There needs to be one editor-in-chief (with final veto-power) to assemble the
proposal and who's competent, experienced in publishing, a good manager and
delegator, and has a thick skin to withstand the slings and arrows that will
be launched from some quarters. (The last quality is probably as important
as any; projects like these rarely end up in hugs and kisses all around.)
Andrew Fildes' comments on this matter are apposite, in my opinion. Namely,
that the only one who'll make any dough on this project will be the
publisher. (A friend of mine recently published his first book. It sold
5000 copies, 4900 of which are lining the walls of his basement.)
When presented with the proposal, a publisher will ask pertinent questions:
Why would I want to publish this project? Can I make money doing this? Is
there a market for this book? Who will be doing the actual writing? And
more.
I come from a magazine-scribbling background, where good editors are a gift
from the gods, while dealing with bad ones are like shoveling smoke.
James Lawson
Et semel emissum volat irrevocabile verbum.
|