Support is a Lot More than Bras and Jock Straps [introduction to Xerography Debt #36]

I’d been pondering the intro for this issue for a few weeks and was getting a bit nervous when my usual, “something will come to me” approach wasn’t working. The deadline for this issue was Sept. 15, 2014. So there I was, at the Bomba Estereo show in Philadelphia at 11:30pm on Sept. 15, not a word of this  introduction written, and not really thinking about anything when I had what Japanese Buddhists refer to as satori1, but on a much smaller scale. I had a sudden, unexpected, fully formed idea surrounding one word: Support.

The concert ended about 60 seconds later and as we emerged into the night air I told Patrick he had the first shift driving home because I had to write the intro to XD. Thankfully, as a fellow writer and editor he didn’t see this as aberrant behavior on my part. My love of spiders is another story.

Within the pages of this zine we’ve discussed time and again the ideas of community and supporting zines. This zine’s very essence speaks to that. If we had a mission statement the word support would be used, probably more than once. But what does support really mean?

Oftentimes support is seen as strictly financial – buying zines or funding a Kickstarter campaign, but that isn’t always an option for everyone, nor the only option. In my eyes support is showing up at a reading or signing to support not only friends but any author or publisher you respect. It means writing a letter to say how much you enjoyed a new issue (or book). It means writing a review or telling other people about zines you admire.

I once went to a show where only a small handful (literally) of people showed up. The band played as if they had a full house. They earned twice my respect that night. Zines can be like that too. Often only a limited number of copies are published and if I am among that small audience I should be applauding loud enough for the writer to hear. We don’t do this in a vacuum, but sometimes it can feel like it.

In the last several months three writers I know have been dealing with some heartbreaking problems. I’ve attempted to offer support in the ways I can and see that other members of their respective communities are doing the same. Sometimes support comes in the form of just listening and other times it is wine and potato chips.

Support, like much of life, is about showing up. So show up and support in whatever way you can. It matters.

Davida

PS - Also, you should give Bomba Estereo a listen.

1 “sudden enlightenment and a state of consciousness attained by intuitive illumination
representing the spiritual goal of Zen Buddhism” — Merriam-Webster

Follow-Up to “What’s He Building in There” (the introduction to XD #35)

Over the last several weeks I’ve followed the continuing war between Hachette and Amazon, watching more and more of the publishing industry weigh in as the pundits make this national news. In the process, I realized I had a bit more to say about one of Amazon’s biggest falsehoods. I also want to talk a bit more about self-publishing/independent publishing/micro publishing/[insert your own nomenclature] and Amazon.

I am and have been an independent publisher since 1995. I’m involved in zine and book publishing. I’m wholly supportive of other publishers and authors. As a consumer, I do not support Amazon. I feel I need to make these points clear.

As a book distributor (my day job for the last 10+ years), I’ve learned that the idea of availability often trumps logic. I remember when publishers and authors felt like their books were only successful if they were on a store shelf – even if that store never sold a copy because the audience was wrong, and the copies would just come back as damaged returns. Now, authors fixate on Amazon showing their book as readily available, whether or not Amazon actually has copies in stock.

The idea of “in stock” and “ships in 24 hours” is a huge falsehood. The appearance of availability is a marketing tool, and it is one of Amazon’s best weapons. What people don’t realize is that most online vendors hold very few books in stock. What they do have is a lot of data and sophisticated supply chains. In its war with Hachette, Amazon has destroyed the myth of availability. Amazon took away one-click ordering, super-fast delivery, and pre-orders.

However, these books are just as available now as they were before – they just aren’t showing as available on Amazon. When you order from Amazon, very often that order is actually being fulfilled by a wholesaler. If you walk into your local bookstore and they don’t have what you want in stock, chances are they will order it for you, just like Amazon would have – just like Amazon does.

