art and money are incompatible. The insertion of publishing houses in media, education and entertainment conglomerates connected to financial capital has been a target of criticism, as we will see next.

2. Heralds of quality and diversity Those who see a problematic character in the conglomerate, massive and financial hues taken by the editorial market are clearly inclined to make comments reminding them of a missed past, when they thought the editors were more concerned with quality and diversity of what they published, and when

1 2

See Borges (2008) for a detailed survey of that scenario. In the survey made by FIPE, the UNESCO definition is taken into consideration: a company is considered a publishing house if it publishes at least 5 titles a year, and produces at least 5000 copies.

they would not bend to the financial design. As an example, see the literary metaphor used by Bueno (2005:355) to refer to the Spanish editorial market: There was a time when the people responsible for publishing performed their work imbued with the meaning of their duties towards the reader and the author, dedicated to their role of culture knighterrant. They walked over their particular Mancha that of the printed text 3, garnished with a crowd of faithful knights and supplied with an ancestral wisdom that allowed them to elegantly solve any drawbacks. But there came a day when the armies of mercenary barbarians devastated this rich and fertile land where the cultural grains were ground, and they exchanged mills for giants; those who resisted their aggressive advancement became a decimated bulwark of a Quijotes style mission: to preserve the art of spreading knowledge and to continue to celebrate the cult of the beauty and the sublime forms of representation of words In the sequence, the author apologizes for the rhetoric and justifies the pessimism: in her opinion, the small publishers are just like Don Quijote fighting against an invisible and invincible enemy a fight destined to failure, or to innocuousness. She gives special attention to the drop in quality in book production, subjected to shorter and shorter deadlines and to an editorial process not as judicious as it should be, performed by professionals that are not very well prepared, and who certainly are overloaded. Agreeing with Bueno, it could be said that the book, as it happens with electric appliances, cars and cell phones, is subjected to the phenomenon of overproduction and of programmed obsolescence: to motivate consumption, the industries including the cultural ones would be deliberately diminishing the quality of the products in such a way that they can be constantly substituted by others, making the wheel of the system turn: [] today, when the editorial groups acquire quality stamps more or less historical and put in their executive positions people who are aliens to the logic of the publishing field, and demand annual financial results from them or force experienced editors to admit and apply somewhat shamelessly, credulously, and decidedly the profitability criteria of a company with a structure that requires abundant and regular investments to survive , their principles are deviated and the edition of books turns into a crazy, aimless activity. (Rodriguez in BUENO, 2005:364) Gilles Colleu (2007:19) corroborates with that: It is not only a matter of criticizing the commercial aspect of the publishing of a book, but also the emphasis on a financial drift of that commercialization (italics mine). According to the author, the main cause of the changes in the publishing policies of the large companies that now favor those books that present immediate return, is the change in the structure of the capital: when it no longer belongs to a family, or to a limited group of partners, and becomes a group dominated by pension funds or investment associations, the publishing business loses its characteristics and loses the historical commitments with education and culture. Gilleu, as well as Bueno, stresses the presence of managers that are foreign to the publishing mtier: they would be the concrete agents of a world that compares symbolic assets to any other asset, making management styles converge. Another aspect pointed out by Colleu is that of the internationalization of the publishing market; according to him, it reinforces the Western cultural dominium and the hegemony of the countries in the North over the ones in the South. In many countries that would provoke instability among the independent editors actions and would destabilize strategic sectors, such as the one of text books in Brazil, and it would favor ideological and economic exogenous interests. Even though focused on North-American market, Schiffrins testimony points to similar routes. To him, the editorial market has been quickly transforming itself into a small share of the conjoined communication industry (2006:20), with all the consequences that it can bring: profit over quality, use of standards from the entertainment industry, belief in a consumption democracy. According to
3

Mancha is a reference to the region in Spain where Do n Quijotes story takes place. Nevertheless, in Spanish and in Portuguese, mancha also means the space the text occupies on the printed page.

