Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind

Shel Silverstein's Secret, Raucous Recording Sessions

Shel Silverstein's 80th birthday was last Saturday, and since my admiration (okay, uh, general fannishness) is hardly a secret in these quarters, it seemed like as good a time as any to write about the series of recordings he did approximately 40 years ago that were too profane to release to the general public. That piece runs today on TheAtlantic.com's culture channel, and includes YouTube clips for two of the unreleased recordings: "Fuck 'Em" and "I Love My Right Hand."

Because of time and space constraints, the final version of the piece didn't include some of my recollections of how I first got a hold of one version of these bootleg sessions:

In early 1999, I was still a college student, a fan of Silverstein's works for children but barely cognisant of his work for adults. Thanks to a long-defunct site run by one Carol Arnett, I got up to speed in record time, my own dormant archival instincts awakened. On April 17 of that year - just three weeks before Silverstein died - a curious item went up for auction on eBay. It was an acetate, with two sides of eye-popping titles like "Fuck 'Em", "I Am Not a Fag" and "I Love My Right Hand." It bore the marks of Glenbrook, CT-based blank tape manufacturer Audio Devices Inc., which would be bought by Capitol Records in 1972 and closed down just two years later. The seller, now consigned to the dark, dank basement of the Internet, seemed just as bewildered as the small but enthusiastic community of Silverstein fans made aware of the acetate for the very first time: "This acetate was probably never intended to see the light of day because 1) Shel Silverstein sounds as though he is high on something and 2) the subject matter of most of the songs is-shall we say-adult rated? I realize that Mr. Silverstein is a very unusual artist, but this material is out there even for him."

Eventually the acetate sold for $431.60. I, being a frugal-minded college student, didn't bother to bid, though eBay secured me a rare 1963 Silverstein interview published in a college magazine, first editions of out-of-print titles and other material currently gathering dust in my parents' house. But then an out-of-the-blue email came from a fellow Silverstein enthusiast. He could burn me a copy of a slightly different version of the acetate, did I want a copy?

Indeed I did. Per the estate, there are no plans to release these tracks commercially, and it remains to be seen if Silverstein ever intended them to see the light of day or if it was just him having way too much fun in the recording studio. But there are still so many unanswered questions: where were the sessions recorded? Who was the producer who says "take number one, Fornicate Them" and is privy to Shel's madcap lyrical stylings? Was the acetate that sold on eBay a decade ago the master of all the recordings or a multiple-generations-removed copy, like the version I have? Or does the master actually live in one of CBS's vaults somewhere?

One more note: this piece would never have been written without the power of Twitter. So thanks first to Alexis Madrigal for expressing his interest, and to his colleague Eleanor Barkhorn, the culture channel editor at The Atlantic, for signing off and whittling the piece down by about half. And I think I'd better go listen to the "Julie's Working" outtake again...

A Question of Audience: What the Publishing Industry Should Know About Those Who Report About Them

Sometime soon, Julie Bosman will move beats and report on the publishing industry for the New York Times, replacing Motoko Rich (who will now report on the economy.) Bosman's a familiar face, having filed book-related stories between September 2006 and February 2007, and I presume her prior experience vaulted her to front-runner status for Rich's old job because the learning curve wouldn't be as steep. It also pre-empted a half-joking post in my head for a while that would have offered advice to the paper's incoming publishing reporter. Or at least, mutated it into a larger consideration of what it means to report on a specialized niche for an audience that may have different wants and needs than the niche.

I've become increasingly aware the longer I've written about publishing for a business news site that some stories that are big news within the industry carry little relevance outside of publishing circles. That means certain news items I pay attention to and analyze to death via Twitter, such as Random House's most recent reorganizations of the Bantam Dell/Ballantine and Crown divisions, won't merit larger stories. It also means that certain topics that are discussed endlessly in the publishing bubble (especially the digerati-populated one), while relevant to the outside world, have to be written about in a way that might come off as eye-rolling rehash. 

So yes, I suppose what advice I'd have for Julie Bosman, or any incoming publishing reporter at any consumer-oriented publication, is to remember that your industry contacts and sources want you to get the story right and be comprehensive and thorough, instead of picking and choosing what will make thee best narrative (this, I think, has been the crux of Publishers Lunch's semi-ongoing series of posts playing factcheck on the NYT's e-book and agency model stories over the last few months.)

But I also think it's important for the publishing industry to remember that the NYT isn't catering to them, and that their audience, being broader and larger, has very different considerations. Just as that paper's considerations will differ from its so-called competitors, so that certain stories are a natural for one publication and will never appear in another.

None of this is earth-shattering, but I don't think I've seen a real breakdown of what kinds of book and publishing stories appear from each publication. So let me offer my own interpretation of who's covering the beat and their publication's given audience:

Associated Press (Hillel Italie): Exclusive scoops on book deals by notable politicians (George W. Bush, Sarah Palin), Celebrities/Hollywood types (Marilyn Monroe, James Cameron, John Sayles) or journalists (Bob Woodward). Plagiarism scandals. Lengthy profiles of historians, biographers, politically-minded folk, and literary figures with some degree of longevity (Deborah Eisenberg). Notable awards, like the National Book Awards, the NBCC Awards, and the latest inductees into the American Academy of Arts & Letters.