***

As a zine publisher, my print runs range from 100-500 copies. That is more than a lot of books published by major academic presses. Books published by academic presses are fully available to wholesalers, bookstores, and online retailers. The data is out there to make the books widely available within a variety of sales channels. The majority of zines, on the other hand, are not. But they often sell about the same numbers. Zine publishers tend to know their audience and have direct connection with readers. That is at the crux of so much of the strife – readers vs. consumers. How are you viewed by the literary businesses you support – as a reader or a consumer? Think about that for a minute.

***

I’m not looking to make a living off of any of my personal publishing endeavors. And that is where it gets tough for small publishers who are indeed trying to live off their writing. Amazon has built a system where that is possible. I don’t want to see that progress disappear. However, I remain steadfast that Amazon is detrimental to publishing and far too powerful. I hope that additional options are developed and utilized that help weaken Amazon’s death-grip on the publishing industry. I think that publishers of all sizes would benefit from that. I believe that can happen if people think about the options and look at the myths they are being sold. I also hope that publishers and authors look at the division Amazon has caused and repair those bridges.

Hopefully, once people stop thinking of Amazon as a primary source for books, publishers and readers will find each other again – ideally in local bookstores. Publishers, once you know who your readers are, the less likely you will need a monolithic company standing between you and them. Readers, local bookstores need you far more than Amazon needs you. Let’s fix this mess.

What’s He Building in There? [introduction to Xerography Debt #35]

By Davida Gypsy Breier

Where Are We? How Did We Get Here?

The following is my opinion, based on known facts and personal experience. It is born out of frustration and sorrow. I need to get this off my chest.

I’ve been involved in zines since 1994, with professional bookselling and publishing experience happening concurrently. My book publishing experience has been diverse, but my focus has primarily been distribution, marketing, and sales. I currently work for a large university press.

I watched as chain bookstores took over and killed off half of the independents. I saw Amazon emerge and begin eroding the chains’ power, seemingly as savior for publishers. I was there when Kindle began and I helped feed that gaping maw content. I was a bystander as once-maligned “vanity publishing” was re-branded and sold to the same people as vibrant “self-publishing.” I was witness to disruptive change from the inside.

Now, I sit here surveying the current landscape of publishing and can see the damage that has been done to books, to publishing, and even culture, and accept that I was (and perhaps still am) complicit in the destruction.

Before I continue, I feel I should declare my support of authors and publishers who would not have books or a readership if not for Amazon. I do not in any way begrudge them. Amazon did eliminate publishing’s gatekeepers and promoted an agenda of literary democracy. On the surface it sounded great. In hindsight, there is a dark side. The purpose of this essay is to provoke thought and discussion. To at least consider the future we are all building.

It Could Have Been Lamps

Amazon helped to destroy the traditional gatekeepers to publishing (something zines have done for decades). Amazon offers multiple publishing tools and visibility for publishers and authors. They are one of the reasons self-publishing is now considered mainstream. Authors are now discovered by algorithms and sales, not just editors and agents. My concerns lie with Amazon’s motivations. Zines seek readers, Amazon seeks customers (and their precious, monetized data). I’m not saying that the old gatekeepers were right – many excellent books and authors were ignored and deterred from publishing – but I am concerned that our literary culture is being commoditized into sloppily written, downloadable “content” that is produced with sales goals. Of course the same accusations could be made of paper zines, except for the sales goals bit. I’ve never met one person who expected to make a living off of his or her zines; zine publishers tend to write for the sake of writing and to connect with readers. Amazon’s goals have always been market domination and profit. Always.

Why did Amazon focus on books instead of lamps or hammers if that was the goal? Because books are relatively simple to mail and not breakable. Because the goal was the customer, not the product. Publishing has been completely disrupted because books were easy to ship.

