POETS were shocked to receive a curt letter from Oxford University Press yesterday informing them that the publishing house had decided to abandon its entire modern poetry list.
There had been no warning. Even the poetry editor, who has run the list for 20 years, had been kept in the dark. The letter told the 40 poets on the list that the publishing house was facing "tough conditions in some of our many markets" and that it was "increasingly difficult to give such specialisms the attention they deserve. We need to give priority to our core scholarly and educational publishing."
The poet Peter Porter, who has been with OUP for 30 years, said: "It's a bad day for serious literature when the most distinguished academic publishing house in Britain chooses to neglect contemporary literature. They probably think they can get by with endless Coleridge and Wordsworth. It's only contemporary poetry that's affected. They're not sacking Shakespeare." He said the decision has wider implications: "It is an indication that something in Britain is getting more and more frivolous. The only thing that matters is the bottom line."
The poet D J Enright, who has been with the publishing house since 1979, said the poetry list had never cost much to run, particularly as the poetry editor was only employed one day a week: "That can't have cost them much. The poetry list more or less broke even. It seems it didn't make a sufficient contribution to the profits. They say they weren't able to give it promotional support, which it deserves. That seems to be the reason for destroying the list, which is ridiculous."
The letter informed the poets that OUP will not be contracting or reprinting any further books on the list, although it will honour existing commitments. It mentions the possibility of "finding a good home for the list". Andrew Potter, OUP's director of music, trade paperbacks and Bibles, said the decision had been a hard one, but pointed out that 90 per cent of the list sold under 200 copies last year. Some collections sold less than a handful: more than half reached only double figures. "Very few cover their costs without a lot of subsidy," he said. "However successful some are, it just about breaks even. The university expects us to operate on commercial grounds, especially in this day and age."
Mr Enright said: "There was no warning. It was presented as a fait accompli. Even the poetry editor didn't know. The first she knew was when there was a delay in putting through several books for publication next year. It's so pathetic. The money involved is peanuts. It's a good list, built up over many years."
Another OUP poet, Carole Satyamurti, said: "This is the outrageous thing. I have a typescript ready. I had suspected something as the contract hadn't arrived. One doesn't expect OUP publishers to terminate their poetry list. It's extraordinary that a university-owned publisher doesn't realise that poetry is an ornament to their portfolio. It doesn't lose money. Their poetry list has been going since 1918. With Faber, it is one of the two most established lists in the country." She was among many who pointed out that poetry has seen a resurgence of interest in recent years. "If a university-based publisher doesn't realise that some areas of literature are never going to make a profit, it's extremely dispiriting," she said.