Schiffrin, who saw his own career being swallowed by a huge conglomerate, editorial concentration represents a political danger: [] if the possession of ideas remains in the hands of those who want to make all the money possible, then the debate that is fundamental for the performance of a democracy will not happen. To a great extent, this silence took over a big part of the North-American intellectual life (2006:158). In that respect, he corroborates Colleu (2007:26-28), to whom the strong ideological ties between the big groups and the liberal right make the publishing business suffer influences and pressure, and the books of critical content end up disappearing from the bookshelves of bookstores. Their arguments, curiously, are very similar to the ones expressed by the Brazilian poet, Glauco Mattoso (2004:56): Beginning in the 1980s, with the re-democratization of the country, the official censorship loses its threatening power, but an internal censorship, informally, starts to take effect in the editorial environment, partly due to political commitments, and in part due to commercial interests. Even though they deal with different socio-political realities, they all point to the questions related to market censorship and self-censorship as the new dangers to freedom of ideas in democratic regimes4. What alternatives do Bueno (2005), Colleu (2007) and Schiffrin (2006) propose to those problems? The first author, more concerned about the quality of books than the diversity in themes and styles, glimpses solutions in the field of editorial policies more than in public policies: it would be up to the publishing houses to revert the precariousness of the labor process; to the representative bodies, to create and propagate a standard and a quality stamp to certify books and companies; to the government, she only mentions the task of preparing good professionals, through continued education. Colleu, in turn, argues that only legislative dispositions in favor of the book and reading would allow independent publishing houses, with good catalogues, to survive: elimination of privileges given to large conglomerates on the government book acquisitions; limitation of concentration of property in the sector; respect Unescos Convention on the diversity of cultural expressions; prepare professionals to be agents of biblio-diversity; fiscal, postal and custom exemptions; State support to publish and translate; protection of authors rights; creation of an independent observatory5. And finally, Schiffrin leans towards a market solution, disconnected from the government, even though he visualizes it as a democratic issue. In his book, the panacea is the New Press experience, a publishing house that he founded, and it is financed by a foundation pool. According to this publisher, they dont interfere in the choice of titles, and their interest is limited to a debate of ideas offered by the company, a nonprofitable organization. Only briefly does he mention the possibility of public financing (like the promotion of movies and public TV stations in Europe) the publishing of books by the cultural and academic institutions managed by federal resources. For the most part, the solutions proposed by the three authors are related to the role of the public power in their countries (Spain, France and United States, respectively). However, if the authors mentioned above diverge in their arguments, it is just a matter of emphasis: in Bueno, the invisible microcosm of editing; in Colleu and Schiffrin, the prodigious universe of publishing. In the end, all of them end up in a leitmotiv of very strong idealist hue: the Economics world (capitalist, financial, global) would be swallowing up the cultural world, grinding people and books in the same grinding machine, domesticating if not nullifying their different saberes e sabores6. Also, this is the tone of
4

In spite of the new character given to the problem in the statements, something similar, in a reality that preceded the boom of the editorial conglomerates, is pointed out by George Orwell in the preface of his book Animal Farm (published at a later date), released in 1945. According to him, the British publishing houses and newspapers, even though not suffering censorship from the British government at the time allied with USSR refused to publish any material against Stalins dictatorship. 5 As we will see later, Colleu is, among those authors, the one who approached the most to the arguments expressed by the independent publishing houses associations, and was some sort of academic speaker, organic intellectual of those organizations. In Brazil his book (that explicitly mentions the associations) was published by Libre. 6 A pun that means cultures and tastes (N.T.).

