Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog

Neil Nyren and Putnam like the proposal for the next book, which I will no longer refer to as Vol. III because that's the last thing I want it to be perceived as.

Here's why: because BFA came so closely on the heels of PNM (only 15 months) and had a very similar cover and had "The Pentagon's New Map" on the top of its front cover, way too many people confused it with PNM proper. You would be amazed how many readers of PNM (roughly 100k copies sold in the U.S.) are still waiting for my second book, not knowing that it came out two years ago. I constantly get introduced as the author of "The Pentagon's New Map: Blueprint for Action," as though it's one book instead of two.

That's why I didn't sell anywhere near as many BFA as PNM.

So, as we go back and forth with Putnam on the advance, which they naturally want to base on the second book's sales rather than the first (reasonable business decision on their part), we're naturally of the opinion that--given the right rebranding and separation from the first pair, I've proven I can write something that sells in the 100k range.

Having said all that, I don't regret writing BFA whatsoever. It really did complete PNM and it would have killed me not to have that second half out there.

But indeed, the challenge we face now is penning something that moves beyond that success and replicates it in a confirming way (he can do this more than once). Based on my stuff for Esquire and my columns (When is somebody going to approach me to bundle a chunk of that up in a Ralph Peter's-like annual book? I mean, damn! I've got that going on already in Turkey!), I know the material continues to flow and mature, so the trick is the right big package for a big new flow of ideas and concepts and descriptions and strategies, and that's what we (Jenn, my agent, Mark Warren and I) know we have sitting before Neil as we run down these details.

The actual advance isn't a big deal to me (it gets spread over four tax years on this one). Rather, it's Putnam's sense of commitment on getting their money back, so it's a complex thing where everyone wants everyone else to be properly incentivized, with no one feeling ripped off.

The big anchor for me at Putnam is obviously Neil. He feels strongly about my writing and that matters much to Mark and I and Jenn. You don't walk from that relationship casually. Putnam is Putnam, and I get to deal directly with the man, and that's pretty cool.

Still, all this back and forth over the past two months is draining. The effort is minor. It's the uncertainty and the desire to have it all settled that unsettles.

But these are all great problems to have. I go back five years and I had no such "headaches" that--quite frankly--I would have given quite a bit to suffer then, so it's all relative. My "disappointing" second book sold 75 times as many units as my PhD diss (a classic academic text) and roughly five times as much as your truly "successful" serious policy book, so PNM's legacy is a great one that I can never complain about. It's given me the career I so enjoy now and a work/home balance I wouldn't trade for the world.