# What Will You Stand For?



## Mindfire

Something I mentioned in another thread and I wondered if anyone else here felt the same. Do you guys have any "non-negotiables", things that you'd stand up to a publisher over or terms they'd have to agree to before you signed a contract? Because I do. 







The ethnicity of characters will not be changed, and I will insist that they be accurately represented on the cover, or else not at all.

Any perceived religious references will not be toned down or removed. If it's there, its there for a reason.

I will not tone down any sophisticated vocabulary that might appear, because I have this insane notion that the reader is not, in fact, an idiot.

I will not add vampires, dragons, or anything else just for the sake of commercial appeal.

I will not add sex scenes or romantic subplots for the sole purpose of pandering to the female demographic or to gain readership. Because no.


So, anyone else feel similarly about "executive meddling"?






RE: Mods- Not sure if this belongs here or in publishing.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

None really that I'm outright opposed to. In fact, I'd be very interested in hearing what their content editors have to say to improve the story appeal.

In reality, if you're so staunchly opposed to making the above changes you should probably just self-publish. There's nothing wrong with keeping your story the way you want it to be kept. However, you're telling publishers who will be investing significant money towards your book that they aren't allowed to influence some pretty major themes (sex, religion) that have a lot to do with potential commercial appeal. As an unknown, first time author, you don't have that kind of clout. It's unlikely that you'll find a publisher willing to invest so heavily in you & abide by all of your restrictions.


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> Something I mentioned in another thread and I wondered if anyone else here felt the same. Do you guys have any "non-negotiables", things that you'd stand up to a publisher over or terms they'd have to agree to before you signed a contract? Because I do.
> 
> 
> The ethnicity of characters will not be changed, and I will insist that they be accurately represented on the cover, or else not at all.
> 
> Any perceived religious references will not be toned down or removed. If it's there, its there for a reason.
> 
> I will not tone down any sophisticated vocabulary that might appear, because I have this insane notion that the reader is not, in fact, an idiot.
> 
> I will not add vampires, dragons, or anything else just for the sake of commercial appeal.
> 
> I will not add sex scenes or romantic subplots for the sole purpose of pandering to the female demographic or to gain readership. Because no.



A good reason to self-publish, because you retain complete control. If you go with a traditional publisher, you have to understand they are running a business and going to be expending money on you on the front end. If you aren't willing to compromise, you don't make a very good business partner for them.

With respect to cover art, for example, I've heard from authors who already have a couple of novels behind them that they didn't like what the publisher did with the cover. That leads me to believe that even if you have a little bit of a track record, you're not necessarily going to get much say on the cover art, at least not with the big publishers. They have marketing departments that handle that. I suspect that if an unknown author had a bite from a publisher like TOR and wanted clauses in the contract that gave veto power over things like this, the author would be as likely told to take a hike as to get the deal.

I've related before that another published author, who got a three book deal from an established publisher, was told to play up the romantic subplot for marketing reasons. She did. Had she not, it was likely the publisher was going to walk.

None of which means you can't insist on whatever terms you like, but you also have to be realistic about it and be cognizant of the impression you are giving a potential business partner you are soliciting (which is essentially what you are doing) when you are intransigent on a number of issues.

As for me, with some of my works I'd likely be happy to accommodate the publisher. With others, I might feel more protective.

EDIT: Ninja'd by T.Allen.Smith, who said it more succinctly


----------



## SlimShady

I shall not change character personalities too make them more well-liked.  Ethnicities are untouchable as are religious themes.  The grittiness of the plot will remain, as will the depressing darkness.  Other than that anything goes, except I will not add anything new to the world just because someone says so.  

  Other than that, I would be pretty open.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

SlimShady said:


> I shall not change character personalities too make them more well-liked.  Ethnicities are untouchable as are religious themes.  The grittiness of the plot will remain, as will the depressing darkness.  Other than that anything goes, except I will not add anything new to the world just because someone says so.
> 
> Other than that, I would be pretty open.



So characters, plot, & a major theme are unalterable. I wouldn't describe that as "pretty open". 

If you came to the table with these types of demands/restrictions, your potential publisher that you worked so hard to attract is going to laugh and walk away, never to return.

These deals are, at best for you, partnerships folks. Until you're in the ranks of Stephen King, JK Rowling, & Nora Roberts, you might as well forget these lofty ideals. When you sign with a traditional publisher you're signing some of that precious control away.

Get comfortable with it or understand that self-publishing is the only avenue that provides the control you vehemently desire.


----------



## Penpilot

I'll never say never. I'll listen and I'm willing to be flexible because, in my eyes, it's a partnership. You put up the time to write the book. They put up the capital to get that book to the readers. (A bit simplistic but...) It's in both your interests to be profitable. 

I mean think about it. The author gets an advance, yippie, they get paid. If the book doesn't turn a profit, the publisher, is the one left holding the bag. This doesn't mean I'll do everything they ask, but I'll definitely keep myself open to hearing them out.


----------



## Steerpike

It's kind of like this:

Author (approaching publisher): Hey, I want to go into business with you. Here's my story. I'll need an advance, and I'll need you to front the money for cover art, distribution, whatever marketing you want to do, and so on.

Publisher: No problem, that's what we do. Let's have a look....Hey, this isn't bad. I think we can work with this.

Author: Great! There's my list of non-negotiable demands on the table.

Publisher: OK. There's our door.


----------



## Mindfire

I've pretty much accepted that this will make my work a harder sell. But I think it's worth it. But having said that, I don't think these will really come up. With the exception of cover art, how likely is it that a publisher will object to or mention any of these? How often does a publisher really say "you have to add vampires/dragons/sex/romance"? Or "your use too many big words"? Or "make this character white"? Or "take out the religious undertones"? The only one of these I see really causing friction is the cover art issue, and I'm giving them a way out: don't put characters on the cover.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

The content editing portion of work will take a long time & be very in depth. This is one of the reasons that it may be a couple years before your book is on shelves after you sign your deal.

I'd say it's highly likely that all of those issues will be scrutinized and brought to a discussion.


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire:

Setting aside everything else, from the authors I've talked to I think it is unlikely you'll have even that much say over the cover art (e.g. don't put characters on it or do it my way). In most cases, it looks like the input from the author is slim to none at all. At least, with the major traditional publishers.


----------



## Jabrosky

I have similar concerns as yours, Mindfire, and frankly for reasons already mentioned I'll probably self-publish anyway. I want more control over my product too.


