Halt and Catch Fire and Why It’s So Hard to Tell Stories About Making Things

By

Lee Pace as Joe MacMillan - Halt and Catch Fire _ Season 3, Episode 3  - Photo Credit: Tina Rowden/AMC

Lee Pace as Joe MacMillan in Halt and Catch Fire. Photo: Tina Rowden/AMC

There’s something odd that can happen to TV series that are, at their cores, about the process of making something. Take Entourage. (I understand that maybe you’d rather not, but bear with me.) When you set aside the bro atmosphere and Jeremy Piven’s troubling mania, that show was really about making Vincent Chase’s career. And from one episode to another, following that arc felt like living in a tiny hamster wheel that looped endlessly from obstacle to resolution and back again, a regular wave of near-catastrophes that were always about to sink the ship until, suddenly, they weren’t.

The same is true for Silicon Valley, a much better and more interesting show, but one that nevertheless follows the same underlying “TV series about getting something started” grooves. In their quest to make Pied Piper into a successful tech company, Richard and the gang are perpetually falling into holes and scrabbling their way out again — starting the company in the first place, battling against competitor products, battling for funding, battling an internal dispute about how to drive the company, battling for more users. When you step back and look at the trajectory from the show’s beginning, you see some progress from one guy’s little algorithm into a real company. But on a micro-level, the experiences of each episode look pretty similar. A problem. A fix! The fix works, but actually we’ve just created another problem! Rinse, repeat.

That rinse-repeat structure is familiar to us from everywhere on TV — if Law & Order’s not your thing, it’s also the essence of every HGTV show, and 90 percent of medical shows, law shows, etc. There’s nothing inherently wrong with a procedural structure! It’s so soothing. The trouble, of course, is a show about making something is exactly the wrong place for this type of structure. We want shows like this to demonstrate progress, to move forward — David Schwimmer’s got to open that restaurant eventually, right? Instead, structures like the ones in Entourage feel like they perpetually spin their wheels, starting over again and again without ever going anywhere. When it comes to the story we want, long-form, open-ended serialized TV and narratives about starting something are uneasy storytelling bedfellows.

Which brings me to Halt and Catch Fire, a show that’s struggled with this fundamental problem and made some deft maneuvers to avoid it. Its first season followed a classic “show about starting something” arc, moving Joe, Gordon, and Cameron through familiar trials and tests. Build a team, try to build a computer that meets seemingly impossible spec goals, hang in while everything constantly falls apart, until, with a couple of eurekas and Hail Marys, they pull it all together at the end. And, as we all knew was coming, they’re crushed in their moment of victory. In season two, they have to start again from the beginning.

When Silicon Valley returned for its second season, it came back to the same group of people all working on the same project — it works because its comedy elements are so strong, but it’s hard not to feel like we’ve made it all the way through a full season of TV, and nothing’s changed. In comparison, Halt and Catch Fire’s uneven first season created an opportunity to mix things up. When it reset the loop to put its characters back at the beginning, it also reoriented its storytelling around Donna and Cameron, and put its major innovative energy behind a new company, Mutiny, with a different set of goals.

Mutiny allowed Halt and Catch Fire to walk a useful line — it wasn’t a full reboot, and it didn’t turn the show into a Ryan Murphy–style anthology series. But in shifting its focus to a new set of characters, the show distracts the eye from the underlying loop it’s enacted. The show is still running, so it can’t allow the characters to reach any kind of happy completion plateau yet. Instead, it shifted the potential for growth onto a different set of characters, creating a new buy-in for someone else’s success and cannily tying it all up in a story about two women in the tech industry. Sure, we’re back to square one, but we’re rooting for someone entirely different now, and conveniently, they’re a lot more fun to root for.

The relocation to California in season three performs the same function. It’s a way of moving the goalposts, and of allowing HACF to once again reset the expectation for what “making it” looks like. Sure, Mutiny became successful enough in Texas, but that no longer matters. They’re starting from scratch again, but now it’s on a much bigger stage. At the same time, the California setting introduces a different background, a new set of characters (hopefully — they haven’t been particularly noteworthy yet, but I’m sure they will be), and enough novel material that it’s easy to avoid the fatigue of the narrative hamster wheel.

There are some real-world parallels going on here, too. HACF is contending with the historical reality of the nascent digital revolution — it’s not plausible to tell a story about tech pioneers without writing them into California at some point. The California move needed to happen eventually, but its placement at the beginning of the season signals how simultaneously useful it can be at acting, once again, like a soft reboot for the show.

The most important real-world element is something that’s much more fundamental about storytelling generally. Stories about starting something are always different than reality. The point of stories is that they end, after all, and they impose celebratory finality on things that too rarely have it in our lived experience. This is why marriage-plot novels end when they do (in spite of the entire marriage that necessarily follows), and why sports stories can be so satisfying narratively (there’s a winner!), and why we like to tell stories about making something. In a story, you invent it, you struggle through the trials of getting it made, and then you did it! Congrats! The end!

In reality, as we all know too well, you make something, and then you manage it for a while, and then it fails and you start over. Or it succeeds and you move on to the next goal to make it grow. In reality, the goalposts move constantly. In reality, the lived experience of trying to make a career or a company is exactly like Entourage, looping endlessly from one obstacle to another, regardless of what bigger “progress” might be barely perceptible in the background.

This, as much as anything else, is why it’s so frustrating when stories about starting something just keep starting over. We want the story to end with some finality, because that’s precisely what’s so hard to find outside of a constructed narrative. And in this sense, long-form TV is actually perfect for telling these kinds of stories — perfect for telling a real-life story of making something, that is. Unlike so many other forms, it actually has the length and structure to reenact that too-familiar perpetual loop. But just because TV’s uncannily good at mirroring the Sisyphean struggle to create something new, doesn’t mean that’s a story we actually want to see: TV’s endlessly circling do-overs don’t always make for satisfying escapism.

This is the real genius of Halt and Catch Fire’s California reset. Like life, it stays true to the experience of making something, where you start it and start it and start it over again. And also like life, moving everything to a new place gives that repetition meaning and novelty that might otherwise have been hard to find. Sure, we’re starting from scratch one more time. Sure, this is the same thing all over again. But it’s also different. And this time, maybe we’ll finally, really, make it.

A Timeline of the Gay Male–Straight Female Friendship on TV

By

Photo: Kelly Chiello and Photos by Getty Images, HBO, Hulu

It’s a tale as old as time: A gay man meets a straight woman on a TV show and friendship sparks fly. With the latest iteration of this all-important relationship, Difficult People — starring Julie Klausner and Billy Eichner — in the middle of its second season on Hulu, we decided to take a look back and trace its evolution on TV. Early on, the gay male was often presented as an afterthought on television (see: Coco, the gay houseboy on The Golden Girls never to be seen again after the pilot), or as accessories to the lovelorn female character (see: Stanford Blatch to Carrie Bradshaw). Whereas lesbians have been largely ignored in the cultural landscape, for decades gay men have served as wise, sassy sages, snapping in a Z formation and providing a sympathetic shoulder for women to cry on. But, as Dan Savage says: It gets better! Over time, gay men have become fuller, more well-rounded characters, and consequently, their friendships with women are more three-dimensional: They’re equals more than they are appendages. Let’s take a little tour through the most memorable straight-gay TV friendships from the past 30 years.

The Golden Girls, 1985
The friends:
Coco and the Golden Girls
The relationship:
The pilot episode featured Coco, a manservant cum houseboy who existed as a literal set piece for the women to interact with, and dressed like a fully clothed Agador Spartacus, Hank Azaria’s character in The Birdcage.
The read:
Coco doesn’t really do much except stir a pan of enchiladas with a very limp wrist. And after the creators of the show realized that the Golden Girls could stand on their own, Coco was never seen again.

My So Called Life, 1994–1995
The friends:
Ricky, Angela, and Rayanne
The relationship:
Ricky Vasquez was friends with Rayanne first, but after Angela dyed her hair and ditched the normies to hang out with them, she joined the fold.
The read:
Ricky, Angela, and Rayanne’s friendship felt revolutionary for its time, and Wilson Cruz’s portrayal of Ricky deserves more recognition. As the first openly gay teenage character on American network television, he opened doors for the rest of the teens on this list. His sexuality is not a plot device to further his relationship with Angela and Rayanne, but an important story line on its own.
Memorable moment:
When Ricky’s emotionally and occasionally physically abusive uncle kicks him out of the house, Angela and her family take him in, no questions asked.

The Show: Sex and the City, 1998–2004
The friends:
Carrie and Stanford; Charlotte and Anthony
The relationship
: Stanford is Carrie’s trusted confidant, unafraid to call Carrie on her various transgressions. Anthony serves a similar purpose for Charlotte but, like, way sassier.
The read:
Stanford is fully formed but exists as a secondary character, present mostly to dish up advice and catty quips. Anthony is a stylist who exists solely to fluff Charlotte’s ego. Eventually, the two characters marry each other in Sex and the City 2 in a move that only makes sense because, naturally, two gay men who’ve spent time together always, always get married.
Memorable moment:
Carrie improbably walks in a couture show wearing nude sequined underpants and a royal blue morning coat and trips. As Heidi Klum steps over her prone form, the camera cuts to Stanford, who proclaims her “fashion roadkill.”

Will and Grace, 1998–2006
The friends:
Will and Grace; Jack and Karen
The relationship:
Will and Grace have been friends since college. She dated Will in college (a popular trope) and is positioned as the slovenly, neurotic foil to Will’s smooth high-performer. Jack, Will’s flamboyant best friend, met Grace’s functionally alcoholic design assistant, Karen, and the two have been besties ever since.
The read:
The friendship between Will and Grace laid the groundwork for almost every other gay male–straight female friendship depicted in popular culture — see Michael J. Willett’s role in the not-very-good 2013 movie Gay Best Friend and the relationship between Sasan (Zachary Quinto) and Tori Spelling in So Notorious, the VH1 sitcom based loosely on Spelling’s own life. Jack and Karen’s ecstatic friendship is similar to Will and Grace’s, too, but it’s played primarily for comic relief more than anything else.
Memorable moment:
In the episode “Das Boob,” Grace’s water bra springs a leak at a very important gallery opening and the beautiful bit of physical comedy that follows is the perfect representation of why their friendship works.

