[I have bumped David’s entry back to the top due to the interesting conversation happening in the comment section. – jp]
For more than a decade I’ve wanted to digitize the entire archive of The Kenyon Review and make it available to readers, researchers, and scholars on our website. Imagine that–nearly 70 years of extraordinary literature and criticism, a legacy that remains vital and part of the fabric of KR’s identity. The problem, of course, has been resources. Our only option was to take the project on ourselves, and we estimated that to scan all the back issues, create the software, and so on would run in the neighborhood of $50,000. We didn’t have it.
But the electronic universe continues to evolve with stunning rapidity. Now there are at least a couple of different opportunities–some might see them as threats–for making that long-held hope come true. First comes JSTOR, a nonprofit organization founded originally by the Mellon Foundation. They digitize many journals of varying types and make them available in a controlled fashion through “members,” such as universities, colleges, and libraries. In other words, you can access the archives of these publications only if you or your institution are a member of the JSTOR community.
The advantage here is that we would maintain control of our most precious commodity, the content of The Kenyon Review and its copyright. Among other things, this would protect the (rather small) income we receive annually for permission to reprint material.
The disadvantage is the flip side to that same coin: access would be limited. A reader could find the link at KenyonReview.org to our archives and click on it in pursuit, say, of a Flannery O’Connor short story. Only to find that access is denied because he or she isn’t a member of JSTOR.
And then there’s GOOGLE. You knew this was coming. Google is digitizing everything. (There was an interesting article in The New Yorker about this a few months ago.) Partnering with some of the largest libraries on the planet, Google is rapidly scanning and digitizing everything in print. You may have heard that there are lawsuits challenging their efforts, but these are mostly token feints on behalf of commercial publishers who are trying to protect their own copyrights and holdings. Ultimately, money will almost certainly change hands. Lots of money. But it seems unlikely that any barrier will long delay the Google Leviathan.
Rather than wait passively for the Whale’s arrival, we approached Google to find out whether we might actually collaborate. It turns out that they are very eager to bring a distinguished journal such as KR into their nets sooner rather than later. They’d do the scanning/digitizing without charge and quickly. What’s not to like?
Ah. Well, by leaping into the whale’s maw willingly we would essentially surrender all control of our content. Everything KR has ever published would be available through Google (and also through a link on our own website, which is certainly an attractive element). We would get some token advertising, and our identity would be clear on all the materials. But and but.
The KR staff is divided on the question. John Pickard, our maestro webmaster and electronic guru, believes we should refuse as a matter of principle–we should hold out to the last byte. I do see and admire his point.
So, we could go with JSTOR. Or with Google. Or not offer the archive electronically at all until some time in the future when we have the wherewithal to do it ourselves and in a controlled fashion. (Readers/scholars can always have access to particular items by contacting us directly, of course.)
But here’s the final kicker: Google will ultimately swallow us anyway. Of that I have no doubt. KR resides in libraries among all those other print artifacts that are being scanned as I type. Maybe it will take ten years. Maybe less. But Googled we will be.
I’m leaning toward making the plunge now. Nothing’s decided, but I am leaning. Here’s why. Our principal mission at The Kenyon Review is, as I understand it, to publish the best stories, poems, and essays from around the world and then to have as many people read them as possible. The more, the better. We are a nonprofit corporation, after all. We are only interested in making money in order to support our efforts. Those include, it must be said, scholarships for talented young people to attend our writing workshops, and our other efforts “to keep the flame of literature alive.” But if I can balance the books at the end of each fiscal year, shouldn’t that be sufficient?
We now reach more readers than ever before because of the Internet, and I’m hoping those numbers will continue to grow. If readers find selections from KR through Google, what’s the harm? Is there a harm? I’m not sure.