Subject: Springer-Verlag Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:20:43 -0600 (MDT) From: David Pengelley To: Don Davis CC: David Pengelley Don, A post to your topology list in response to Joan Birman's. Thanks, David _____________________________________________________________________________ Friends, Joan Birman wrote recently in great pessimism about the new sale/merger of Springer. With caution and trepidation I urge not adopting her strong conclusions quite yet; let's hold our judgement a bit. Perhaps I am just being hopelessly nostalgic and naive, but some time will tell; let's allow it to do so. > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:16:35 -0400 (EDT) > From: Joan Birman > You might be interested in the fact that, as of September 16, 2003, > the former Springer-Verlag (more recently BertelsmannSpringer) was > merged with Kluwer Academic Publishers. > This is, I think, a sad day for mathematics. Springer-Verlag has > played a major role in the development of our literature. But as > anyone who has bought a Kluwer book recently knows, they are among the > absolutely top priced books in the field. As for their journals, they > are destroying our library. But what's done is done. Yes, this worries me greatly, although note that indeed Springer has already been under the ownership of Bertelsmann for several years, and yet seemed to remain the positive influence it has long been in mathematics (I would mention, though, that the top Springer journals have always been highly priced, too; in the journal world Springer has never been an angel, and in non-mathematical fields, e.g., medicine, their European operations have always had a very over-priced reputation. It is more in the area of mathematics monographs that Springer has played such a positive role for the mathematical community, and which we now feel is threatened). I am in close contact with Springer monograph editorial staff, since I have ongoing book projects, and they are cautiously optimistic that the good they do in mathematics will remain under the new ownership. My impression is that this will begin to become clearer in actual deed in a few months, when new management over the top of Springer management takes over. I have the impression that some of the distinctions we see between Kluwer and Springer are to remain separate. > The good news is that there is no way that these two giants can > succeed in destroying our literature if we don't contribute our books > and articles to them and work for them as Editors! Without our > cooperation, they have bought something that has no real value. > > There are lots of alternatives--the professional societies, the > university presses, the independent publishers (e.g. International > Press and Geometry and Topology Publications, but NOT, for example, > Hindawi Press) and the myriad of privately owned journals such as > Annals of Mathematics and the Pacific Journal of Mathematics. > > There is also the possibility of like-minded individuals in the > community pooling their talents to start a new journal, in the same > way that some of us did with GT and AGT. There is support for that ... I could not agree more, and always have! I myself always take these publishing world issues into the strongest consideration when I make decisions about publishing my own work or reviewing that of others. I am one who has the strongest feelings that we as a professional community should strive increasingly to own and control our own work and its publication. I say this from a political and social point of view, deeply skeptical of the role of capitalism in our intellectual endeavors, and also as one intimately involved in the struggles of our university libraries. All I'm saying, and I can hardly believe I'm saying it, is "Give Springer a chance" before condemning it at this moment; look at deeds and actions, don't just act from the fear. I so hope that I won't feel in a few months time that this plea was simply wishful thinking. Best wishes, David Pengelley