Amazon arrived when publishing was in trouble and it did seem like a savior to many. I remember when they were a quiet account who bought non-returnable, paid on time, and made small publishers’ books visible on their virtual store shelves. Brick-and-mortar stores have limited shelf space, but Amazon was able to showcase all books – new and old – and touted itself as “the everything store.” Small publishers finally had a chance to compete against the major publishers. Older books became discoverable. Chains, on the other hand, were demanding higher and higher discounts, increased co-op (publishers have to buy those prime spots near the front of the store), mainly carried new books, and often returned 30% or more of what they bought (usually damaged). Compared to the chains, Amazon did seem like an ally. The first hit was free.

Now, it is clear Amazon was mining data, refining business models, and gathering strength. They intended to go after both competitors and suppliers, with a propaganda-like mantra of servicing the almighty customer. Publishers were openly referred to as gazelles (to Amazon’s unnamed predator). They have been known to publicly remove buy buttons to force publishers to capitulate. What we never know is the amount of influence going on to manipulate books to the top of searches…or to the bottom. They have fought and worked around tax laws – remember, local stores contribute to the community. Amazon also touts the jobs they offer. The reality is that they are anti-union, and warehouse jobs are under constant criticism for the hours, stress, and conditions. Office jobs at Amazon sound even worse, and they grind though young workers who either join the cult or move on in a matter of months. I know many people who righteously boycott Wal-Mart, but happily shop at Amazon. Explain the difference.

For the publishers I currently represent Amazon accounts for 26% of net sales (FY2013). Amazon has grown so large that publishers are now dependent, and Amazon has the power to dictate terms and break backs. And books only account for 7% of Amazon’s annual revenues. They figured out how to sell lamps and hammers, too.

Literature in Danger

So where does Amazon’s power end? I don’t know, and that’s what scares me. The company controls the majority of digital books sales and is now moving into additional media – movies, TV, and music. Amazon’s megalomaniacal weirdo founder, Jeff Bezos, recently bought The Washington Post. Federal lawsuits involving Amazon’s monopoly have come down in favor of the giant, under the guise of consumer protection. Actually, monopoly isn’t the correct word, monopsony is. It means that Amazon can dictate terms to its suppliers, and in doing so, Amazon is now in a position to dictate popular culture. Publishers have lost control of their content and many authors are now going it alone intentionally. Books aren’t being published that should be published. This passage from George Packer’s article on Amazon for The New Yorker rings true:

Several editors, agents, and authors told me that the money for serious fiction and nonfiction has eroded dramatically in recent years; advances on mid-list titles—books that are expected to sell modestly but whose quality gives them a strong chance of enduring—have declined by a quarter. These are the kinds of book that particularly benefit from the attention of editors and marketers, and that attract gifted people to publishing, despite the pitiful salaries. Without sufficient advances, many writers will not be able to undertake long, difficult, risky projects. Those who do so anyway will have to expend a lot of effort mastering the art of blowing their own horn. “Writing is being outsourced, because the only people who can afford to write books make money elsewhere—academics, rich people, celebrities,” Colin Robinson, a veteran publisher, said. “The real talent, the people who are writers because they happen to be really good at writing—they aren’t going to be able to afford to do it.”

Ironically, Amazon is taking self-publishing backward to a culture of vanity publishing!

Making Choices

Consumers now assume they have to buy from Amazon. Authors watch their sales and rankings obsessively. People think if the book isn’t available on Amazon it isn’t available. There are other choices, but the drug of one-click shopping and free shipping has intoxicated shoppers. Publishers have long since come down from their high of thinking that Amazon is an ally.

For me personally, I stopped buying books from Amazon a couple years ago and completely stopped all purchases a year ago. I haven’t touched my GoodReads account since Amazon bought it. I avoid funding projects using Amazon’s eCommerce system. I have found other options. I choose not to support the bully. These are small, probably pointless, economic protests on my part. What is more important is that I still publish and promote zines. This zine you are holding does not commodify ideas and words. Instead, it promotes community and tries to keep publishing’s furnace of creativity and passion alight.

