Gregg and Barrett,
See Julias initial response to the manuscript, below, along with my note to her this morning. To summarize, shes extremely disappointed. Theres no doubting her basic message: this isnt just an ordinarily messy first draft; in her mind, this is far from publishable.
My sense? I havent read it all, but Ive read enough to know that its a long way from being something that I could even submit to another publisherin its current shape, anywayif Amazon were to cancel the book. Im not siding with JuliaI work for you guysbut objectively, you should know that I dont think shes way off the mark. This needs a LOT of work.
BUT: I work for you, and so for the time being the quality of the manuscript itself is irrelevant to me, becausegood, or notits my job to protect your interests. And so, in service of that, I want to give you the lay of the land, OK?
What Julia was HOPING for in this email exchange with me was to have a collegial chat about the deficiencies of the manuscript; if Id read the ms and agreed that it was a mess, my being on board with her opinion would help her facilitate her next move, whatever that might be. And its on that front that Im not going to make this easy for her.
The options, potentially:
· she wants my OK simply to kick your butts editoriallyto rant about sloppiness, but then to really be SPECIFIC about the work you need to do, and help you do it. That would be the best possible news, because actual INPUT is exactly what weve hoped for.
· it may be that she wants to suggest that we (YOU) hire an outside editor to help remedy a substandard manuscript that will otherwise be deemed unacceptable;
· or she feel that the manuscript is so far from what she envisioned that she wants to initiate cancelation immediately.
My GUESS is that she wants to cancel the book outright. If so A) she cant just decree it thusas Im about to explain; and B) I can (and WILL) be obstructionist rather than cooperative, and will REQURE her to adhere to the letter of the contract, in a formal way. Heres the contractual language about acceptance (or non-acceptance) and what the process would be. Cuz there actually IS a process here, as laid out below
So: before they could cancel the book, if thats what they ultimately wanted to do, FIRST they have to make a good-faith effort to provide the editorial guidance required to improve it materially. They could still decide to reject it, after those revisionsbut those revisions will almost certainly be helpful TO US in terms of reselling this elsewhere, if thats what happens.
Sorry for the long email. There are other issues here too, and Im happy to answer any questions you have, ANY, OK? For now, though, the balls in Julias courtwe need to get a more specific response from her. By the way? Its possible that she still DOES want to make this work, and is preparing to roll up her sleeves in a serious way. That would be IDEAL, for a bunch of reasons, because it means the book wouldnt be delayed indefinitely before finally being published.
Thats all for now. Again, call if youd like to discuss.
-Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 7:18 AM
To: Cheiffetz, Julia
Subject: RE: Do-over
Hey, Julia--
What's your sense of when G&B will be getting edits back? Are you and Katie working on that now? I ask not to excuse the fact that I haven't read this yet [I'm sorry to be so fucking slow--I am (literally) the slowest reader I have ever encountered] or to absent myself from the process, but because I don't want to be (can't be) the reason the process gets stalled indefinitely. Obviously I'm sorry to hear your reaction here, and I'm not going to pretend that this doesn't need considerable editorial direction--but it's that, yours & Katie's direction / response, that's what matters & is needed here, you know?
-D
________________________________
Dan Conaway
Literary Agent
Writers House
________________________________________
From: Cheiffetz, Julia [juliac@amazon.com]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 2:45 PM
To: Daniel Conaway
Subject: RE: Do-over
Please holler once you've read it so we can put our heads together. Without being overdramatic, I'm shocked at how disjointed and poorly written it is.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Conaway [mailto:dconaway@WritersHouse.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 11:37 PM
To: Cheiffetz, Julia
Subject: Re: Do-over
I haven't yet, no--had hoped to have finished edits on another project this weekend and dig in, but to no avail. It's next on the stack as soon as I do.
--D
Sent, briefly, from my phone
----- Reply message -----
From: "Cheiffetz, Julia" <juliac@amazon.com>
To: "Daniel Conaway" <dconaway@WritersHouse.com>, "Salisbury, Katie" <katiesal@amazon.com>
Subject: Do-over
Date: Fri, May 11, 2012 5:11 pm
Thanks.
Dan, let's chat next week. I'm very disappointed with the manuscript. Have you read it?
From: Daniel Conaway [mailto:dconaway@WritersHouse.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 1:04 PM
To: Cheiffetz, Julia; Salisbury, Katie
Subject: Do-over
Apologies again... Hadn't realized Barrett's original was single-spaced. Delete the previous; here's the version *I'm* printing out for myself.
-D
Dan Conaway
Literary Agent
Writers House