Dawson’s Creek, 1998–2003
The friends
: Jack and Jen
The relationship:
Jack dated Joey first, but then realized that he was gay. Naturally, since Joey was busy with other things — namely Dawson, Pacey, and rowing that boat to shore over and over again — Jack bonded with Jen because outcasts have to stick together.
The read:
Why do so many of these friendships start with misguided romantic interest? Regardless, after Jack comes out, he and Jen become best friends and even follow each other to “Boston Bay College,” which is most likely a stand-in for Emerson College, an artsy liberal arts school in Boston full of theater majors and would-be novelists. Jack and Jen are two misanthropic peas in a pod, like a sadder and angstier version of Kurt and Rachel from Glee.
Memorable moment:
In a move straight out of a yet-to-be-written Nicholas Sparks book, at the end of the series, Jen’s “weak heart” finally betrays her. She leaves her best friend Jack with something that every 25-year-old man surely wants: a 1-year-old baby named Amy.

Queer As Folk, 2000–2005
The friends:
Debbie and everyone else on the show, basically.
The relationship:
Debbie is the mother of one of the protagonists, Michael, and on just about every count they are very — maybe uncomfortably — close. She runs the Liberty Cafe that functions kind of like Central Perk, but covered in rainbows. She’s super chill about homosexuality.
The read
: Before anyone self-identified as an ally, there was Debbie Novotny, PFLAG mom and proud wearer of rainbow vests and shirts. She’s comic relief, but she also represents an idealized version of a parent with a gay son: supportive, bawdy, and loving.
Memorable moment:
Debbie gladly opens her house to her son’s friends, providing a safe haven for those whose parents are less accepting than her. Nothing shows her generosity of spirit more than the slightly after-school special moment when she finds Justin’s art in the trash and talks him into following his dreams as an artist.

Degrassi: The Next Generation, 2001–2015
The friends:
Marco and Ellie
The relationship:
Ellie misinterprets Maco’s interest in the Edward Gorey book she was reading as romantic interest, but because Marco wasn’t 100 percent sure of his own sexuality, they “date” for a while. When Ellie presses Marco to go further, they eventually kiss. He then comes out to her, and she agrees to be his beard for a spell, but he eventually comes out.
The read:
Because Degrassi is an earnest show for teens, Marco’s sexuality is treated with the kind of consideration most other shows lack. He’s a fully formed person with his own story lines and is never seen as an accessory or an accomplice.
Memorable moment:
Ellie reaches her breaking point as Marco’s beard and tells him she won’t do it anymore, leaving Marco to figure out how to handle his sexuality by himself.

Gossip Girl, 2007–2012
The friends:
Eric van der Woodsen and Jenny Humphrey
The relationship
: United initially as outcasts and then divided by Jenny Humphrey’s bad eyeliner and social-climbing ways, Eric started out as Jenny’s friend and stuck by her side until he realized she was turning into a monster.
The read:
This started out feeling like a real friendship based on their shared status as social pariahs, like Kurt and Rachel on Glee but with more social climbing and class anxiety. Eric stood by Jenny long enough for her to realize that he was more useful to her for access than actual friendship.
Memorable moment
: Eric’s boyfriend Jonathan accidentally starts a feud with Jenny and her friends, which ends with Eric getting splattered with yogurt.

Glee, 2009–2015
The friends:
Kurt and Rachel
The relationship:
Hummelberry started out as frenemies competing for the honored title of the best Glee club singer and the attention of Finn. They eventually become friends, move to New York, leave New York, and finally, return to McKinley High in order to fulfill their destiny of running the Glee Club.
The read:
They are the distillation of every high-school musical-theater enthusiast’s friendship with their teenage partner in crime, but with more nuance than one would expect from a show about dorky theater kids who break out in song every five minutes or so.
Memorable moment:
The “Diva-Off” between Kurt’s upper register and Rachel’s earnest singing face set to the tune of “Defying Gravity” at the end of the first season is the moment they realized they were stronger together.

Real Housewives of Atlanta, 2008–present
The friends:
Miss Lawrence, Derek J, and Sheree Whitfield
The relationship:
Miss Lawrence and Derek J were brought on the show to serve as Sheree’s friends, confidantes, and erstwhile hairstylists.
The read: The Real Housewives haven’t always been the most enlightened in their relationships with gay men on the show, treating them as set dressing rather than actual human beings. Both men left the show due to the Housewives’ constant and insidious homophobia.
Memorable moment
: Since Miss Lawrence and Derek J have moved on to better and bigger things, the best encapsulation of their place in the Real Housewives’ ecosystem is their web series, Spill the Tea, in which both gentlemen sit in a Bravo-branded studio in bathrobes and, uh, spill the tea.

Happy Endings, 2011–2013
The friends:
Max and Penny
The relationship:
Max and Penny are intimately close, and inhabit a special world in which everything they do or say is uproariously funny to one another.
The read:
Max is the least “stereotypical” gay man on this list: He’s slovenly, lazy, and a total bro. Also, his codependent relationship with Penny borders on the unhealthy and dips occasionally into toxic territory, but that’s probably the most realistic thing about it.
Memorable moment:
Halloween episodes are usually hit or miss, but Penny dressed as a mother with Max as her child strapped to her chest in a Baby Bjorn with bonus interactive arms is the best Halloween costume of all time.

Girls, 2012–present
The characters:
Hannah and Elijah
The relationship:
Hannah used to date Elijah in college and found out he was gay after he came out to her over drinks in the first season. He and Hannah later reconnect and move in together after Marnie moves out. His relationship with Hannah has a ride-or-die ethos to it.
The read:
Elijah is the moral center of the show, unafraid to tell the titular girls precisely how and why they are the way they are.
Memorable moment:
When Elijah presciently called Hannah’s father gay all the way back in the first season after unceremoniously coming out to Hannah and leaving.

Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, 2015–now
The friends:
Titus Andromedon and Kimmy
The relationship:
Kimmy Schmidt was sprung from an underground bunker and moves in with Titus in Brooklyn.
The read
: Kimmy doesn’t understand anything and Titus, who hasn’t lived in a bunker, knows a thing or two. For the first season, he mainly functions as Kimmy’s introduction to the world, but in season two, Titus gets his own story lines, including a boyfriend. As it grows, their relationship begins to show reciprocity — an image of what an actual, healthy friendship can look like.
Memorable moment:
While Lillian may have been manning the camera for Titus’s seminal work, “Peeno Noir,” without Kimmy working as Jacqueline’s best friend/servant, there would be no opulent setting for this music video.

Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt – Music Video “Peeno Noir” from InSync PLUS on Vimeo.

Orphan Black, 2013–2016
The friends:
Felix and Sarah Manning
The relationship:
Felix and Sarah were both adopted by Mrs. S and spent their teen years running amok in London. Sarah finds out that she’s a clone. Felix does whatever it is he can to help her deal with this.
The read:
Sarah and Felix begin as siblings bordering on friends, but he seems to have evolved from fully fledged character to fall guy for everything Sarah and her sisters get mixed up with. Felix is there for every single clone for whatever they need, which is an awful lot of emotional labor.

Looking, 2014–2015
The friends:
Doris and Dom
The relationship:
Doris and Dom are high-school friends, roommates, and as close as two people can get without being in a romantic relationship.
The read:
Doris and Dom are perhaps the best example of a gay-straight friendship on this list because they feel like real friends. Just about every interaction they have demonstrates how much they care about each other.
Memorable moment:
Doris and Dom discussing a much-maligned chicken shack in what looks to be the worst Zumba class I’ve ever seen.

Difficult People, 2015–present
The friends:
Billy and Julie
The relationship:
Billy Kessler and Julie Epstein are best friends and aspiring comedians with strong personalities and an alarming lack of self-awareness. They like each other and don’t really like anyone else.
The read:
Billy and Julie are friends because they have the same interests and disinterests. Nothing about Billy’s sexuality feels like it’s played for a joke and Julie is just as “difficult” as he is, so they’re on equal footing.
Memorable moment:
Watching Billy and Julie walk down the street in the opening scene of the pilot and listening to their non-stop commentary felt like eavesdropping on the perfect conversation.

Americans split on whether to tip hotel staff

Hugo Martin

If you are unsure whether to tip your hotel housekeeper, you are not alone.

There is no consensus among Americans travelers about which, if any, hotel staffer should get a tip, according to a survey commissioned by the travel company Expedia.

The survey of more than 1,000 American travelers found that 30% don’t tip anyone at a hotel. Of those travelers who do tip, 46% say they tip housekeepers, 40% tip room service attendants, 30% tip the valet, 20% tip the porter and 10% tip the concierge, according to the survey.

Although travelers are not obligated to tip any hotel workers, it is proper etiquette to leave a tip for those workers who helped make your visit enjoyable, said Lizzie Post, the great-great-granddaughter of etiquette queen Emily Post and president of the Emily Post Institute.

“If I’m dealing with them directly and they are doing a good job, I tip,” she said.

As for the hotel housekeeper, Post said she typically leaves between $2 and $5 a day on the nightstand or a desk, along with a note, thanking the worker for his or her effort.

hugo.martin@latimes.com

The Man Behind ‘The Last Bookstore’

Aug 18, 2016 | 465 videos

Video by Chad Howitt

Josh Spencer is the owner and operator of The Last Bookstore in downtown Los Angeles. It’s aptly named; after all, there have been widespread closures of bookstores across the country in favor of online purchases and e-readers. Chad Howitt’s short film, Welcome to the Last Bookstore, is an emotional look at Spencer’s journey towards opening the store and the heart behind its success. Years ago, he was in an accident that left him unable to walk and forced him to reexamine his life. “I’ve always been a writer and a reader, so I thought, ‘Well, I’ll try books,’” he says. “It was busy from the first day we opened our doors.”

For more of Howitt’s work, visit his website. He’s currently working on a short film based on the poem “From 35,000 feet / Praise Aviophobia,” by the American poet Geffrey Davis.

Author: Nadine Ajaka

Obit for the Obits

No sense in burying the lede. This week, after more than eight years of lively habitation in one of journalism’s more obscure corners, I’m making a final egress, passing on. Starting after Friday’s deadline (ha!) I am an ex-obit writer.

Here’s my legacy. A thousand salutes to the departed, something like that. Age range 11 to 104. Cops and criminals, actors and athletes, scientists and judges, politicians and other poobahs. Famous, infamous or as obscure as the rest of us except for one instance of memorable distinction. A man with a mountain named for him, another who hijacked a plane. A woman who changed infant care for the better, another who shot a ballplayer. High achievers who died after long and fruitful lives (Yogi Berra, Ruby Dee, E. L. Doctorow) or whose unanticipated demise (Grete Waitz, Philip Seymour Hoffman, David Carr) demanded furiously quick reporting and writing — and attention on the front page.

