Zinesters are not the Beats generation, we are the Beat-UP generation

[Tom Hendricks]

Zinesters are the first generation that has had it's literature completely blocked from fair reviews in the mainstream media. There were the Beats writers in the 50's. Zinesters are the Beat-up writers. No other generation has had it's best contemporary writers block so completely and so unfairly.

The consolidation of the media has ruined mainstream publishing and the media that reviews it.
For some reason the media has given up all journalistic responsibility in refusing to cover zines and almost all better indie writing.

No coverage of the revolution in any art. It is just not literature.
No coverage of the new writers in new forms.
No coverage of the new writer advocacy groups and leaders such as King Wenclas, or ULA or Musea.
No coverage on why no coverage. The mainstream media can not be questioned on their almost total generational block of fair reviews for zines.

What do you think?

[tim scannell]

logorrhea
tim

[Yul Tolbert]

For now, I have to say I generally agree with Tom's position here. But if you're a zinester and you're happy being unknown and unappreciated, I can understand that too.

[Tom Hendricks]

Holden W. Attradies said:

THANK YOU NICOLE.

NicoleIntrovert said:

you are SADLY mistaken about the number of books published... even per year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_published_per_country_per_year

Tom Hendricks said:

Also Tom, please stop telling me what I would and would not do. you are not me and so far most times you have tried to assume what I would do you have been wrong.

It was a question not a command, "IF you ran...". Well what would you do if you ran a review service. Would you rule out all zines?

Lot less fiction published than books. And there is a lot less corporate publishing from a handfull of major publishers - that control most US publishing, than zines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_consolidation

[Tom Hendricks]

CocoaPuss Zine said:

i would love to have more mainstream coverage of my zine. mostly because i am obsessed with myself and being famous and want people to know who i am. slightly narcissistic but i love my zine and think everyone should read it. put me in vogue and cosmo, that would make my motherfuckin day.

so far i have had coverage on the venus zine website but my #3 issue i'm going to push really hard at distros and such. maybe even bust and ms. magazine. why the hell not?


So would I. I write for everyone - even those in the future. I hope that what I write will touch hearts and minds of people not even born yet - of every country on the planet. I write of my time now, but I hope the message is universal to all.

[Tom Hendricks]

Yul, for example is a fine cartoonist, and he deserves a wider audience for his work. That's a fact.

Yul Tolbert said:

For now, I have to say I generally agree with Tom's position here. But if you're a zinester and you're happy being unknown and unappreciated, I can understand that too.

[Kate Haas]

Tom Hendricks said:

I've published 170 issues of my zine Musea - and that's more than the number of novels most big publishing companies have published in the same time. Now instead of a single zinester add every other zinester on the planet and you have a lot of publishing - much more than corporate novels.

The NYT should reflect the publishing world - It calls itself book review, because it refuses to acknowledge zines. Zines have ushered in a golden age of literature. And the NYT missed it...If you were running a publishing review service would you block out zines and the golden age of literature they ushered in? No of course not. They are not covering the publishing industry.

1. Of course the NYT Book review is not covering the entire publishing industry. I'm not sure why you think this is their responsibility. In fact, did you know that romance novels are the most widely published type of book in the US? Will the NYT Book Review come near them? Not with a ten-foot pole, they won't. Why? Because the NYT covers "literature" as defined by them. Do you see anyone agitating for romance novels to get coverage in the NYTBR? Well, sometimes. But mostly, if romance readers want to know about the latest, they turn to their own magazines, websites, etc.

Pretty much the way we zinesters do.

2. I disagree that zines have ushered in a golden age of literature. I like many zines, but sorry. Just as with most "corporate" books, a percentage of them are truly excellent, another percentage are decent, some are mediocre, and some are dreck. Quantity doesn't equal quality.

[NicoleIntrovert]

Very well said, Kate. I agree.

[tim scannell]

over 30,000 titles/yr.
lit's G-Age was 19th C
NEVER saw a beat-up zinester

zinery...generally...is not lit...and should not be
(and, anyway, won't be)
tim

Kate Haas said:

Tom Hendricks said:

I've published 170 issues of my zine Musea - and that's more than the number of novels most big publishing companies have published in the same time. Now instead of a single zinester add every other zinester on the planet and you have a lot of publishing - much more than corporate novels.

The NYT should reflect the publishing world - It calls itself book review, because it refuses to acknowledge zines. Zines have ushered in a golden age of literature. And the NYT missed it...If you were running a publishing review service would you block out zines and the golden age of literature they ushered in? No of course not. They are not covering the publishing industry.

1. Of course the NYT Book review is not covering the entire publishing industry. I'm not sure why you think this is their responsibility. In fact, did you know that romance novels are the most widely published type of book in the US? Will the NYT Book Review come near them? Not with a ten-foot pole, they won't. Why? Because the NYT covers "literature" as defined by them. Do you see anyone agitating for romance novels to get coverage in the NYTBR? Well, sometimes. But mostly, if romance readers want to know about the latest, they turn to their own magazines, websites, etc.

Pretty much the way we zinesters do.

2. I disagree that zines have ushered in a golden age of literature. I like many zines, but sorry. Just as with most "corporate" books, a percentage of them are truly excellent, another percentage are decent, some are mediocre, and some are dreck. Quantity doesn't equal quality.

[Dan 10things]

Tom Hendricks said:

I've published 170 issues of my zine Musea - and that's more than the number of novels most big publishing companies have published in the same time.

Except most of these were one or two pages and print runs of under 500, so you aren't really outnumbering them in any way. Hell, I'd bet most zinesters have published more pages than you... my zine averaged about 80 pages and print runs of 3,000-5,000. Why do I get the feeling that everyone is getting trolled into another one of Tom Hendrick's wandering arguments that go nowhere?

ps- Tom, Yul and Karl W are part of the Underground Lit Alliance and always try to get zinesters hyped into their little boycotts to give press to their writers and organization. It never works because they never put together a very coherent argument or really get zinesters to buy into their lit movement.

[Tom Hendricks]

Reggie Mental said:

If you want to talk about the consolidation of media, I'm with you...but Tom, your arguments are absurd. These are fringe publications that more often than not have all the artistry and expression and relevance of a guy on a corner wearing a sandwich board... and less of an audience. And you're all in a heap because the New York Times won't cover them?Get real, chappie.

And check your history if you think there was some golden age where fringe viewpoints were celebrated and explored by the mainstream. And by 'fringe', I don't mean Hemingway, Faulkner, Fitzgerald...

And you bring up the Beats...well, I don't seem to remember the "littles" of that period getting massive mainstream coverage.


You are pretty tough on zinesters in a zinester forum. LOL
I think the best of zinester writing is as good as any lit gets. See the Zine Hall of Fame.
http://zinewiki.com/Category:Musea_Zine_Hall_of_Fame

[Tom Hendricks]

ps- Tom, Yul and Karl W are part of the Underground Lit Alliance and always try to get zinesters hyped into their little boycotts to give press to their writers and organization. It never works because they never put together a very coherent argument or really get zinesters to buy into their lit movement.
Karl and Yul are good people and don't deserve this.
This has nothing to do with this thread. I'm stepping out of it.
Thanks to all for their fun responses.

[Betty]

Dan said:

Why do I get the feeling that everyone is getting trolled into another one of Tom Hendrick's wandering arguments that go nowhere?

and

Reggie said:

Kudos to you folks who typed out 18 paragraph responses to this nonsense...

Gar...it took me long enough to figure this out. I feel stupid. I could have spent all that time on a sweaty bike ride. *sigh* Thanks for the reality check.