“Identity is ‘the fact of being who or what a person or thing is’ and is from the Latin root, ‘idem’ meaning ‘same’ and late Latin, ‘identitas’ and French, meaning, identical.”
The publishing industry is an amalgamation of lexicon, identity politics, and reputation. A publisher’s press identity is often, therefore, conveyed through branding and through the use of imprints.
Often when we think of identity with think of faces. For presses and publishing companies, the face of the brand is their compendium of book covers and literal imprints, aka, their logos or signatures. In addition to this a publisher’s brand identity, as of our contemporary is largely determined by their book imprints. And to that note, most publishing houses seek to create an identity (genre or otherwise) with imprints. The development of these imprints though separate is an extension of the main brand’s identity.
An imprint is a press or publisher owned by another company. Imprints usually specialize in niche or genre-specific interests. An imprint can also be the literal imprint of the publisher or publishing company’s name in a published work. Small presses usually don’t have imprints. It is just another thing bigger publishers tend to have a monopoly on.
An imprint is usually created (1) to keep the identity of the small company when a merger or consolidation happens or (2) to capitalize on a niche audience or content demand that differs from the publishing companies’ main brand identity. It’s important to note, that when self-publishers create imprints, it is usually to develop a legitimate reputation and peer review within the industry, unlike the reasons an established company probably would.
Even though distinct and separate from the whole – imprints usually depend on the reputation and resources of their parent company. In theory and in practice, they are “branches” of the main brand’s press identity. Conversely, imprints tend to target a specific niche audience. Not only that but imprints are more about interest than profit: which is why the imprint of a brand usually operates solely on what they choose to publish there so as not to interfere with the larger frame of their identity as a whole.
Several publishing companies own imprints and do so, to appease tor market to several demographics. They either do it because their minor interests don’t interosculate well with the main interests of the brand, they don’t want to take the risk of publishing something that may not sell well or, they have just consolidated with a smaller press and still want to make materials under that smaller press’ name, keeping the two brand’s identities and audiences, separate.
Take for example Penguin Random House. As a publishing company, they have over two hundred imprints under their belts, some of which has no relation to one another. They have Knopf Doubleday, Penguin Young Readers, technically Random House is an imprint too, and Random House Children’s books. Each one of their main imprints also has a milieu of sub-imprints. I do wonder if they preface quantity over quality. While these imprints probably do wonders in exercising and expanding their reach, their audience, and their markets, it’s kind of hard to figure out what exactly is their company’s message when they are basically making books for all kinds of groups, demographics, and markets. See all of the imprints here
Another company that houses many recognizable imprints is Harper Collins. From looking through their set of imprints, I found that they have many yet not too many niches for their imprints, which include but are not limited to topics such as fashion, film, romance, design, conservatism (?), etc. Some of Harper Collins’ imprints are Avon Books, Broadside Books, Eccho, Harper Books, Harper Design, Harper Business, Harper Voyager, Harper Perennial, Harper Wave, HarperAudio, HarperCollins Espanol, etc. Safe to say, they’re not exactly creative with their imprint names. Nonetheless, a rather noticeable point I found during this closer look into Harper Collins’ imprints is the fact that they have an imprint, called Broadside Books, that just so happens to be a conservative book publishing brand. I felt as though this further illustrates how imprints can differ so much from the main brand’s presse identity. I don’t think most people associate HarperCollins with conservatism (or do they?) But their imprints no matter how differing are still a reflection of the brand’s identity. It also begs the question if imprint identity has the ability to ‘taint’ the main pressed identity if it differs or conflicts too much. I’m also curious how much HarperCollins as a company backs the mission statements of their imprints or if it is just another blatant attempt at making the sale. Looking at Simon & Schuster‘s and Penguin Random House‘s imprints, they all tread the same line. More and more big publishing companies are making or had have conservative imprints for a time too. Are their identities as a brand shifting or are they just trying to cash in? The world may never know. Curious and curiouser. Read more about Broadside Books here
All in all, as far as brand identity is considered, I do believe, when you look for a job within a publishing house, it’s probably best to look for one that matches your personal values or interests. For one, it makes the work easier and the reading experience easier to facilitate. Imprints and mission statements are good places to start. Additionally, when purchasing a book from an imprint or publishing company it’s always going to be nice comfort to know their brand values align with your personal reading interests. Whether it is an imprint dedicated to reaching minority groups or minority interests, imprints help overall to build communities as they oftentimes reach voices and listeners that have largely silenced, disenfranchised, or obfuscated. In today’s industry, you’ll be able to find imprints for pretty much anything. And that, I believe is the true power of the imprint!