New York Times (formerly Motoko Rich, now Julie Bosman): Higher-end revolving door, such as CEO exits, massive layoffs, authors switching houses when there's a lot of money involved, book deals of a seven-figure variety. Increasingly more stories on e-books and digital developments as it affects readers. Profiles of recently published or about to be published authors with some buzz. Notable awards.

Wall Street Journal (Jeffrey Trachtenberg): quarterly reports for big publishing houses. New digital developments (like Google Editions, when an e-reader is supposed to ship/why it's been delayed). Some author profiles, especially from an industry/book sales standpoint, though increasingly those are being done by colleague Alexandra Alter.

USA TODAY (Bob Minzesheimer): big features on authors, either bestselling (Stephenie Meyer, Rick Riordan) or on track to be (Wes Moore). Snippets of information relating to the USA TODAY bestseller list. Notable awards. Ever mindful that its audience is national, reads the paper at hotels, doesn't have a lot of time for depth.

New York Magazine (Boris Kachka): analysis on the so-called end of the publishing industry. Q&As/in-the-field pieces on authors who have a specific anchor to New York City. More of a "glamor" (trade publishers, big six, agents and editors you've heard of) focus instead of a business one.

New York Observer (formerly Leon Neyfakh, now Molly Fischer, who spends most of her time editing the Daily Transom blog): Andrew Wylie's latest literary estate grab. Book deals by hot new literary writers. Profiles of bright young literary things. Reorganizations at large publishing houses, with analysis. E-books, not so much.

GalleyCat (Jason Boog): Publishing moves, with memos attached; Q&As with literary agents, editors and other industry types; job ads; half for publishing industry types, half for authors. Increasing emphasis on e-books and digital.

EBookNewser (Craig Morgan Teicher, though not for much longer; replacement TK) What the name says: all things e-book and digital. Product reviews and conference reports. Some crossposting to GalleyCat.

DailyFinance (moi): Quarterly reports. Ron Burkle and his ongoing battle with Barnes & Noble. Borders successful last-ditch effort to secure more financing and stay alive. E-books and digital with a financial or retail angle. Publishing moves at the executive level (i.e. Random House adding an M&A person, Macmillan falling afoul of the World Bank.) 

The National Post (Mark Medley): author profiles; the "ecology of publishing" series from many vantage points, including editorial, book publicity, marketing, e-books.

The Globe & Mail (John Barber): Author profiles of the NYT "lots of buzz" variety. Not as much on the purely industry news side, and those big stories - Amazon opening up a consignment warehouse in Canada proper, the parallel importation debate - are handled by others, including James Adams. 

FYI, I'm leaving out truly trade-oriented publications and websites (like Publishers Weekly, Publishers Lunch, Shelf Awareness, Publishing Trends, BookBrunch, Book2Book and The Bookseller in the UK, Quill & Quire in Canada, Publishing Perspectives for the entire world, to name a few) - that are geared towards the publishing community, or varying slices of it, as well as book-focused but not necessarily publishing focused publications who, say, might write up literary galas and book awards but aren't so concerned with publishing. (Jacket Copy, run by Carolyn Kellogg, has some industry and digital stuff, but the focus is more generally bookish. Almost all the newspaper-run book blogs are just that, so less concerned with industry news.)

It also goes without saying there are fewer people who are devoted outright to the publishing beat. The Washington Post had Bob Thompson for years, but he's retired and no one has really replaced him. Josh Getlin covered publishing for the Los Angeles Times until he was laid off in 2008, and while author profiles abound, publishing stories really do not. Keith Kelly used to pay more attention (hence "NY Post dollars" for book deals, due to the inflated numbers almost always reported in his stories) but less so these days. When Mike Fleming was at Variety, he used to report on publishing as it related to the film business every now and then. Now that he's at Deadline, it's less of a priority.

In any case, I hope this haphazard guide - which, based on past experience, is subject to immediate and obsolescence-inducing change - explains why some stories run in some publications and not others, and why audience is a huge consideration in what you'll read in said publications.

Death, Taxes and the American Way of Literary Estates

Now I can confess: when I first heard the news that J.D. Salinger died, I was instant-messaging with my editor at DailyFinance and said something to the effect of "not to sound crass, but his family is going to end up a whole lot richer as a result." Obviously, the big question, as the AP's Hillel Italie succinctly put it, is "what's in the safe?" - which is why I had put in my own two cents about what will surely be the title of an upcoming thriller, The Salinger Vault (oh wait, looks like someone wrote that already.) But my so-called crassness stemmed from the piece being edited, and now live - a look at the wacky loophole that repeals the federal estate tax, for the time being, for the duration of 2010. 

