Iowa City, Iowa
119 East Hall
University of Iowa
June 28, 1935

Dear Miss Nowell:

I have your letter of June 20th. I have no agent, it is true, but
agents in the past have tried to do something for me and have rather
given the thing up as a bad job. Curtis Brown declared they could
sell some essays I had (since published in a small book by the Casa-
nova Press) but they couldn't; and other agents have, like you, said
I was throwing my short stories away. One of them solicited me so
persistently that I sent him two a year ago and he still has them
and I'm going to ask for them soon and give them to "little" mag-
azines.

So I hardly know what to say. I've been thinking for some time of
asking Lieber if he wanted a try at it; but if you're not interested
in the "cheap commercial authors" and if you have done things for
Wolfe, I'm inclined to look hopefully in your direction. I write
very few short stories, however; yet would be tempted to do more
if doing them seemed to get me anywhere. My novels, as you point
out, do not lend themselves to parceling, and the last one anyway
is now out of my hands and with the publishers. One agent once
put the matter to me this way: we can make too little with your
shorter things to justify our time but we'd be glad to handle them
and put them across if we could look forward eventually to the
handling of most of your rights. That seemed wholly reasonable
to me and I told them to go ahead but their enthusiasm was short-
lived. And that is the way I see the matter: I expect eventually
to place most of the rights with an agent and I am aware that if
an agent gives time and patience to early matters that bring him
small returns, he ought reasonably to expect to handle the more
profitable relations when and if they come.

So I am of a mind to give you a try at it if you really feel that
the long-pull will justify you; but I shouldn't like to have you
undertake it unless you have faith in the venture. I imagine my
work will prove to be a fairly difficult case. And would you mind
telling me what rights you handle for Wolfe? I ask because my
publishing arrangement is a rather unusual and a rather strange
one.

I haven't a single thing to send you now but I may be able to dig
out something in the months immediately ahead.

My home address is Ririe, Idaho, but I shall be at the above
until August 1st.

Ririe, Idaho

September 13, 1935

Dear Miss Nowell:

Your letter of August 12th I've read three or four times and have thought of for the better part of two days. You ask for my response to it. I was rather abashed by the time and thought you have given to the stories and feel very humble in my gratitude. I liked your frankness---and reflected that it was not necessary here and there to try to soften, as you did: I can take it. And I have been depressed---and have reflected that I have no reason to be.

Before coming to your criticism, I want to declare with all the earnestness I have that in asking for frankness I wanted it and shall always want and expect it from you, and shall never be offended by anything you say: I have no doubt of your integrity or intelligence or want of malice and those are enough for any author to lean on. In turn I shall try to be wholly frank, believing that you are too sensible a person ever to misread me. And please never feel that you have to soften: I'm not of those authors who are knocked off their legs or fall into a self-pitying funk or grimace in spiritual anguish. I do often feel depression and it is often quite terrible; but in spite of what some critics say to the contrary, I'm not an oaf who is all deadly earnestness and humorlessness.

Your letter depressed me but that was my weakness and it has not lasted long. I had no right to imagine that you could achieve miracles for me. If I thought you might be able to do something, I suppose it was because I have seen, now and then, in the better magazines a story which was out of place. But I know full well that I don't belong and can never belong to the Harper's or any other "family" and that if any of my stories ever get into such magazines it will be through channels that I do not understand. I mean that I am not expecting too much from you: I'll be reasonable and mighty glad if you can achieve for me anything at all. And if you cannot, God knows I shall not imagine that you're at fault.

And now for your letter. You say, "It's all a question of how much a writer can stand to compromise." There, I suppose, is the rub. I can take and am quite willing to take, am, in fact, eager to get all the criticism I can use in building a story into a better one. But compromising to reach a lower level of intelligence I shall never do. It is not, I hope you can believe, that I'm a pigheaded fellow or that I am contemptuous of the average run of, say, Harper's stories or that I'm a humorless moralist with adolescent ideals. It's chiefly that I know that compromise when started runs by slow or fast degrees to a complete selling out: that I found to be true in the academic world and it is no less true in art. I have given the best part of ten years to writing, have published seven books, and have received in all that time less than three thousand dollars. I do not say that with vainglory. I'm as weary as any of trying to live and support a family on the royalties from a novel a year that sells 2235 copies and pays ten per cent. But I entered this game to stick it out for the best in me, not in a spirit of defiance or childish self-glorification or a lust for martyrdom. I choose to do it because everywhere today we are beaten down by fradulent seekers of a thousand kinds and if we are to have from them any refuge we must build it ourselves. I shall do it, too, because when I'm an old man and look back over my life and reflect that I shall soon be forgotten dust, I don't want to have to remember with awful bitterness that I sold out. And I should have to remember because I could never so deceive myself as to fancy that I had not.

2

Now all this I write, fully aware that neither you nor anybody can sell the sort of stories that editors do not want. It would be stupid of me to expect you to do that. It would be stupid to ask you to try. So all I can reasonably expect is this: to send you what I turn out; to use your criticism for improvement if I can see it; to expect you to fire back what you know to be hopeless; and to hope that possibly you may land a thing or two and that I can work into some sort of market.