several public manifestations of small publishing houses. Some of them, concerned about market oligopoly, and about what they consider to be ominous consequences of that process, are beginning to forge and refine the idea of independent publishing, tied to the ideals of quality and diversity. 3. The Brazilian publishing market and Libre To understand the practices and representations of Libre (Liga Brasileira de Editoras) [Brazilian League of Publishing Houses] in the last years, we must understand the socio-historical conditions in which the organization emerges and evolves. For that, it is necessary to review some circumstantial data. According to the last demographic census performed by IBGE (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatstica) [Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics] in 2010, the country had more than 190 million inhabitants which means three times the population of the other CPLP countries (countries of Comunidade dos Pases de Lngua Portuguesa Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries)7. This puts Brazil in a strong position in terms of its linguistic market. Besides that, in spite of the insufficient schooling rate8, Brazil has had, since the 1990s, one of the largest public programs of text books distribution. In 2010 the government bought a total of US$ 600 million dollars in books for schools. In that same year the expenses with text books alone (including books for private schools), answered for 46.65% of the total billing of the sector. And, due to the increase in number of students in fundamental and middle schools, the tendency is that the amount will be even more attractive. After the 1990s, the Brazilian publishing market gigantic cipher (the eighth largest in the world at the time), added to the relative economic stability and the incentive to foreign capital policies, favored the entrance of several large publishing houses in the country. Brazil witnessed its publishing market change radically, just like what had happened in Mexico, Argentina and Chile. These countries served like an open door to many companies that wanted to invest in the area, now seen as a place of big opportunities, considering the return to democracy and the development perspectives. In the previous decades Brazil had already attracted foreign publishing houses that opened their branches mainly in So Paulo. However, it was in the 1990s and 2000s, due to the conditions mentioned above, that the most significant investments occurred and Brazil became, for many large groups, a strategic market in the expenditure and consolidation of their businesses. Just like in other Latin-American countries, the Spanish companies stood out in this period9. Also, there was a concentration process led by Brazilian publishing houses that, with more capital, started to acquire participation of others, forming publishing groups with several seals10. It is in this concentration and internationalization context that in 2001 the Brazilian League of Publishing Houses came out. In the new bylaw of the organization, signed in 2008, it is stated that it is an organization of public interest, non-profit, non-political party affiliation, free and independent from public and government sectors, which works cooperatively for the strengthening of their businesses, of the Brazilian publishing market and their biblio-diversity (art. 1st). It is composed of
7

Besides Brazil, Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Portugal, So Tom and Prncipe, and East Timor are members of CPLP. 8 According to IBGE 2009 data, less than half of the economically active population had completed at least the mandatory 11 school years. The average number of school years of Brazilian people between 25 and 64 years old used to be only 7.7 years. 9 The Santillana, SM and Planeta groups are among the most important examples. The first one bought national publishing houses (Moderna and Objetiva are the most important ones); the second opened its own subdivision in the country and the third one combined both strategies. Other foreign companies active in the country: Pearson (present as a brand as well as a shareholder of Penguin in the well known Companhia das Letras), McGraw-Hill, Cengage Learning, ReedElsevier, LeYa, etc. 10 As examples of groups, Record, Ediouro and Saraiva, of publishing houses associated to large communication groups in the country (Abril, Globo, Folha de So Paulo) and others.

