read it here http://issuu.com/bamn_mag/docs/plan_c_bamn_0814_v2
read it here http://issuu.com/bamn_mag/docs/plan_c_bamn_0814_v2
Got new stock in – Contact me or buy via http://www.pavementbooks.com/zoogenesis
And the best student workplace inquiry of the year award goes to… http://www.daftaripara.org/
Click on the cover to get the PDf, or here: disocrazy-20131
Here is a student handbook prepared for NYU. I am reliably informed that the Goldsmiths Handjob (here) was an influence on their tone.
Pavement books is interested in hearing about any original book projects which eschew the dry, turgid and didactic along with journalistic drivel. Exciting writing with critical depth.
And no slogans or zombies.
We’re particularly interested in projects emerging out of the fields of cultural studies, continental philosophy, urban studies, architecture, visual cultures, literary and film criticism.
Proposals for single-authored and collaborative works should include the following information. Please do not send full manuscripts unless requested.
This should provide a clear indication of the area of focus and the contents of your book.
A concise introduction (1-2 pages) indicating aims, themes and scope of the book.
This should take the form of a table of contents with a short summary (1-2 paragraphs) for each chapter.
Number and type of illustrations proposed, if any. As a rule we do not publish texts in full-colour although may consider doing so in certain circumstances.
Please provide brief biographical details (no more than 100 words) of all authors, editors and contributors involved in the project.
What is the proposed market and intended readership for the book?
Are there any similar texts currently on the market? How does your book differ from these?
Length of Publication
How many words (including bibliography and index) will the book be?
Date of delivery
How soon can you deliver a complete manuscript?
From the good folk at Minor Compositions, a project for hipsters, creatives and others with too much to lose (please share widely):
Surviving as a cultural or artistic worker in the city has never been easy. Creative workers find themselves celebrated as engines of economic growth, economic recovery and urban revitalization even as the conditions for our continued survival becomes more precarious. How can you make a living today in such a situation? That is, how to hold together the demands of paying the rent and bills while managing all the tasks necessary to support one’s practice? How to manage the tensions between creating spaces for creativity and imagination while working through the constraints posed by economic conditions?
In a more traditional workplace it is generally easy to distinguish between those who planned and managed the labor process and those who were involved in its executions: between the managers and the managed. For creative workers these distinctions become increasingly hard to make. Today the passionate and self-motivated labor of the artisan increasingly becomes the model for a self-disciplining, self-managed labor force that works harder, longer, and often for less pay precisely because of its attachment to some degree of personal fulfillment in forms of engaging work. And that ain’t no way to make a living, having to struggle three times as hard for just to have a sense of engagement in meaningful work.
This project sets out to investigate how cultural workers in the metropolis manage these competing tensions and demands. The goal is to bring together the dispersed knowledges and experiences of creative workers finding ways to make a living in the modern metropolis. And by doing that to create a space to learn from this common experiences that often are not experienced as such while we work away in different parts of the city.
Preface: The Liquidation of Foundations
I. Contingency, Necessity, Performativity
Reading Xenophon in (post-)Fordist Times – Arendt, Foucault: Oikonomia, Biopolitics, or Oikonomia? – Intersection, Domos – Agamben, Foucault, and Dumézil – Locke’s Holy Trinity
Annotation: Insurance, Inoculation
III. Legal, Tender
Genealogy – The Limits of Right – Reproducing Race – Frontier Expansion – Queer Value? – Reproducing Labour-Power – Reproducing Value – Genealogy Otherwise
Annotation: Infrastructure, Infra-politics
IV. Unproductive Circulation, Excessive Consumption
V. Foucault, Neoliberalism, and (the) Intervention
Welfare/Warfare – The Disappearance and Reappearance of Foucault’s Genealogy – Colonial Properties – Household Property and Proper Homes – Foucault, Becker and the New Household Economics – The Re/Production of Human Capital
VI. Proliferating Limits
Points of Exchange – The Boundaries of Oikonomia – Polanyi and Marx – The Gift of Surplus Labour – Patterns of Re/Production – Emerging Markets, Frontiers
Annotation: Affective Labour
VII. Flora and Fortuna
VIII. Neocontractualism, Faith-Based Capitalism
Contagion and Plague – Moral Hazard and the New Covenant – Socially-Necessary Labor, Human Capital and Service Work
IX. Mutuum, Mutare
Usury and the Return of the Dark Ages – The Fordist Domestication of Liquidity – Marx’s Intermundia – Student Debt, Education Bubbles and Speculation – Financial Contagion, Loose Ties and Complex Systems – From Infinite Debt to Endless Credit – Clinamen
UPDATE – pre-order here
Click on the pages to enlarge and read.
Book Reviews from the Big Crabapple that is NX, London.
This is a haphazard collection of reviews old and new. Of course we are not competing with any of the other fine book review rags out there from other towns like New York or London, it’s just that…
We will accept contributions where they are by our friends and comrades, where they are really good and so long as they are approved by the unbiased (non parliamentary, ultra-leftist, no touching faith in reformism or the State) editors. We reserve the right to reject (and hunt down, huff and puff, and burn your house etc.) any sexist, racist or pro-capitalist comments or contributions. You know the drill.
We are for reading, for reading in context, for making reading a part of the struggle to transform lives and life – looking for ways to transmute the nasty slime of Capital into something else, something better, whatever it takes. If it takes book reviews too, then here we go. Culture Industry Reconsidered! Film reviews too people – high-brow elitist theory-heavy auto-reflexive hyper-critique inclusive.