Name a profession (Scream queen? Used car dealer? Astronaut? Guru?) or an achievement (Solved an equation? Caught a killer? Integrated a sitcom?) or an ignominious label (Pederast? Con artist? Embezzler?). For whatever reason — AIDS or Alzheimer’s, cancer or a car crash, heart failure or kidney disease, sepsis or suicide — they all went on my watch.

We’re accustomed, my colleagues and I, to saying that an obituary is not about a death, but a life. This is true, but really, we’re reporters and you can’t avoid the news, which is, of course, the same news every time. That’s one thing that distinguishes writing obituaries from anything else in journalism.

Another is that we start at the end and look backward. There’s some reward in this, in the excavating we do that often unearths interesting, long-forgotten facts.

But it’s melancholy, too. We had a movie made about us recently, a documentary called “Obit,” and in it my former deskmate Doug Martin, who effected his own exit from the obit business a couple of years ago, made a comment of encapsulating rue. He often admired the people he wrote about, he said, but he never got to meet them.

I’ve had a long career at this newspaper, three decades, exercising, for better or worse, a good deal of imagination. But in the last eight-plus years I haven’t had to come up with a story idea. I’ve spent hundreds of afternoons burrowing deep into cyberspace and perusing yellowed news clippings from The Times’s historical archive, a.k.a. the morgue. And then the phone interviews — necessary, sometimes grueling, often poignant with laughter or tears, half consulting with and half consoling friends and relatives of the dead who hope I’m giving credence and gravity to their anguish and not sucking the marrow out of it.

I hardly ever left the office; that bugs me. A few trips to the library or a bookstore, once or twice to a museum, the apartment of the widow of a former Marlboro Man who had some old ads I wanted to see. Not the most adventurous reporting in the world.

All that said, I don’t think it’s self-aggrandizing to say that obituary writing is important work. An obituary is, after all, the first last word on a life, a public assessment of a human being’s time on earth, a judgment on what deserves to be remembered. In addition, though we write for readers of all stripes, of course, and not especially for those in mourning, I suspect all of us who do this keep the loved ones in mind, and if we don’t seek their approval exactly — unsavory details are often unavoidable — we strive to write so that they at least recognize the person they’ve lost. Journalism isn’t supposed to be a personal service, but obituary writing, without compromising any professional integrity, can be. Maybe should be. In any case, getting it right is not easy. And getting it wrong can cause real distress to the already distressed.

Obituary writers tend to be older people, at least at The Times, where the average age of the reporters and editors on the obits desk is higher than that of any other department. This is as it should be. Partly, I guess, they don’t want us running around too much, approaching decrepitude as we are. But mostly it’s because we’ve shared a lot of time on earth with our subjects and have lived through much of the history they helped make. Not incidentally, we’ve all had the experience of grief and know what it feels like to live in the immediate aftermath of personal tragedy.

The significant irony to retiring from the obits department is this: I may be going but you’re not quite rid of me. My byline is likely to continue to appear for months, even years, because of the 40 or 50 obituaries I’ve written of people who are still living — the future dead, as we say, in mordant obit-speak. Perhaps I’ll even have a posthumous byline or two — not something I aspire to, by the way.

Advances are what we call these obituaries written in, well, advance. It’s a practical matter; you can’t write the comprehensive life story of a president or a pope or a movie star in an hour or even a day. But think about the presumption of such an enterprise. We know they’re going. We don’t know how. We don’t know when.

Which is, of course, the main reason I’m getting out while the getting is good.

Elisabeth Scharlatt VRP

Elisabeth Scharlatt has been at Algonquin Books for 25 years. As publisher, she has maintained a small list of 20 new titles annually, half fiction, half non-fiction. Algonquin is celebrating its 30th anniversary since its founding in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, by a professor of literature at UNC. It still has an office in North Carolina as well as a small office in New York, on the premises of its parent company, Workman Publishing, an independent, family-run publisher of non-fiction.

CUNY Graduate School of Journalism Interviewhttps://vimeo.com/97854485
In the Media:

‘Life After Life’ pulls literary double duty  |  USA Today  |  March 26, 2013
A publishing nightmare has turned into a publicity bonanza after two prominent novelists chose the same title for their books, to be published six days apart.

Two well-known writers, two highly anticipated novels with the identical title arriving within a week of each other: That’s the dual story of Life After Life.

The first, by Jill McCorkle (from Algonquin Books), is set in a North Carolina retirement center and explores community and family bonds. It goes on sale Tuesday.

The second, by Kate Atkinson (from Reagan Arthur/Little, Brown), revolves around Ursula Todd, born in England in 1910 only to die and be born and die again repeatedly. It arrives April 2.

Algonquin publisher Elisabeth Scharlatt and Little, Brown publisher Reagan Arthur faced a literary nightmare last fall when they discovered the books would be published within days of each other.

Both publishers were surprised, and not by joy. “I would love to know the statistical probability of this happening,” says Scharlatt. Because marketing and publicity plans were already underway, neither wanted to change the title.

But as publication day dawns, there’s a silver lining: media attention, say Arthur and Scharlatt. Adding to the sense of a jinx turned lucky: For the first time, independent booksellers have declared a tie for their No. 1 Indie Next Pick, selecting both Life After Life novels for April.

McCorkle, 54, tinkered with her story — her first novel in 17 years — for a dozen years. Why such a gap between novels? This new one “engages a lot of characters,” she says. (She published two short-story collections during those 17 years.)

She picked out the title about 2½ years ago. As she Googled “life after life,” she kept thinking, “I can’t believe no one has ever used this, it’s just too good for the title of a novel.” (She did notice Raymond Moody’s non-fiction best seller, Life After Life, first published in 1975.)

Similar titles happen, says Nora Rawlinson, former editor in chief of Publishers Weekly and founder of EarlyWord, a book website aimed at librarians. She points to E.L.James’ Fifty Shades of Grey and Ruta Sepetys’ young-adult 2012 novel Between Shades of Gray. There also have been books with identical titles (for example, Motherland by Amy Sohn was published last year; Motherland by William Nicholson arrives next month, and both are novels). Titles cannot be copyrighted, says Rawlinson.

Originally, Rawlinson thought “What a nightmare!” about the two Life After Lifenovels. But now, seeing the two different covers, the way the title works for each book and the media attention, “I don’t think it does them any harm at all, though I wouldn’t counsel people to try this in the future.”

Elise Howard Moves to Algonquin to Start List  |  Publishers Weekly  |  October 27, 2011
Chapel Hill, N.C.-based publisher Algonquin, which made it big just five years ago with the runaway success of Sara Gruen’s Water for Elephants, is launching a line of books for YA and middle-grade audiences. In a conversation with PW, Algonquin publisher Elisabeth Scharlatt called the line a “natural way for Algonquin to grow” while maintaining its short, carefully selected adult list of 20-25 new titles per year. “If we are to grow,” she said, “it makes sense to keep our adult list as it is—small and mighty—and expand to a new audience.”

Scharlatt said that she’d been dreaming of a YA line for “at least” a decade, but couldn’t go ahead with it until “the absolutely right person came along to do this with us.” That person is Elise Howard, a 12-year veteran of HarperCollins, who has been named publisher of the new list. According to Scharlatt, her expertise and “sensibility” made her a natural fit at Algonquin. “Of all the opportunities that have appeared in my path over the years, this one instantly felt right,” Howard said in an e-mail. “I’ve had a long, satisfying tenure at Harper, but the idea of a startup venture, a small list, and the chance to seriously acquire and edit again appealed to me very much.”

Asked about author possibilities, Scharlatt said that “Elise will be starting from scratch,” making a point to indicate that Howard won’t be expected to raid the stables of HarperTeen. As for Howard, she says she will be looking for work consistent with Algonquin’s list as it is: “Books for serious readers, you could say, though that doesn’t mean all books on serious topics, by any means.” She also hopes to publish books “that might entice a casual reader to become a true reader—that’s probably the biggest reward in creating books for young readers.”

Howard says that her list will include YA and middle-grade fiction, “perhaps initially leaning more toward YA, but that’s entirely dependent on what exciting manuscripts make their way to my desk.” She adds that she’d also love to find a “great memoir.” She will be starting at Algonquin in mid-November and will work out of the publisher’s New York office.

According to Scharlatt, the YA line will swing into action once Howard puts together a small list, “between four and six books.” Though that per-year count should grow over time, Scharlatt said, “we’re not putting pressure on ourselves. We want the right books—that’s the way Algonquin has always operated.”

Susie Tompkins Buell VRP

Meet one of Hillary Clinton's biggest donors in California.
Susie Tompkins Buell is the co-founder of ESPRIT. Since selling her business in 1996 she has been heavily involved in political activities. A longtime friend and supporter of Hillary Clinton’s, her main focus is to support and encourage women to enter the political arena as she believes the imbalance of men and women in government is the cause of many of our problems. She has two daughters and five grandchildren and lives in Bolinas, Calif., with her husband.

VERY Magazine: ESPRIT – The Story
“Be informed — be involved — make a difference.“ That is and was my mission statement. I hope that Esprit still has that vision as well.

1968 was a busy year. Doug and I had two baby daughters, Quincey and Summer and we had just sold The North Face shop. I was looking for something to do to balance motherhood while Doug was making plans to go on some climbing expeditions.

Our friend Jane Tise was looking for a job, and I suggested we start a business making clothes for our peers as there wasn’t much around in California at the time. Jane and I decided to make little snug dresses and call the collection Plain Jane. We showed them to the Joseph Magnin store in San Francisco and their first order was the beginning.

I remember we never had gas money. I had to scramble to get everything made, but that was all part of the fun and magic. Doug was gone a lot but we figured things out and step by step we started the business. It was a lot of “winging it“. We never had a big plan, we were just kids trying things out.

It was a lot of doing the right thing at the right time, with a few little connections and a lot of energy. We borrowed money, got the samples made, sold, produced, shipped and everything in between. We had little competition then and there was a steadily growing need for trendy easy styles.

Jane and I would pop over to London for inspiration and come home full of ideas. Eventually we needed a new space, and Doug had a great time building. Everything we did was addressed creatively, quite like an art form, very process driven, very open.