I hope that publishers and authors who feel they need Amazon understand that Amazon does not need them. Once Amazon has the content and the customer data, authors and publishers are disposable. Much like sex-work is about the John, Amazon loves you, just leave the cash on the dresser and get out.

I acknowledge that I am jousting at windmills that I helped build. Ultimately, I mourn for publishing and where it feels like it is headed. It isn’t the industry I joined 20 years ago. It makes me doubly glad that I never left zines and that we have warded off many of the detrimental changes.

Zinester Immunity

One thing I feel is important to mention – many small publishers I have met are really authors who couldn’t find a publisher to publish his or her book. Amazon gave them the ability to self-publish and sell their books. They often cease being publishers as soon as they have a book contract – they are authors at heart, not publishers. Zinesters, on the other hand, seem to believe in the process – all of it. They are authors, artists, publishers, and marketers, not just because of the intrinsic DIY spirit, but because it is part of being a zine-maker. I think it is this difference that sets zinesters apart and often makes us more immune to the push and pull of consumerism. It is a process, not a product.

In the aforementioned New Yorker article, Andrew Wylie, an agent, said, “What gave publishers the idea that this was some big goddamn business? It’s not—it’s a tiny little business, selling to a bunch of odd people who read.” I think that idea summarizes what I always loved about publishing and continue to love about zines.

As zine-makers and zine-readers, Amazon will never be able to compete with a LOC (letter of comment) as payment or understand that giving a zine away for another zine makes perfect economic sense. That $3.00 in the pocket of a zinester is lunch and a couple of stamps. That as zinesters, publishing is still up to us and that we continue to invest in our own future and community. As consumers, does supporting Amazon, especially at the exclusion of other options and merchants, align with our ethics? What do you think?

Recommended reading:

·               Merchants of Culture: The Publishing Business in the Twenty-First Century, By John Thompson, 2012 (available in paperback and hardback)

·               “Cheap Words, Amazon is good for customers. But is it good for books?” By George Packer, February 17, 2014, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2014/02/17/140217fa_fact_packer?currentPage=all

·               The Everything Store: Jeff Bezos and the Age of Amazon, By Brad Stone, 2013 (available in paperback and hardback)

·               “‘Cheap Words’: The New Yorker on Amazon and Books” February 11, 2014, http://www.shelf-awareness.com/ar/theshelf/2014-02-11/_cheap_words_:_the_new_yorker_on_amazon_and_books.html

·               “The Book Industry Is So Scared of Amazon, No One Will Talk on the Record Except these people” By Laura Bennett, February 20, 2014, http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116677/book-industry-so-scared-amazon-no-one-talks-record

·               “Worse than Wal-Mart: Amazon’s sick brutality and secret history of ruthlessly intimidating workers” By Simon Head, February 23, 2014, http://www.salon.com/2014/02/23/worse_than_wal_mart_amazons_sick_brutality_and_secret_history_of_ruthlessly_intimidating_workers/

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised, It Is Being Published

This column appears in the forthcoming issue of Xerography Debt (#29). Order now!

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised,
It Is Being Published

by Davida Gypsy Breier

What is a zine? No, seriously. I’m not trying to sound like an MTV reporter in 1996 trying to hype a “youth fad,” I’m genuinely questioning how the combined loss of generational history and the massive rise in independent publishing over the last five years has blurred lines and broken down walls. When I got into zines it was a culture of barter, freedom of expression, and rebellion against established media. We published zines because we wanted to communicate and because what we had to say and how we wanted to say it was of no interest to commercial publishers. That was fine, they had their world and we had ours. Zines that got big enough to carry ISSNs or barcodes of any kind were scorned. And anything with an ISBN might as well have carried the mark of the beast. We were in a culture war of sorts, defying the commodification of art and ideas. Many of the people I knew and traded with at that time were in their teens and twenties. We were figuring ourselves out and zines were how we did it.

