What big publishers can do for small presses

Over the past couple of years I have found myself added to various WhatsApp groups, Discord servers and email chains that all pose the same question: what can small presses do to create space for each other? This question seems to lie at the heart of small press publishing over the past few years, as space gets squeezed out and editors battle for their list to be heard among the crowded voices of other literary endeavours. I think, however, that the wrong question is being asked, or rather the wrong people are being asked the question.

Small presses have always been at the forefront of collaboration and community, and helping each other has, in most cases, been pivotal to the work of a small press editor. I know, from my work running Broken Sleep Books, that I am regularly in discussion with the likes of Bad Betty, The87Press and Prototype as we share insights and explore ways to gain recognition collectively. The onus, therefore, should not be on small presses to find ways to somehow elevate the already exceptional work we do around and for each other but, instead, I believe this issue is one that should be posed to the major publishers, the bigger presses: how do you, as a major publisher, create space for the small presses that keep the literary scene afloat?

The problem is not Broken Sleep Books or Bad Betty taking up shelf space that could be occupied by Outspoken or Influx, because that space is finite, and sometimes it seems bringing in one small press pushes out another. Rather, the issue seems to be that there is an inordinate number of books from major publishers, the likes of Penguin et al, that occupy space which could be shared widely. I am not just referring to shelf space in physical bookstores here, but also intend to nod towards marketing, awards and review space.

If small presses continue focusing only on what we can do for each other, we risk ignoring the systemic issues that limit our potential

In 2020, I had a discussion with a critic on X (formerly Twitter) who claimed to have spent a decade championing small presses in their reviews for the likes of the Guardian. After I did a little research, I discovered that they had in fact only covered one small press book for the paper out of 53 reviews, of which Picador, Bloodaxe and Faber made up over 50% of the coverage.

Similarly, for the Poetry Book Society’s spring 2024 selections, the Poetry Book Society Choice, three of the four PBS Recommendations and the PBS Special Commendation choice were Carcanet, with Bloodaxe being selected as the spare Recommendation and the Translation Choice. These reviews and awards lead directly to increased profit for small presses, which aids in platforming new authors and ideas. As the only poetry subscription service of its type in the UK, the Poetry Book Society runs the risk of being dictatorial in how it presents its tastes. Revolving selectors do ensure this should not happen, though another poetry book subscription in the UK would be beneficial as it would serve to generate an atmosphere in which the status quo is broken up and replaced by genuinely groundbreaking selections.

If the people who determine who gets the coverage and awards fail to recognise the endeavours and quality of small presses, then what chance is there of breaking that hegemony through the combined efforts of those who are overlooked?

Small presses are fundamental to the way literary scenes grow and thrive, through their work publishing talent that previously has gone unknown, to the ways we create and foster communities and readerships, and to the work we do in carving out space for work that is deemed too risky for the commercial presses. Without small presses breaking new ground and setting out markers for new and exciting work, there would likely be a staid, conservative literary scene that refuses to take risks due to the lack of previous evidence, one which relies on the admiration of sales over adventure. I have published authors who were rejected by the "Big 5" and proved there is a readership for their work as published by Broken Sleep Books. I have then congratulated those authors as big presses pick up and publish their next book – but have done so knowing that we had to break the ground first and prove the value of their work in an environment that those big presses ensured was difficult and under-appreciated. It all feels very much like Thomas Tuchel’s Champions League win with Chelsea, or Roberto di Matteo’s Champions League win with Chelsea, in that Frank Lampard and André Villas-Boas did the groundwork while Tuchel and Di Matteo held the trophy aloft.

If small presses continue focusing only on what we can do for each other, we risk ignoring the systemic issues that limit our potential. We have already proven our ability to collaborate and innovate. It is now time for major publishers and industry gatekeepers to share the stage and ensure a diverse and equitable literary landscape, to ensure that we are not left with another decade where one small press celebrates a review in a national periodical, and two presses share the same awards among themselves every three months.