(Photo from the Edinburgh International Book Festival)

Recently I profiled a venture called Creative Capital which supports creative artists by using a hybrid profit/nonprofit structure. I also happened to come across this piece over at The Literary Saloon that focuses on a similar venture, but this time specifically geared toward the literary arts called the Literary Ventures Fund. It's profiled here at the Washington Post.

The Literary Ventures Fund is a tiny nonprofit, founded last year with offices in Boston and New York, that "seeks to challenge the status quo of literary publishing," as its Web site boldly proclaims. LVF hopes to help exceptional works of fiction, literary nonfiction and poetry find the readership they deserve -- by using an economic model more frequently associated with Silicon Valley.

And further down, how it works:

LVF invests in books it believes to have both literary merit and commercial potential that might go unrealized without an added push. So far, its investments (there have been fewer than 10 to date) have been made in partnership with the books' publishers, though it plans to work directly with authors as well. The extra money, along with LVF's connections and expertise, can be employed in many ways, with the most obvious being increased marketing to help a book cut through the noise of a crowded marketplace.

If its investment pays off, LVF will take a cut of the book's profits. If it doesn't -- like a venture capitalist funding a high-tech start-up -- it will swallow the loss.

While the Literary Saloon raises some concerns, I think they miss the point of the value these types of social ventures using hybrid profit/nonprofit structures can bring to the market. What's wrong with sharing the reward as well as the risk? Obviously they could simply go the profit route as they do already with their publishing houses, but as we often see this does not always mean quality literature is making its way to the top. They could also simply go the philanthropic route, but this is too often a weak and unsustainable structure. This type of hybrid venture is nearly the same as many social entrepreneurial ventures being hatched today in so many other fields, what's wrong with it being used in the publishing world?

Take a look at the first book on the list, American Genius, from the publisher of my own book, Soft Skull. From personal knowledge, I'm well aware that places like Soft Skull can't offer much in terms of an advance. They are innovative and hard-hitting presses that take risks, but can't always do so depending on their schedule and profits from the last year. It seems the Literary Ventures Fund can help fill that gap, possibly take chances that publishers might not always bite on, mitigate the costs and in turn support the authors. As for the selection criteria, I don't like the fact that it isn't open to individual authors (you can't directly apply), but it is early in the game, and does look like they'll make that effort eventually.

I do share some of the skepticism the Literary Saloon does, but do think these types of attempts are better than the status quo. I'll certainly be interested in seeing how it turns out over the next couple of years. Like Creative Capital, I could see this being a leading example of how publishing can transfer for the better and support a wider array of writers instead of being top heavy as it is now.

More on LVF at Joanne McNeil, Ethos, SuicideGirls, Writer Beware, and Old Hag.

In other similar news ...

*The World Bank has a collection of links to works of poems and personal accounts of poverty available at its webpage.

*Hope in new software "for human beings", designed to bridge the digital divide, at Open Democracy.

*Welcome to the art hotel, at Business Week. How hotels around the world are tapping into the talents of local artists and incorporating it into how their visitors experience their stays.