In many cases zines actually lead (or even helped) us into careers as librarians or in publishing. I fall into the latter camp. I started out working for a non-profit that supported itself through publishing. From there I went to work for a distributor that specialized in small presses. In some cases, the small book publishers I worked with were like zine publishers – only they were older and had the capital to fund their projects. They had something to say, wanted to connect with readers, and commercial publishers weren’t interested. It has often been said that zines are defined by a lack of financial gain. Well, if that is the case, most book publishers I know are actually zine publishers. 

I watched the struggles these small publishers were experiencing and they mirrored some of what we faced in zineland. Up until 1998 we had Factsheet 5 to help readers and publishers find each other. Small book publishers had no such vehicle. Other zine review zines sprang up, but none of us ever had the distribution into the retail market that F5 had. Speaking of distribution, it is very hard for small presses to get distributed and when they do it can be expensive.  Again, this is a similar barrier in zines. How many of us remember zines that just disappeared – how many of you realize that some disappeared because their distributor (anyone remember Desert Moon? Fine Print?) went under owing them money, which meant that print and postage bills went unpaid and the publication was compromised or ultimately folded. How many of us had to scale back after Tower went under?

I was working with these small presses as POD (print-on-demand) technologies started really developing. At that time stores didn’t want to touch anything they thought was POD because they felt the supply was limited and the quality was poor – sound familiar zine people?

Let’s flash forward a few years. In 1995, 113,589 ISBN’s were registered with Bowker; in 2010 there were 316,480. What happened? Fucking independent publishers happened! We all talk about the death of print (both zines and books), but look at those numbers. More books are being published than ever before. We act like blogs are killing zines. What if books are killing zines? What if the people, faced with all the barriers we faced in 1995, wanted to publish and couldn’t. Chances are some of them would be making zines. Instead, in 2011 the barriers between the worlds of book publishing and zine publishing are disintegrating. If I wanted to create a book today there are companies that will help me do everything from registering an ISBN (I don’t have to buy an expensive block of 10 or 100 now), do the layout in an automated template, and set my file up with a POD printer. Imagine something like that existing in 1995! Is what you have created a zine? A chapbook? A book? What the hell is it? And does that matter?

Within the book publishing world there is a lot of identity crisis going on right now. Digitization and the easy access to the industry have broken down so many walls that used to exist. I mean, even the term book is being challenged by the larger notion of content. Here’s a question to exemplify how things are changing: What is your favorite recording artist or song? Did you hear the music or picture a band or person? Or did you picture a CD, LP, or MP3 file? If you pictured the recording artist you are interested in the content. If you pictured the CD you are interested in the format or media. The term book or zine defines how you will read, not what you will read. It is the media, not the content. What matters more to you?

These days I wear several hats in the land of publishing (and a few in zineland) and some of my focus is digital content. I have read on an e-reader and on a laptop, and I can see the potential value of this media, but as you can see by this zine in your hands I have not given up traditionally printed zines or books. One thing I see ebooks doing is something we all were doing in 1995 – independently produced ebooks are challenging the establishment.  They are providing readers with alternatives. They are often cheaply produced or free and filled with typos and poorly rendered design. But are they zines? No, of course not. But they sound a hell of a lot like a zine, don’t they?

So this brings me back to my original question? What is a zine? Is a definition created to try and explain the “fad” to the uninitiated in 1995 still accurate? I don’t think so. I think that zines, like publishing, have undergone a few changes and that we should keep our community open instead of trying to hold onto established labels because we are fearful of change. Does that mean I think a blog is a zine? No, I don’t. But maybe you do. Does that mean I think a paper zine created by cutting and pasting directly from a blog is a zine? Well, yes, technically, but I also think it is hella lazy.

