Writing in a changing universe

The beautiful pictures taken by the Hubble Space Telescope of the giant galaxy Centaurus A which appeared on the front page of the Guardian a few days ago are a reminder that – as William Herschel discovered 230 years ago – our universe is not static, but changing all the time. Supernovae explode, and new stars are formed out of the material left behind. In the introduction to Secrets of the Universe, Paul Murdin writes ‘where the astronomers of antiquity spoke of fixed stars, we speak of whirling galaxies and the death and birth of stars…’

Or, as Caroline Herschel reflects, in my just-published novel, Variable Stars:

…if there are new-born stars, then there must also be stars of middle years. Ageing stars. Dying stars. Stars reborn out of that dead matter…

Of course the stars are not the only things that vary; we ourselves are subject to change. Although it has to be said that – always excepting those lonely pioneers in science, art, philosophy and political ideology who have taken it upon themselves to show the rest of humanity the way forward – we don’t, as a species, embrace it. Change is something to be regarded with suspicion – even with dread. Because while it can be a positive thing, to do with growth and development, it also leads inevitably to decay and death.

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(Turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes…

So it’s hardly surprising that change – and the innovations in science and technology that bring it about – tends to be resisted by all but the most forward-thinking. The invention of the printing press in the fifteenth century was doubtless regarded with horror by those rulers of the Church and State who had hitherto controlled the flow of ideas through the written word. Gutenberg’s invention set in motion a chain of events that led directly to the Enlightenment and the explosion of scientific discovery that followed. It’s hard to think of another single invention – until the computer, in our own time – which has changed the world so comprehensively. Without it, none of the other things that have shaped our lives – from the steam engine to the mobile phone – would have come about. Change, it would seem, is a by-product of mass-communication.

Which brings me to that most recent change in the history of writing: the development of online publishing. Now, for the first time in decades, the dissemination of ideas is no longer in the exclusive control of a few multi-national corporations masquerading as publishing houses. Books can be produced quickly, cheaply, and stylishly by those most concerned with maintaining the quality of written language – the writers. More than this, a whole new community of readers has come into being, thanks to the growing popularity of eBook devices, and the accessibility of electronic texts. The conventional publishing world, dominated as it is by an all-too familiar handful of ‘celebrity’ authors, and driven by the demands of a number of failing bookshop chains, seems increasingly moribund.

As with all world-changing movements, the new publishing has met with a good deal of resistance. Some of the voices raised express the not-unreasonable view that all this is happening too fast. Do we really want to jettison centuries of book-related culture, for the sake of a lot of fancy gizmos? Aren’t old-fashioned libraries a better source of information than the Internet? And what of the next generation? Aren’t we raising a society of junk-addicted children, unable to sustain interest in anything – let alone reading?

As someone brought up in a world before computers became ubiquitous, I can sympathise with this point of view. Of course books and libraries ought to continue – just as live performances of music – and indeed, pre-digital forms of music recording – ought to survive, if only for variety’s sake. But it may be that what we’re experiencing at present is one of those shifts that occur in human consciousness in response to new forms of technology. It happened, as I’ve said, when the printing-press made it possible to spread information rapidly and widely. It happened with the invention of the telescope: suddenly, the universe doubled in size, and people realised that the Earth was no longer its centre. And it’s happening now – regardless of those who deplore, or try to ignore it.

A good few of these nay-sayers have a vested interest in keeping the old system going: they’re the ‘gate-keepers’, as it were, of the old publishing industry. Even though it is these people – agents, editors and marketing types – whose decisions over the past few years have brought about the current lamentable state of publishing, with its ‘misery memoirs’ and its interchangeable ‘three for two’ bestsellers, they are the first to scream about the supposed fall in ‘standards’ that online publishing will bring. An industry which, decades ago, abandoned its once-deserved reputation as the guardian of cultural and intellectual values, in order to pursue the get-rich-quick philosophy of the post-Thatcher years, now finds itself fighting a desperate rear-guard action against innovation.

Certainly, there is at the moment no clear system of quality control – other than that provided by readers themselves, through blogs and Amazon reviews. The print newspapers – also rapidly being rendered obsolete by the rise of online media – still exercise a disproportionate influence on public opinion through their reviews pages. But that, too, will change, as online publishing becomes the dominant mode, and online journalism gets its act together. Already, the mainstream publishers are scrambling to get a piece of the eBook action. Because where there’s a demand – whether for quality fiction or breaking news stories – there’s money to be made. It won’t stay this free and unstructured for long – but while it lasts, being a part of the brave new world of digital publishing is as exciting as it must have been for those eighteenth century astronomers, viewing their newly expanded universe for the first time.