The piece, which for contractual reasons I cannot quote from here, stems from my longtime fascination with legacy and what happens after death - especially for authors. It's why I've read disappointingly little of Raymond Carver but can quote chapter and verse about the battles Tess Gallagher waged to get the "real" versions of her husband's stories out in the world lest they settle for Gordon Lish's semi-authorial stamp on "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love" and the like. It's why Andrew Wylie interests me less as an agent of living authors than of dead ones, why literary biographies soon after a subject's death both appeals to and repels me (cf. Louis Begley on John Updike, D.T. Max on David Foster Wallace) and why most of my author interviews of late somehow stray into the notion of what they plan on doing with their voluminous literary archives.

You're not supposed to speak ill of the dead, and you're not supposed to ask what happens to the unpublished manuscripts and creative endeavors when the body's hardly cold. But look at how so many estates end up in legal hell, with heirs wrangling over the right to publish or not publish what the recently deceased writer wanted or did not want. Even a perfectly ordered estate takes a great deal of time to sift through, but it seems that the more time spent in advance thinking about what to do, the less there will be headaches.

Unless, of course, you're related to J.D. Salinger. Because there's just no way I can envision a simple solution, even if he had taken the step to put most of his earnings into a self-named trust back in 2008. Not when CATCHER IN THE RYE still brings in a boatload of backlist bounty for Little, Brown, acting as the publisher's secret ingredient for continued success. Kafka wanted his manuscripts burned, and look how that turned out. Nabokov didn't want THE ORIGINAL OF LAURA published, and look how that turned out. But wouldn't it be strange if it turned out the decision to let loose those hypothetical magical revolutionary* manuscripts depended on whether the estate tax repeal - and thus, the beefing up of family coffers - actually stuck for the remainder of the year?

*obligatory Apple iPad joke. It's been that kind of week.

The Girl Who Made American Readers Impatient

When THE GIRL WHO KICKED THE HORNET'S NEST, the final book in Stieg Larsson's Millenium trilogy, was published in the UK in October, I knew I had to get my hands on a copy almost immediately*. I was far from the only impatient one, as it turns out, and the New York Times' Motoko Rich was on the case to figure out why American readers were ready and willing to fork over as much as $45 for McLehose Press's airport edition of the book, and independent bookstores like Partners & Crime and Murder by the Book have sold about 100 copies each of the title:

The imports are attracting fans like Joan Morgenstern, a retired property manager in Houston who had already torn through the first two books in the series and was eager to read the third when she discovered that her favorite bookstore in Houston, Murder by the Book, imported several copies of the British hardcover version shortly after it was published in October.

Ms. Morgenstern, 64, paid $40 for her copy and read it over the Thanksgiving holiday. “I’ve never been extremely patient when it comes to stuff I can find and read,” she said...

...Bridget Lennon, an interior designer for retail stores, visited the shop last week to buy a copy of “Hornet’s Nest” as a Christmas present for her fiancé. “You put down the first one, and you want to read the second; and you put down the second, and you want to read the third,” Ms. Lennon, 27, said. Although she said the $45 price tag was steep, she figured that by the time she, her fiancé, her fiancé’s sister and his father had all read it, “between the three or four of us that we know immediately who want to read it, it will pay off eventually.”

So why is Knopf, which publishes Larsson in the States, holding off on releasing THE GIRL WHO KICKED THE HORNET'S NEST until May? Spokesman Paul Bogaards said the company wanted to allow interest to build as more and more readers discovered the first two volumes in the series. “The sales on Book 1 and Book 2 are so strong that you wouldn’t want to add Book 3 to the mix immediately."

And here's the thing: Bogaards is probably right. The hard-core fans may not want to wait until May to read it, but their early buzz essentially acts the same way that advance copies do, and if the early adopters are enthusiastic (so far, they have been) then the much larger market segment of less hardcore fans will not only be primed to pick up book #3, they will also have plenty of time to catch up with THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (764,000 copies sold in all formats, according to Bookscan) and THE GIRL WHO PLAYED WITH FIRE (199,000 copies sold of the hardcover, also according to Bookscan)

Now, the funny thing is that originally, HORNET'S NEST was supposed to come out in early 2010, keeping the one-a-year pace of the first two books. But McLehose Press, a division of Quercus, moved it up, and the combined sales of all the Larsson books pretty much salvaged their year. They are far more in need of the cash boost the books provide than is Random House, which started off being 9 months behind (DRAGON TATTOO was published in January 2008 by Quercus, September of that year by Knopf) and has been publishing the series at a slightly accelerated pace, too (PLAYED WITH FIRE came out in late July; HORNET'S NEST will be out this coming May.)

If anything, publishing HORNET'S NEST so "late" makes it more likely that 2010 will provide the needed boost for the entire company - Dan Brown did all right, but they needed plenty of other books to perform well, too. And by 2011, when all three of the books are in paperback, Knopf - through its paperback arm, Vintage - will see plenty more money still from perennial backlist sales. 