----------



## Kim

I understand what you mean, Mindfire. There are some things in my books that I don't want to change. Fortunately I have found a publisher that likes the stories I write, but I think I don't have any chance to be published by a Dutch publisher that is considered one of the big publishers in the Netherlands. Thats the choise I made.

But I think you should listen to the publisher before you put your demands on the table. I have changed a lot after my publisher had read the story. I am sure his suggestions made the story better, some times the story was more how I wanted it to be after the changes.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

Mindfire said:


> I've pretty much accepted that this will make my work a harder sell.



It will be much more difficult. The odds of any new author attracting a traditional publisher's interest and actually signing a deal are slim at best. Placing further restrictions and limitations that would be likely to queer any deal, changes the chances to infinitesimal levels.


----------



## Mindfire

T.Allen.Smith said:


> It will be much more difficult. The odds of any new author attracting a traditional publisher's interest and actually signing a deal are slim at best. Placing further restrictions and limitations that would be likely to queer any deal, changes the chances to infinitesimal levels.



Maybe. But if they didn't want to publish the book I wrote in the first place, what's the difference really? The things that i listed are pretty much the heart and soul of the work (except for the cover obviously). If they make my main character white, or take out the religions I painstakingly built, or add dragons and sex just to attract more readers, it's not really the same book is it? It'd be like they'd never published it at all. The only difference is the money. And I'm not writing for money.

Also, I'd like to believe, however irrationally, that publishers know better than to display gross racial insensitivity.


----------



## ShortHair

If you have any qualms about how a publisher will handle your work, publish it yourself. That is all.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

Mindfire said:


> Maybe. But if they didn't want to publish the book I wrote in the first place, what's the difference really? The things that i listed are pretty much the heart and soul of the work (except for the cover obviously). If they make my main character white, or take out the religions I painstakingly built, or add dragons and sex just to attract more readers, it's not really the same book is it? It'd be like they'd never published it at all. The only difference is the money. And I'm not writing for money.
> 
> Also, I'd like to believe, however irrationally, that publishers know better than to display gross racial insensitivity.



If these things are that important to you (and it's obvious they are) then you should stick to your guns. 

I'm not trying to dissuade you from following your desires. I'm merely trying to point out that it may be unrealistic for that publishing model. 

Either way, I wish you success in the endeavor.


----------



## Ankari

What if the publisher points out that your novel can be perceived as an attack against a major real world religion?  One of your points was that they couldn't alter your religions.  What if the "evil" religion was too close to a real world religion?  Don't they have the right to ask you to alter the religion as it may exclude a certain significant consumer base?

Also, I understand that black characters are very thin in the fantasy realm.  I've always wondered about that.  But why do you think the publishing company would portray your characters any differently than what you describe them as?


----------



## Chilari

While there are several things I'd ideally keep as they are in my WIP, if it came down to it I'd negotiate with the publisher over certain things. My main character is aromantic, for example, a decision taken in part to distance myself from the train wreck that is The General's Secret and in part in reaction to the fact that everything has a romantic sub-plot. But if a publisher wanted me to include one, and would walk if I didn't, I'd do it, but try to do it my own way. Then if they, say, ask me to make all the main characters white or try to get me to make characters fit into more archetypal roles, the evil king, the comic relief, etc, I would have the negotiating capital to say no. I don't see why a publisher should be willing to back down on their requests if I'm not at least as willing to accommodate them; it's about compromise.


----------



## Jabrosky

In all honesty, Mindfire, I'd be shocked if a modern publisher insisted on racially whitewashing characters you explicitly describe as black. I'd think they would appreciate diversity in their books' content. The only reason I could see the issue coming up at all in your case is because your world's major black culture (the Mavarians) has a strong Egyptian flavor, and for better or worse ancient Egyptians are stereotyped in popular culture as lighter-skinned. Even then, you could claim Nubia rather than Egypt as your inspiration.


----------



## Mindfire

Ankari said:


> What if the publisher points out that your novel can be perceived as an attack against a major real world religion?  One of your points was that they couldn't alter your religions.  What if the "evil" religion was too close to a real world religion?  Don't they have the right to ask you to alter the religion as it may exclude a certain significant consumer base?
> 
> Also, I understand that black characters are very thin in the fantasy realm.  I've always wondered about that.  But why do you think the publishing company would portray your characters any differently than what you describe them as?



Honestly, I'm less concerned about a publisher suggesting changes because I seem to be attacking a real world religion than I am about them suggesting changes because I seem to be _supporting one_. I don't "preach" in my books at all, but certain elements do have a Judeo-Christian flavor, much like Lord of the Rings (if you'll pardon the comparison). 

As for why a publisher might whitewash my characters, I don't know of an incident where it's actually happened, so I might be paranoid, but I have heard about this. Whitewashing is a distasteful business.


----------



## Mindfire

Chilari said:


> While there are several things I'd ideally keep as they are in my WIP, if it came down to it I'd negotiate with the publisher over certain things. My main character is aromantic, for example, a decision taken in part to distance myself from the train wreck that is The General's Secret and in part in reaction to the fact that everything has a romantic sub-plot. But if a publisher wanted me to include one, and would walk if I didn't, I'd do it, but try to do it my own way. Then if they, say, ask me to make all the main characters white or try to get me to make characters fit into more archetypal roles, the evil king, the comic relief, etc, I would have the negotiating capital to say no. I don't see why a publisher should be willing to back down on their requests if I'm not at least as willing to accommodate them; it's about compromise.



Some things, of course, are open to compromise. Most things are, in fact. The reason those particular things are on the list is because if the publisher wants to make those kinds of changes, they'd be better off buying a book that actually suits the niche they're looking for and I'd be better off keeping my integrity.


----------



## Steerpike

Interestingly, something like this played out with respect to a writer I was representing. Without getting into the details, a publisher wanted to buy the work but the author wanted to retain all kinds of control over the work and what happened to it. Ultimately, the publisher said they were walking away from it. The relationship between the publisher and writer was not only strained, but it put a big strain on the writer's relationship with his own agent, who was ready to dump him (remember an agent doesn't get paid until there is a sale, and here she was working for months on the writer's behalf only to have him scuttle the deal).

Ultimately, it was the threatened loss of the agent that caused the writer to change his mind and he agreed to just about everything the publisher wanted. It wasn't a huge deal - the advance was in the tens of thousands - but that was the agent's payday as well as the author's.

Luckily, I was brought in only to review the publishing contract, so I didn't have to be in the middle of all of that discussion.