99 publishing houses 40 of those in So Paulo, and 39 in Rio de Janeiro, the two largest economic and publishing poles of the country , whose editorial lines vary considerably: from the thoughts of the left (Boitempo, Perseu Abramo) to the books of art (Cosac Nify, Pinakotheke); from foreign novels (34, Estao Liberdade) to national poetry (7Letras, Ibis Libris); from children and adolescent literature (Brinque-Book, Cuca Fresca) to feminist books and books for lesbians (Mulheres, Brejeira Malagueta); from music score books (Jobim Music) to audio-books (Livro Falante). In its bylaw, Libre tries to define independent publisher as the one not connected to large corporations, and clarifies their objectives (that, generally speaking, do not differ much from the objectives of Cmara Brasileira do Livro [Brazilian Book Chamber] and the federal government). However, it is in a 2010 document that the organization sets a more clear position in the field: the Carta aberta aos futuros Deputados, Senadores, Governadores. E ao futuro Presidente da Repblica [Open letter to all future Representatives, Senators, Governors. And to the future President]. Right in the beginning, the text reflects the ideas of the authors mentioned in the previous topic: The book market is going through a moment of deep transformation, motivated by it s own capital movement, but also by new technologies which threaten its biblio-diversity. That is why we believe that, in a country that is becoming more educated and that has new development potential, it is our duty to point to new grounds to break for the maintainability, survival and, especially, the democratization of knowledge and art that depends on this biblio-diversity. For the large publishing groups, if the increase in schooling and in the perspectives of development are opportunities for the conquest of new markets through new projects, acquisitions and fusions , for Libre it means a historical opportunity in favor of reading democratization. Ahead, it adds: [The book chain] is a complex and unequal chain, where small producers compete even with multinationals connected to large economic groups which, according to their size, structure and need of high profit margins, pressure for culture pasteurization. Here, the opposition between large and small companies, discursively elaborated by Libre, is even more obvious. Following on these observations, the letter states which concrete measures is expected from the new elected government: actions that will strengthen small publishing houses and small bookstores (minimal quota when the government shops for books, special credit lines, exemption of some taxes); a set price for the book and a fair discount in all levels of the chain; permission to book consumption using the vale-cultura [something like a culture voucher]11; controlled reprography without criminalizing students; creation and maintainability of public libraries and opening of private libraries to the public; limitation of the performance of companies with foreign financial capital in the sector, as it has happened with the press; special fees for book mailing and postage; creation of a Digital Book Chamber to discuss and implement uniform policies for the sector. As is evident, Libres demands intend to form a public reader not only through book consumption (subsided or not), but also through free access via libraries; it defends the promotion of diversity not only through the fostering of small and medium size companies, but also fighting the conglomerates and the entrance of foreign capital. It supports, above all, the strong presence of the State in the publishing market, such as similar agents in sectors such as journalism, broadcasting and advertising. In this vein, the entity adds to the debate questions previously neglected by other organizations, but also, it openly manifests itself against interests of the large ones, represented, for example, by the Cmara Brasileira do Livro (CBL) [Brazilian Book Chamber] and by Associao Brasileira de Editores de Livros Escolares (Abrelivros) [Brazilian Association of Text Book Publishers]12.

11

Still in course in the Brazilian Parliament, the vale -cultura poposes a benefit given to workers to monthly spend up to R$ 50,00 (fifty reais) on culture. 12 Even though many of the Libre publishers are associated to CBL, several of its presidents and directors have already expressed their opinions in favor of the entrance of foreign capital in the sector as a means of fostering

It is worth pointing out that the Libre document mentions issues related to the book reality in Brazil, as well as those related to other countries. In order to enrich this discussion, we will see the positions that the independent publishers take in a transnational action. 4. The Independent Publishers Alliance As it happens with Libre in Brazil, there are, worldwide, several different organizations of independent publishers of regional (State and provincial, etc.), national and supranational scopes. Even though the concept of independent publishers varies in certain aspects in each case, all those initiatives point to common needs needs that, in their representations, convert themselves into virtues13. The most common argument is that it is necessary to fight against the domain of large conglomerates, as these, less concerned about the cultural value of their products and more dedicated to high financial returns for their owners or shareholders, submit themselves to less demanding quality standards and to the pasteurization of contents. That is the keynote of the Independent Publishers Alliance (IPA), organization initiated in 2002 and set in France. It brings together editors and publisher organizations from many different countries, including Libre, and expresses their ideas in documents such as the Dakar (2003), Guadalajara (2005), and Paris (2007) Declarations. In this last one, the organization defines an independent publisher as follows: An independent publisher conceives his publishing policies with total freedom, in an autonomous and sovereign way; it is not an organization that expresses the ideas of a political party, institution, or communication group or company. [] The financialization of the publishing world acquisition of publishing houses by actors of the entrepreneur world without any relationship with the publishers profession and the implementation of a high profit policy implies in the loss of independence and, not rarely, in a modification of the editorial line. (2007:2)14 The same document defines biblio-diversity as cultural diversity applied to the world of books. To the organization, the independent publishers are a guarantee of the plurality and dissemination of ideas, in a situation in which the editorial production of the large media groups is facing thematic, aesthetic and ideological limitations. In this, as well as in the other two declarations, the organization endorses the motto for another globalization and expresses a great variety of other values: solidari ty and social justice; fight against discrimination; organizational spirit; book democratization; solidarity with those countries where freedom of speech is curtailed. The organization claims to act against the commercialization of culture and the uniformity of the contents; to reinforce the local productions; to exert influence over international negotiations and book and reading policies; to protect linguistic diversity; to fight in favor of independent booksellers; to fight against the direct and indirect censorship, and the self-censorship as well. The IPA established itself as a legitimate organization to represent the independent publishers in front of the governments and the international organizations in order to influence the course of the policies related to the book and reading. However, it is important to point out a fundamental specificity of its
it. As to Abrelivros, the board of directors is basically made up of big text books publishers, including those of open capital (Abril Educao) and foreign capital (SM, Moderna, MacMillan). 13 The expressions independent editor and independent publishing appear here as native categories, and as such, a priori, it is not possible to adopt them as transparent. 14 There are different criteria to define independent publisher, and there are differences among the a ffiliated organizations of the IPA. It is suffice to remember that for Libre, such definition is given, basically, in relation to large conglomerates, and that among the organizations there is the Editora da Fundao Perseu Abramo, connected to the Labor Party (PT, in Portuguese), and the Edies Casa de Rui Barbosa, connected to the federal government. Those cases go against the definition of IPA.

