Vanity Press Publishing

A D E F I N I T I V E H I S T O R Y of vanity publishing can probably never be written. There is evidence to indicate that it has existed and at times even flourished during the last thirty-five or forty years, and it is not unreasonable to surmise that it goes back in time beyond that. But much of the published evidence takes the form of accounts of individual experiences with vanity publishers with the identities of all concerned quite carefully concealed, so that while these accounts are undoubtedly true, they are not the stuff from which a documented, statistical history can be compiled. One is also confronted with the impossibility of formulating a tight definition of the term vanity publishing, which would show its historical continuity. Today, when what its critics term vanity publishing has emerged as a statistically significant part of the American book industry, the houses alleged to practice it reject the term and prefer to call themselves "subsidy" or "cooperative" publishers. Perhaps what is needed more than a definition is a new, neutral term so that any partisan discussion can at least have a common point of reference. The very use of the term vanity publishing implies contempt for the book produced and a judgment on the author and publisher-on the former because he has chosen an unorthodox way of attempting to achieve a recognition his talent does not merit, and on the latter because he has pandered to another's weakness for his own profit. Traditionally vanity publishing has operated like a kind of confidence game, although one that managed to remain, if at times only barely, within the law. Authors were persuaded, or flattered, or duped if you will, into paying a purported publisher for producing manuscripts which any reputable editor would reject as being totally without merit. Usually the books themselves were examples of wretched presswork and shoddy binding, and showed evidence of only cursory editing and proofreading, if any. The payments asked ranged from a few