Importing UK titles happens all the time, and I expect that issues of territory will become far more serious once e-books have more than a 3-4% market share. But with regards to Larsson, the number of people too impatient to wait versus the expected market for THE GIRL WHO KICKED THE HORNET'S NEST is still so tiny that, to my mind, Knopf is hardly losing out - if anything, they're gaining more attention and potential sales as a result. Because many early adopters will turn around and buy the US edition come May - for themselves, for loved ones,  for anyone they can think of. And that way they benefit Knopf and McLehose Press (who, by the way, get first dibs on US sales because they bought World English rights back in the day) double. 

UPDATE: Publishers Lunch (subscription req'd) points out one aspect that Rich didn't touch much on in her story but "is of concern to some trade publishers: bulk imports for resale by US retailers (portrayed as a savvy "way to lure customers into paying premium prices") are a violation of copyright law." I followed up with Knopf's Paul Bogaards on a couple of points. First, to my question about whether they might pursue any action against booksellers who imported the Larsson books en masse, he said:  "I'm not at liberty to discuss action we may be taking against booksellers who are operating in clear violation of copyright law, other than to say, we are carefully reviewing our options with counsel."

The release dates for HORNET'S NEST and the paperback editions of THE GIRL WHO PLAYED WITH FIRE remain unchanged as well, and with general regards to issues of high demands, Bogaards had this to say:

Import sales, while illegal, are not a new phenomenon, and we witnessed some of the same consumer behaviors with book two in the series (the UK sale preceded our own, and some readers purchased UK editions). The term "high demand" is relative one, and could easily be substituted with another, more accurate turn of phrase (ala "a cadre of die-hard Larsson enthusiasts in concert with their lawless, book smuggling brethren") -- and it is important to note that what is driving current demand for The Girl Who Played with Fire in the US marketplace are the phenomenal paperback sales of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

Generally, it is the wide availability of a paperback, in all channels of distribution, that helps broaden a hardcover readership, as has been the case with Larsson. As this story continues to unfold in the months to come, it is the wide availability of both paperback editions of The Girl Who Played with Fire, coming in March, as well as the attendant marketing campaigns for Fire and Nest, that will spur readers to purchase The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest when it is released in May.

Also see BookNet Canada's Morgan Cowie's post for yet more food for thought. 

*(thanks, A.K.)

Glenn Beck, the New Patron Saint of Thriller Writing?

I suspect reading Motoko Rich's story on "the Glenn Beck effect" on thriller writers might have caused a trace of discomfort among many writers and publishing industry types. It's certainly different than a spot on Oprah, or Craig Ferguson, or NPR, or the Daily Show or the Colbert Report, as those media outlets lean more towards the left, or the comedic, or keep politics to a minimum, let alone whip up a frenzy of cartoonish propaganda Warner Bros. would have balked at during the apex of World War II.

But publishing casts about for anyone resembling a savior, someone whose recommendations will lead to the magic elixir of book sales. Even Oprah's own transformative powers have decreased this year (picking a short story collection that, while exceedingly well-written, centers around poverty and violence in Africa) So now Glenn Beck, that "outspoken media darling of populist conservatism," gets his turn.

There are a number of interesting takeaways, the first being the types of books Beck gravitates towards and who is writing them. They are, by and large, thrillers that hinge more on elaborate plot twists, conspiracies and grand schemes, featuring protagonists who are more absolutist (what they do is good, who they battle is bad, with little room for grey areas or introspection) and more conservative in outlook. In the past couple of years, Beck's interviewed David Baldacci, James Patterson, Brad Thor, Ted Bell, Andrew Gross, Brad Meltzer, Vince Flynn, Christopher Reich and Daniel Silva, among others - in other words, it's like Beck has a line into the upper echelons of ITW. (The most notable absence at first blush would be Lee Child, but consider that the first of his Reacher novels to top the NYT list, NOTHING TO LOSE, was also the most heavily criticized by the right.) Beck definitely has a line into what his viewers - especially the 800,000-odd people in the coveted 25-54 demographic - might be interested in reading. Chances are they are not avid book buyers, lucky to put a couple of hundred bucks' total into publishers' coffers.

Beck's viewership also skews predominately towards white males, and at the risk of gross overgeneralization, fall into the stereotypical category of those who shy away from reading books outside their own gender (or ethnic and cultural worldview.) I didn't search through Beck's entire interview archive of radio programs and tv episodes, but at least since he's moved over to FOXNews, he doesn't appear to have talked with a female thriller writer. Not doing so cuts off access to the larger, predominantly female book-buying demographic, but they aren't really Beck's audience - and I'm not sure he's all that interested in catering to that particular group.

Increasing overall ratings is certainly of high priority - 3 million or so watch Beck daily, a loud minority that's only about 1% of America's total population. (Such is cable television.) But to put things in perspective, that's a phenomenal number of potential book buyers. So no wonder William Morrow attributes Beck as the reason James Rollins' THE DOOMSDAY KEY stayed on the NYT bestseller list longer than they anticipated, since all it takes to stay on the list is a steady sales stream of several thousand copies per week.