We built a “factory“ complete with a kitchen full of healthy, great food. The building and business were like an extension of our family, little kids everywhere. We started to truly be guided by our corporate name “Esprit de Corp“, or the “spirit of the group“ which we had taken up.

A fire burned the entire building to the ground in the late 70s which was a devastating moment. By this time we had branched out in Europe and Asia and were responsible for many jobs. I think this was when we all grew up and recognized what we had, fully focused and came back better than ever. We were very appreciative of the loyalty of our people and returned the commitment and respect.

Doug and I incorporated our outside interests into the company: language lessons, a culture club, river rafting trips, disco classes, a gym, better kitchen and food. We used the business to create awareness in our employees and customers. We were probably the first company to have an active AIDS campaign.

When we became aware of the environmental degradation we tried to install responsible practices wherever we could in our offices and factories. This is very difficult, particularly in Asia. We set up an Eco desk to monitor things best we could.

The Eco desk led us to see that we needed to try to make a product that was as environmentally responsible as possible, and out of this, the “Ecollection“ was conceived. It was launched in 1992 after years of research. We bought the first lots of organic cotton and found many ways to be more responsible with the whole process, shipping included.

The Ecollection was the first of its kind and a very worthwhile endeavour. Lynda Gross, a very devoted designer, was running it and Dan Imhoff, the head of the Eco desk, was very involved on the communication side. We wanted to inform our consumer how destructive production could be.

In the meantime I had set up a foundation in the company focusing on the environment and women. Now it is called the Susie Tompkins Buell Foundation (www.susietompkinsbuell.organd its focus is quite the same. Doug is doing critical work from his base in Chile (www.deepecology.org) so both of us have the passion and good fortune to make a difference.

I feel that we need to learn and teach to live with less and to walk gently and consciously so that others will have a chance. To live artfully, simply and passionately is more satisfying than being a conspicuous consumer. We need to know global situations, be passionate within our community; and know that in every place in our life we can make a difference.

Twitter (108 followers): https://twitter.com/stompkinsbuell
Susie Tompkins Buell Foundation Websitehttp://susietompkinsbuell.org
In the Media:
Susie Buell, Hillary Clinton: Politics makes great fellowship  |  SF Chronicle  |  June 24, 2016
Susie Tompkins Buell’s TV is broken, which is probably a good thing given that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has been tearing into Buell’s good friend, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, on the airwaves.

“It’s the lowest of the low,” Buell said. “She’s my friend, and to hear this blithering, crazy narcissist say those things about her is literally appalling.”

Tompkins Buell and her husband, Mark Buell, have turned their Pacific Heights penthouse into a sort of Airbnb for high-profile Democratic candidates. President Obama has been there so often for fundraisers that he joked that he felt as if he lived there. This week Buell hosted Gabby Giffords, the former Arizona congresswoman who nearly died after being shot in the head by a deranged gunman in 2011.

“She still has a hard time communicating,” Buell said. “But she is always smiling. She’s like an angel.”

But it’s Clinton with whom she’s formed a bond. The two chat about their kids, plan dinners and chat regularly, in person or on the phone. Clinton, who calls Buell “my free-spirited friend,” is likely to get a text from Buell to point out something like a lovely full moon.

It’s that kind of relationship. Clinton has been criticized for seeming cold and aloof, but she’s clearly embraced the New Agey Buell, who is prone to observations like her feeling that Clinton has maha.

“It’s a Sanskrit word meaning greatness,” Buell said.

Lack of pretense
Most likely, Clinton appreciates Buell’s lack of artifice and pretense. Although she’s a fervent supporter and fundraiser for Democratic candidates and causes — climate change and gun control are two passions — she’s anything but a political wheeler-dealer.

She met Bill Clinton at a dinner in Sacramento in 1991 when he was just ramping up his campaign for president. Buell, who founded the popular clothing lines North Face and Esprit with her ex-husband Doug Tompkins, says she was “going through a divorce and selling my company.”

Bill Clinton was a sympathetic listener at the dinner and, impressed, Buell wrote a check for $100,000 to his campaign. She figured that was that. Then someone from the Clinton organization called with a question:

“What do you want?’ they asked, figuring anyone who made a large donation like that would have an agenda.

“I had no idea you could buy anything,” she said. “I just wanted to help him become president.”

Mark Buell was the 1st
It was only the second political campaign contribution she’d ever made. The first was in 1988, when she donated $500 to a guy she’d known at Lowell High School, Mark Buell. He was running for the Board of Supervisors, and although he lost, he remembered his former classmate.

Buell sent out a form letter thank you, but handwrote at the bottom: “This is a long way from high school.” The exchange sparked a romance, and in 1996 the two were married. Mark, a real estate investor and president of the Recreation and Park Commission, still has the note, framed and mounted on the wall of his study.

“I’m very spontaneous and emotional,” she said. “Mark gives me sound advice. It’s very yin and yang. And it works.”

Although their 12th-story penthouse is a spectacular setting with views of the bay and both bridges, there’s nothing stuffy about it. The lack of formality clearly appeals to Hillary Clinton.

‘Hillary for Congress’
Buell recalls the chilly evening when Hillary Clinton was spending the night and asked her if she had something warm she could wear.

“All I have,” Buell said, “is a ‘Hillary for Congress’ sweatshirt.”

“That’s fine,” Hillary Clinton said. “Then if someone finds me roaming the halls, they’ll know who I am.”

Hillary Clinton also spends time in Bolinas, where the Buells have a home. It’s a place where Buell says the presidential candidate can let her hair down. During one visit, Mark made her a whiskey sour. Buell says she liked it so much she had another.

Some time later the Buells were at the White House and Hillary Clinton walked up holding a glass of white wine.

“Wouldn’t you rather have a whiskey sour?” Mark asked.

“What happens in Bolinas stays in Bolinas,” Hillary Clinton replied.

Hillary a foodie
Hillary Clinton, it turns out, is also a bit of a foodie. Buell says she checks in with her when a San Francisco visit is upcoming and asks, “Can we go out to dinner and have some fun?” She’s taken her friend to ultra-hip State Bird Provisions and a Michelin two-star restaurant, Quince.

If you’re sensing a trend, you’re right. Buell and her buddy prefer cozy, trendy places like the hip, but small and unassuming Liholiho Yacht Club on Sutter Street, where they dined in May.

“She loved it, just cocktails, gossip and fun,” Buell said. “We totally forgot she was running for president.”

Meet one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest donors in California. They hardly ever talk politics  |  LA Times  |  June 3, 2016
When Hillary Clinton parachuted into Los Angeles recently, some of the well-heeled donors who swarmed her brought unsolicited campaign advice, while others brought ambitions of White House appointments. Susie Tompkins Buell brought a bag of dry-roasted chickpeas.

It was fitting that Buell, a wealthy San Franciscan who ranks near the top of the sprawling national network of Clinton benefactors, was obsessing about the candidate’s nourishment. Few people in the orbit of the Clintons have done more for their care and feeding than this 73-year-old fixture of Bay Area philanthropy and salon society who wanted nothing to do with politics — she didn’t even vote — until a chance meeting with Bill Clinton well into her adult life.

Buell not only has become a fundraising powerhouse since then. She has also become Hillary Clinton’s soul mate. Theirs is among a handful of friendships that have been key to fueling the candidate’s ambitions, providing emotional and financial sustenance. It reflects the uncanny Clinton ability to build and maintain unyielding loyalty from the people positioned to help them the most – even people, like Buell, who have no business interests or political aspirations the couple might advance. In many cases, the bonds have only solidified through the stresses of scandal, electoral disappointment and Democratic Party rivalries that the Clintons have powered through.

The network has been most valuable in California, where Hillary Clinton is raising more cash than anyplace else. How Susie Tompkins Buell became a hub of that operation is a uniquely California story.

Buell never thought she would be rich. She was but a 21-year-old who had chosen work as a keno runner in Tahoe over college when she randomly stopped by the roadside to pick up Doug Tompkins, a hitchhiking beach bum who, like Buell, had an unexpected mastery of entrepreneurship and getting in front of trends. The two eventually married and together built a fortune and a cultish following around the clothing lines they created: North Face and Esprit.

But it wasn’t until they divorced and Buell found herself at a retreat at the Esalen Institute that she got curious about the Clintons. Buzz about Bill Clinton at that Big Sur haven of mindfulness intrigued Buell. It was 1991, and the fledgling presidential candidate had inspired one of the speakers at the event, New Urbanist architect and thinker Peter Calthorpe, with his ideas on building and strengthening community, a topic of interest to Buell.

So on a whim, and with a stroke of luck in timing, she dropped in at an event for Clinton while passing through Sacramento on her way home from Tahoe.

She quickly found herself at the head table. The conversation was memorable.

“I told him I was getting divorced and how I had worked with my husband all these years,” Buell said. “He really wanted to know what it was like, and he started talking about Hillary and how she was nervous that night because she was giving a speech at Wellesley,” her alma mater. They talked about the crushing poverty Clinton had seen on the campaign trail, Buell recalled, “and how much people were relying on government. I really wanted a president who would look out for them.”

She decided at that moment it should be Clinton. The next day, she wrote him a $100,000 check.

But the Clinton campaign was confused. Such large gifts usually come with requests for face time with the candidate or, at the very least, donor perks like ticket packages to the party convention and star-studded fundraising events.

“They asked me what I wanted,” she said. “I remember saying, ‘I want him to be president.’ I had no idea about how the money part of this worked.” Indeed, the only candidate who had ever received a cent from her before then was Mark Buell, the man who is now her husband and who long ago unsuccessfully ran for county supervisor. He got $500.

The donation to Clinton might have been a one-off but for the relationship that bloomed when Hillary Clinton approached Buell to personally thank her. The women clicked immediately, and Buell grew more enamored when she saw Clinton deliver an impassioned Mother’s Day address at Glide Memorial Church, a hotbed of leftist activism in San Francisco’s Tenderloin district.

“I was attracted to Bill Clinton, but as soon as I met Hillary, it was much deeper for me,” she said.

Buell hasn’t stopped giving to the Clintons since. More than $15 million has made its way from Buell’s bank account to the campaigns and causes of the Clintons. Untold millions more have been raised by her, often at her gorgeous Pacific Heights penthouse apartment, a mandatory stop on the fundraising circuit for prominent liberals. The menu that iconic chef Alice Waters prepared when Bill Clinton dropped by in March 1996 is framed in the kitchen.