I agree with what T.Allen.Smith said, above, that if it is really important to the writer, the writer should stick to his guns. I do, however, want people to have a realistic view of what going through a traditional publisher is. It is a joint business venture, essentially, between the publisher and author and, if the author is lucky enough to have one, the agent. 

In this day and age, if you really want full control I think self-publication is your best bet.


----------



## TWErvin2

As has been said, if you've got a big list of things you won't budge on, including cover content, odds are you're wasting your time and the publisher's time by even submitting to them.


----------



## Mindfire

TWErvin2 said:


> As has been said, if you've got a big list of things you won't budge on, including cover content, odds are you're wasting your time and the publisher's time by even submitting to them.



Which brings me back to the question: will a publisher really drop you simply because you object to whitewashing? Because if so, I may need to revise my opinion on human decency.


----------



## Steerpike

No need to over-dramatize. We are just pointing out that publishers have their own ideas and experiences about selling books. If you want to dictate the cover or retain total control over other aspects, self publish. I don't remember anyone saying they'd white wash it, and a cursory examination of the book shelves at a store will show that is not the case.


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> No need to over-dramatize. We are just pointing out that publishers have their own ideas and experiences about selling books. If you want to dictate the cover or retain total control over other aspects, self publish. I don't remember anyone saying they'd white wash it, and a cursory examination of the book shelves at a store will show that is not the case.



Well this isn't an issue of control so much it is an issue of "I really hate whitewashing."


----------



## Zero Angel

Chilari said:


> While there are several things I'd ideally keep as they are in my WIP, if it came down to it I'd negotiate with the publisher over certain things. My main character is aromantic, for example, a decision taken in part to distance myself from the train wreck that is The General's Secret and in part in reaction to the fact that everything has a romantic sub-plot. But if a publisher wanted me to include one, and would walk if I didn't, I'd do it, but try to do it my own way. Then if they, say, ask me to make all the main characters white or try to get me to make characters fit into more archetypal roles, the evil king, the comic relief, etc, I would have the negotiating capital to say no. I don't see why a publisher should be willing to back down on their requests if I'm not at least as willing to accommodate them; it's about compromise.



This reminds me of this: Love Song (Sara Bareilles song) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

@Mindfire: That article you posted was scary. I had no idea people were still doing this. In my books, I rarely speak of race (other than dwarves/minotaurs/etc), and only mention skin-complexion when it is drastic. I hope that readers will imagine the characters however they like to, although in films I am sure they will be portrayed lighter probably. 

Interestingly, I had no idea Ursula K. Le Guin's Earthsea Quartet concerned people with dark skin until she criticized the Earthsea TV miniseries for having white actors and actresses. I read the stories when I was younger and must have just ignored this fact. 

Anyway, there are many things that I would not want to change about my books, and that is surely part of the reason why I have gone the route of self-publishing. I never really thought about things they would change in my books to make them more marketable, but now that I read your post, I would be VERY concerned about MANY issues and ideas in my books.


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> Well this isn't an issue of control so much it is an issue of "I really hate whitewashing."



So do I.

/10char


----------



## Jabrosky

It would be impossible for any publisher to get away with whitewashing my WIP with cover art even if they wanted to. Not only do I explicitly mention my heroine's dark brown complexion and other African (or "Negroid") physical features _in the very first chapter_, but her race actually affects how the antagonists treat her. No reader could ignore the contrast between a whitewashed portrayal of my character on the cover and how the text actually describes her.

Then again, as I said earlier in this thread, I plan to go the self-published route with my story.


----------



## Steerpike

Zero Angel, of you look at the body of fantasy literature,  I'm not sure anything is off limits.


----------



## Zero Angel

Jabrosky said:


> It would be impossible for any publisher to get away with whitewashing my WIP with cover art even if they wanted to. Not only do I explicitly mention my heroine's dark brown complexion and other African (or "Negroid") physical features _in the very first chapter_, but her race actually affects how the antagonists treat her. No reader could ignore the contrast between a whitewashed portrayal of my character on the cover and how the text actually describes her.
> 
> Then again, as I said earlier in this thread, I plan to go the self-published route with my story.



Did you read Mindfire's link to that article? It gave several examples of just this thing.


----------



## Zero Angel

Steerpike said:


> Zero Angel, of you look at the body of fantasy literature,  I'm not sure anything is off limits.



I assume you mean off-limits to getting published and out there? I agree, but I also think nothing is off-limits to being changed in the eyes of the publishers. I think it is important to have a working relationship with your publisher/agent/publicist, but at the end of the day, I cannot imagine giving up control. 

Especially already having the entire series planned out -_- if a publisher came in and said, well you are going to need to change this or else we're done and that thing they want changed sets up something six books down the line...well I think it would be time to put a fork in the relationship because yes, we would be done.

But that being said, do publishers give "ultimatums" or do they give suggestions and workarounds and things of that nature? I don't have any experience, but I would want to give them the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## Steerpike

Zero Angel said:


> Did you read Mindfire's link to that article? It gave several examples of just this thing.



I missed the link; which thread is it in? This one?

I've read a lot of fantasy over the years with so many varied topics, including so many that people might consider taboo, that I have a hard time thinking of something that is completely out of bounds. Individual publishers might have their own issues, but I can't think of anything that couldn't be placed somewhere.


----------



## Steerpike

Zero Angel said:


> But that being said, do publishers give "ultimatums" or do they give suggestions and workarounds and things of that nature? I don't have any experience, but I would want to give them the benefit of the doubt.



I suppose it depends on the publisher. The editors, or even an agent, might make suggestions. It is up to the author whether to accept them or not, and if the author does not it is up to the publisher to decide whether they want to proceed. If they felt strongly about it, I can see publishers walking away from the deal just as an author who feels strongly might.


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> I missed the link; which thread is it in? This one?
> 
> I've read a lot of fantasy over the years with so many varied topics, including so many that people might consider taboo, that I have a hard time thinking of something that is completely out of bounds. Individual publishers might have their own issues, but I can't think of anything that couldn't be placed somewhere.



Here you go. I think my original link was far too subtle.

Cover Matters: On Whitewashing | The Book Smugglers


----------



## Zero Angel

Mindfire said:


> Here you go. I think my original link was far too subtle.
> 
> Cover Matters: On Whitewashing | The Book Smugglers



Ninja'd!


----------



## Steerpike

Ah, got it. Thanks.

I expect part of the problem lies in the fact that marketing departments and cover illustrators don't read the books. It wouldn't surprise me if they default to light-skinned people unless they are told otherwise.