But then comes the proverbial problem: now that Rich's story has run, will Beck's producers be besieged by writers wanting to appear on his show? And if they don't share Beck's views, or deviate considerably from them, will they run into similar situations as befaced Andrew Gross?

"I'll get people who are obviously fans of his who write me e-mails, saying, 'I paid $27 for this, and I didn't want to buy a bunch of lefty [shit,] Mr. Gross said. “And then I get calls from people on the left who say, 'I've always liked your books but now that I see you have an association with Glenn Beck, I'm reconsidering.'"

Mr. Gross said he defended himself to both sides. "Invariably, I've had people who said, 'I wasn't going to read it because I saw it was endorsed by Glenn Beck,'" he said. "And I've pushed them to hold their judgment. And several of them have written back and said, 'I take it back.'"

In other words, Beck's reach works because it's self-selecting to his chosen audience, and when there's a sales bump of a certain author's titles, the publisher beams. Threshold, the conservative imprint of Simon & Schuster, will have plenty of occasion to do just that when Beck's own thriller (still untitled) is released next spring. But move outside that self-selection bubble and the happy scenario may play out far, far differently. It's a dance that requires a great deal of delicacy - a far cry from Beck's own outsized, button-pushing persona.

And the Publishing Beat Goes On

When I left GalleyCat a couple of years ago the prospect of covering the publishing industry on a daily basis had become something of a grind. There were other projects to pursue - some successful, others less so and hence never discussed publicly - that stuck closer to my beloved genre of crime fiction or flew further afield.

But a funny thing happened in the intervening years: I didn't burn out on publishing. Far from it, as the convergence of a recessed economy, the rise of e-books (even if just in terms of how many stories are published about said rise) and the enthusiasm of many observers and insiders who want to mold publishing into a model that better fits the 21st century all make this a very exciting - albeit disturbing and not-so-occasionally depressing - time for publishing. Twitter helped keep track of that, and occasional stints hosting Publishers Lunch over the last year and a half confirmed I had too much of a personal stake to stay away.

Now comes a new gig: As of last week, I'll be writing about the publishing industry for DailyFinance, AOL's money and finance news blog. There will be short posts (like this and this) when news breaks and longer features every week or two. DailyFinance is a business-oriented site, and so too will my stories for them, which means I can cut loose on more stat-and-numbers geekery and learn more about the twin engines - technology and financials - that will drive publishing forward.

So a word of warning: between DailyFinance, my crime fiction columns at the LA Times and the Barnes & Noble Review and other freelance assignments - not to mention some larger projects in the works - Confessions will likely operate at a reduced frequency (aka when the mood strikes me.) Of course, the moment I announce such things, I end up blogging like a demon, which is how I've stayed at this for over six (!) years. But unpredictability is a wonderful thing, isn't it?

Brownian Motion Can't Be Stopped, At Least For Now

Can you stop a speeding juggernaut? When it comes to THE LOST SYMBOL, I'm sure many would like to try, but I'm not one of them, as my review of the book in the Barnes & Noble Review - where I will also wear the monthly mantle of "The Criminalist" - more or less attests.  It's a long piece, but I wanted to take a more methodical approach that could be read at a later date, instead of feeling like I had to burp out the first insta-reaction popping into my brain. Here's a couple of choice excerpts:

First, a confession: I liked The Da Vinci Code. This news is even more of a surprise to me than it might be to those who, years ago, heard me quip that I quit reading it because "the moment the albino assassin came through the door, I left." The novel's clunky opening sentence ("Renowned curator Jacques Sauniere staggered through the archway of the Grand Gallery") foreshadows Brown's penchant for stilted turns of phrase, and the most loudly proclaimed facts about ancient rites and secret societies are often nothing of the sort, but by now I understand why the fascination of 80 million readers made The Da Vinci Code such a massive phenomenon....

...Let's get right to the bottom line: The Lost Symbol works, albeit with reservations. It works because whatever mental alchemy Dan Brown needed to turn away from the noise and ramp up his creative signal, to stay away from distractions and focus on the story, takes hold with the opening utterance that "the secret is how to die." From the first sentence, we know what we're in for: there's a traitor in the midst of a sequestered society -- this time, as long-rumored, it's the Freemasons -- whose members include the most powerful people in the land, and our villain hungrily searches for the solution to an age-old proof known to few, doubted by many, and scoffed at by far more. Last time out the quest was for the Holy Grail; now it's for The Lost Word, or maybe, as I kept thinking of it as I turned the pages, L'Elisir Pensiero (for the Italian-challenged, that's the "Elixir of Thought.")...

