Authors Venting to Readers: Good or Bad?

AnneMarble · Aug 2, 2009

A rant appeared in historical romance author Cheryl Holt's newsletter to fans:
http://cherylholt.com/news/newsletter.html

In it, she explains why her book from her new publisher (Grand Central) didn't come out. She says that after she delivered the first book, "...my new editor hated everything about it, and I was forced into an exhaustive and pointless round of rewrites. I spent 8 1/2 months trying to fix the manuscript, and she still did not feel that it was satisfactory for publication. I threw up my hands in frustration and left the company."

I realize that fans want to know why an author falls out of sight for a while. I do like it when authors are honest about their problems. But there's honesty about a problem and there's venting, and this crosses that line. There can be a downside to venting. So do you think a reader newsletter is good place to vent about publisher or editorial issues? What would be a better way for an author to discuss this sort of issue with her readers (especially as there will always be two sides, if not more, to these situations)?

Also, could this be bad for the writer's career down the road? Could it make it harder for her to find a new publisher? Are there other possible problems that could come from this? (It has already hit one of the blogs as well as the Romantic Times forum, so if she thinks better of it and takes down the newsletter, the post will be up at those places.)

Salis · Aug 2, 2009

I think it's acceptable if they have a lot of fans who are expecting a book to come out. In that scenario, the publisher is dropping the ball big-time.

I don't see that as a really strong venting (from what you quoted). Really over the line would be something like, "And the new editor sucked balls and had no idea what they were talking about", she's just honestly telling her fans that the reason no book is coming out is because things didn't work out with her new publisher.

Lisa Cox · Aug 2, 2009

Anne Rice vents to readers. This author here is just explaining her absence. There's a huge difference.

Linda Adams · Aug 2, 2009

I didn't see it as venting, especially since she also notes in her newsletter that she's rethinking her writing and the whole tone stays pretty professional. Could she have taken out a few of the more emotional words and made it more professional? Yes. But it certainly doesn't make me not want to read her books--and several of the recent diatribes from writers that have turned very nasty have done that.

Millicent M'Lady · Aug 2, 2009

To be honest, I find it a little unprofessional sometimes when you hear of authors slating others in the profession. It also makes me wonder (fairly or not) how unreadable a story had to be to be extensively edited and still not good enough for a publisher.

A better way for her to have put this would have been to invoke the old "artistic differences" line and leave it simply as "I wanted to go in a certain direction but the editor/publisher did not. Unfortunately, we could not find a happy medium and were forced to part company". That assigns no blame to either party and makes them both seem like reasonable, mature individuals who just could not work together.

Being an author is still a job and one that a writer should hope to remain employed at somewhere. This is no different than leaving any other job and telling customers or colleagues, very publicly, that your boss is a PITA. I just don't see how that can lead anywhere good- you never know where you will encounter someone again.

That said, I don't think Ms. Holt's "rant" was too bad- I think she was very careful not to cross that line.

Salis · Aug 2, 2009

It also makes me wonder (fairly or not) how unreadable a story had to be to be extensively edited and still not good enough for a publisher.

This one always makes me laugh. Really? Plenty of people cannot stand reading very popular books. Why do people think editors are any different from normal people? Some editors are going to be unhappy with perfectly fine books.

Marian Perera · Aug 2, 2009

Yes, the tone could have been different. "The new editor hated everything about it" vs. "The new editor and I didn't agree on the best direction for the book".

I'm kind of unsure about how much I'd want to know if a favorite author of mine had such a disagreement with their editor, though. On the one hand, I'm interested both as a reader and a fellow writer. On the other, I can't shake the feeling that I'm reading about something which might be better kept confidential. Maybe that's just me, though.

AnneMarble · Aug 2, 2009

Salis said:
I think it's acceptable if they have a lot of fans who are expecting a book to come out. In that scenario, the publisher is dropping the ball big-time.

I wonder if the publisher did drop the ball, though. I'd like to hear their side, too. There's always another side to these things.

For example, years ago best-selling futuristic romance author Dara Joy told readers that they wouldn't be getting new books from her because of a lawsuit with her publisher (Dorchester). (I don't remember the specifics because she has since removed her rant from her site after the lawsuit was settled, years later.) I do remember that it sounded as if she had been done wrong by the publisher. But then, eventually, Dorchester posted their own version in their forums. The short version is that Dara Joy was supposed to deliver books to Dorchester, and they kept extending the deadlines. She did have some clauses she probably shouldn't have agreed to

, but she did agree to them. She was contractually obligated to send them her next futuristic romance. Then she published a book with another publisher, claiming that it was a science fiction novel. But no matter what the spine said, most everyone agreed that it was a futuristic romance novel. Dara Joy hasn't had a contract since this and has self-published several novellas and short stories instead.