Some of your criticism of these stories I think is sound from the point of view of quality. I knew that Odyssey was a synopsis of a novel: it's a story I tried twice before to write and could not fetch off. I didn't want to make it too long and yet I had to cover fifteen years: that's a hard job in a short story. But I did not give a single physical detail about the protagonist because I wanted him to be a symbol more than a man and not to divest him of his huge implicit proportions by spiking him down with details. I've a notion that perhaps I can revise it and improve it some, especially in the expository passages. Your statement that the Harlan dialogue is flat is true: I felt it. I should be kicked for leaving it in. I may be able to characterize John a bit in the physical and still reach for the larger theme. I'll try. Your criticism of the other story I can't respond *may* to, save in some minor respects. If I were to hold it all up to the bishop's remark and finish on that emotional climax I'd have a smart O. Henryish story and that would make me sick. But I think I can improve the thing some; shift the focus from Hallie to something more pertinent; but I can't reconstruct it. I never can. I'd have to throw it away and wait a year or two and try it again if I were to rebuild it.

In both these stories I was aiming, as you perhaps saw clearly enough, at a large universal implication in which the actual situation itself is only a sort of symbolic starting of a motor. Nearly all the short stories I expect to do will be of that sort. For I am a "theme" fabulist and I'm interested only in the instance that throws a great darkness into some kind of relief and perspective. Maybe I'm not making this at all clear. In my story "The Mother" (which most likely you've never seen) I was trying to lift from the somewhat sordid and petty details of one situation *thebes* a suggestion of the whole vivid eternity of motherhood. A critic said it was nothing but a pulp thriller. In "The Scarecrow" I was trying to suggest by another brutal situation the ancient and enduring kinship that exists in the whole animal world and beats through the in-scrutable wonder of life in a common pulse. In Odyssey I wanted John Ben-ton to stand for the moment and in his pathetic situation as a symbol of that force in humanity which has lifted it in some degree out of its dark-ness and to throw that symbol against that background of brutal self-seek-ing which keeps the human animal only one remove from the lower primates. In Laughter I was trying to suggest how a force as ancient and primordial as laughter (not humor) could restore a whole group (the symbol here) to the earthiness of emotional sanity. Now I know that such stories are "in-tellectual" stuff and not welcome in any editor's office. I tried to write them so they'd be interesting as stories, too, for those readers with no interest in the somewhat appalling implications lying under the scene. I don't say that I succeeded. But when I see how many persons (some of my friends among them) miss what I'm driving at, then I wonder if I don't have so much story that the implication is buried.

So much for that. I find myself wondering if you can have much enthusiasm for my stuff for very long. I hope you can---but I'm not hoping against reason. Anyway, please have at me always with all possible candor whenever you feel I've faltered in reaching to all the strength to be found in the thing. I'm going to get at these as soon as I can but it will probably be

3

a month before the final revision reaches you. And I've two or three more
I want to write and get to you as soon as I can. If I can find the money
I want to go to New York in January and I shall, of course, see you then.

Why the postmaster in Ririe returned your letter with postage due I don't
know. But he's a farmer new at the job, a Roosevelt political appointee,
and he doesn't know much about his job.

And, confound it, never get on pins and needles again in regard to me.
It distresses me to know that you've been so anxious.

Sincerely,

Ririe

September 26, 1935

Dear Miss Nowell:

I laid my novel aside and got busy on the stories and both are going
back to you.

ODYSSEY

This I know I have improved by cutting altogether a page or two, whack-
ing down the long expository passages, and giving it as much speed as
I seem to be able to. It is better than it was but possibly not an
exciting lot. The first two pages are unchanged and you can lift them
from the version you have.

LAUGHTER

Over this one I agonized most and wrote and rewrote. I could not see
my way to any big structural change but I think it is considerably im-
proved. I put in a bit more of preparation to explain the bishop's
confusion and in the conclusion I have tried unobtrusively to point
the implication for the more obtuse readers. I like it some better
than the other version. I can't think of any other title that would
be apt but if one occurs to you, use it. I had thought of "Irrelevant
Death" but the last line now makes that unnecessary.

I repeat again that I hope you will not regard me as an obstinate
"arty" fellow. I'm going always to do my damned best for you but
I'm afraid I am the sort of writer for whom a thing does run rigid
in form once I have got it on to paper.

I hope you have luck with these. You have one small advantage: dur-
ing the past half-dozen years no more than two short stories by me
have intruded upon the time of eastern editors; so I cannot be wholly
regarded as a pest yet. Those are the two that Chambrun hawked about.
They are home now, with some interesting comments from a few editors,
and I suppose I'll offer them to "little" magazines. Meanwhile, I'll
try in the next two or three months to get off to you another two
or three.