If we are going to have the label talk, let’s step back in time a moment and discuss how we got here. Current nomenclature stems from the term “fanzine.” When I was a wee geek I actually subscribed to a few SF fanzines, but didn’t really think about their relationship to zines until I was firmly entrenched in zine culture. “Fan magazines” are another thing entirely. An example would be Sports Illustrated – this is created as a for-profit venture and caters to the interest of fans. So back to fanzines – these were everything from DIY to semi-professional publications that originated in science fiction circles. In many cases they were modeled after existing professional publications. These were generally genre specific to a largely homogenized audience. Existing publications provided a blueprint. Not a lot of boundaries being pushed here.

People like to write about their obsessions, so early SF fanzine culture lent itself to other fan-based genres, such as horror, music, and sports (note that these were traditionally “male fan” genres – we’ll get back to that in a minute). Music will become an important one as independent music gains a foothold, but commercial music magazines and radio stations refuse to cover and play these underground bands. Sub-cultures form around these marginalized arts.

For early fanzines, there was an attempt at aesthetic – again emulating professional magazines. Remember, we are talking about the ’30s-’50s here, so these were being printed on mimeographs and ditto machines. These took time to set up and were labor intensive. So what happens to bring modern zines to the fore? Two things: 1) technology – photocopies become cheap and accessible and 2) the cultural revolution of the ’60s leaves people realizing that mainstream media is not addressing their interests or culture. That thread of individuality flourishes in the ‘70s and people start documenting their own lives and cultures. This is passed onto the next generation and participation in zine culture peaks in the mid-‘90s. So to get back to the idea of fanzines covering “male dominated” genres – the rise of the women’s movement allowed for societal changes to begin in the ‘70s and one interpretation of those changes led to the rise in Riot Grrrl zines in the ‘90s. Unlike with fanzines, zines as we know them today were very inclusive of people and sub-cultures that had little power in mainstream society. If you were LGBTQ, dealing with mental health issues, or just the class weirdo, zines were a relatively safe place to call home.

Zines were filled with raw emotions and gritty personalities. Again, a huge difference from fanzines. People were learning to talk and write and it felt anonymous because often the only interaction writers had occurred months after they finished a zine and dropped it in the mail. People talked about obsessions, traveling, bands they liked, abuse, politics, and their personal experiences. Aesthetics were often not a high priority and legibility seldom taken into consideration (margins, what are margins?). Cut & paste was done because it was all we had in the old days. And it can be done in a way that is legible. Sloppy is just sloppy.

When I got into zines there were a few basic criteria used to define what a zine was (and none of them really worked). 1) it was created without intent of monetary gain and was bartered for other zines; 2) fewer than 500 (or 5000 – depends on who you ask) copies were printed; 3) zines allowed voices who had no other outlet to be heard; 4) no ISSN or ISBN (ironically, this means that zinedom’s sacred cow, Factsheet 5, was, in fact, not a zine). So did zines that started out small and grew get grandfathered in? For some people, yes. For others, ridiculous indy creed was more important. And truthfully, a lot of us were just in it for mail and could care less about debating Bust’s standing as a zine.

The boom period in the ‘90s saw a lot of zines born and die. Much like the early ‘00s saw a ton of blogs born and die. Many of the same reasons that drove people to create zines drove them to create blogs, only blogs were faster, easier, cheaper, and allowed for immediate gratification. Now, headed into the 10’s, some of us see where a blog can in fact be useful and compliment a paper zine without cannibalizing it. Technology has, in many respects, helped push forward the agenda of book and zine publishers and to not use tools that are within our reach to help us complete our ultimate missions seems self-defeating. How many people reading this learned about the Revenge of Print project online?