performance as related to the authors already mentioned and to Libre: the unconditional defense of freedom of speech in view not only of the self-censorship and the market censorship present in the democratic States, but also as the official censorship in the dictatorships. Also, it proclaims everyone to work to promote the flow of ideas around the world, encouraging translations between non-hegemonic languages (in order to fight against the prevalence of the English language) and cojoined solidarity editions and the transfer of rights between publishing houses, allowing publishing in developing countries which is called solidarity book. The organization supports the idea that the book is a public asset and emphasizes the role of sovereign States in its protection and promotion. More than that, they believe that fiscal, cultural and educational policies are critical in order to place the independent publishers in the center of the dissemination of ideas. On the other hand, they emphasize the need for all the performers in the book chain, as well as the patrons of art and the international organizations to work together towards the ideals expressed in the Declaration. As seen, this is a full, idealist, bold agenda in many respects. However, what seems to be a set of big, unrealistic ideas in the Paris Declaration, becomes more concrete in a document called Perspectives for the Alliance for 2010-2011. In this document, besides mentioning several objectives already expressed in the declarations, the organization gives examples of how they could be achieved. For example, in order to turn the support for isolated language publishers into something more concrete, or to perform in contexts of great difficulties, the document proposes the creation of a net of Persian language in the Alliance itself, counting on the reinforcement of Iranian publishers of the diaspora. They also propose the creation of an observatory of biblio-diversity and censorship to monitor the situation of the different countries and regions, forming a data base to foster the public debate, and to pressure governments and international organizations. Generally speaking, what can be perceived is that the objectives and the strategies announced by the Independent Publishers Alliance is in agreement with Unescos Convention on the Protection and Promotion of Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005) organization that sponsored the meeting that resulted in the Paris Declaration , incorporating values not directly connected to the idea of diversity and freedom of speech (for example, the respect for the environment and the adoption of good corporate practices). 5. Conclusion The objective of this analysis is to show the development of a set of arguments originated in several countries and organizations, and that resulted in what we could temporarily call ideology of independence in book publishing. In spite of some differences in terms of emphasis and priorities, the discussed authors and organizations usually exemplify what Canclini (2008:70) says: In the recent analysis of cultural policies, many authors, sensitive to the trans-nationalization of culture and its reallocation in media communication processes, continue to claim the role of the State as a guarantee of public interest, of the plurality of information in each nation and as a facilitator of a more democratic access to social and cultural assets. The author continues in his conclusions: Just as it is argued about the indispensable role of the States in the defense of biodiversity and in face of the ecological threats, the recent studies on the global reorganization of the cultural industries support the idea that the national public powers and also the regional ones, like in the European Union have the responsibility to promote the film-diversity as well as the biblio-diversity. In order to do that, it is necessary to have programs to support the endogenous cultural production of each nation and the protection of the intellectual properties, tasks that still are the responsibility of the States and of inter-government organizations. (CANCLINI, 2008:70) In order to understand the problems pointed out in the independent publishers speech and their expectations of influencing the public policies, it is necessary to examine not only the publishing 8

