Author Siân Pattenden went after a recent clause added to Random House contracts in the UK:
Yet another example of how different we are in the States. I doubt if any of our publishers would consider a clause like this one, and yet I think there might be an unwritten expectation in the industry that we are supposed to be role models.
Most American children's book authors aren't known for DUI arrests, suicide attempts, or accusations of abusive behavior towards our mothers. Are creators of children's stories a happier, more stable (some might read: boring) bunch than other artists? Are we better at keeping our mistakes quiet? Or is there an unwritten code moderating our behavior this side of the Atlantic (authors who are party animals need not submit manuscripts; celebrities exempted)?
If you act or behave in a way which damages your reputation as a person suitable to work with or be associated with children, and consequently the market for or value of the work is seriously diminished, and we may (at our option) take any of the following actions: Delay publication / Renegotiate advance / Terminate the agreement."Writers are not, and should never be, seen as role models," Ms. Pattenden states in her Guardian blog post.
Yet another example of how different we are in the States. I doubt if any of our publishers would consider a clause like this one, and yet I think there might be an unwritten expectation in the industry that we are supposed to be role models.
Most American children's book authors aren't known for DUI arrests, suicide attempts, or accusations of abusive behavior towards our mothers. Are creators of children's stories a happier, more stable (some might read: boring) bunch than other artists? Are we better at keeping our mistakes quiet? Or is there an unwritten code moderating our behavior this side of the Atlantic (authors who are party animals need not submit manuscripts; celebrities exempted)?