Now this incident in no way approaches the Dara Joy incident. Ms. Holt did deliver her manuscript on time, she did not sue her publisher, and she did not break her contract. Still, it gave me that vibe of "Maybe she shouldn't have put those exact details in her newsletter." And it made me wonder about the editor's side of things. (But Grand Central is large than Dorchester, and not family owned, so I doubt we'll see their version posted in a forum as we did for Dorchester.)

Millicent M'Lady said:
To be honest, I find it alittle unprofessional sometimes when you hear of authors slating others in the profession. It also makes me wonder (fairly or not) how unreadable a story had to be to be extensively edited and still not good enough for a publisher.

I had to wonder, too. Maybe I'm biased because I bought some of her most recent historical romances, for the guilty pleasure factor, and couldn't finish them. The scenarios were quite over-the-top. In one of them, the hero holds an audition for his next mistress, And the virginal heroine ends up there by accident. Wha?... Still, I'm sure she sold well with that publisher and is probably wishing she had stayed.

Millicent M'Lady said:
That said, I don't think Ms. Holt's "rant" was too bad- I think she was very careful not to cross that line.

Yeah, it was far from "Riceian."

And it wasn't as bad as the Dara Joy mess.

Millicent M'Lady · Aug 2, 2009

Salis said:
This one always makes me laugh. Really? Plenty of people cannot stand reading very popular books. Why do people think editors are any different from normal people? Some editors are going to be unhappy with perfectly fine books.

I wasn't aware I made a joke.

I don't think editors are any different from normal people, thank you, I don't hold them in some scarily high esteem.

I am aware that different people have different tastes but it does an author no favours to say they edited and reworked something for eight months and an editor still did not like it. One would presume an author was signed based on previous works and that an editor would have enough familiarity with their work to know their style and, if said editor could not pleased, either the editor is very wrong or the author is.

Either way it might cause a person to wonder about the quality of that writing.

Salis · Aug 2, 2009

Millicent M'Lady said:
I wasn't aware I made a joke.

I don't think editors are any different from normal people, thank you, I don't hold them in some scarily high esteem.

I am aware that different people have different tastes but it does an author no favours to say they edited and reworked something for eight months and an editor still did not like it. One would presume an author was signed based on previous works and that an editor would have enough familiarity with their work to know their style and, if said editor could not pleased, either the editor is very wrong or the author is.

Either way it might cause a person to wonder about the quality of that writing.

You didn't. It's just something I see a lot, and it's pretty amusing. It's group thinking.

Like if you'd never heard of Godfather the movie, you ran into someone who said it sucked, and you never ever watched it or ran into anyone else who talked about it, well, I guess you'd forever think it sucked.

Actually, the batting average as far as manuscripts go is pretty dismal. More often than not, that blockbuster novel that goes on to sell millions is rejected as mediocre or terrible by many people before it gets out there.

Ah, taste. You are fickle.

Cathy C · Aug 2, 2009

Of course, this is one of the dangers of publishing. Some publishers "assign" an editor, rather than having the editor be the one who fell in love with the manuscript. I think she actually handled it very tactfully. I don't think any less of her for the newsletter. It was more of a vent than a rant, IMO.

Millicent M'Lady · Aug 2, 2009

Salis said:
You didn't. It's just something I see a lot, and it's pretty amusing. It's group thinking.

Like if you'd never heard of Godfather the movie, you ran into someone who said it sucked, and you never ever watched it or ran into anyone else who talked about it, well, I guess you'd forever think it sucked.

Actually, the batting average as far as manuscripts go is pretty dismal. More often than not, that blockbuster novel that goes on to sell millions is rejected as mediocre or terrible by many people before it gets out there.

Ah, taste. You are fickle.

Fair enough and I can kind of see your point but I've never been one for running with a crowd and tend to see or do the things I want because they interest me.

My earlier point was that Ms. Holt's book is a product and when its producer says that it couldn't be rewritten to an editor's palette, it's not really a good advertisement for her book. She would have done better to use the "we both wanted different things" excuse than to say that an editor didn't care for it at all. It's just better marketing sense. But that's just my own judgement.

Authors Venting to Readers: Good or Bad?

AnneMarble

Nefarious Ghost Fan

Salis

You Lie!

Lisa Cox

Linda Adams

Soldier, Storyteller

Millicent M'Lady

Exploring the infinite abyss

Salis

You Lie!

Marian Perera

starting over

AnneMarble

Nefarious Ghost Fan

Millicent M'Lady

Exploring the infinite abyss

Salis

You Lie!

Cathy C

Ooo! Shiny new cover!

Millicent M'Lady

Exploring the infinite abyss