I'd be interested to know the effect on sales, just from an academic point of view. I went to a book store in St. Louis once, looking for books by Octavia Butler (who was excellent), and after asking the clerk for them I found that they were hidden away in a tiny section for "African American Literature" that was hard to see. The clerk's explanation was that they looked like African American Literature from the covers (there were black people on them). I suspect the marketing arms of the major publishers think about this sort of thing. It doesn't make them right to change the covers just for the sake of an imagined target demographic, however. I convinced the clerk at the store in St. Louis to move Butler to Science Fiction, where she belonged (along with Delany, who was in African American Literature as well).  Ideally, I would eliminate book categories based on race in the bookstores and treat all works the same. But, at the same time, the reality is that this store did have a few people coming in looking specifically for African American Literature (if you can define that), and that's why they had the section, though it was hardly noticeable in passing.

I guess it can work the other way as well - witness the cry over a more pale-skinned Cleopatra, even though Cleopatra was not of Egyptian descent by blood.


----------



## Zero Angel

Steerpike said:


> I'd be interested to know the effect on sales, just from an academic point of view. I went to a book store in St. Louis once, looking for books by Octavia Butler (who was excellent), and after asking the clerk for them I found that they were hidden away in a tiny section for "African American Literature" that was hard to see. The clerk's explanation was that they looked like African American Literature from the covers (there were black people on them). I suspect the marketing arms of the major publishers think about this sort of thing. It doesn't make them right to change the covers just for the sake of an imagined target demographic, however. I convinced the clerk at the store in St. Louis to move Butler to Science Fiction, where she belonged (along with Delany, who was in African American Literature as well).  Ideally, I would eliminate book categories based on race in the bookstores and treat all works the same. But, at the same time, the reality is that this store did have a few people coming in looking specifically for African American Literature (if you can define that), and that's why they had the section, though it was hardly noticeable in passing.



In general, maybe not your specific example, I would think that it would *help* her sales, not hurt them. And "ideally" from the publisher's standpoint it would be categorized under both "African American Literature" and "Fantasy & Science Fiction".


----------



## Steerpike

Zero Angel said:


> In general, maybe not your specific example, I would think that it would *help* her sales, not hurt them. And "ideally" from the publisher's standpoint it would be categorized under both "African American Literature" and "Fantasy & Science Fiction".



In this store, it hurt her simply because the number of people who browsed the African American section was quite small compared to the number of people browsing Science Fiction and Fantasy. Putting a few copies in each section would probably be best, true.


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> I guess it can work the other way as well - witness the cry over a more pale-skinned Cleopatra, even though Cleopatra was not of Egyptian descent by blood.



Actually that book cover was Nefertiti, who _was_ Egyptian.


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> Actually that book cover was Nefertiti, who _was_ Egyptian.



I wasn't talking about that book cover.


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> I wasn't talking about that book cover.



Ah, ok.

/10char


----------



## Chilari

And actually Cleopatra did have some black African descent; she was well and truly mixed race.


----------



## Jabrosky

Chilari said:


> And actually Cleopatra did have some black African descent; she was well and truly mixed race.


In light of those findings, perhaps someone like Rihanna or Beyonce (both socially "black" but obviously of multiracial background) would work better as an actress for Cleopatra.


----------



## Kit

Ok, just read the entire linked article, along with one that it referenced:

Red Sari: An Analysis of S. Asian and Diaspora Book Covers - Red Sari

regarding Asian authors/books- since my WIP is set in China. 

Appalling.

I knew about whitewashing, and I'm always complaining about the way publishers make all female characters on fantasy covers into anorexic bimboes with three pounds of makeup, giant breast implants and wearing S&M fetish costumes. I also knew that authors have no control over the covers. But it's even worse than I knew.

This deals the final death blow to whatever small thought I ever had about submitting (all implications intended) to a traditional publisher. 

If I want to just write for money, I can do all sorts of commercial work- on purpose, knowing that this is just a job I'm cranking out in return for a paycheck. Boss tells me what to write and I'll write it. Fine, whatever.

If you had a crystal ball and told me that if I take my book to a traditional publisher I'll be as successful as Rowlings, but I'd have to watch them do these things to my story and characters.... I'd really have to sit down and think that over. Truly, offer me MILLIONS of dollars... I'd have to really think that over.


----------



## Amanita

> So characters, plot, & a major theme are unalterable.


Seriously, what's the point of getting your story published if this not the case? Well, at least as long as it's not mainly about the money or about getting something published to get your name out. 
I could see myself change things if editors spotted  problematic things I didn't notice, such as boring magic discussions (which I try to get rid of before anyway but still), making the magic more visiual, cutting controversial background stories for some characters, cutting minor subplots that might put certain people of etc. 
I don't see the point in altering major themes and plotlines however. At least as long as they're not giving me really good reasons for this. I might understand those reasons but I may not. Like Mindfire said, if they don't want my story, they should do without it but I don't want anything out there which has my name on of it, bus has nothing to with my beliefs and interests. 
Probably, publishing is not for me really.

I'm really shocked by the fact that characters of different racial background still seem to be such an issue. Are there really so many white people who wouldn't buy a book because there's a person with dark skin on the cover? I really can't understand this way of thinking.


----------



## The Dark One

I haven't read the entire thread so sorry if I'm repeating stuff said earlier...

It's important to remember that there is only one reason a publisher will publish your book...because they think they can make money from it. If they don't think it's quite right (ie, right enough to crowbar cash from the pockets of punters) they will require changes. Changes devised by publishing professionals who (think they) know what sells. If you don't agree to the changes they won't publish your book. 

If you want more control, approach small niche publishers. They are far more likely to believe in your total vision. That was my experience with both my published books - the biggest cut I had to make was to reduce a 230k ms to 192k for publication, just to reduce print costs. Definitely improved the book though.


----------



## Steerpike

Chilari said:


> And actually Cleopatra did have some black African descent; she was well and truly mixed race.



This is all purely speculative and there its no hard evidence to support the contention. It seems to me the best evidence we have are contemporary depictions, and those present a fairly clear picture.  Those arguing for an African heritage are reduced to arguing that contemporary depictions were intentionally misleading - again with no evidence. It's not very good science.


----------



## Steerpike

Jabrosky said:


> In light of those findings, perhaps someone like Rihanna or Beyonce (both socially "black" but obviously of multiracial background) would work better as an actress for Cleopatra.



Those aren't "findings, " but rather speculation about possibilities. You are in the sciences; you should know this.  As the original author indicates,  it is quite possible she had no Egyptian blood.  In fact,  the weight of the evidence supports it. When, in science, do you accept a proposition that has no evidence behind it?  You are making my case about reverse white washing.

