Yikes, David. Sorry to hear it.
Aww, it's not a crisis. We built some leeway into the book by soliciting sidebars and collecting some vintage reviews by old zine writers from the 70s, and Kim and I have cut back on our essays. It's actually better to aim fat, and leave yourself room to trim here and there without losing any major contributions. It's just a bit fatter than planned because most folks went over the 300 word limit. Also the writer bios add up unexpectedly.
So, out come the knives. But I have to say Kim's been doing line edits for a long time (she has her own magazine) and she wields a very fine scalpel. Generally the essays come out the better for her cuts. It's just still no fun if you're the writer.
Nah, I appreciate a good editor. It's a rare skill and always improves pieces when used well.
That said, I confess that my reviews came to me in a prophetic dream and were ultimately carved by lightning into stone tablets high upon Mount Lester. Just in case you were thinking about cutting them. (ah, I kid.)
carved by lightning into stone tablets
As an editor, I scoff at stone tablets. I wield a mighty stonecutter.
My Sidebar?!
Nah, you're in. But I need you to sign a release.
Some people submitted multiple sidebars. We're being careful not to cut any of the solicited and approved main reviews. Nobody's going to be cut out of the book entirely.
I wield a mighty stonecutter.
So
you're
responsible for Steve Guttenberg's career!
So you're responsible for Steve Guttenberg's career!
The minute I typed "stonecutter" -- nay, as soon as I got "s-t-o-" out -- I knew it was going to go in a Simpsons direction.
ookaaaayyy....
No, really it's fine.
There's really nothing to worry about with that clause about signing over your house to the editors
There's really nothing to worry about with that clause about signing over your house to the editors
Why? So Kim can find the box of Lothars CDs and sell them on eBay?