Ririe

October 3, 1935

Dear Miss Nowell:

I'm awfully sorry I can't send a chapter to SIGNATURES.
The original copy, twice revised, is now in press in
Garden City, and the carbon, with none of the revisions
in it, is out in Caldwell or elsewhere. But after this
I'll try to be ready for such opportunities and we'll
take up these matters long in advance of the script's
going to press.

I should say, too, at this time that it does no good
to send me either air mails or telegrams here. I live
20 miles from Ririe and get my mail only when I go
there, not more than once a week; and telegrams are
merely posted and await me with my other mail.

Am very glad you like the revisions in the stories.

argue with Maule or anyone else on every damned book over
little details that might offend the pure I'd prefer to let
only Caxton handle my stuff and accept a sale of a thousand
copies to the book. And it is all so stupid and useless; for
Maule or anyone ought to know that my potential audience is
not the sort to cavil over the things that he wants deleted.
Lest you think I exaggerate I'll give you an instance.

In the fourth volume there was this. The protagonist, talking
with a NY poet, says:

"Do you know Brownell's statement that this generation is not
emancipated? It is merely unbuttoned."

Jack rose gravely and looked at his trousers. "Excuse me," he
said. "I forgot what I was going to do."

And Maule wrote: "That stuck in my throat horribly. It gagged
everyone in the office and I make a big point of your taking
it out."

Great God! And so, after six months of bickering, I deleted
"and looked at his trousers" as well as a deal of details
similar; and it rather sticks in me because I know that readers
whom I want to reach would only have smiled at the way a sar-
donic poet made jest of an aphorism. A publisher who is gagged
by anything so silly is simply not a publisher for me on a long
pull.

I intended to discuss this and similar matters with you in
January. It looks now as if I shall not go back. I'd like
to know if there are any big publishers who are less absurd.

1415 Franklin Street
Boise, Idaho

November 13, 1935

Dear Miss Nowell:

Your friend is right: this job is one infernal round with starving
persons and red tape but I'm going to try to fetch a book out of
it. Soon as it get the thing moving I'll be back to my writing;
and when I feel something like philosophic calm again I'll try
another story or two for you....If the Towser thing looks hopeless,
I can let Merriam haveit for Frontier and Midland....If the stories
don't come off there, I think Robert Penn Warren of SOUTHERN REVIEW
will take either: he pays, I think, a cent and a half....About
foreign rights and publishers: perhaps we'd best wait and see if
D-D do anything. I've a notion that Curtis B don't give much at-
tention to such unlikely authors as I am, having so many who are
easier to place....As to my future writing, I'd prefer much to
talk the thing rather than write it: before coming to this job
I expected to see you in January. Now I don't know but I may get
back before another year is out. Nobody has any options on me
for anything but I do feel a big obligation to Caxton who took
me on when others said no. I can't let the Caxton people down
and this circumstance, I know, makes the whole set-up more dif-
ficult. They published me and are still in the red and are willing
to publish me indefinitely and just as I want the books to stand.
Of course the whole present arrangement whereby both Caxton and
D-D are trying to make a profit rather leaves me on the small end
of nothing: it's hard for two publishers and myself to get a
profit out of my stuff! And we don't. The Caxton-D-D arrangement
was made only for the tetralogy. After that, nothing is certain,
except my feeling of loyalty to this small western outfit. Before
long I shall see and have a long confab with Gipson of the Caxton
Printers. He's a swell fellow and has done everything he could
for me; and on top of that, in his contract with the wise eastern
boys he rather got his fingers burned....So you see why it would
be so much better if we could sometime get together over a cock-
tail and try to decide what if anything could or ought to be done.
Doubleday, Doran have worn me out and I can't see myself going
on indefinitely with them.

Thanks much for all your kind interest and all the thought you
are giving to my wretched little problem. We'll just have to
wait until I can get hold of something definite.

December 24, 1935

Dear Webb:

I am sorry, of course, to hear that SANCTUARY has come to grief, though why and for what reasons I do not know. I'm hoping you have better luck next time. Meanwhile, a New York agent thinks she might be able to sell a story for me, and inasmuch as I gave you the only thing I had at the time, I'll be glad if you'll send it on to her and let her have a try at it.

Elizabeth Nowell
114 East 56th Street
New York, New York

If you make another start in the magazine world and should want another story from me, let me hear.

If Miss Nowell (I've told her to get in touch with you) does not send postage for the story, drop me a card and I'll shoot it in.

With the season's greetings and a lot of success to your next venture,

1415 Franklin
Boise

Jan. 21, 1936

Dear Miss Nowell:

Herewith is a copy of the D-D--Caxton contract. I want you to
tell me what you think of it: of its fairness or unfairness to
both parties and to author. On later volumes there were some
modifications of it:

1. At D-D's insistence and with my support, the royalty on WE ARE BETRAYED was reduced to 15% on each the first three thousand.

2. The Caxton edition was reduced to one thousand plus review copies.

My royalty from Caxton on all volumes has been 10% on the first five thousand; 15% thereafter. On TRAGIC LIFE my royalty on all other rights was 50%. On WAB I insisted on 65%. On movie rights I stipulated that no production could ever be made without my approval of scenario etc. That, I know, practically kills all chances but that's how I feel on this novel.