Email the editor-ish (you will see, editorial here is a self-organising collective process) John.Hutnyk [at] gold.ac.uk
Two quotes from Theories of Surplus Value Vol 1.
‘a writer is a productive laborer not insofar as he produces ideas, but insofar as he enriches the book-seller who publishes his work, or insofar as he is a wage-labourer of a capitalist entrepreneur’
I’ll collect various things to come back to regarding alt-publishing here:
First up, a thesis that sets the scene (from Canada, but international in scope) – by Heather Morrison
That thesis was the one linked to in the previous post about big publisher profits
in anticipation of the CCS workshop on questions of academic publishing mid Feb
Which is just after this important meet at INIVA on National Libraries Day
The Stuart Hall Library celebrates National Libraries Day with a talk and display
A talk introducing Iniva’s special Library collection. A display will include exhibition catalogues, journals, monographs, zines and artists’ books, archival documents and ephemera.
Find out more about the Library and get advice on researching visual art using Iniva’s collection.
National Libraries Day will be the finale to a week of events at UK libraries celebrating libraries and librarians, and highlighting the importance of reading.
Book online to register your interest
This article is one in an issue becoming quite the popular. Having published a commissioned (unpaid) article with Elsevier – it was called ‘Jungle Studies’, and after proofreading they replaced the phrase ‘For fuck’s sake’ with ‘For God’s sake’ – I know, there are several levels of gah! – I am keen to point out that many publishers are not scum and open access is making some headway, but…
Good material for our forthcoming workshop on publishing and alternative formats for ‘Early Career Researchers’, and I’ve something else coming out on the topic soon.
Read the comments on this piece too – here.
January 13, 2012
In an article that many of you will now have seen, Heather Morrison demonstrated the enormous profits of STM (Scientific, Technical and Medical) scholarly publishers. The figures are taken from her in-progress dissertation which in turn cites an article in The Economist. It all checks out. I emphasise this because I found the figures so hard to believe. Here they are again: profits as a percentage of revenue for commercial STM publishers in 2010 or early 2011:
- Elsevier: £724m on revenue of £2b — 36%
- Springer‘s Science+Business Media: £294m on revenue of £866m — 33.9%
- John Wiley & Sons: $106m on revenue of $253m — 42%
- Academic division of Informa plc: £47m on revenue of £145m — 32.4%
So it’s evident that profits on the order of 35% are pretty typical for commercial STM publishers, and that Elsevier’s figures are not an aberration. Not only that, but all four of these companies’ profits as a proportion of revenue are still increasing — by 2.4%, 4%, 13% and 3.3% respectively. The U.K. Office of Fair Trading noted back in 2002 that “the overall profitability of commercial STM publishing is high, not only by comparison to ‘non-profit’ journals (which is not surprising), but also by comparison to other commercial journal publishing”.
I wanted to be sure that I was assessing this fairly, so I looked through Elsevier’s annual reports for the last nine years — happily, they make them available, if not particularly easy to find. What I found is that they have been consistently bringing in profits in the region of 33% throughout the last decade. Specifically:
- 2002: £429m profit on £1295m revenue – 33.18%
- 2003: £467m profit on £1381m revenue – 33.82%
- 2004: £460m profit on £1363m revenue – 33.75%
- 2005: £449m profit on £1436m revenue – 31.25%
- 2006: £465m profit on £1521m revenue – 30.57%
- 2007: £477m profit on £1507m revenue – 31.65%
- 2008: £568m profit on £1700m revenue – 33.41%
- 2009: £693m profit on £1985m revenue – 34.91%
- 2010: £724m profit on £2026m revenue – 35.74%
(I have not been through the same exercise for Springer, Wiley or Informa, but there is no reason to expect that the results would be any different.)
What does it all mean?
Yes, publishers have a right to make a living. Not only that, but they have a right to make as big a profit as the market can bear (though of course when they form a cartel that distorts the market monopolistically, that changes things).
But here’s what it means to scientists that Elsevier’s profit is 35.74% of revenue:
- When you pay $37.95 to download a PDF from an Elsevier journal, $13.56 of that goes straight into the pockets of Elsevier shareholders.
- When you pay $3000 to have your submission to an Elsevier journal appear as open access, $1072.20 of that goes straight into the pockets of Elsevier shareholders.
- When your library pays $1.7m for a bundle of Elsevier-journal subscriptions, $607,580 of that goes straight into the pockets of Elsevier shareholders.
- When you or your library pays Elsevier $23783 for any reason, that is enough for them fund Representative Caroline Maloney’s $8500 bribe to co-sponsor the evil Research Works Act, out of their profits alone.
You just have to ask yourself whether that’s where you want your money going.
And though this workshop is open only to Goldsmiths Berlin FU and Copenhagen Doctoral School PhDs (its a training workshop) we’d not be adverse to hearing from interested persons. So here is the cfp:
A horrifically good and brand new issue of the CCS postgrad noctournal publication Nyx was launched tonight in New Cross/Deptford, and a very fine thing it is too. You will soon be able to purchase the new issue from the website. Do be quick! NOW HERE.
PubliCITY – commissioned multi-author section of Left Curve no 29 – LC29.PUBLICity35pp-Hutnyk