 |
 |
|
|
2.
AOTW: When did you realize you needed to change your work-in-progress?
Lori Woolridge: Hitts and Mrs. was at that time a book about a man who died suddenly in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the secret life he left behind. That story died with many of my friends that day.
Philip Jolowicz: By the end of that day I knew that changes needed to be made. I felt terrible guilt at even thinking about my own work at a time like that, but I couldn't stop my mind selfishly jostling in that direction; it was just so obvious that the book was affected by what was unfolding before my eyes.
In fairness to myself, I appreciated that the connectivity of my book to the events of 9/11 would receive immediate attention, as I was due to speak at a conference of the sales force for my UK publishers on 13th September. The issue could hardly fail to arise given that this was the book's debut showing outside a narrow circle and the prospective audience already knew the work was set in Manhattan.
William Carman: I actually realized it the next day. I didn't talk to my editor until several days later. My publisher is located in New York City.
Jim Fusilli: A week or so after the attacks, I went down to TriBeCa, the area where my characters live that's adjacent to the World Trade Center. I saw how deeply affected the community was, not just physically with the destruction of a part of the neighborhood, but emotionally, with this sort of very unfamiliar aura of vulnerability that surrounded them. I was moved by the collective sense of fear, anxiety and uncertainty among the people who live there and have businesses there. They were really struggling to cope with the tragedy. It was clear that something fundamental about them had been changed, and the same thing had to be true of my characters, Terry Orr and his teen-aged daughter Bella.
Bruce Feiler: My gut knew it before my head did. I had been working for months on a second biblical trek through the Middle East, a follow-up to Walking the Bible. I knew almost instantly that the idea of traveling through Iraq, Iran, Israel and Egypt, as I had planned, would be almost impossible. And yet I also knew I couldn't stay away. The atmosphere in the world after 9/11 seemed to make the idea of some kind of journey back in time --- specifically one that looked at ancient texts --- even more important. Only now I wanted to bring Islam into the conversation.
Jennifer Blake: Recognition came in a matter of hours, as it became clear that the US would retaliate against the Taliban government. It seemed unlikely that the fundamentalist Islamic regime would survive. If they were defeated, then my laboriously researched plot would fall apart.
Earl Merkel: I wish to hell that Final Epidemic had been a work-in-progress; what I had was a complete, finished book to rework.
My editor at Penguin Putnam and I had completed "final" edits on the novel in late August 2001. I had already put Final Epidemic behind me and was working another book project --- one that was as far away from terrorism and biological weapons as I could find. I had lived a bit too long in that book, if you understand what I mean; it was fiction, but the research had focused on experts who knew that bioterrorism is a very real threat.
When did I know revisions were going to be needed? Probably about mid-afternoon, when CNN was interviewing an expert in terrorism, and I recognized him as one of the people I had interviewed when I was researching my book.
It's odd; at the time, the full impact didn't hit me. I thought, 'H-m-m-m... okay, yeah, I'll have to tweak this-or-that a bit, I guess.' But then they kept coming, one after another, all these people I recognized from the research --- a guy from the anti-terror studies group at Johns Hopkins, people who had been at Dugway and Fort Detrick when they were working with bioweapons, retired spooks and special ops personnel. That's when I realized Final Epidemic was back on the table.
Want to know how naive I was? I thought, with the sudden interest in terrorist groups, special operations, bioweapons and all, Penguin Putnam would want to rush the book into print immediately. I was even worried I wouldn't have time to make the changes I felt we needed.
Instead, as most publishing houses did with pending books dealing with violent themes, the publisher put Final Epidemic on hold for what turned out to be almost a year.
Oh, yeah --- the delay was crushing. Really, it seemed like a curse at the time. But I guess it turned into an opportunity. Uh --- did that sound convincing enough? Seriously, it did give us the time to look at the writing and make sure that the content reflected the new realities we all face.
The flip side, though, is that I still don't buy the argument the publishers were selling. I have a hard time swallowing that you should pull books or movies because they offer content that may be "disturbing."
Okay, it was a marketing decision; they didn't want to risk offending the book-buying public while the wounds of 9/11 were still fresh, particularly in New York City. But I think they misjudge the resiliency and strength of the public, especially the people of NYC.
Fiction has always been a way that people deal with their fears and uncertainties --- years ago, I made the mistake of reading "Jaws" on a beach vacation, for crying out loud, and it made each plunge into the salt far more exhilarating that it would have otherwise been.
In putting certain types of books on hold, perhaps the publishing powers-that-be didn't give their readers the credit they deserve. It was just a bit too elitist, in my humble opinion. Perhaps it was the publishers who were too sensitive about the subject, not the readers.
|
|
|
|
|
(c) Copyright 2002, AuthorsOnTheWeb.com. All rights
reserved.
|
|