I read somewhere that some people in the Ptolemy line were blonde or golden haired (not many). So one could just as easily speculate that Cleopatra had those features - only there is no evidence to back that up either. Casting Beyonce to play her wouldn't be any more historically supported than casting Gwyneth Paltrow.


----------



## SeverinR

Imo some changes are expected, and negotiable.
PC changes just to be PC would take alot for me to agree.
Gratuitous sex scenes would be another questionable hard sell.(one that does not advance the story, just adds sex)

I might be ok with some changes as long as it doesn't change the major characteristics of the book.


----------



## Anders Ã„mting

I suppose I would be reluctant to alter the characterization and themes of the story. Not saying I would outright refuse, but they'd have to give me a really good reason. Plot changes I might be okay with, as long as it's not stupid changes, or changes for stupid reasons.


----------



## Jabrosky

Steerpike said:


> Those aren't "findings, " but rather speculation about possibilities. You are in the sciences; you should know this.  As the original author indicates,  it is quite possible she had no Egyptian blood.  In fact,  the weight of the evidence supports it. When, in science, do you accept a proposition that has no evidence behind it?  You are making my case about reverse white washing.
> 
> I read somewhere that some people in the Ptolemy line were blonde or golden haired (not many). So one could just as easily speculate that Cleopatra had those features - only there is no evidence to back that up either. Casting Beyonce to play her wouldn't be any more historically supported than casting Gwyneth Paltrow.



Actually some of the comments in Chilari's link allude to recent findings that a skull _possibly _belonging to Cleopatra's half-sister Arsinoe showed a mixture of "European" and "African" characteristics. Now, to be fair, there is some doubt that the skull really belongs to anyone from Cleopatra's family, and of course Cleopatra and Arsinoe probably had different mothers, but it _could_ suggest that the Ptolemies were more open to interracial mixing than previously believed


----------



## Steerpike

Jabrosky said:


> Actually some of the comments in Chilari's link allude to recent findings that a skull _possibly _belonging to Cleopatra's half-sister Arsinoe showed a mixture of "European" and "African" characteristics. Now, to be fair, there is some doubt that the skull really belongs to anyone from Cleopatra's family, and of course Cleopatra and Arsinoe probably had different mothers, but it _could_ suggest that the Ptolemies were more open to interracial mixing than previously believed



Yes, it is possible. But the evidence to support these lines of thought are possibilities. So far, I haven't found anything persuasive enough to convince me that contemporary busts and coinage were purposefully misrepresenting her appearance. That may change if new evidence comes to light, but so far I don't see it (and when it comes to something like skin tone, I doubt we'll ever know).

I don't care if she was pale, dark-skinned, or if she swam over from China and was of Asian ancestry. I just don't like to see history manipulated to fit modern political concerns, that's all.


----------



## TWErvin2

The key, I think, would be to research the publisher _before_ you submit your work to them for consideration. While there is give and take in the editing process, the managing editor is the final say on what is produced/published by that house. The publisher is the one that generally hires/commissions the artist and approves the final cover art and titlework. While the author _may_ have some input, the publisher is the one who has the final say on the work's title.

Successful publishers have been doing this for a while and have experience. If they didn't, they would be out of business. If you're unwilling to cede some control over the content of your novel, don't waste your time (and the publisher's time) submitting. You're approaching them. The publisher isn't approaching you. If they were, you'd have more leverage.

You're not going to submit your novel, have them accept it, and the publisher simply does a proof reading to catch typos, commission an artist which you will approve, including the final cover art version and titlework, and publish the piece. If they do, what value are they adding to the quality of the piece? Sorry, the draft you sent them isn't that good. Heck, three years from now, if you keep writing, you'll look back at your novel (if published or even if not published) and see how it could have been written better. What a publisher is trying to do is improve a work, make it more marketable, a better read, and earn a profit, which will be shared with the writer through an advance and royalties.

In addition to editing, a publisher will open doors and access to readers--a potentially wider audience.

As was said earlier, niche or smaller publishers may be a better fit, especially if more control is desired. Again, research before submitting to a particular publisher. Read samples/novels. Gauge the quality and content, because not all publishers are equal.


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> Those aren't "findings, " but rather speculation about possibilities. You are in the sciences; you should know this.  As the original author indicates,  it is quite possible she had no Egyptian blood.  In fact,  the weight of the evidence supports it. When, in science, do you accept a proposition that has no evidence behind it?  You are making my case about reverse white washing.
> 
> I read somewhere that some people in the Ptolemy line were blonde or golden haired (not many). So one could just as easily speculate that Cleopatra had those features - only there is no evidence to back that up either. Casting Beyonce to play her wouldn't be any more historically supported than casting Gwyneth Paltrow.



Regardless, I think "reverse" whitewashing is a bit less harmful and far less common than regular whitewashing. But let's try not to derail the thread by starting _another_ debate about Egyptians.


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> Regardless, I think "reverse" whitewashing is a bit less harmful and far less common than regular whitewashing. But let's try not to derail the thread by starting _another_ debate about Egyptians.



We're not, she wasn't Egyptian 

(Seriously, though, back to the topic at hand).

Marketing people are going to want to use cover art that sells. I don't know that publishers are going to ask you to change the ethnicity of characters. As I've said before, I know someone who was asked to play up a love interest and remove a death from her Fantasy novel, because the publisher wanted to market it as Romance. She agreed and inked a three-book deal.

Realistically, I suppose it depends on what the publisher is offering. I don't care what I submitted to a publisher, if they came at me like they did Stephanie Meyer, waving $3/4 of a million dollars around, I'd say "What do you want changed and when do you want it?" Then, if the publisher's bet paid off and the book sold like crazy, I'd spend the rest of my life writing whatever the hell I wanted.


----------



## Caged Maiden

Okay, certainly I am no authority on publishing, but I want to weigh-in here.  I've written, a LOT!  And if I've learned anything, it's that there's always another story.  I've submitted my 7th novel for representation twice, with only a request for a partial, so again, I'm only one aspiring author, trying my best.  BUT, if an agent told me tomorrow, "We want this novel, but we are concerned about your lack of religion, we want you to make your werewolves more frightening, and we need to see more/less sex to pander to our readers."  I'd make the changes, do it my way, and see whether it was enough to please the person I'm hoping wants me as their partner (for the price of 15%).  