Gipson is now of a mind to return to 2000 on his edition after this. I don't like that. I think, on the contrary, that if his eastern publisher were pushing the books he ought to print not more than 500 of the first edition.

How does the whole thing look to a disinterested expert?

I sent the proof of Laughter back today.

Boise, June 29, 1936

Dear Miss Nowell:

Jim says any terms I approve are ok with him so you may accept the 15% and the $250.00 advance provided D-D will allow Caxton to have their 1000 copies at cost above plates. I know enough about author-publisher contracts to realize that for Maule those terms are stiff on a fellow who sells as few copies as I do. As you have pointed out, by having two publishers in the picture I am on the short end of the draw; but there are compensations. Jim is mightily interested in building me up and will doubtless do some to promote me, even though his sales territory is to be strictly limited. We, and you, too, I imagine, are looking to the future returns rather than to those on the present volume. So it is to be:

1. 15% straight royalty to me;

2. 1000 copies first edition to Caxton at cost above plates;

3. 2½% out of my royalty to Caxton on D-D's sales beyond 4000;

4. 10% royalty on Caxton's 1000;

5. And 10% commission to you on royalties accruing to me.

Jim's interest is chiefly twofold: in having me in his lists for whatever prestige that circumstance will continue to give his publishing ventures and to arrange matters so that I can earn enough to get out of boondoggling and settle down to my bigger projects. The above terms make it impossible for him to lose money and if the book should catch fire he will make some. So he is satisfied. And I wish it were possible for you to suggest to Maule that the advertising copy they write of my work is pretty stupid. They can't present me in the market as if I were a K. Norris or a McFee.

Have I covered all the issues? With the above terms do you feel Maule is going to put a little push behind APRIL?

Glad you sold Odyssey and still sore at Scribner's for not taking Charivari. I can hardly do a better story--or is it that they want a poorer one? No doubt Jim will let you keep the carbon so you can proceed with foreign rights.

Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow I've been saying for ten years and am still in the literary cellar. But I'm awfully pleased with the success you've had with my shorter things and I'm still hoping the time will come when I'll earn $2000.00 a year. I could get by on that and keep my temper down and stop looking down my nose.

Copy to J.H.Gipson

302 Sonna Building
Boise, Idaho

June 17, 1936

Dear Jim:

I am sending you a copy of my last letter from Miss Nowell which should leave no doubt in your mind that she has a tough proposition back there and is doing her best. I urge you to write her at once, making what concessions you feel to be necessary at this time to keep the negotiations going. I think she doesn't exaggerate when she says that Maule is so extremely annoyed that he is at the point of washing his hands of the whole affair. At the present stage of the game this is something which we can hardly afford to have him do. The chief nigger-in-the-woodpile seems to be the distribution of my books by Reilly and Lee, and I am of the opinion that you will advise Miss Nowell to advise Maule that Reilly and Lee will make no coverage on the next novel of territory which Doubleday-Doran will cover. We cannot allow these negotiations to drag out too far if the novel is to appear the first of next March.

Miss Nowell, as you will observe, suggested that I could send a copy of her letter to you if I chose. I see no reason why I should not, inasmuch as the three of us must act together in this matter and know what one another is doing. Miss Nowell is a very frank person with a tendency, like that of your lamentable author, to speak her mind, but I have never doubted that she had the tact to handle sensitive situations of this kind. I can see her, metaphorically, giving Maule a kick in his pants and then caressing his beard--I hope the man has a beard. I have no doubt that she will take care of the matter in a very satisfactory manner before she is done with it.

I am sending you also a copy of my letter to her.

As ever,

June 17, 1936

Dear Miss Nowell:

With alternate groans and chuckles as usual, I have read your letter of June 12. We both, Gipson and I, of course, want Double-day-Doran, our publisher in the picture at this stage of the game, and feel that the present is no stream to be trading horses in the middle of. You will doubtless receive by air mail a letter from Gipson that will do a good deal towards clarifying those niggers-in-the-woodpile.

It is true, of course, that Caxton Printers allowed Reilly and Lee to cover territory covered by Doubleday-Doran salesmen, but Gipson resorted to this move only after it seemed to him that Maule was determined to sit down on the matter of promotion. I think Gipson once wrote a letter to Maule which read, in effect, that if Doubleday-Doran were not going to push the books, Caxton would. That, as I understand it, has been the picture, especially in regard to the last two volumes.

I am going on the road again for two weeks, but probably my mail will catch up with me in case you write either good or bad news during that time. I have the fullest confidence in your ability to handle this matter, and I think Gipson has too.