“I can’t even count the number of events I have been to at the house,” said Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who first got to know Buell years ago, when he ran a wine shop and was good friends with her daughter. “It is a perfect venue overlooking the bay. There is an austerity to it. It is an opulent building, an opulent view. But the space itself is austere.” The rooms are sparsely but carefully appointed. Pieces worth more than a small condominium share rooms with stylish items plucked from far-flung flea markets. Every window has a panoramic view.

“It is a perfect backdrop to focus less on the surroundings and more on the occasion,” Newsom said.

The occasion is almost always political activism.

“The environment, women’s rights, children’s rights, equality, all of this,” said Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, ticking off in an interview the causes she has been involved in with Buell. “Susie comes through. She doesn’t say, ‘Put my name down,’ and take a back seat.”

As Buell got entrenched in politics, her relationship with Hillary Clinton began to move beyond it. Clinton writes in one of her books about a conversation between the two while the then-first lady was under siege by Congress amid its investigation into her Whitewater real estate investment. “My free-spirited friend Susie Buell said she didn’t follow all the dramas going on back in Washington, but she did have something to say to me: ‘Bless your heart.’ That was all I needed to hear,” Clinton wrote.

Much later, Clinton showed up at Buell’s apartment to meet her dying brother, a prominent surgeon who was staying with Buell while undergoing painful cancer treatments. “Most people would say, ‘I am sorry I never met your brother,’ or send their best. She just goes right into it,” Buell said. “She wasn’t taking advantage of him. They laughed. It was just sweet. It was one of the tenderest times in my life. … Her comfort with the situation was very moving.”

Buell said she regrets how few people see that side of Clinton.

“I remember once saying to her: ‘Can’t you just be yourself, Hillary?’ ”  Buell said. “When there are not cameras around, she really lets it fly. She said, ‘You know what happens? They will get a moment of me expressing something and then say, “There she goes again, the crazy.” ’ Experience has trained her to be so cautious.”

But Clinton also sees a side of Buell that many candidates never get to see: the one that doesn’t talk politics.

“I don’t want to be one more thing she has to think about,” Buell said. “She knows who I am, she knows how I feel. We don’t talk shop. … She doesn’t need one more person to say, ‘What do you think about the Benghazi report?’ ”

This is the same donor who showed up at a high-stakes fundraiser for President Obama near the end of his first term and told him to knock off the small talk when he began to genuflect. Then she launched into a scold about his failure to get a landmark climate change bill through Congress.

Newsom, who says Buell “holds your feet to the fire” when candidates get her support, let out a knowing chuckle when asked about her reluctance to push Clinton. As Buell and other climate activists fought for years to kill the Keystone XL pipeline, candidates who did not stand with them were getting an earful from her. Except Clinton, who stayed neutral through most of the battle.

“They have a deep friendship, and that transcends politics in many respects,” he said. “She has a loyalty to the Clintons that is extraordinary, and it is unbreakable.”

It’s not that Buell is star-struck. She is constantly in the company of celebrity. Meryl Streep gushed in an email about Buell’s “open, welcoming mien.” Waters happened to text while Buell was talking with a displaced former California reporter, and at Buell’s behest, recommended where in Washington to dine.

Bill Clinton emailed to say, “Susie has been my friend for almost 25 years,” and express gratitude “for her constant love and support for Hillary.”

And Gloria Steinem has also been Buell’s friend for years. She recalled in an interview coming to speak about feminism to Esprit employees in the 1980s, long before it was fashionable for big companies to try to raise the consciousness of their workforce. Buell’s then-husband vetoed her plans to advertise in the fledgling Ms. magazine, so Buell sidestepped him by writing a check to subsidize subscriptions for universities.

“She is a self-educated person in the best sense,” Steinem said.

Buell stopped selling clothing long ago, but she never stopped marketing her brand. Lately, she has been working on her “Badass for President” project, a more hipster-oriented line of Clinton campaign memorabilia  than the less-daring goods sold in the campaign store. A mock-up poster in her office has the logo emblazoned over a black-and-white photo of young Hillary Clinton in stylish ’60s attire and a coffeehouse conversation pose.

The fundraising events she holds are among the fastest-selling tickets in the city — especially when they are at her apartment in the penthouse of a landmark red-tile-roof building on a Pacific Heights hilltop where the views are dreamlike and the history is rich.

Buell says she was one of the lonely Democrats in the old-money-heavy building when she held her first fundraiser for Bill Clinton there. She had to quickly patch together a bunch of linens to cover the picture windows that the president’s detail warned would be a security risk. Clinton joked that it was better to be looking at the linens than shattered glass. The Secret Service once got stuck in the utility elevator there for an hour after too many of the agents piled in.

They know their way around better now. There are at least three other big Democratic donors in the building now, and sometimes they team up to hold multifloor events. Obama once joked that he had been through so many times he was starting to feel like a resident. Buell expects that she and her neighbors soon will be holding another multitiered event in the building for Hillary Clinton soon. The haul from such events is in the millions of dollars.

“It works great,” she said. “As long as the Secret Service is clear that they can’t all pile into the utility elevator at once.”

And what’s next for Buell if Clinton wins? Probably more of the same, she said.

“I am absolutely not interested in getting appointed to something,” she said. “I have the perfect life.”

Meet Hillary Clinton’s Bulldog  |  Time Magazine  | September 21, 2015
Political assassins don’t choke up in front of reporters. But here is David Brock, confessed hit man and wrecker of reputations, the baddest bull in Hillary Clinton’s billion-dollar win-the–White House militia, with his eyes gone bloodshot and filling with tears.

We are sitting at one corner of his sprawling complex of offices, just a few blocks from the U.S. Capitol, where he employs 250 youthful activists to dig dirt on Republicans, plant stories in the press and punish pundits who step out of line. They work for groups with bland names that conceal their importance–Media Matters, Correct the Record, American Bridge, American Democracy Legal Fund, to name a few–on two floors that don’t look anything like a D.C. political office.

Think Cupertino startup meets Buddhist retreat meets the Jetsons, with bright molded-plastic furniture, exposed ceilings, colorful art, the occasional Japanese paper wall. Brock doesn’t look anything like a D.C. operative, either. At 53, he wears his silver hair long and pomaded behind his ears; he likes tailored shirts that fit too tight, pocket squares and skinny ties. When he drafted the office lease, he wrote in a clause for Toby, the pet schnoodle who accompanies him to work.

The question is simple and should be easy. When was the first time you saw Hillary Clinton after you defected from the conservative movement? He’s told the story before; it all happened more than a decade ago, for God’s sake. But his voice is halting. Then it cracks.

It was a Senate lunch in 2002, he says, just after he had published his third book, Blinded by the Right, a confession of all the rotten things he had ever done to liberals–from his “little bit nutty and a little bit slutty” slander of Anita Hill, who had accused then Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment, to his discovery of Paula Jones, which forged a trail to Bill Clinton’s impeachment.

In an ornamented room, he told the Democratic leaders about their right-wing enemy, talking for nearly an hour. Clinton, then a Senator, sat in the back, immobile, hard to see over all the balding heads and charcoal suits. “She didn’t say anything, so I was starting to wonder,” he says. “And her hand went up at the very end.” This is where he starts to lose it. “And … she just summarized everything I said. Better than I said it. And it was amazing.”

I ask if something is wrong, if he is really as emotional as he appears. “Yeah,” he says. “It was a big deal.”

Now Hillary Clinton is rising again, along with the scent of scandal and the frenzy of her enemies, and Brock has pledged to fight by her side. To understand his commitment, you must first understand the most bizarre entanglement in modern political history, which has turned Brock into one of the most powerful players in Democratic politics. Among other jobs, he currently coordinates message strategy with the Clinton campaign, leads her rapid-response super PAC, raises money and sits on the board of a separate “independent” super PAC that will pay millions for her TV ads, and has set up the group that creates all the federal Democratic opposition research for the 2016 campaigns.

In total, over a little more than a decade, he has personally raised more than $150 million from rich liberals to fund his sprawling empire, which also includes a group that files mostly spurious ethics complaints against Republicans and another that mercilessly attacks both Fox News and the New York Times. This is no small feat for a reformed liar who has never held political office. And to hear his defenders tell it, he has done it all with aplomb.

“Brilliant,” several of them tell me when I ask about Brock’s talents. “He’s like a minister,” says John Stocks, the chairman of the Democracy Alliance, an umbrella group for wealthy progressives. “He is like an artist in my mind,” explains Susie Tompkins Buell, a progressive activist, Clinton supporter and Brock’s first major donor.

But talent is not all Brock has. His relationship with Hillary Clinton is at the root of everything he has accomplished. Salvation came first to Brock, who in 1994 found himself suicidal, sitting in a running Range Rover in a closed garage in Laguna Beach, Calif., suffering for the lies he had peddled about Anita Hill. He stepped out of the car and into his next project, a takedown biography of Clinton, which had earned him a $1 million advance. But instead of writing what everyone expected, he wrote the truth as he saw it, a glowing tribute to a courageous woman. “In struggling to find Hillary’s humanity, I gradually found my own,” he explains in his latest book, Killing the Messenger, due on store shelves Sept. 15.

Salvation came to Clinton years later, after her husband’s affair with a 22-year-old White House intern became a national disgrace. As the furor grew, Brock, who remained a member of the conservative elite, became her eyes and ears, a secret agent feeding the White House real-time intelligence by way of Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal. Brock detailed it all, from the leaks coming from the independent prosecutor’s office to the secret sources of Internet bad boy Matt Drudge.

When Clinton went on NBC’s Today show in 1998 to warn the country of a “vast right-wing conspiracy,” she was describing a picture Brock had painted. It was Hillary who kept a chaotic White House focused on its tormentors that year, and it was Brock who gave Hillary the ammunition. “Having knowledge restored a sense of normalcy,” Blumenthal would later write of Brock’s contribution to Hillary during those dark days.

Over time, both Bill and Hillary Clinton found they shared something else with Brock: an unnatural focus and fierceness. “What I appreciated from the right wing was you had to have political power before you could make the changes you wanted to make,” Brock explains now. “And I wasn’t afraid of that. There was a culture in the Democratic Party of weakness and nonresponse. I think some of what we did helped change that culture.”