sector, the book industry or the reading market: we need to focus on the publishing field, as a place of disputes that become the agents in question. Those disputes dont refer only to capitalist competition the search for readers, circulation, profits not even the search of a symbolic recognition acclamation, adhesion, repercussion, awards. It would be hasty, then, to classify publishers and publishing houses in two poles economic and cultural. It deals, rather, with the search of concrete forms of publishing (the property regime, financing forms, development of catalogue policies, the efforts of convergence) the overlapping of those two spheres of disputes, sometimes one standing out, and sometimes the other, making the field and subdivisions tip towards one side or the other. Complementing those ideas, it is important to consider that the oppositions of the field, delimited by interests and specific disputes, require the discarding of the common sense idea that the publishers are molded by the consensual project of reader country, based on speeches (from the State, supra-state organizations, civil society and private initiative) that insist on the need to increase the reading rates. This false consensus obscures the multiplicity of projects and interests: to specific subjects and groups, the meaning of a reader varies as well as the means to reach that goal. In that sense, it is important to understand how distinct editorial projects that convert themselves into political projects, exceed the individual plan of each publishing house to culminate in collective practices and interests that are in direct or indirect, explicit or covert opposition. It is expected that the analysis of the path of the publishers and the access, mediated by interviews, to their experiences will finally take us to the whirlwind of practices and investments through which the agents are trying to find reasons capable of justifying their existence (MICELI, 2003:73). This will take us to places (both institutional and discursive) where those fights occur, especially as to the direction that is planned for the book public policies: what role do the government and supragovernmental institutions exert on the definition of such policies? How much pressure do they suffer from the chamber of commerce, unions and publishers organizations, authors and booksellers, groups considered here as institutions, i.e., organizations that define the configuration of the preexistent field interaction and, at the same time, create new positions in it, as well as new groups of life courses for the individuals that occupy them (THOMPSON, 1998:21)? What effects do the specific pressures and field relationships have in the short and in the medium run? The centrality given here to the arguments in favor of the independent publishing and of the quality cannot obscure the fact that there are also other arguments that emphasize, or at least justify, the phenomenon of concentration and internationalization of the publishing market. Temporary and partial, and it couldnt be different, this text tried to give intelligibility and visibility to the converging practices and representations of authors, publishers and institutions that believe to be contrary to a certain reasoning that is developed in the field15. So, it is possible to run the risk of overshadowing or leaving for a second plan the diversity of directions, experiences and convictions that constitute the whole group. This risk is valid because it can explain certain specific processes, at the expenses of others, provided that it will give, in future papers, a different perspective to the debate.

6. Acknowledgements I would like to thank Capes, a Brazilian federal agency that fosters research, for the Ph.D. scholarship it has given me.

15

By the way, this discussion is not exclusive to the publishing field. The idea of independence also in journalism, movies, theater, arts and music echoes certain oppositions discursively constructed, of course , between financial profitability and aesthetic experimentation; between the maintainability of political, economic and religious alliances and the ideological autonomy; between entertainment and democratization of culture; between private interests (connected or not to the transnational capital) and the public interest; between the culture being managed by intellectuals or by agents of the corporative world.

