The New York Post -- that bastion of journalistic integrity and rectitude -- is reporting that Laura Bush's one-book deal with Scribner's for a memoir is pegged at $1.6 million.
Their source? "One well-placed publishing source." (Though another source, placed either less well or more well or precisely as well -- the Post doesn't specify -- thinks it could be a little more.)
That's about what I would have expected -- you can't offer a first lady less than seven figures, and the "point-six" implies some jockeying for position, or a possible auction. Bush's eventual book still might not earn out -- that's the risk every book runs -- but it'll have a better chance than those overpriced Clinton tomes of earlier this decade.
2 comments:
Andrew,
Wondered if you saw the Jan. 5th entry on Ed Gorman's blog. I'd be interested in your take on it.
http://newimprovedgorman.blogspot.com/
Jeff P.
Jeff P.: I hadn't seen that -- thanks for the link.
I certainly do agree that something -- and it's probably the word-processing revolution -- has brought many more bad novels out into the light of day than ever before. (I'm fond of saying that more people want to write a novel than read one these days.)
I'm not as sure that the audience has shrunk -- not for books as a whole. As always, the audience is moving from one subgenre to another -- historical romances are hot these days after being in the doldrums in the '90s, urban fantasy is very hot, and foreign-set thrillers seem to be cooling off -- but it's generally looked to me like a steady state or slight growth.
That's leaving aside the last year, when a lot of people started sitting on their hands instead of buying many things -- but that's purely because of the economy. (I bet library circulation figures are up.)
Post a Comment