Political knife fighting turns out to be far more complicated than the real thing. The best practitioners conceal not only the knife but also the fighter. They distort the truth without getting caught in a lie. Most important, they submerge their cutthroat instinct in a redemption story, a fight for justice and goodness, which allows people to believe in the cause–and in the need to shed more blood in its name.

Brock has such a story. Last year he traveled to the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Ark., to make his case that the person he used to be still exists in the conservative firmament. The dark enemy would return. “I know from personal experience that the best efforts of the right wing to market political smut did not defeat the Clintons,” he said. “The truth won out in the end. And it will again.”

This time, he promised, the fight will not play out as it did before. If the New York Times stumbles in a Page One story on Hillary’s email scandal, Brock is there, penning a letter demanding an editorial “review” of the paper’s “flawed and fact-free reporting.” If Jeb Bush takes a dig at Hillary for failing to promptly turn over her emails to the government, Brock’s deputy asks the Florida state attorney to open a criminal investigation into Bush for his possibly “knowing and willful” violation of Florida public-records laws. If Trey Gowdy, the head of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, asks for Clinton’s personal server, Brock counters with an open letter to Gowdy demanding the public release of “your own work-related and private email.”

Candidates have long sent kids to track their rivals with video cameras, hoping to capture a public slip-up. But Brock’s operation is the first to have a team of about 30 trackers live-stream the footage back to headquarters so that it can be more quickly cut and sent out to reporters. He has also begun to plot new ways to get his trackers more involved–in asking questions of Clinton’s rivals, perhaps even setting up dummy groups so they can buy their way into fundraising events.

Such undercover work, a trademark of conservative activists since the Nixon era, has lately been frowned on by liberals. “I am very aware of what the Democratic culture will tolerate,” Brock says. By this he means he continues to push for change, though he maintains that he will never return to peddling falsehoods. “If people understand what propaganda is,” he says, repeating a koan of his craft, “it ceases to have an effect over time.”

As time has passed, the Brock trophy case has grown. By creating bursts of outrage, he helped get Don Imus kicked off MSNBC, ended Lou Dobbs’ run at CNN, chased Fortune 500 advertisers away from Rush Limbaugh and organized a boycott of Glenn Beck’s Fox News show before its cancellation. A local Brock tracker was the first to uncover Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin’s bizarre comment about “legitimate rape” in 2012, and his opposition research helped ensure that Tea Party candidate Richard Mourdock won the Senate primary in Indiana, thus ensuring a Democratic pickup in the general election.

Chances are your views on Charles and David Koch, the biggest backers of conservative politics, have been shaped more by Brock’s research machine–which paints the brothers as greedy moneybags with selfish interests–than by their own multibillion-dollar operations. Before he entered the race, Jeb Bush was tripped up on camera over a question on his support for the Paycheck Fairness Act, a Democratic effort to increase wages for women. Brock’s people not only recorded the exchange, they also planted the question. Back in 2010, he even wrote a secret memo proposing the impeachment of Justice Clarence Thomas, a radical idea that Blumenthal forwarded to Clinton. “After the ’13 and ’14 cycle we went back and we measured the TV coverage of any piece of research that was original to us,” Brock says. “And we monetized it as if you went out and bought it as advertising. It was over $225 million in publicity, and we spent $15 million to produce it.”

Ask Brock where it ends–this constant innovation, the institutional expansion–and he gives an ice-cold answer. “The only place it can end is with the defeat of the extreme elements of the Republican Party,” he says. “A third of the Republican base thinks Obama is the Antichrist. You just can’t reason with them.” This is the language of zealots who welcome peace talks only after the total surrender of their rivals. I point out that most liberals would not talk like that. “Probably not,” he agrees.

Last January, some Democratic opponents of Brock attempted a sort of palace coup. They didn’t like his growing power, didn’t like his fundraising methods–his business partner earns a commission on nonprofit donations, an unusual practice–and they wanted to maintain the Obama hold on the party’s richest donors. A disparaging story appeared in the New York Times, detailing the complaints, and Brock abruptly quit the board of Priorities USA, the Clinton advertising effort, threatening a rift in the high-dollar Democratic-donor community. “This is the kind of dirty trick I’ve witnessed in the right wing and would not tolerate then,” Brock wrote in his resignation letter.

Within weeks, Hillary Clinton’s allies stepped in, and Brock won back what he wanted, almost completely. Obama insiders were dispatched and demoted, a Clinton confidant was put in charge of the organization, and Brock was invited back to the board, with the promise of a joint fundraising plan he had long proposed. In the coming months, even as he advises the campaign, he plans to raise millions for a joint fund, which will split its money with the pro-Clinton group he founded. Not much has been raised yet, but hopes are high. “I think we came up with 800 donors who could give $1 million or more,” he says. “That doesn’t mean they will. But they could. So that’s not a terrible number.”

As for the current scandals swirling around Hillary, he refuses to give an inch. On the private email server: “I don’t feel any criticism is due.” On the Clinton Foundation’s raising money from people Bill Clinton helped through public appearances overseas: “The attacks on the foundation are almost the most despicable because of all the good work the foundation does.” Any reason for concern over the creation of a private consulting firm, Teneo, that employed Hillary Clinton’s State Department aides while aiding Clinton Foundation donors? “No. I haven’t seen anything,” he says.

This is David Brock. When he thinks of Hillary, he doesn’t think about an awkward politician with a mechanical laugh who has lost as many public battles as she has won. He thinks of the “deep well of personal integrity” he wrote about in his 1996 book. He thinks about the time she invited him to the Clinton summer rental in Sagaponack, N.Y., when her whole family was there, the siblings, spouses, kids and dogs. He thinks about eating pizza and sipping soft drinks by the pool, then looking up after a couple of hours to see the Secretary of State walking around the yard with a trash bag, picking up garbage. “Just like something my mom would do,” he recalls.

Does that sound like propaganda to you? You could call it that. Or you could call it politics. But for David Brock it is also the truth, a lodestar for the person he has become.

 

Meet one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest donors in California. They hardly ever talk politics

Meet one of Hillary Clinton's biggest donors in California.

When Hillary Clinton parachuted into Los Angeles recently, some of the well-heeled donors who swarmed her brought unsolicited campaign advice, while others brought ambitions of White House appointments. Susie Tompkins Buell brought a bag of dry-roasted chickpeas.

It was fitting that Buell, a wealthy San Franciscan who ranks near the top of the sprawling national network of Clinton benefactors, was obsessing about the candidate’s nourishment. Few people in the orbit of the Clintons have done more for their care and feeding than this 73-year-old fixture of Bay Area philanthropy and salon society who wanted nothing to do with politics — she didn’t even vote — until a chance meeting with Bill Clinton well into her adult life.

Buell not only has become a fundraising powerhouse since then. She has also become Hillary Clinton’s soul mate. Theirs is among a handful of friendships that have been key to fueling the candidate’s ambitions, providing emotional and financial sustenance. It reflects the uncanny Clinton ability to build and maintain unyielding loyalty from the people positioned to help them the most – even people, like Buell, who have no business interests or political aspirations the couple might advance. In many cases, the bonds have only solidified through the stresses of scandal, electoral disappointment and Democratic Party rivalries that the Clintons have powered through.

See the most-read stories this hour >>

The network has been most valuable in California, where Hillary Clinton is raising more cash than anyplace else. How Susie Tompkins Buell became a hub of that operation is a uniquely California story.

Buell never thought she would be rich. She was but a 21-year-old who had chosen work as a keno runner in Tahoe over college when she randomly stopped by the roadside to pick up Doug Tompkins, a hitchhiking beach bum who, like Buell, had an unexpected mastery of entrepreneurship and getting in front of trends. The two eventually married and together built a fortune and a cultish following around the clothing lines they created: North Face and Esprit.

But it wasn’t until they divorced and Buell found herself at a retreat at the Esalen Institute that she got curious about the Clintons. Buzz about Bill Clinton at that Big Sur haven of mindfulness intrigued Buell. It was 1991, and the fledgling presidential candidate had inspired one of the speakers at the event, New Urbanist architect and thinker Peter Calthorpe, with his ideas on building and strengthening community, a topic of interest to Buell.

So on a whim, and with a stroke of luck in timing, she dropped in at an event for Clinton while passing through Sacramento on her way home from Tahoe.

She quickly found herself at the head table. The conversation was memorable.

“I told him I was getting divorced and how I had worked with my husband all these years,” Buell said. “He really wanted to know what it was like, and he started talking about Hillary and how she was nervous that night because she was giving a speech at Wellesley,” her alma mater. They talked about the crushing poverty Clinton had seen on the campaign trail, Buell recalled, “and how much people were relying on government. I really wanted a president who would look out for them.”

She decided at that moment it should be Clinton. The next day, she wrote him a $100,000 check.

But the Clinton campaign was confused. Such large gifts usually come with requests for face time with the candidate or, at the very least, donor perks like ticket packages to the party convention and star-studded fundraising events.

Election 2016 | Live coverage on Trail Guide | Track the delegate race | Sign up for the newsletter  

“They asked me what I wanted,” she said. “I remember saying, ‘I want him to be president.’ I had no idea about how the money part of this worked.” Indeed, the only candidate who had ever received a cent from her before then was Mark Buell, the man who is now her husband and who long ago unsuccessfully ran for county supervisor. He got $500.

The donation to Clinton might have been a one-off but for the relationship that bloomed when Hillary Clinton approached Buell to personally thank her. The women clicked immediately, and Buell grew more enamored when she saw Clinton deliver an impassioned Mother’s Day address at Glide Memorial Church, a hotbed of leftist activism in San Francisco’s Tenderloin district.

“I was attracted to Bill Clinton, but as soon as I met Hillary, it was much deeper for me,” she said.

Buell hasn’t stopped giving to the Clintons since. More than $15 million has made its way from Buell’s bank account to the campaigns and causes of the Clintons. Untold millions more have been raised by her, often at her gorgeous Pacific Heights penthouse apartment, a mandatory stop on the fundraising circuit for prominent liberals. The menu that iconic chef Alice Waters prepared when Bill Clinton dropped by in March 1996 is framed in the kitchen.

“I can’t even count the number of events I have been to at the house,” said Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who first got to know Buell years ago, when he ran a wine shop and was good friends with her daughter. “It is a perfect venue overlooking the bay. There is an austerity to it. It is an opulent building, an opulent view. But the space itself is austere.” The rooms are sparsely but carefully appointed. Pieces worth more than a small condominium share rooms with stylish items plucked from far-flung flea markets. Every window has a panoramic view.