Boise

July 17, 1936

Dear Miss Nowell:

One of these days I'll tell Maule to go jump off the Empire Building. I can't understand his perturbation over a royalty of 15% because that is high on an unprofitable author onемec like me and I can understand that the situation is difficult with Caxton doing the first edition when the total sale is likely to be small. But when he says he has done spade work on foreign rights, I thumb my nose at the statement. He certainly has not. After all, TOILERS AND BRIDWELL were both published in England before Maule ever heard of me; and all he did was to turn the matter over to Curtis Brown who have no more interest in me than I have in the North Pole. With the tetralogy Maule through C-B has done no more than to sell the English rights and nearly anyone could have done that. So where in hell is the spade work? What effort has ever been made to sell the tetralogy in Russia or Germany or Sweden, in all of which the matter oughtn't be too difficult?

I don't want D-D to handle foreign rights because I don't think they will do as well by me as you. And tell Maule I said so and base my judgment on the little that has been done. Tell him I'll give him 15% of a bonus or whatever he would get after paying Curtis Brown and others out of the 25% he asks. You figure that out. And write it in the contract or in a letter to Gipson that he is to get 10% of the gross on foreign rights after I have received $100. How is that! And give Gipson 2 1/2% of my royalty above 4000 copies.

IF you want to work with D-D on foreign rights, ok, but if he is not content with a gift of 15%, if he insists on handling the foreign rights exclusively and so burying them under C-B's indifference, then count D-D out of the picture and call all negotiations off. And that is final.

And tell him so without delay.

The matter of articles for Esquire I'll have to consider later. I'm buried under work but expect to get this damned job off my chest partly in another six weeks.

444 Yates Bldg.
Boise

May 31st, 1938

Dear Mr. Knopf:

My Mormon novel is not committed. If you are interested, you
might get in touch with my agent, Elizabeth Nowell, 114 E 56 St.,
New York City.

This is the situation from my point of view. In the first place,
I've never been fool enough to imagine that any of my books here-
tofore had sales possibilities, though I think the last two would
have done much better if the publishers had done more than merely
print them and trust to God. The Mormon novel is another matter.
With the right promotion, I think it could go to town in a huge
way.

It is the crucial novel of my career. During the fifteen years
I've prepared for the writing of it, I've known it would be.
I shall insist, therefore, on a publisher who will get behind
it and do a thorough build-up before it appears. If I cannot
get such a publisher, I'll let Caxton handle it alone. They
do not have facilities for distribution, but they will put a
considerable amount of money behind it.

Dear Nowell:

If you insist, then sign with Harper's now; but I'd rather you'd have
a talk with Aswell on the following points.

and

1. If the novel does not get the prize (xxixxx I shall not count on it at all), then am I assured that Aswell and Saxton will not assume that it must be much less than they had supposed, and so neglect it? In short, IF it doesn't get the prize, will they not likely feel that they overrated it, and be disposed not to push it vigorously? You may tell Aswell for me that I don't think much of prize novels; and that if I get a prize on this one, I'll be inclined to take inventory of myself.

2. By all means make Aswell understand that I'm not the kind of author who jumps publishers. Houghton M and Doubleday D threw me out: I never left them. The best interests of both author and publisher are served by a long and continuous relationship. I'd say to Aswell what I said to Maule: I'm not a long-pull prospect, and any publisher who takes me on should consider me not as a rocket but as something which if it ever shines will possibly not go out overnight. If Harper start the series, God knows I'll want them to finish it. Let them lay the foundation under me. I'll not in that case be shopping around for another publisher. I've little patience with all this damned stealing of authors, this trying to cash in on authors after another publisher has laid the foundation.

3. The offer is $3000 and 15%. If I'll raise that ad. appropriation to $4,500 by taking 10% on 10,000, what in addition will Harper do? IF I'm sold enough on the book to gamble, will they gamble with me?

4. If it does get the prize, can I count on a pub. date in early Sept ? What will be the date of the prize novel? In other words, I suppose the prize novel would get the choicest available date. What would I get ?

5. Above all, make Aswell understand that when I sign this time I want to feel settled down and be done with this monkey business of changing publishers all the time. It doesn't get me or anyone anything. If the Mormon novel clicks, Lincott and Maule will chew their whiskers; but that's their fault. I tried my best to persuade them to go along with me on a long pull proposition. Aswell may be worried about the novels to follow. I don't think he need be. They may not go with the wind but I think they'll have plenty of potential sales.

6. I have 205 pages of II done. Do you want it so Aswell can read that much before we talk signing? Or all of it at once? I'm so cockeyed <u>x</u><u>x</u><u>x</u><u>x</u> goofy from these almost three weeks of fever that I can't remember what I wanted to write you. But do have another confab with Aswell and cover the above points. I'm inclined to favor Harpers, but I'm half German and rather than go off half-cocked I'd not go off at all.

Yrs

VF

Dear Nowell:

Have received your letter following the wire. Suggest you send inclosed
letter to Aswell and then later at your convenience discuss the points
with him. IF I'll throw in $1500 of royalties in advertising, how much
more will they put in?