Imagine it was another business, oh wait, I can, because I have another business.  I run it alone, and let's be frank, it's in the red.  I owe my husband about $3500 for his investment.  Well, say tomorrow, I have someone who wants to be my partner.  "I really like what you're doing Caged Maiden, but I'm a guy, and hate the name of your business, let's change it to A Tale of Two Tailors."   

If I want a partner, I'm guaranteeing, he'll want more than 15%, and also want some things changed.  Right now, I sell to mostly women, cater to women with unique body shapes who have a hard time finding garments, and definitely focus on people who want unique costumes.  Do I abandon all that I have built for the sake of a partner who will help me run my small business?  I'd have to consider whether the changes are ones I can live with, and maybe even embrace.  

Writing is not so different.  Perhaps my original vision for my books is creative genius, perhaps it is lack-luster and already done.  I'm not the authority, and I can only benefit from a partnership with an agent.  

For everyone out there who has a novel they love, I'd recommend very carefully making demands.  If you are in love with your book, then reserve it, put it on the back burner until you have a name and reputation, then haul it out in all its glory when it can stand on its own.  Think about writing a stand alone novel that will appeal to an agent, if you don't think you can alter your first novel.  No one says you have to make sacrifices you aren't comfortable making.  But to think you're special (not pointing at any one person, but at all artists aspiring to be noticed), that you somehow are more worthy of being taken from the amusement park line and being seated on the hot new ride first, well, that's just silly to me.  

We are all in the same situation, trying to get our work out there.  An agent is taking a chance on me, the least I can do is give them their 15% of influence over my work.  That's how partnerships work.  

I have some pretty controversial subjects in my books, and I could understand an agent not wanting to stamp their name all over those issues on the first attempt.  So would I make changes?  You betcha.  But I'd hope that as our relationship builds, and we both experience success from our partnership, we can grow in mutual respect and trust each others' decisions.    They're not asking for the keys to my car, they're asking me to drive a little slower for safety reasons.  

I wish everyone who wanted to be an artist had a market awaiting them, but I just don't think that is the case.  Agents are trying their best to help people and make a profit for themselves.  I'd recommend testing the water with something you're not so attached to if you feel you can't break into the market with something you want to remain unchanged.


----------



## Amanita

I'm starting to wonder if the excess of boring and cliche fantasy (and romance) novels isn't the fault of the authors but of publishing houses who don't think anything else will sell...


----------



## Steerpike

Amanita said:


> I'm starting to wonder if the excess of boring and cliche fantasy (and romance) novels isn't the fault of the authors but of publishing houses who don't think anything else will sell...



It's both. And probably the fault of readers as well, who gobble it up


----------



## Kit

Caged Maiden said:


> If you are in love with your book, then reserve it, put it on the back burner until you have a name and reputation, then haul it out in all its glory when it can stand on its own.  Think about writing a stand alone novel that will appeal to an agent, if you don't think you can alter your first novel.  .





(We don't have a "thumbs up" or "ditto"  icon on this forum; this was the closest I could get!)

I like this idea.


----------



## Feo Takahari

As a writer of erotica, I don't think there's any level on which I might realistically be asked to sell out that I haven't already sold out on, but I hold where I can. When I submitted _Five Conversations on a Pier After Dark_ to a magazine that typically publishes straight romance, I asked whether I should specify the originally gender-ambiguous narrator as male, so as to make his romance with a female character "straight." The editor said it would be better to do so, since the magazine couldn't afford any controversy at the time, but handed that obvious censor bait, she completely ignored that I was now giving a positive portrayal of a feminine male.


----------



## lawrence

Some great advice here, esp Steerpike and Caged Maiden. 

Nobody wants creative art to be squeezed into _current-trend_ or _populist_ production moulds, and have its shape changed far beyond the artist's intentions. One of the joys of the arts is its diversity.

But any publisher will want to have input, due to their considerable investment, as has been pointed out. I agree that one of the keys is to try to work with a publisher that has a favourable inclination towards your kind of work. 

I can think of quite a few book derived movies where I am sure the author must have been really disappointed with the outcome. I guess you have to decide if you are prepared to take the money and run. Very few of us will ever need to deal with that crisis of integrity!


----------



## Mindfire

lawrence said:


> I can think of quite a few book derived movies where I am sure the author must have been really disappointed with the outcome. I guess you have to decide if you are prepared to take the money and run. Very few of us will ever need to deal with that crisis of integrity!



True. But it can't hurt to plan ahead. I've already decided it's highly unlikely I'll ever give away film rights to my work. For every _Lord of the Rings Trilogy_ you also get an _Eragon_. Of course the source material for that film was already crap but that's not the point. I'd have to be really, _really_ convinced the books would be done justice before I signed a movie deal. And by convinced, I don't mean won over by the number of zeros on the check. The production company would really have to believe in the project and the directors and writers would have to have genuine vision. The last thing I'd want is for my work to be adapted as a mediocre, soulless cash-in like Percy Jackson Generic Teenage Adventure Movie with Greek Stuff.


However, I'd have much more initial interest in an animated series adaptation. Especially if the geniuses behind Avatar: The Last Airbender were leading the project. As a bonus, they'd probably sympathize with me, since they know firsthand what it's like to have your work turned into a bad adaptation.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

Mindfire,

I understand your position but it seems to me your setting up obstacles for yourself. There's enough tribulation to deal with just in publishing, marketing, and gaining a fan base without having to worry about potential problems that we may never face. This feels like a "cart before the horse" situation. Get the book finished first.

Planning ahead is one thing, but lashing out against perceived potential exploitation is just kind of silly. Write the book you want to write and take things a step at a time. Your opinion on many of these issues may change as you evolve as a writer, as you mature as a human being, and as the industry itself changes (no I'm not talking about your religious or social views either, I'm speaking about craft & business).


----------



## Mindfire

T.Allen.Smith said:


> Mindfire,
> 
> I understand your position but it seems to me your setting up obstacles for yourself. There's enough tribulation to deal with just in publishing, marketing, and gaining a fan base without having to worry about potential problems that we may never face. This feels like a "cart before the horse" situation. Get the book finished first.
> 
> Planning ahead is one thing, but lashing out against perceived potential exploitation is just kind of silly. Write the book you want to write and take things a step at a time. Your opinion on many of these issues may change as you evolve as a writer, as you mature as a human being, and as the industry itself changes (no I'm not talking about your religious or social views either, I'm speaking about craft & business).



Are you referring to my objection to whitewashing, or my objection to shoddy adaptations? I can't tell which post you're replying to.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

Mindfire said:


> Are you referring to my objection to whitewashing, or my objection to shoddy adaptations? I can't tell which post you're replying to.



