Alice Munro - Writing Her Lives

Munro saw as “the best editor in the world,” and continuing: “You stated your client’s position very firmly, and suggested that while there were no legal grounds for contract termination, you felt moral-suasion held great force in this situation, and that no publisher should force anauthor unhappy with a contract.” McKnight’s argument was as follows: Macmillan understood that Gibson would publish Munro’s subsequent books, but as for
Progress
, Macmillan had performed well in the past and was concerned about the effect of Munro’s move on its reputation; the book was in production in New York (where most of the editorial work had been done) so Gibson was not needed in that regard. In effect, the financial blow to Macmillan would be great. McKnight closed by suggesting that they travel to Clinton to meet with Munro. Replying to McKnight on March 14, Barber said her memory of their meeting differed a bit but, in any case, McKnight should have received Munro’s letter by then, and “I don’t see how you can deny her after you’ve read it, and I’m hoping you will then agree to promptly put through termination papers. Because Alice’s request to be released is based on her desire to continue her successful partnership with Doug Gibson, you know surely that we will express openly and privately our gratitude to Macmillan and our satisfaction with your publishing program.”
    Munro’s letter clearly states her wish to be let out of the contract with Macmillan, but it is more interesting for the view it offers of her own career:
    Doug first talked to me about publishing with Macmillan in the mid-seventies. I was very discouraged at that time. Ryerson had done nothing to promote or even distribute my first book. McGraw-Hill Ryerson had published the second with expressed reluctance and the third without enthusiasm – merely, I believe, to keep a Canadian fiction writer on their list. Every publisher I had met had assured me that I would have to grow up and write novels before I could be taken seriously as a writer. No one in Canada had shown the least interest in taking on a writer who was going to turn out book after book of short stories. The result of this is that I wasted much time and effort trying to turn myself into a novelist, and had become so depressed that I was unable to write at all. Doug changed that. He was absolutely the first person in Canadian publishing who made me feel that there was no need to apologize for being a short story writer, andthat a book of short stories could be published and promoted as major fiction. This was a fairly revolutionary notion, at the time. It was this support that enabled me to go on working, when I had been totally uncertain about my future.
    I came to Macmillan because of Doug, and his respect for my work changed me from a minor, “literary” writer who sold poorly into a major writer who sold well. I hope that you will understand how I have felt, from that time on, that I owe him a great deal, and that I want him to have charge of any book I publish. I am not making a judgement against Macmillan – my relations in the house have always been good – but for Doug Gibson.
    I realize that I do not have a legal right to move this book, but I hope that my very strong feelings about publishing with Doug will influence you to let me go.
    They did not. On April 2 McKnight wrote again to Barber announcing Macmillan’s decision not to let Munro and
The Progress of Love
go.
    Viewed as a minor episode in publishing history, things got really interesting at this point. Barber called McKnight and asked what it would take to buy Macmillan out. Macmillan replied that it wanted the $12,500 advance, $80,000, and half of the publisher’s share of the paperback. Armed with this offer, Gibson wrote Avie Bennett and Peter Waldock, his colleagues at McClelland & Stewart, that his “inclination here is to make a good offer that makes sense from our point of view, and ask Ginger to make it clear that if they turn it down, the fact that they did so is likely to come out.” Then Macmillan would be seen holding Munro against her will and having turned down an offer that would have been straight profit to them. They would look bad, even silly.
    On April 11 McClelland & Stewart agreed to return the advance and split the publisher’s share of the paperback contract, but refused the $80,000 payment, offering $32,150 instead and outlining how they came up with that figure.