“It is a perfect backdrop to focus less on the surroundings and more on the occasion,” Newsom said.

The occasion is almost always political activism.

“The environment, women’s rights, children’s rights, equality, all of this,” said Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, ticking off in an interview the causes she has been involved in with Buell. “Susie comes through. She doesn’t say, ‘Put my name down,’ and take a back seat.”

As Buell got entrenched in politics, her relationship with Hillary Clinton began to move beyond it. Clinton writes in one of her books about a conversation between the two while the then-first lady was under siege by Congress amid its investigation into her Whitewater real estate investment. “My free-spirited friend Susie Buell said she didn’t follow all the dramas going on back in Washington, but she did have something to say to me: ‘Bless your heart.’ That was all I needed to hear,” Clinton wrote.

Much later, Clinton showed up at Buell’s apartment to meet her dying brother, a prominent surgeon who was staying with Buell while undergoing painful cancer treatments. “Most people would say, ‘I am sorry I never met your brother,’ or send their best. She just goes right into it,” Buell said. “She wasn’t taking advantage of him. They laughed. It was just sweet. It was one of the tenderest times in my life. … Her comfort with the situation was very moving.”

Buell said she regrets how few people see that side of Clinton.

“I remember once saying to her: ‘Can’t you just be yourself, Hillary?’ ”  Buell said. “When there are not cameras around, she really lets it fly. She said, ‘You know what happens? They will get a moment of me expressing something and then say, “There she goes again, the crazy.” ’ Experience has trained her to be so cautious.”

But Clinton also sees a side of Buell that many candidates never get to see: the one that doesn’t talk politics.

“I don’t want to be one more thing she has to think about,” Buell said. “She knows who I am, she knows how I feel. We don’t talk shop. … She doesn’t need one more person to say, ‘What do you think about the Benghazi report?’ ”

This is the same donor who showed up at a high-stakes fundraiser for President Obama near the end of his first term and told him to knock off the small talk when he began to genuflect. Then she launched into a scold about his failure to get a landmark climate change bill through Congress.

Newsom, who says Buell “holds your feet to the fire” when candidates get her support, let out a knowing chuckle when asked about her reluctance to push Clinton. As Buell and other climate activists fought for years to kill the Keystone XL pipeline, candidates who did not stand with them were getting an earful from her. Except Clinton, who stayed neutral through most of the battle.

“They have a deep friendship, and that transcends politics in many respects,” he said. “She has a loyalty to the Clintons that is extraordinary, and it is unbreakable.”

It’s not that Buell is star-struck. She is constantly in the company of celebrity. Meryl Streep gushed in an email about Buell’s “open, welcoming mien.” Waters happened to text while Buell was talking with a displaced former California reporter, and at Buell’s behest, recommended where in Washington to dine.

Bill Clinton emailed to say, “Susie has been my friend for almost 25 years,” and express gratitude “for her constant love and support for Hillary.”

And Gloria Steinem has also been Buell’s friend for years. She recalled in an interview coming to speak about feminism to Esprit employees in the 1980s, long before it was fashionable for big companies to try to raise the consciousness of their workforce. Buell’s then-husband vetoed her plans to advertise in the fledgling Ms. magazine, so Buell sidestepped him by writing a check to subsidize subscriptions for universities.

“She is a self-educated person in the best sense,” Steinem said.

Buell stopped selling clothing long ago, but she never stopped marketing her brand. Lately, she has been working on her “Badass for President” project, a more hipster-oriented line of Clinton campaign memorabilia  than the less-daring goods sold in the campaign store. A mock-up poster in her office has the logo emblazoned over a black-and-white photo of young Hillary Clinton in stylish ’60s attire and a coffeehouse conversation pose.

The fundraising events she holds are among the fastest-selling tickets in the city — especially when they are at her apartment in the penthouse of a landmark red-tile-roof building on a Pacific Heights hilltop where the views are dreamlike and the history is rich.

Buell says she was one of the lonely Democrats in the old-money-heavy building when she held her first fundraiser for Bill Clinton there. She had to quickly patch together a bunch of linens to cover the picture windows that the president’s detail warned would be a security risk. Clinton joked that it was better to be looking at the linens than shattered glass. The Secret Service once got stuck in the utility elevator there for an hour after too many of the agents piled in.

They know their way around better now. There are at least three other big Democratic donors in the building now, and sometimes they team up to hold multifloor events. Obama once joked that he had been through so many times he was starting to feel like a resident. Buell expects that she and her neighbors soon will be holding another multitiered event in the building for Hillary Clinton soon. The haul from such events is in the millions of dollars.

“It works great,” she said. “As long as the Secret Service is clear that they can’t all pile into the utility elevator at once.”

And what’s next for Buell if Clinton wins? Probably more of the same, she said.

“I am absolutely not interested in getting appointed to something,” she said. “I have the perfect life.”

Doree Shafrir VRP

While Sillicon Valley likes to think of itself as the epicenter of the tech universe, New York attracts its fair share of ambitious entrepreneurs determined to make their mark. Among them are Mack McAllister, the it-boy visionary of the moment trying to take his app to the next level; Isabel, a social media ninja working for him a bit too closely; and Katya, an ambitious Russian emigre journalist desperate for a scoop. When a scandal erupts in the lower Manhattan loft building where all three work, they quickly discover just how small a world the Big Apple’s tech community can be. Doree Shafrir’s debut is a sharp, hugely entertaining story of youth, ambition, love, money and technology’s inability to hack human nature.

About the Author
 

Doree Shafrir is an American author and executive editor at BuzzFeed. She was previously an editor at Rolling Stone, Gawker and The New York Observer. She lives in Los Angeles with husband Matt Mira, a comedy writer and podcaster.

With Jessica Grose she founded the Postcards From Yo Momma website. She and Grose co-authored a book based on Postcards From Yo Momma, titled Love, Mom: Poignant, Goofy, Brilliant Messages from Home, which was published by Hyperion in March 2009. Shafrir’s first novel, STARTUP, will be published by Little, Brown in 2017.

In Her Own Words
Hi! I’m Doree. I’m a Senior Culture Writer at BuzzFeed News, where I used to be the Executive Editor, Culture and edited the Ideas section. My first novel, Startup, will be published by Little, Brown on April 25, 2017. (You may pre-order it now!) I’ve also worked as an editor or staff writer at Rolling Stone, the New York Observer, Gawker, and Philadelphia Weekly, and have contributed to publications including the New York Times, The New Yorker, Slate, The Awl, Daily Beast, Marie Claire, and Wired. (Click on “Work” above to read some of my stuff.)

I grew up outside of Boston, went to college in Philadelphia, lived in New York for nine years, and now live in LA with my husband Matt Mira, a comedy writer and podcaster, and our mastiff/Shar Pei mix Beau, a dog.

Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doree_Shafrir

Twitter (20.3K followers): https://twitter.com/doree?lang=en

Amy Gash VRP

 

Amy Gash is a Senior Editor in the New York office of Algonquin Books, where she has acquired literary fiction and narrative nonfiction for the past 15 years. Among the books she has edited are Ariel Sabar’s My Father’s Paradise: A Son’s Search for His Family’s Past, which won the National Book Critics Circle Award for Autobiography, the New York Times bestseller Work Hard, Be Nice: How Two Inspired Teachers Created the Most Promising School in America by Jay Mathews. A forthcoming novel, The Art Forger by B.A. Shapiro, is the #1 Indie Next Pick this November. What connects all her diverse projects, whether fiction, memoir, history, education, travel, religion, science, or popular culture is the author’s distinct voice. Before arriving at Algonquin, Amy worked at HarperCollins and Random House.

In the Media:

Algonquin Books Acquires Gayle Forman Adult Novel  |  Ad Week  |  June 23, 2015
Algonquin Books, a Division of Workman Publishing, has acquired the North American rights to publish bestselling author Gayle Forman’s first novel for adults.

The publisher snapped up the title at auction. Amy Gash, senior editor at Algonquin, negotiated the deal with Forman’s agent, Michael Bourret of Dystel & Goderich Literary Management. The book is tentatively titled Bypass and is slated for publication in Fall 2016.

“After a decade of mining the young-adult experience, I was ready to turn my attention to marriage and motherhood. It felt like the time to write a novel starring people my own age,” Forman explained in a statement. “I have been reading Algonquin books for years, so it’s a bit surreal to now find myself in the prestigious company of authors like Robert Goolrick, Sara Gruen, Tayari Jones and more. Needless to say, I am thrilled to be publishing my debut adult novel with Algonquin.”

The novel is the portrait of a go-getter woman who finds herself in search of her estranged birth mother after a heart attack.

Inside an Acquiring Editor’s Mind with Amy Gash, Senior Editor, Algonquin Press  |  The Writers Circle  |  March 24, 2013
JL: How did you come to editing?

AG: When I first started looking for work, I didn’t know all that much about publishing but I lucked into a publicity job at Times Books, which was then owned by The New York Times. When the company was sold to Random House six weeks after I started, I was told that they couldn’t bring me. It turned out, though, that an editor at the company needed an assistant and so I moved to editorial and went with the company to Random House. I’m very glad I was able to switch over to the editorial department, so it worked out for the best. Eventually I left and worked at Morrow, Harper, Addison-Wesley, and then I had a baby and took some time off. When I wanted to start working again I was thrilled to find a position at Algonquin Books, where I’ve been for the past 15 years.

MC: What types of books does Algonquin publish?

AG: Literary fiction and narrative nonfiction. We are very specific about looking for good stories and for authors who have an original voice. Algonquin only publishes about twenty books a year, so we have to be pretty picky. We also know what kinds of books we do best and what kinds of titles we don’t publish as well. So we turn down a lot of fine books, just because we’re not the right publisher for that particular genre or that type of project. It has to be a good fit for both author and publisher. This seems to work for us because, despite our small list, last year we had six books on the bestseller list.

JL: What sorts of books have you personally worked on?

AG: I edit a lot of narrative nonfiction. One example is Last Child in the Woods by Richard Louv, which speaks to the importance of encouraging children to play and explore outside. While it includes research, it really was based on a common sense idea: Children spend too much time looking at screens. This was something parents and others knew instinctively to be true, but no one had looked at studies and hard evidence about just how it was affecting our kids. Rich brought all that together in one book.  (Laughs.)  At first the author was unsure about the subtitle, Saving our Children from Nature- Deficit Disorder, but we managed to convince him, and I think it has helped draw attention to the topic, even though Rich always points out that it’s not a medical diagnosis! One of the roles a publishing house plays is to help “package” the book in order to make it attractive to readers. Publishing is a business and we need our books to sell, just like any other business.

