| Subject: Re: blurbs |
| From: Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> |
| Date: 3/11/10, 19:15 |
| To: Rachel Trusheim <rachel@sterlingandross.com> |
The only revision I'd like is the San Miguel bit I e-mailed you about earlier today. Thanks.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Rachel Trusheim
<rachel@sterlingandross.com> wrote:
Cool... as for Enrique...maybe defining him as a dealer or whatever would allow that reference to continue on. Can you just revise so it's clear. I don't want to delete it completely.
Thanks.
We're typesetting now, so I'll need anything you want removed asap.
Rachel Trusheim
Executive Editor
212.244.2084 ext. 111
On Mar 11, 2010, at 4:38 PM, Barrett Brown wrote:
I'll see what I can do regarding getting blurbs. Drew might have better luck at getting Matt Taibbi's attention than I; he hasn't responded to my e-mail. I'm working on getting excerpts in Gawker, Mother Jones, Atlantic Wire, and the deputy editor of New York Observer has asked me to come meet with him on Wednesday to discuss something along those lines for them (or perhaps a series of pieces, I guess; can't imagine why he'd want to meet over one piece). Got a few other prospects as well. Will see who else might be interested in providing blurbs as well.
The Enrique's girl's crib line can be taken out if you'd like; it was meant as a riff on the cops finding what's in the glove compartment, "Enrique's girl's crib" being the sort of place where one might be likely to use such a thing.
If it hasn't gone to the typesetter yet, I'd like to remove a couple short segments from the book; will e-mail you with those proposed removals in a bit.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Rachel Trusheim
<rachel@sterlingandross.com> wrote:
Hi Barrett,
Two things:
1. Do you have any blurbs you can garner from your buddies in the print media, et. al? Vanity Fair or Rolling Stone and the like?
2. I'm a little curious if the last line/reference in an early paragraph is understandable. What was the original thought with that reference?
The problem with extrapolation is that it is entirely necessary. When we drive a carI guess it has two steering wheelswe drive certain speed in a certain direction. A tree is straight ahead. We extrapolate that, if we are to continue on our present course, we will hit that tree and then the cops will come and they'll probably find what we've got stashed in the glove compartment. But having extrapolated this tree-hitting scenario from our present course, we will probably just turn the car a bit so that we are no longer headed for this problematic tree. Perhaps we will get back on the highway, where there are considerably fewer trees to hit, but at any rate we have in this case successfully used the art of extrapolation to avoid hitting the tree and thereby we are more likely to successfully make it to our destination, which is Enrique's girl's crib.
Thanks!
Rachel
Rachel Trusheim
Executive Editor
212.244.2084 ext. 111