7. References Borges, B. 2010. Um novo cenrio para o negcio do livro. So Paulo: Com-Arte. Bourdieu, P. 2007. A economia das trocas simblicas. So Paulo: Perspectiva. Bragana, A. F. A. 2001. O eros pedaggico: a funo editor e a funo autor. Ph. D., Universidade de So Paulo. Brazilian League of Publishing Houses. 2008. Novo estatuto da Libre. Disponvel em: <http://libre.org.br/institucional_view.asp?IDPagina=9> [Acessed 15 June 2012]. Brazilian League of Publishing Houses. 2010. Carta aberta aos futuros Deputados, Senadores, Governadores. E ao futuro Presidente da Repblica. Available at: <http://www.libre.org.br/institucional_view.asp?ID=87> [Acessed 15 June 2012]. Bueno, Silvia S. 2005. En lugar de la Mancha... Procesos de control de calidad del texto, libros de estilo y polticas editoriales. Panace@, Vol. VI, no. 21-22, Sept.-Dec. 2005, p. 355-370, Available at: <http://www.medtrad.org/panacea/IndiceGeneral/n_21-22_revistilo_SenzBueno.pdf> [Acessed 25 May 2009]. Canclini, N. G. 2008. A cultura poltica: entre o meditico e o digital. MATRIZes, no. 2, April 2008, p. 55-71. Colleu, G. 2007. Editores independentes: da idade da razo ofensiva? O editor independente de criao, um ator maior da bibliodiversidade. Rio de Janeiro: Libre. Harvey, D. 2010. Condio ps-moderna: uma pesquisa sobre as origens da mudana cultural. So Paulo: Loyola. Independent Publishers Alliance. 2003. Dclaration des diteurs indpendants et solidaires. Dakar. Available at: <http://www.alliance-editeurs.org/IMG/pdf/Alliance_-_Declaration_fr.pdf> [Acessed 15 June 2012]. Independent Publishers Alliance. 2005. Dclaration des diteurs indpendants du monde latin. Guadalajara (Mxico). Available at: <http://www.alliance-editeurs.org/IMG/pdf/decla_fr.pdf> [Acessed 15 June 2012]. Independent Publishers Alliance. 2007. Declarao Internacional dos Editores Independentes, para Proteo e Promoo da Bibliodiversidade. Paris. Available at: <http://www.allianceediteurs.org/IMG/pdf/PDFPORTUGAIS.pdf> [Acessed 15 June 2012]. Independent Publishers Alliance. 2010. Les perspectives 2010-2011 de lAlliance. Available at: <http://www.alliance-editeurs.org/IMG/pdf/Les_perspectives_2010-2011_de_l_Alliance.pdf> [Acessed 15 June 2012]. Mattoso, G. 2004. Editadura: excluso versus opresso editorial. In: J. Busato et al., eds. A verso do autor. So Paulo: Com-Arte, p. 53-60. Miceli, S. 2003. Bourdieu e a renovao da sociologia contempornea da cultura. Tempo Social, April 2003, p. 63-79. Mollier, J.Y. 2011. A evoluo do sistema editorial francs desde a enciclopdia de Diderot. LIVRO: Revista do Ncleo de Estudos do Livro e da Edio, no.1, May 2011, p. 61-74. 10

Muniz Jr., J. S. 2010. O trabalho com o texto na produo de livros: os conflitos da atividade na perspectiva ergodialgica. 2010. Master Degree, Universidade de So Paulo. Schiffrin, A. 2006. O negcio dos livros: como as grandes corporaes decidem o que voc l. Rio de Janeiro: Casa da Palavra. Thompson, J. B. 1998. A mdia e a modernidade: uma teoria social da mdia. Petrpolis: Vozes. Unesco. 2005. Conveno sobre a Proteo e a Promoo da Diversidade das Expresses Culturais. Texto oficial ratificado pelo Brasil por meio do Decreto Legislativo 485/2006. Available at: <http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001502/150224POR.pdf> [Acessed 15 June 2012]. Websites CBL [Brazilian Book Chamber]: www.cbl.org.br IBGE [Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics]: www.ibge.gov.br Independent Publishers Alliance: www.alliance-editeurs.org Libre [Brazilian League of Publishing Houses]: www.libre.org.br

11