Here's my idea of proposition to put to Aswell. They are putting up
$3000 on first 10,000. I'll add $1500 to that by accepting 10% provided they
in turn will contract for 30¢ per book advertising on copies 10 to 20,000.
Royalty, of course, after 10,000 to be 15%. That looks to me not only like
a fair proposition but one they should jump at. It gives them another 1500
to get the book going; and if the book gets going, certainly they intend to
go on pushing it. So how could they lose?

Aswell once spoke of putting great guns into this book, saying they'd be
building for books to come and all that, provided they could be sure I'd
stick with them. All right, call his bluff. Give him assurance I'll stick
if they really do mean business in putting a foundation under me, and then
ask for his proposition, what he proposes to do on basis of that assurance.

June 12

Dear Nowell:

The carbon of Children Gipson has does not contain those hundreds of
revisions and additions. Don't you think the copy going abroad should
be the final improved? Soon now wouldn't you be able to get a set of
page proof? If you want the carbon, air mail Gipson and he will send
it pronto. I told him to yesterday if he heard from you.

Regard to Bridwell and Bonnier: there was a small advance; Caxton bought all rights from Houghton M. On both Toilers and Bridwell, you should write Gipson ànasmuch as he bought all rights from H-M. In Sweden, if another book is to be published, using children as a lever, I'd prefer In Tragic Life. As you may surmise, in regard to that country I have a crazy notion in the back of my mind. In regard to all other countries, use your judgment, choosing the one you think would sell best or best help to establish me. Use Bridwell in Sweden if your judgment points that way. It's true that Curtis Brown may be in on any further advances on Bridwell in Sweden: as usual, damn it, my contracts are in eastern Idaho, and Gipson's were burned in the fire. I don't remember how much Bonnier paid: about fifty dollars.

Sometime if you happen to be around the Public Library, drop in and see if there are any novels on the Comstock Lode. I've got on the trail of none. If you find any, please send me titles, publisher, etc.

In regard to Fox, am inclined to agree with you that $4000 would be
perhaps better than a dim chance on the future---if $4000 is all Geller
can finally get.

COPY OF LETTER RECEIVED FROM VARDIS FISHER

July 9.

Dear Nowell:

I think it entirely reasonable that Cap Pearce or anyone else should inquire into my attitude toward revisions. I welcome criticism and suggestions and would be the last person to fancy that any perfections were lodged in my books. I still remember Linscott of Houghton Mifflin with friendliness because of the most excellent suggestions he gave me on Bridwell; but his criticisms were always toward a stronger book rather than toward a more saleable one. I acted on nearly every criticism he ever gave me.

If in spots there is in the author's style a hint of levity or slanginess in treatment of Joseph, by all means it should be corrected. I intend no flippancy or tongue-in-cheek stuff. I always suspect that in cutting a publisher is motivated more by saving expenses than in strengthening; but I'll give earnest consideration to all suggestions in that respect and it is quite likely that in a few spots some tightening can be done. That looseness, so-called, is hardly a matter that readers gag at is amply demonstrated in a lot of long-winded recent tomes, including Gone with the Wind.

It comes down to this: Harcourt or any other publisher you talk with can depend on my being cooperative in dead earnest; but I cannot promise to make changes (and especially cutting) unless I am convinced such cutting will make a stronger book. You might remind anyone with whom you talk of the incredible lopping of Methuen in Forgive Us -- to such a degree that parts of the book were left meaningless. When a publisher will go to such extremes as to take all the sense and continuity out of a novel, then the author has to be wary. Part I covers a hell of a lot of ground. I can't imagine right now where there could be any cutting except in the revelations; and I think it necessary to give the reader a fairly full notion of Mormon theology. But we'll see if and when I receive suggestions.

A synopsis of Part III is herewith. This part is three-fourths written in the rough. As I wrote you, I have in I and II invented only two or three persons. I could not, therefore, write of present leaders under disguises. It would be silly and I'd be sued. There is one other possibility. I could continue in III from the death of Brigham in the late seventies and end the novel when Pres. Woodruff outlawed polygamy in the Church about 1890. But in that decade and half there was chiefly only wholesale jailings and fleegings until the Church leaders realized that polygamy had to go. More vital by far, in my opinion, is the fact that Mormonism has become a capitalistic philosophy and the fact that the United Order (the chief glory of Joseph and Brigham) is as dead as a doornail. In other words, Mormonism ran its cycle from morning to evening and today is just another Protestant sect.

Aug. 17, 1938

Dear Nowell:

Have just received your wire. I am wondering again if you are not working too fast and if the whole business may not boomerang on us. Seems obvious to me that Aswell is bidding against the prestige of Harcourt and that to some extent Harcourt is bidding against the bait of the Harper prize. In short, it is hard to say how much on the part of either is genuine interest and how much is inflation whooped up by their bidding against one another. I still do not think now is the time to sign. I still think that they ought to see Part II and that the matter ought to ride until I have finished it. In order to protect you and us and the whole situation I am sending you two originals of a letter, one for Aswell and one for Pearce. Unfortunately, I am still in bed but I am hoping to get Part II in your hands soon after Sept. 1.

