Fitzhenry & Whiteside: Writer Beware Q&A #2.5

What’s that, you say?  Aren’t you keeping us up to date any longer here on WordPlay?

Just as soon as I get back from twelve hours of agility trialing for two days with the Beagles.   8)

#FreeDLJ!
And writers, take a look before submitting your work.  Knowledge is power…

======================
This is a vastly updated version of Q&A #1.  It’s lots different, though–I just didn’t want to stick a second post in this space to clutter things up.

If you haven’t seen the BoingBoing post—or read Cory Doctorow’s wonderfully concise and clear comments regarding the nature of regular trade channels—you might find it of some interest. Not everyone there thinks I’ve got my head screwed on straight, of course.

In response to the most common point I see being addressed in comments here and there:

Yes, in a perfect world, the contract reversion clause would have been more tightly negotiated–but we had to fight tooth and nail to get what we got.  Going forward on those terms was a decision I made on the basis of significant mitigating circumstances–my agent responds with a little more detail in the original post comments. By all means, learn from this situation.  But the main point here is how this publisher has behaved for the past eighteen months.  Learn from that, too.

The Original Post
The Timeline
The BoingBoing Post
The Writer Beware Post
WriterBeware Comments Further (scroll down!)
Twitter #FreeDLJ

Regarding my awareness that this is a Canadian publisher—yes, I know that.  It’s been taken into account with regards to the distribution conversation, as has the industry standard meaning for “regular trade channels.”

But delayed, limited online availability doesn’t constitute regular trade channels.  And even this (Tuesday) evening, a search on Indigo.ca of all the Chapters, Coles, and Indigo bookstores in Victoria, Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Winnipeg, and Toronto has revealed DLJ to have one copy on the shelves at one store.

I’ve said elsewhere (I haven’t the faintest idea where.  It’s been a crazy couple of days) that I have no delusions that this book should be a best-seller.  It’s a 17yo title which sold modestly the first time.  The first edition copies are regularly priced at sums that startle me, but it can also sometimes be found at your basic used-book price (note:  it’s easier to find a used copy of the first edition than it is to find the reprint under discussion–I signed three of them at the last convention, after which they went back in their plastic protective sleeves).  To some extent, conversational threads that go in that direction–my unreasonable expectations or some failure to understand the modest nature of the book–are only misdirection.  To the contrary, I have a very good (and realistic!) idea of what this book could be selling.

Meanwhile, I’ve left a comment here and there, but I haven’t engaged in any significant conversations outside this blog.  I’m aware of what’s being said about me, and…well, I disagree.  Let’s leave it at that.

I admit it. This is not my strength. I’m not someone who enjoys a good rousing argument or is invigorated by social conflict. Mainly, I’m doing my best with something I feel needs to be done. Probably that means it could be done better, but you know…here I am, and here it is, and so be it.  I mainly hope the word of this publisher’s behavior over the past 18 months is reaching agents and authors who are considering submission plans.

PS: First-time posters on this blog pass through moderation before posting, and always have.  This is a Zone of Thoughtful Discourse, whether you agree or disagree with me.  Visitors here should feel safe to post, either way.  Visitors of Virulence will receive the Mighty Click of Moderation.