So how do the early definitions of “zine” and “fanzine” hold up in 2011? Well, email has pretty much killed my neurotic compulsion to stop by the PO Box regularly. Instead, I neurotically check my email. The Internet now allows for a din of individual voices to be heard and finding likeminded souls is not the same weird crap shoot of putting your zine in an envelope and sending it off to a PO Box wondering if you are about to meet someone who will become a part of your life. (A brief tangent – remember how it used to be weird when people said they met online? Now try explaining to people that you met your best friend through the mail and you have never actually met in person. )

I think the original ideas behind the labels “fanzine” and “zine” are dated. I think fanzines could learn from zines by opening up to more diverse, personal, and critical content. Similarly, I think that zines could learn from fanzines and start making publications that are easier to read and dare I say it – actually interesting to look at. Do we hold to the old definitions and try and work within those boxes? Do we create new terms to explain what is going on now? I don’t have any answers. Here is a good example why – someone uses a library computer to create a publication. She cannot afford a computer, internet access, or copies, so she creates a PDF and emails that to people or posts it to a site like Scribd. She is giving it away and soliciting people to send her their zines (via email or mail). Her motivation and content are very much in line with old-school zine ethos, but her method of delivery is new-school. Has she created a zine?

Personally, I would love to read more international zines, but postage is often a barrier. Is a PDF of a zine created and printed in New Zealand, but emailed to the rest of the world any less of a zine? These are the questions I am asking myself as a zine writer, zine editor, zine reviewer, book publisher, and book distributor as I continue to move forward as a creator and merchant of words and content.

As I see it, what matters is intent. The how and the why are more important to me than the what. I view myself as an independent publisher, who enjoys zines as a culture and medium. I edit and manage Xerography Debt for the community and co-edit Rigor Mortis to fulfill my creative needs. My monetary goal is sustainability, which pretty much means attempting to break even based on content. I don’t sell ad space, nor do I sell my mailing list (again, F5 is held aloft, but there were a lot of rumors about Seth Friedman bartering and selling the F5 mailing list. Our culture wasn’t what held value, but what we could be sold.). I define XD and RM as zines to those who understand the term and to those who don’t they are “small press publications.” Many reviews have defined RM as a fanzine (which makes my co-editor apoplectic). None of these labels change the content. 

So these are my truths. Your truths may vary or settle during shipping. And the truths of today may not be the truths of yesterday or tomorrow. If you must have a label and can’t find one that suits you, make one up. The important thing is that we each examine the what, how, and why and make sure they are in line with our intent.

In the words of The Dude, “Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man,” so I say to you, dear readers, what is your truth? What is your opinion on the state of zines? Why do you or did you publish? Do you publish looking forward or backward? Is it about revolution or nostalgia? Or both? Please send me your thoughts – roughly 250-500 words – with a deadline of October 15, 2011. This will become a new series called, “The Voices of Zinedom.” In this instance, I embrace modern technology as a time-saver and would prefer to receive responses by email (Davida@leekinginc.com). 

Just keep reading – no matter what, no matter how.

Maynard goes Zombie with Rigor Mortis

Rigor Mortis Vol 1, Issue 1
$3 cash/check or 1 M.R.E.
Davida Gypsy Breier
P.O. Box 11064
Baltimore, MD 21212
zombie@leekinginc.com

Mmmmm, brains.... This zine fills me with nostalgia for the Pre-Internet days, before cable, when Saturday afternoons were filled with awful Sci-Fi and horror – including zombie – flicks on Channel 20.

And we need zombies like never before to help us cope with modern living: crashing markets, rising unemployment, interest rates at freakin' ZERO percent. These are scary times.

And zombies are great foes. They are purely dead, only want to kill us, and cannot be reasoned with, only stopped with a bullet to the brain. There is no room for compassion or ethical worries with killing them. They are as dead as dead can be; not like a little boy with a bomb strapped to his malnourished body.

Although they tend to win through overwhelming numbers....

But wait, there's more! Not only do you get to ponder zombies with this zine, you'll get high-quality editorializing and excellent reviews of classic and esoteric zombie flicks to add to your queue of viewing pleasure.

The love the writers have for the topic drips off the page, like rotting flesh and congealed blood, in great gobs of well wrought-and-thought writing, which is in darn short supply on that thar “Internet.”

A joy to read.