Between you and me here is some more notes. (1) It may be true, as you say, that Harper's is more dependable; but I need a spectacular spread and the publisher with the most prestige on this novel because the last one was boycotted. (2) I like Pearce's saying that options are not important and that if I like my publisher I'll stick. (3) The idea of $4500, 10% is absurd; it is the same as $3000, 15% with the author throwing in $1500 to advertise. More about this when I am able to sit up and write. (4) I don't care much about prizes. I'm not sure prizes would be a good thing for my career now. I'll take it if I get it, if we go with Harper's but I'm more interested in a small but steady income from stories and articles in Harper's magazine. What is the relationship between Aswell-Saxonn and editors of magazine? Is magazine still largely mouth-piece for Harper authors? Let me know what this situation is and what definite assurance Aswell could give. (5) If we went with Harper's, Aswell would have to understand that if I didn't get prize I'd still expect them to promote the novel with undiminished enthusiasm. (6) I don't think much of Sloane's criticisms. A few were such as any author would welcome but most of them are wholly trivial. He is no Linscott. (7) In choosing publisher we must consider my future books more than this one. I think it best, therefore, for you to send to Pearce and Aswell enclosed letters and so give us more time to consider.

I am sure I've received all your letters since I left Boise. Unless you hear further I'll leave here Sept. 3.

VF

833 North Johnson
Iowa City, Iowa.

Dear Nowell:

I got off the train July 31 with a temperature of 104,
and have been flat since. Combination of strep throat and
acute nephritis. Can't say when I'll get II to you but'll try
for around Sept 1 unless I have a backset. Am still down but in
no way critical.

Received your letters ok. Plan to leave here Sept 3 for
Boise.

Ever,

Vardis

THE COMPANY WILL APPRECIATE SUGGESTIONS FROM ITS PATRONS CONCERNING ITS SERVICE

1201-S

WESTERN
UNION

(51)

CLASS OF SERVICE

This is a full-rate
Telegram or Cable-
gram unless its de-
ferred character is in-
dicated by a suitable
symbol above or pre-
ceding the address.

R. B. WHITE
PRESIDENT

NEWCOMB CARLTON
CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD

J. C. WILLEVER
FIRST VICE-PRESIDENT

SYMBOLS

DL = Day Letter

NM = Night Message

NL = Night Letter

LC = Deferred Cable

NLT = Cable Night Letter

Ship Radiogram

The filing time shown in the date line on telegrams and day letters is STANDARD TIME at point of origin. Time of receipt is STANDARD TIME at point of destination.

Received at 10 East 55th Street, New York

1938 AUG 31 PM 12 54

NAE120 10=IOWACITY IOWA 31 1112A

ELIZABETH NOWELL=

:114 EAST 56 ST=

OF COURSE SIGN WITH HARPERS AM EXPRESSING PART TWO TODAY=
VARDIS FISHER.

THE QUICKEST, SUREST AND SAFEST WAY TO SEND MONEY IS BY TELEGRAPH OR CABLE

Dear Nowell:

Have contracts etc. and am sending to Gipson as per inclosure.
I still feel it is best to show Part II as is so I can also have
benefit of Aswell and other suggestions before working on it.
Two other 'literary' persons out here have now read both I and
II and pronounce II 'much more interesting' and argue plausibly
for retention of all the Hickman material. I think some can be
cut but damn it I want to know how Aswell and Saxton feel. They
might not want it cut at all.

When I get Aswell's suggestions on I, they won't agree perhaps
in any detail with Sloane's. Pity the poor author, Liddy, and
let's find out what Ed thinks. After all, I want the novel to
be right possibly more than any of you, and will work like a dog
to make it so. But I don't want to run up blind alleys.

Haven't heard yet from Aswell.

Ever,
Jude

Dear Nowell:

I had just mailed my letter when your postscript came. I say again you're full of bird seed, in spite of your damned swell goodness in my behalf and the way you're working like a beaver (or whatever works hard) to put this over with a bang. In your postscript you say, for instance, that Part I is so much more real, I must have lived with it a long time; and II I did in haste. Shucks, gal, you have it backward. Honest to everything true, I lived with Part II and Brigham for years, never thought of Joseph; and honest, Part II I wrote slowly, at peace with the world, in a quiet place, with no worries on my mind; and Part I I wrote in the office, at home, and in at least a dozen different places.

You'll say, Baby, then get worried and write Part II again; but I say, You're so damned convinced, were so convinced in your subconscious mind (or like Ginger Rogers in her last picture, don't you have any?)—well, I mean YOU WERE SO AFRAID IN YOUR SUBCONSCIOUS MIND THAT PART II WOULD NOT BE UP TO SNUFF, SO WORRIED ABOUT IT AFTER GETTING SUCH A SWELL OFFER? THAT NOW YOU FIND IT SO.

I really believe that's most of the truth of it. Now other persons of much more than usual judgment and taste have read both parts and have found II the better. That doesn't make it so by any means; but it does make me pause and wonder what kind of bug has got into your literary bonnet.

