From: janeyolen at aol.com <janeyolen>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:04:40 -0400

 



I ain't naming names but there are editors all over town who attend acquisition meetings, and present projects that are quickly approved. Even if someone on the committee is hesitant, that editor is fully supported. And too, while acquisition committees are always viewed as a negative, it is where the initial enthusiasm for a project often begins. Furthermore, , sometimes folk on the committee have terrific ideas that may not have occurred to the acquiring editor. On the other hand...in some houses, and for some editors, these meetings can be grueling and unpleasant. Easy/quick to make generalities of any kind....but the facts/realties do not always reflect the generalities. Enough from me on that subject...Norma Jean
_______________________________________________


 Wow Norma Jean, then either I have never published with any of these editors, or there's a whole lot of dissembling going on. I have had books that my editors love turned down by the Committee in most of the major publishing companies around, and I don't think my editors--people I have worked with for years--are lying to me. And this includes among others, Harper, Harcourt, Penguin-Putnam, and S&S. Still, you have a long and close relationship with editors in a different capacity than I do, so I certainly believe you. It just doesn't represent my experience.Or the experience of most of the actual authors that I know. (I am not including celebrities here.)

Jane


 


Jane Yolen www.janeyolen.com

 


 

-----Original Message----- From: Norma Jean Sawicki <nsawicki at nyc.rr.com> To: CCBC <CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu> Sent: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 9:50 am Subject: [CCBC-Net] Minders of Make Believe










Leonard is quite right in wanting/asking to confine this discussion to his area of expertise....the history of children's book publishing.

I do not want to stray from that focus either, but I would like to say that while "publishers" as a group certainly have sins of omission and commission, one can say the same of writers as a group. One can say it about any group. Generalities are not only misleading but sometimes dangerous. While many publishing houses have acquisition committees, and in" some" houses, most, if not all, publishers must attend, there are several cases in which an editor, and/or publisher is so well regarded that the meeting serves as a point of information only... editorially he/she can publish anything she/he wants....the meeting is no more than a rubber stamp and a way to provide information. If the advance required to acquire a project is a goodly sum, there could be a spirited discussion about it but that is a separate issue.

I ain't naming names but there are editors all over town who attend acquisition meetings, and present projects that are quickly approved. Even if someone on the committee is hesitant, that editor is fully supported. And too, while acquisition committees are always viewed as a negative, it is where the initial enthusiasm for a project often begins. Furthermore, , sometimes folk on the committee have terrific ideas that may not have occurred to the acquiring editor. On the other hand...in some houses, and for some editors, these meetings can be grueling and unpleasant. Easy/quick to make generalities of any kind....but the facts/realties do not always reflect the generalities. Enough from me on that subject...Norma Jean
_______________________________________________ CCBC-Net mailing list CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe... http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net



 
Received on Wed 23 Jul 2008 09:04:40 AM CDT