MC: You sound like you were completely invested in the success of that book. What sorts of books are you passionate about?

AG: It’s critical for an editor to have passion for her books. I work very closely with the author for a very long time – sometimes as long as three years or more – so I better love and enjoy that book.  There are times when I see a proposal for a book but it doesn’t quite speak to me and, even though it may be a wonderful project, I’ll still turn it down. Because I know that if I don’t have that passion I won’t be bringing something essential to the author and the book, and that’s not good for anyone. On the other hand, sometimes when I’m very interested in a subject or author, I’ll pursue a book. One example is when I heard Heather Lende speaking on NPR and decided to call her on the phone to ask if she wanted to write a book.  There was a long silence on the phone and then she said, “I’ve been waiting my entire life for you to call!”  But then the hard work began. Heather had written a lot of essays, but we needed to find a way to give the book a focus.  It turns out that she was the obituary writer for her tiny town in Alaska, and we realized we could use those obituaries as a focus and that helped give the book its power and originality. It probably took two years before Heather actually started writing the book, which is called If You Lived Here, I’d Know Your Name.

JL: What sort of work do you do with authors?

AG: Here’s an example: I worked with the author who had submitted a collection of terrific pieces but the book was lacking a narrative structure. I loved her voice and her writing was fascinating, but the book as a whole didn’t have an arc – a beginning, middle, and end — and so it wasn’t as satisfying a reading experience as it could have been. We worked together for several sessions, putting her pieces into a type of succession, looking for the theme and story lurking beyond the written words. We discovered that she was really writing about her growth as a woman and as an artist. She eventually wrote new pieces that connected the original chapters and reorganized it all until we had a complete work that told a story and delivered an emotional conclusion. The book is called The Receptionist by Janet Groth.

MC: What about fiction authors? What do you do with them? How are they different to work with?

AG: There is a difference. Fiction writers usually require less line-editing. Well, not always (laughs) but generally. With fiction, we’re usually working on the pacing of the story and on what in movies they would call “continuity” – making sure it all makes sense and holds together. We might work on clarifying characters motivations and getting that perfect ending. Endings are often hard. Beginnings, too!

JL: What can you tell us about the acceptance and acquisition process? Who reads the manuscript and how does it get to your desk?

AG: I read through hundreds of manuscripts. While I may eventually look at everything that arrives in my office (or in my email, these days), if it comes from an agent, that submission will probably be higher up on my priority list. This is because I can hardly keep up with all the submissions I get each week. I have deadlines I must meet for books I’ve already accepted — deadlines for editing manuscripts, writing copy, sending out galleys for blurbs, looking at press releases, going to meetings! — so my job is a constant juggling act. But, still, acquiring books is probably the most important part of my job. Once I find a book that interests me, I bring it to our editorial group meeting. Before we meet each week, I send a portion of the manuscript to the other editors in the house and our publisher along with my own thoughts on the project. And then we talk about it. Sometimes one editor loves it, another doesn’t — we “argue” sometimes — but we all respect each other’s taste and we usually make a group decision about whether to acquire the project. Or when we can’t, our publisher has the final word. It’s pretty informal at Algonquin, probably due to our small size.

A question from the audience: What are the chances that you’ll actually look at a manuscript if it doesn’t come from an agent?

AG: There’s a large basket in my office that contains what’s called the slush pile – unagented manuscripts. Eventually I’ll get to the basket but unfortunately it’s often last on my list of things to read. It can happen, but it’s a lot slower.

One way to improve your chances would be to work through an editorial assistant. They’re sometimes “hungrier” and want to find the next great book because that’s the way they’ll move up the ladder. So if you do send in a manuscript without an agent, see if you can talk it up to the assistant first, so they’ll be excited to read it and, if they like it, recommend it to someone in the house or acquire it themselves.

It also helps to have published before, maybe in newspapers or magazines or online. Write articles, even if they aren’t connected to your work-in-progress. Publishing houses are more likely to take on a writer who has a platform — a readership or a following. For example, editors are always looking for the blogger who has attracted fans. We’re always in search of “the next big thing” — whether that project comes with an agent or not.

Another question from the audience: Can you give us names of good agents?

AG: Finding the right agent is so specific to the book you’re writing that I really can’t be useful there. But there are lots of resources available to you, such as Publishers Marketplace, which is on line and lists what was acquired at publishing houses each day, along with the agent’s name so you can tell which agents are representing books like yours. Or the LMP (Literary Marketplace), which you’ll find in most libraries. It lists all agents and what they specialize in. The Internet is a great resource, but make sure the site is up to date. And maybe the best suggestion is to look at books that are similar to the one you’re writing and check the acknowledgements page, where the author will thank his or her agent. Then you’ll know that agent has an affinity for your kind of book.

MC: What does it feel like to pass on a book that later becomes hugely successful? Why does that happen?

AG: It happens, but an editor who passes on one book might be the editor of other hugely successful books, so passing on one doesn’t necessarily reflect on him or her. So much is about taste and passion and not every book is for every editor. And you have to remember that a successful book published by one house might not have been as successful if published from another. . I often see books that are really good books but still are not quite right for our publishing program, and if it isn’t, we can’t make the success of it that another house might. Or at least that’s what I tell myself when I see a bestseller that I passed on!

JL: It seems that acquiring a book is an intuitive process. What makes a book stand out?

AG: For me, it’s always the voice of the author. I’m attracted to a book when the writing style is particularly beautiful or the writing is insightful or the author is saying something I’ve never heard before. But it really is personal. There are also times when I have to pass on books I like a lot but I know they aren’t a good fit for Algonquin, and sometimes I’ll even suggest another place for the author to take the project.

MC: What can the author control during the publishing process?

AG: Authors don’t usually control whether publishers send them out on a book tour or advertise their books or even in what season we publish their books. We have a budget allocated and we need to use it wisely – and differently – for every author.  Of course we hope that every book we publish will be a bestseller and we try hard to make that happen. We’re small and we give attention to every title. Algonquin has a reputation for acquiring authors who haven’t necessarily done well at other houses and making their books work. And that’s very gratifying.  We provide a marketing and publicity plan for every book we sell, but these days it helps a lot if the author must also understands how to use social media and can play a part in their marketing.

MC: What about self-publishing, which is a huge trend right now? What does traditional house bring that self-publishing doesn’t?

AG: First and foremost, publishers have the ability to distribute books, to get them into the stores. Plus, I like to think we understand how to market books, to draw the attention of reviewers and others. Then, there is the editorial perspective that we bring – I think, I hope that’s worth something! We hear about that one book that is self published and becomes a huge bestseller. But for every self-published book that breaks through, so many more don’t.  On the other hand, I suppose that’s true of any publishing route, traditional as well as self-published. Book publishing is not an exact science and there’s no perfect formula for success. I’m glad there are lots of avenues for authors.

JL: What is the best advice you could give to an aspiring author trying to navigate the current publishing world?

AG: Often I see proposals of nonfiction books or drafts of novels that aren’t ready yet. Writers need to work and revise and rewrite and make sure that book is the best it can be. Take classes, go to workshops, read the best writers out there. I would seek out as much feedback as you can. And preferably not just from friends! A writer needs to be resolute in his or her own vision, but at the same time be open to hearing criticism and learning from it. It’s a fine line.

‘The Art Forger:’ Can Lightning Strike Twice for Algonquin?  |  Publisher’s Weekly  |  June 22, 2012
In a day and age when computer data rule book ordering and midlist authors can be penalized for their track records, Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill is trying to give Barbara Shapiro a fresh start for The Art Forger. It’s a tack that the press, an imprint of Workman Publishing, used successfully six years ago when it bought Sara Gruen’s novel about the world of the circus. Water for Elephants became a huge hit and was turned into a movie. Although Algonquin never claimed that the book, which was widely embraced by independent booksellers, was Gruen’s first, it did nothing to promote the fact that she had previously published two others, Flying Horses and Riding Lessons.

To support The Art Forger, one of its fall lead titles, Algonquin printed 3,000 galleys, which it began distributing at BookExpo America earlier this month. On them it omitted any reference to Shapiro’s first name or her previous books, published between 1993 and 2002: five suspense novels and one nonfiction. Instead, Algonquin used the gathering to whet booksellers’ appetite for a tale of art and forgery interwoven with the real-life 1990 theft of 13 pieces of art worth more than $500 million from the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston. The press sent out invitations from the fictional art gallery in the book, Markel G, to view the recovered Degas, which plays a central role in the story. The hoax was so convincing that at least one bookseller communicated her excitement at seeing the impressionist painting unveiled in the Workman booth—not far from a set of eggs about to hatch into baby chicks.

While some may think that the Boston setting could make Forger a regional book, Shapiro’s editor, Amy Gash, has always seen it on a national stage. “It never occurred to me that this was a regional book,” she said. “All books are set somewhere. She captures Boston incredibly well. Boston is a character. You can feel the pulse of the city. I was so completely taken by this book. I felt the voice and characters were so unusual. I loved it, and so far everybody in-house who has read it has loved it.”

For marketing director Craig Popelars, the trick will be using the book’s regional connections as a springboard. “It can be embraced by a region, but it can’t be contained by a region. That’s something we have here,” he said. Although Shapiro lives in Boston and will appear at the New England Independent Booksellers Association’s fall conference, she will also attend fall regionals in Southern California, Mountains and Plains, and the South, and do a 15-city tour.

Shapiro’s background as a sociologist—she taught sociology, criminology, and deviance at Tufts University—prepared her for writing The Art Forger. “When you get a Ph.D. in sociology,” said Shapiro, “they retrain how you think about people in relationship to other people and society. And that’s really useful for a novelist.” Still, she found it tough to break out of genre writing and move into literary fiction, and for a house to give her a new chance.

In the intervening decade since her last novel, she shifted jobs and now teaches creative writing at Northeastern University. She says that she prefers long-form fiction and spends about two to three years on each book (she’s hoping Algonquin will pick up her next one). Over time, her fiction has become more research oriented. But caveat to the reader, the research serves only as an underpinning; even the Boston Globe articles in The Art Forger have been made up.