For those who care to keep score, I picked up my copy of THE LOST SYMBOL just shy of 4 PM on Monday, had the first 200 pages read by the time I showed up to Gotham Hall for the launch party, finished the book at 9:30 PM, turned in the review at 11 PM and it was done and dusted by 9 AM this morning. But late yesterday, Louis Bayard at the Washington Post offered my favorite explanation of the page-turning, speed-reading appeal of Brown's thrillers: "Call it Brownian motion: a comet-tail ride of short paragraphs, short chapters, beautifully spaced reveals and, in the case of "The Lost Symbol," a socko unveiling of the killer's true identity."

It remains to be seen how the book will fare - booksellers are mighty hopeful, though one is rightfully skeptical, early prognostications are somewhat tepid and even Brown himself doesn't think "one book can save an industry" - but I wouldn't bet against the (Random) House, so to speak. That said, what does surprise me is that Brown is talking to most every major media outlet - the WSJ (already linked,) USA TODAY, the AP, Entertainment Weekly (which is so, so, not the first interview, sorry) the New York Observer, not to mention the morning shows - hell, even when I asked my one pressing question of Brown last night prior to the launch party, which was whether he had any comment on the death of his former Amherst College classmate David Foster Wallace, he answered: "I want to respect his family's privacy, as I believe he would have done of mine."

Still, let's give Oline Cogdill the last word for now, because she pinpoints why Dan Brown and THE LOST SYMBOL is something to be pleased about, not deride:

The Da Vinci Code wasn't my favorite book, nor did it make much of an impact on me as it did some. It was mildly entertaining and certainly not as good as the works by many of the solid mystery writers I prefer.For me, it was like a potato chip; 15 minutes after it was finished I couldn't tell you what it was about.

But if The Lost Symbol brings people back to the bookstore, back to reading, then great. If The Lost Symbol gets people to talk about a BOOK, instead of the latest pop star's bad behavior, then I say great.

And if The Lost Symbol inspires readers to maybe buy another book or two while they pick up Brown's novel, then I say GREAT.

UPDATE: John Fox has a very different take, troubled as he is by the generally positive tone of the reviews printed thus far:

It seems like this book has superseded its own status of book, and become more like a weather vane for the publishing industry as a whole -- a sacred totem that no reviewer dare out-and-out criticize because so many in the publishing industry want (need!) this book to succeed.

Could it be that massive popularity on this scale trumps any kind of literary merit? That people are just in awe of the Brown Juggernaut, and choose to bow rather than fight the power?

Well, Thom Geier at Entertainment Weekly's an immediate naysayer, and they'll run a rather lengthy interview with Brown in the magazine's next issue, so clearly that particular publication had no qualms about negative criticism. The Guardian's Mark Lawson makes a very good case for why THE LOST SYMBOL is a "rollicking piece of tosh," and Laura Miller more or less throws up her hands in the face of an apathetic reading public. But the kinds of literary crimes that Fox would like to see reviewers bring up just aren't there; this isn't like Thomas Harris turning Hannibal Lecter, a genuinely frightening villain, into a cannibalistic Mary Sue seated at the head table with his adversary-turned-lover Clarice Starling. That warranted the mounds of criticism it got. This isn't even like BREAKING DAWN, which stretched the Bella/Edward will they/won't they to natural limits, got her married, de-virginized and pregnant and embedded some rather disturbing commentary on feminine passivity and male stalking. It's breathless entertainment designed to provoke discussion, but not necessarily serious discussion. Perhaps if THE LOST SYMBOL had committed itself to being more overtly political there would have been more fiery critical rhetoric (which may come if, say, Glenn Beck decides to take up the "cause"...)

That said, I'll cop to one thing: Ed Champion has a point about last night's party, and while I attended because I thought it would give the piece a bit of extra color, in hindsight that wasn't strictly necessary - and something I'll think more than twice about doing in future.

A Closer Look at James Patterson's 17-Book Deal

When a writer signs a deal to publish more than, say, four books, it usually gets some attention in the press. But James Patterson's new deal, which keeps him with longtime publisher Little, Brown until 2012, raised some metaphorical eyeballs among the media, if headlines and ledes are to judge:

"If over the next few months you see smoke coming from the direction of James Patterson’s house, it might be a result of the author’s burning off his fingertips as he types.." -- NYT

"After more than 40 best sellers, James Patterson is just getting started." - AP

"James Patterson's To-Do List: Write 17 Books Really, Really Fast" - NYMag

And then there's Thom Geier at Entertainment Weekly, who rightfully points out that this prolific pace is actually decreased from years past - he's produced 22 books published between 2006 and the end of this year. So what do his fans - and the people who hold the pursestrings at Little Brown's parent company, Hachette Book Group, have to look forward to, by my very rough calculations?

