I’m not entirely sure who DS might be, but clearly Stuart felt that she didn’t get a lot of publisher support. I don’t know what sort of marketing dollars MIRA expended and I don’t know what type of promotional efforts they engaged — book tour? virtual book tour? lots of print ads in certain newspapers? increased ARCs to key readers (I didn’t get one, but, hey, I’m not the only one, I’m sure)?

I do know that Anne Stuart has been doing self-promotion. This is so common in the world of romance that it almost goes without saying. I saw evidence that she was trying to reach beyond her core fan base and connect with new readers. Further to this, she was selling a book that, by some accounts, has a hero that might make romance traditionalists wary. I thought her approach was very effective; if I weren’t already inclined to read this author, I’d be intrigued by her Japanese anime-type analogies. I’m always seeking something fresh and different, being a jaded reader is sometimes rough.

As for your final comment? We may need to agree to disagree. I think publishers need quality authors now more than ever. Authors have the luxury of finding the right house for their work. They also have the ability to take non-traditional routes to publishing. Maybe these routes aren’t MIRA-lucrative, but authors have increasing flexibility and that will give them more leverage — it’s going to take time for this to come to fruition. Even though the relationship is, as you say, a partnership, it’s the author who creates the work and ultimately connects with the audience. All the marketing in the world can’t create a bestseller if the words on the page don’t match the hype — Henry Holt discovered this with Jeb Rubenfeld’s “Interpretation of Murder”. All the elements were in place, right down to a highly photogenic author, but the book didn’t wholly connect with readers. One theory was that this book specifically didn’t connect with female readers, a large component of the book-buying public.

K you said:

>>This means she has sufficient sales and audience to carry a big book straight to the New York Times bestseller list. Say what you will about how this list is determined, but not every author has this ability. Harlequin wanted Stuart associated with MIRA because she would do good for them.

No. She never had a NYT book. She never had a bestseller. That’s what was wrong with the whole brou ha ha. AS complained about her publisher in public just as her publisher -was publishing AS’s book – which book, by the way turned out to be AS’s FIRST novel ever to hit the list in 32 years.

AS and DS can complain about the publisher all they want and claim the book getting on the list was a miracle – but books do not get on the NYT list becuase the publsiher screwed up. They don’t get on the list miraculously.

There is no publisher who needs an author more than the author needs them except when the author is J.K. Rowling. It’s the wrong equasion. Its a partnership. Authors need publishers, publishers need authors.

(The F is for Fangirl.)

But frank discussion is absolutely necessary. Honest talk about author expectations and publisher fulfillment matters. If a house, for example, consistently promises more than it delivers, doesn’t it serve others well to know this — I’d rather go in informed and savvy than come out disappointed.

In defense of Miss Snark, I believe her decision to remain anonymous speaks more to her current business relationships, on both sides of the table (that and she probably doesn’t need queries from everyone who reads her blog — and they are legion). She gives pretty frank advice and doesn’t pull punches when faced with idiocy. I do believe she missed the mark on this issue. As I noted above, she doesn’t really live in the romance community and may have been addressing the general issue without realizing that, in this case, specifics do matter (as Kelly said).

The industry is in trouble. When a good print run is a stable one instead of an increasing one, we’re not growing, and in many ways, we’re sliding backward. Instead of snarking and hissing at each other, we need to all pur our heads together—from creative authors to penny-pinching bean counters and everyone in between—to find a solution to our declining business.

Unfortunately, at the moment, it’s the bean counters who rule, not just in publishing, but everywhere. Without creativity, solutions are elusive. And this is the issue Anne Stuart is addressing, however creatively.

P.S. This almost exact same controversial discussion was carried on between Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlein in the sf world twenty years ago. So it isn’t limited to women/romance or the current marketing strategy of publishers, either

Kelly

Deborah — I am trying desperately not to go all fangirl on you (g). I think BelleBooks is a great testament to how good publishers can do good things. Small presses are among my favorites because they seem more agile — and more willling to take chances. As for changing key plot elements, I don’t get it. I know about sales, I know about marketing, I know all this stuff…yet when I read some of the books being published by Harlequin today, I scratch my head because elements feel wrong.

Joan — You got my point on gratitude. I know how hard every published author works, but publishing is a partnership. Authors are, well, you know, really important in the world of publishing. They should at least be treated like they matter. Without them, there wouldn’t be books. Or at least as many books.

Harriet — I’m a firm believer in making my own destiny. I’m also a firm believer in making informed choices. I wouldn’t have returned the advance either. Three years is far too long to tie up someone’s creative property.

P.S. Since I pointed back to the Crusie rant (and rant is my way of complimenting a person), I should note that while I don’t blog under my own name, that’s more because it’s how things worked out, not necessarily by design. Pretty much everyone who cares knows who I am. When your mother gives you a name like mine, well, let’s just say Booksquare is easier to spell.

Thanks again.