Sorry it was unclear. The reply was directed to the post right above the one you're questioning.

I'm not objecting to anything at all. I agree that white-washing is an abhorrent practice & that film adaptions are often substandard productions of a fabulous written wok.

My comment was made in reference to you worrying now about things like having your book made into a shoddy film adaption. Being concerned about issues like these when you still have to write the work is what I mean by "cart before the horse."


----------



## Mindfire

T.Allen.Smith said:


> Sorry it was unclear.
> 
> I'm not objecting to anything at all. I agree that white-washing is an abhorrent practice & that film adaptions are often substandard productions of a fabulous written wok.
> 
> My comment was made in reference to you worrying now about things like having your book made into a shoddy film adaption. Being concerned about issues like these when you still have to write the work is what I mean by "cart before the horse."



Ahh. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## Caged Maiden

I think everyone needs to spend some time writing awesome query letters (after their novels are complete) and seeing where that takes them.


----------



## FatCat

If you're trying to publish a book, I'd imagine you better be ready for some demands to be made on the part of the publisher. They're a business, and when it comes down to it, you're writing may be a business. Instead of talking in terms of 'whitewashing', maybe the simple answer is that these professionals know what sells, and you didn't bring enough to the table. A professional writer, in my mind, knows how to handle requests from an editor and add them into the work without sacrificing your original intent of the work. Yes, in extreme cases this may be untrue, but for the most part if you want to play ball, know the rules!


----------



## Mindfire

FatCat said:


> If you're trying to publish a book, I'd imagine you better be ready for some demands to be made on the part of the publisher. They're a business, and when it comes down to it, you're writing may be a business. Instead of talking in terms of 'whitewashing', maybe the simple answer is that these professionals know what sells, and you didn't bring enough to the table. A professional writer, in my mind, knows how to handle requests from an editor and add them into the work without sacrificing your original intent of the work. Yes, in extreme cases this may be untrue, but for the most part if you want to play ball, know the rules!



...I'm sorry could you clarify; are you excusing whitewashing?


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> ...I'm sorry could you clarify; are you excusing whitewashing?



I think that is a pretty strained reading of what he said.


----------



## Amanita

> I'm sorry could you clarify; are you excusing whitewashing?


The general idea seems to be that clever people in publishing houses know what sells and what doesn't and as profit-orientated companies, they have no choice but to only accept what sells. (In their opinion). Therefore we foolish new authors being stupidly in love with our "baby" writing have to accept every demand they make or accept that our books will stay in our shelves. 
That's how it sounds. 
It's sad if it's true, especially when issues such as represantation of different ethnic groups is concerned.


----------



## Chime85

There are changes I would at least consider (painfully at times, I'm sure). But there would be some changes I would simply refuse to make.

:- Different characteristics of my characters. This goes for appearence as well as personality. I cannot fathom changing one character from grumpy to giggle, it's never going to happen. 

:- Certain plot elements. Although I'm open to suggestions, there are still some events in the plot that I will refuse to budge on. Not all, by any means. But in my mind, certain events MUST unfold in a particular way. 

As for other elements, I am open to negotiation. I'm not too fussed about front covers, but I would much prefer if the cover did not have any characters on it. An illustration of the world I've set or of a particular place, yes, be my guest. I just dont want a visual representation of any of my characters set in stone before anybody has even read the story.


----------



## Steerpike

Amanita said:


> The general idea seems to be that clever people in publishing houses know what sells and what doesn't and as profit-orientated companies, they have no choice but to only accept what sells. (In their opinion). Therefore we foolish new authors being stupidly in love with our "baby" writing have to accept every demand they make or accept that our books will stay in our shelves.



You can always self-publish. When you use a traditional publisher, you are asking someone else to pay out money in advance, either to you, a cover artist, for the actual book production and distribution, etc. They're going to do that if they think they can make more money in return than they've spent on you. That should be obvious enough. Of course they accept what they think will sell. They wouldn't be in business long if they were spending a bunch of money on things that didn't sell.


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> You can always self-publish. When you use a traditional publisher, you are asking someone else to pay out money in advance, either to you, a cover artist, for the actual book production and distribution, etc. They're going to do that if they think they can make more money in return than they've spent on you. That should be obvious enough. Of course they accept what they think will sell. They wouldn't be in business long if they were spending a bunch of money on things that didn't sell.



I think part of the problem is that there's a bait and switch in there.

"We think your book will sell... but only if you turn it into what we want it to be and possibly make it near unrecognizable in the process." 

If that's what they wanted, why pick up my book at all? Why invest in my work if its not what they really want? Why not just subsidize a writer to make homogenized cash-ins for them instead of vampirizing original work?


----------



## Philip Overby

I think if people have a tendency to worry if their vision will be corrupted somehow, perhaps they should go with self-publishing or indie publishing as others have suggested.  There's less chance of you story being change and you have more freedom over what you can do.  Traditional publishing obviously has the chance for more visibility though.  I see a future where more and more writers do _both._ As many actors say, "Do one for yourself, and one for the money." 

I think as writers it's good to be flexible though.  Heavily consider any opportunities you're given, regardless if they seem to jeopardize your original vision.  I wouldn't just say "no" because someone is suggesting a change.  Just think it over, is all I'm saying.


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> I think part of the problem is that there's a bait and switch in there.
> 
> "We think your book will sell... but only if you turn it into what we want it to be and possibly make it near unrecognizable in the process."
> 
> If that's what they wanted, why pick up my book at all? Why invest in my work if its not what they really want? Why not just subsidize a writer to make homogenized cash-ins for them instead of vampirizing original work?



That's not a bait and switch. Much of this is generally done _before_ they pick up your work, during the contract negotiation process. It's not even close to a bait and switch, in fact. The point people are making is that they're not going to invest in your work if they don't want it. 

Also, you have to keep in mind that all companies operate within the ordinary course of conduct in their industry (one reason an agent can be so important if you don't know the industry). If the common practice is to go through the process of making things more commercially-successful, then the company isn't suddenly in the wrong because you, as the author, weren't familiar with the industry when you got involved and didn't realize that's what they were going to do.

As people have said, if retaining a high level of control is really that important to you, self-publish or go with a niche publisher. if you go with the giants, you have to understand they're looking for mainstream, commercial work that will have mass appeal.