3 Alex Cross novels, co-written by Richard DiLallo
3 Michael Bennett thrillers, co-written by Michael Ledwidge
3 Women's Murder Club thrillers, co-written by Maxine Paetro
2 Maximum Ride books
2 Daniel X books, also co-written by Ledwidge
2 books in the new YA "Witch & Wizard" series, co-written by Gabrielle Charbonnet
Unspecified number of international thrillers co-written by Swedish crime writer Liza Marklund
A non-fiction book, possibly two
A standalone novel, possibly two

Obviously that's a lot of books, but from the standpoint of the co-writer who does much of the legwork, it's basically a book-a-year pace, reporting to the in-house editor/packager that is Patterson.  The bigger story is that Hachette can breathe a sigh of relief that they have Patterson, Inc. for a few more years, and can buy a bit more time until, as a writer speculated to me recently, they have to start planning for what happens when the man with the name is no longer around, but the brand must keep going. Or the darker scenario of whether Patterson might look at the changing winds of publishing and realize he can make more money doing it on his own. That won't happen till 2012 at the earliest - or even later than that - but if it does, those trade winds will be far from calm.

UPDATE: Forbes' Lauren Streib also looks at the new deal - which sources tell her is worth about $150 million - and explains why Hachette had to keep him on and why it's actually "a bargain":

Patterson's not a writer. He's a fiction (and non-fiction) factory. In 2008 he authored or co-authored seven books and in his 33-year career as a published author he's written 57. He sells an average of 20 million books per year. An estimated 170 million copies of his novels are in print worldwide. Most important: During the last two years he's earned Hachette an estimated $500 million. According to Forbes estimates, Patterson took home $60 in the last year million for the effort.

"I've described Jim in the past as the rock we built our business on," says Young.

In other words, they can't afford to lose him. According to Publisher's Weekly, Hachette's revenues rose just 1.4% in 2008 to $2.2 billion, despite the runaway success of the teen series sensation Twilight, which sold nearly 30 million copies last year.

Adventures in Book Marketing with Simon Kernick's DEADLINE

Right now is not the time for authors to settle for traditional ways of book promotion, i.e. hoping and praying that their newest book on offer will be noticed and magically sell copies. Publishers are also trying to figure out creative and unorthodox ways for their titles to garner attention when there is simply too much competition for reader eyeballs. Most of the time, I applaud unusual promotional practices, because everybody needs an edge, a way to stand out. But when I first heard what UK retail chain WHSmith was doing with special editions of Simon Kernick's thriller DEADLINE, which Corgi originally published in paperback last year, my reaction was, shall we say, rather pointed: "Wow. Talk about a jaw-dropping, epic, book marketing fail."

As Marketing Week's Ruth Mortimer discovered, WHSmith is stocking a special, promotion-only version of DEADLINE - which can be obtained for free as long as the customer also pre-orders THE LOST SYMBOL -- with Dan Brown's name prominently displayed on the cover. And she did not like what she saw, not at all, not after initially thinking that DEADLINE was written by Brown because of the name placement:

So I picked up Deadline. Would it be the story of a young female journalist struggling for the scoop of the decade against the odds? At which point, I noticed someone else’s name on the cover beneath Dan Brown’s: Simon Kernick. “Aha,” I thought, “The title is actually ‘Simon Kernick: Deadline.’ Perhaps Kernick is the fictional detective starring in this novel?”

But as I looked closer, it dawned on me that in fact, Brown had not written this book at all. And Kernick is not the detective hero of the piece. The front cover, which proudly boasted that it was “exclusive” to WH Smith, bears the legend: “Dan Brown. If you like your thrillers as fast, furious and unputdownable as Dan Brown, then we thought you’d enjoy…Simon Kernick. Deadline.”

I had got it entirely wrong. Kernick is, in fact, the author of Deadline. Brown is not.

This is selling one author’s book with the name of another author as the hook to draw in the shopper. Rather than simply referring to Dan Brown on the cover notes, suggesting similarities between the authors’ styles, at first sight it seems that Brown is the main writer.

The whole top two-thirds of the book is dedicated to Brown, rather than Kernick. Careless shoppers, like me, could quite easily buy it thinking it was Brown’s own work and only realise their mistake when they’d parted with their cash.

Pace J. Miller, who scanned in both front and back covers of the WHSmith edition of DEADLINE, was similarly outraged: "[This cover] designed to mislead and deceive the careless book buyer, or at the very least cause what is commonly referred to as ‘initial interest confusion’.  The danger is exacerbated when this book is placed right next to Dan Brown’s books, which it was when I found it in WH Smith (a UK bookstore chain). The thing is, Kernick is not some crappy first time author who can’t sell a copy.  His previous novel, Relentless, was the 8th best-selling paperback, and the best-selling thriller in the UK in 2007."

What surprised Mortimer, Miller and me was way in which Dan Brown's name was cross-promoted with Simon Kernick's work. UK publishers, especially of crime and thrillers, have a long history of using cross-referencing - specifically the specialized hardcover dust jacket slipcovers that proclaim "As good as [bestselling author X] or your money back, GUARANTEED" or the like -- and blanketing their top titles (and the books they want to sell like top titles) in tube and train stations. But this appeared to venture beyond over-the-top territory into misleading readers. 

After I posted the article on Twitter yesterday afternoon, others followed suit with reactions ranging from disbelief ("What is wrong with you, publishing industry?!) to clarification ("it's actually a marketing success - but an ETHICAL fail") to coming up with rather resourceful ideas, like the Simon Kernick is Awesome Photoshop Contest currently going on at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books. But Jason Pinter, who saw the promo edition of DEADLINE in the flesh while on tour in London last month, had a far different, and much more positive, reaction, ("most US thriller writers would kill for the same marketing [and sales]") which he expanded on in an email to me yesterday evening:

I've seen so many advertisements and so much marketing material that is bland beyond belief and likely doesn't sell a single copy. When I saw this promotion in the UK a month a go, my first thought was, "Wow, good for Simon." The bottom line is that this will sell boatloads of Kernick books and elevate his status and recognition. So from a bottom line marketing standpoint, it's one of the most effective promotions I've ever seen.

As for Kernick vetoing it--why on earth would Kernick would he ever do that? He gets his name on a book cover with arguably the biggest author (book for book) in the entire world. Tons of his books get prime placement in one of the country's biggest booksellers. It will introduce him to thousands of readers and likely sell thousands of copies. And when you see the book in person, it's a whole lot easier to 'get' what they're doing. Plus it ties in to Kernick's latest hardcover, which is even better for him. I don't think anybody really considers Dan Brown a brilliant writer--from a thriller standpoint you can argue more that he is a good storyteller--so I disagree with anyone saying Kernick's rep will be hurt by this. If anything, it puts him on par with a global phenomenon. So for every person who  thumbs their nose, they'll be drowned out by a whole mess of people who now consider Simon Kernick's name when thinking of Dan Brown.

I think some of the backlash stems from slight (or perhaps major) animosity towards Brown from a segment of the literary community that thinks that either a) he's not a good writer, b) the book wasn't that good, or c) a combination of both. But one thing that's abundantly clear is that there is a massive disconnect between the literary community and the rest of the book-buying world. I think people forget just how massive Dan Brown is--it's like a YA author being compared to J.K. Rowling or Stephenie Meyer. On the adult side, Brown is the biggest author in the world, and sharing a cover with an author of that stature, from a sales standpoint, is worth its weight in gold. Whether Brown's name takes up too much of the cover is a point that could be debated, but all I can say is that when I saw these copies with my own eyes, I 'got' what they were doing immediately.

In the U.S., it's a similar situation to how Andrew Gross began his career. He co-wrote several novels with James Patterson--one of the world's biggest selling authors and someone else with a spotty 'literary' pedigree--and when Gross's own book came out he was immediately recognized, bought and read to a far greater degree than 99% of debut novelists. When people read Gross's books they saw that he had talent, and all it did was give a shot in the arm to an author whose talent warranted it. The same goes with Kernick. The most important thing, bar none, is to get readers to pick up your books. And beyond once-in-a-blue-moon opportunities like a movie adaptation or an Oprah pick, linking your name in such strong fashion to a massive bestselling author is perhaps the most effective marketing an author can get.

"I sincerely hope that no one feels duped in any way," said Kernick this morning by email in reference to Mortimer's article, "[but] to be honest, I'm still not a hundred percent sure what all the fuss is about. This was always a one-off promotion to promote my books by giving away DEADLINE with pre-orders of the new Dan Brown book in WH Smith. THe book with the new cover is not, never was, and never will be for sale, and DEADLINE's still in print with its original cover and available in Smiths and elsewhere. I also knew about the whole thing from the start, and it seems to have worked because my backsales have gone up very substantially in the weeks since it begun, and both Transworld and Smiths are very pleased. I guess, in conclusion, I'm fairly relaxed about the whole thing since anyone who got the book as part of the promotion, got it free and should have been told that it wasn't by Dan Brown but my me."

Seliina Walker, Kernick's longtime editor at Transworld (which is also Dan Brown's publisher) concurred on both the promotional elements and resulting sales: "As far as we're concerned at Transworld, this was a WHSmith initiative aimed at driving pre-orders for The Lost Symbol while giving a high profile front-of-store promotion to Simon who is, as you know, one of the UK's most popular thriller writers. All parties, including both authors, are fully briefed and gave approval for the promotion, which was always perceived as a short-term one. As a result, advance orders for The Lost Symbol have rocketed, and there has also been a huge uplift in Simon's backlist sales. As for the 'misleading' element in the article, we took care to signpost clearly all elements both at point of sale and on the book itself."

Unorthodox, or even blatant, as this particular promotion was, the bottom line is that so far, it's working for Simon Kernick - which means similar gambits may well be employed more often in the future, and might work just as well for crime & thriller writers in need of a marketing push.

James Ellroy and Colin Harrison at Book Expo America

Click To Play

After receiving a number of requests to make the video of my interview with James Ellroy and Colin Harrison at Book Expo America readily available to the public, the kind folks at Publishers Lunch TV have obliged. So for a limited time only, you can watch the video, recorded Friday, May 29 at BEA's Uptown Stage, right here.