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> That's not a bait and switch. Much of this is generally done before they pick up your work, during the contract negotiation process. It's not even close to a bait and switch, in fact. The point people are making is that they're not going to invest in your work if they don't want it.
> 
> Also, you have to keep in mind that all companies operate within the ordinary course of conduct in their industry (one reason an agent can be so important if you don't know the industry). If the common practice is to go through the process of making things more commercially-successful, then the company isn't suddenly in the wrong because you, as the author, weren't familiar with the industry when you got involved and didn't realize that's what they were going to do.
> 
> As people have said, if retaining a high level of control is really that important to you, self-publish or go with a niche publisher. if you go with the giants, you have to understand they're looking for mainstream, commercial work that will have mass appeal.



I get what you're saying. I guess what I'm really asking is: why would they pick it up anyway if they didn't think it would sell as it is? Seems a tad deceptive.

Eg:
"We _said_ we wanted your epic fantasy work, but what we _really_ want is a (insert popular YA here) knockoff. Can you do that?"

An extreme example, yes. But it makes the point.


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> I get what you're saying. I guess what I'm really asking is: why would they pick it up anyway if they didn't think it would sell as it is? Seems a tad deceptive.



It's only deceptive if they are representing something else to you (and if you don't know how the industry works). They "pick up a work" when you and them both sign a contract saying that they are going to publish it. Read it. How things will work is going to be in that contract. It's not deceptive; they're not going to say one thing in the agreement to acquire the work and then spring all of this on you after you've signed on the dotted line.


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> It's only deceptive if they are representing something else to you (and if you don't know how the industry works). They "pick up a work" when you and them both sign a contract saying that they are going to publish it. Read it. How things will work is going to be in that contract. It's not deceptive; they're not going to say one thing in the agreement to acquire the work and then spring all of this on you after you've signed on the dotted line.



Ahhh, ok I get it now.


----------



## Zero Angel

Kit said:


> (We don't have a "thumbs up" or "ditto"  icon on this forum; this was the closest I could get!)



There's a "Thanks" option though! I like Google's the best personally. I +1 all sorts of stuff!


----------



## Steerpike

Interestingly enough, I am reviewing an agreement between a writer and a company right now, and the contract includes the following language:



> Writer shall incorporate into all written material hereunder such changes, revisions, deletions and/or additions as my be required by Company or any representative designated by Company.



So, as I noted above, if you get a publishing contract, READ IT


----------



## Ankari

Steerpike said:


> Interestingly enough, I am reviewing an agreement between a writer and a company right now, and the contract includes the following language:
> 
> So, as I noted above, if you get a publishing contract, READ IT



I hate lawyer talk.  After the second sentence I can only read blah blah blah blah Company blah blah blah Your Soul.


----------



## Ireth

Ankari said:


> I hate lawyer talk.  After the second sentence I can only read blah blah blah blah Company blah blah blah Your Soul.



The gist of the segment is: "You change your stuff how we want it changed if we see fit, and boohoo if you don't like it."


----------



## Mindfire

Steerpike said:


> Interestingly enough, I am reviewing an agreement between a writer and a company right now, and the contract includes the following language:
> 
> 
> 
> So, as I noted above, if you get a publishing contract, READ IT



That seems terribly vague. Could you ask for something to be included allowing you to object to such changes for reasons of conscience, such as whitewashing, violating your religious beliefs, etc.?


----------



## Steerpike

Ankari said:


> I hate lawyer talk.  After the second sentence I can only read blah blah blah blah Company blah blah blah Your Soul.



That's why if you're going to enter into a major deal with a publisher, you have an agent. They can be the ones that want to slit their wrists reading contract language, and you can go have a beer.


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> That seems terribly vague. Could you ask for something to be included allowing you to object to such changes for reasons of conscience, such as whitewashing, violating your religious beliefs, etc.?



You can ask for whatever you want. It all comes down to what you and the Company both agree to. I'm not saying the paragraph I cited is the standard, I just happened to come across it in this particular agreement and wanted to post it as an example of why you read every word of the document (or your agent does).


----------



## Ankari

Steerpike said:


> That's why if you're going to enter into a major deal with a publisher, you have an agent. They can be the ones that want to slit their wrists reading contract language, and you can go have a beer.



Or hire people like Steerpike


----------



## BWFoster78

Ankari said:


> Or hire people like Steerpike



I was kinda wondering if we could actually hire Steerpike.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

BWFoster78 said:


> I was kinda wondering if we could actually hire Steerpike.



You may have to change his litter the rest of his 9 lives...


----------



## Steerpike

I'm not a literary agent. I do review these kinds of agreements from time to time, usually with respect to the intellectual property terms. I've seen enough to know that 9 times out of 10 a good, experienced literary agent is going to pay for their own commission in terms of working the deal for you. That's the route I'd go. If you ever find yourself with a company interested enough to start talking contracts and you don't already have an agent, go find one. They're not too hard to get if you actually have a deal in the works.


----------



## Ankari

No, no.  Only people like him.  Steerpike is a legend around these parts.  Nations need to take loans from the World Bank to cover a day's worth of fees.  He is the most lawyery lawyer in the world.


----------



## Steerpike

Ankari said:


> No, no.  Only people like him.  Steerpike is a legend around these parts.  Nations need to take loans from the World Bank to cover a day's worth of fees.  He is the most lawyery lawyer in the world.



Hey, it would be nice if I could charge those kinds of rates. I'd retire pretty soon and just write


----------



## Zero Angel

Ireth said:


> The gist of the segment is: "You change your stuff how we want it changed if we see fit, and boohoo if you don't like it."



 Ninja'd! -_- I always plan to explain things and then other people always beat me to the punch =P


----------



## Snowpoint

It helps to be flexible. If Jane Austen had not consented to adding Zombies for commercial appeal, then Pride and Prejudice would have never made it to publication.

The system works, because most books that are published are really good.


----------



## Mindfire

Snowpoint said:


> It helps to be flexible. If Jane Austen had not consented to adding Zombies for commercial appeal, then Pride and Prejudice would have never made it to publication.
> 
> The system works, because most books that are published are really good.



What is this I don't even


----------



## Steerpike

Mindfire said:


> What is this I don't even



Amazon.com: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: The Classic Regency Romance - Now with Ultraviolent Zombie Mayhem! (9781594743344): Jane Austen, Seth Grahame-Smith: Books


----------



## FatCat

Steerpike said:


> Amazon.com: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: The Classic Regency Romance - Now with Ultraviolent Zombie Mayhem! (9781594743344): Jane Austen, Seth Grahame-Smith: Books



My god, that's brilliant!


----------



## Zero Angel

FatCat said:


> My god, that's brilliant!



They're making it a movie too I heard


----------