I say again that I'll wager my head that IF you'll send II by messenger to Aswell, saying ONLY that it is swell, that he'll agree. IF you were to tell him all that you think you find wrong with it, then of course he'd approach it with the idea and find a lot wrong with it. Again I say, human nature is like that.

You are worried about Brigham's wives. I don't know what Emmeline looked like or Mary Angel, or what they acted like, or were like; and neither does anybody else except their offspring who wouldn't talk about it. And since their offspring are legion, I won't take the liberty of making a gal tall and dark when perhaps she was short and fair; or good when perhaps she was hell on earth. Some of those liberties other novelists would take; but I can't. I balk. I went the whole hog with Emma because records declare her temper and Mormons today despise her. I can do some things with Amelia because again there are records about her. But Emmeline—I don't know the woman. Invent a wife for Brigham? No. All his wives are a matter of record. It was Joseph who had wives nobody today knows anything about

Sure, I'll take as much time as necessary to do all I can with the book; but I can't tear Part II to pieces until I know what you say is considered judgment and not some sort of subconscious nightmare working out itself out.

I have a scene with Brigham's wife without giving her a name? Sure, because I can't very well choose one of them and make her a vain giddy gal after clothes. I know some of them were that way—wife 19, really wife 27, said so in her book. Brigham said so in sermons. But I don't know which ones. Don't you see? So how in hell am I to say it was Clara when Clara might have been a most devoted and wordless spouse? I have no patience with the liberties most 'historical' novelists take with the dead. I want to be fair. I don't want to invent just because it's easier to write that way. It doesn't matter now what I did with II. You are so damned convinced it is bad that if I had power to make it perfect, you'd probably still find it bad. If Aswell says it's good, you'll likely think he's crazy. So what are we to do?

Yrs,
Vader

1201-S

WESTERN
UNION

(47)

R. B. WHITE
PRESIDENT

<table><thead><tr><th colspan="2">SYMBOLS</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>DL</td><td>Day Letter</td></tr><tr><td>NM</td><td>Night Message</td></tr><tr><td>NL</td><td>Night Letter</td></tr><tr><td>LC</td><td>Deferred Cable</td></tr><tr><td>NLT</td><td>Cable Night Letter</td></tr><tr><td>Ship Radiogram</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

Received at 228 Union St., New Bedford, Mass.

1938 NOV 17 PM 1 48

BV121 10=BOISE IDA 17 1102A

ELIZABETH NOWELL=

95 MADISON ST NB=

AIR MAILING MARGARET SEND HER BARBON TO YOU AT ONCE=
VARDIS FISHER.

TELEGRAMS MAY BE TELEPHONED TO WESTERN UNION FROM ANY PRIVATE OR PAY-STATION TELEPHONE

Boise

June 5th, 1939

Elizabeth Nowell
New York, New York

Dear Nowell:

Upon returning to the office I find your letter detailing Mr. Zanuck's offer for Children of God. I'll probably be called to the road again for a few days and it will be difficult for you to get in touch with me, but I'll try to pick my mail up by next Saturday.

I assume that Mr. Zanuck has only a superficial knowledge of the story of Mormonism. On the basis of that assumption I'd like to point out the following facts. The materials of Mormonism are, it is true, in the public domain, but there cannot be found in any of the records an interpretation of Brigham Young that approaches very closely to mine. The Mormon writers have made of him an impossible saint and prophet; novelists who have used him have for the most part made him an illiterate and thick-headed numbskull of the sort to be found in Snell's *Root, Hog and Die*. Non-Mormon biographers have granted he was a great statesman but their attitude has been chiefly that of Werner: a tongue-in-the-cheek portrait that makes him a combination of dictator and fool. He was none of those; nor was he what the radio programs are now representing him to be. He had no kinship with Increase Mather and Jonathan Edwards. I believe that my portrait of him is the most convincing and plausible one yet set down, and I believe that any motion picture of him which departs far from my interpretation will be a distortion.

I wish to point out that Brigham Young cannot be understood except in terms of Joseph Smith, that Joseph ought therefore to figure in the Mormon picture, and that my interpretation of Joseph is again very unlike any other to be found in the writings about him.

I don't believe any other person is more familiar with the essential facts of Mormon history and especially with the spirit of it than I am. My people on both sides were Mormons almost from the beginning. It was reared in the tradition and have in my blood and training the spiritual feel of the Church and its background; and in addition to that I am an unembittered apostate in a position to get a reasonably clear perspective on the whole movement.

Above all I should wish to point out to Mr. Zanuck the remarkable opportunity not only to portray one of the most dramatic chapters in American history, but also, and more importantly, to make the portrayal implicitly an antidote to the increasing spread of fascism and anti-Semitism in this nation. Practically everyone who has written of Mormonism has, in my opinion, missed the spirit of the movement. Above all else, that movement was an almost century-long struggle to find a refuge for conscience and human liberties. My novel is the only book that has made that the theme and driving force of the movement. As one actively interested in the Committee for United Action Against Fascism and Anti-Semitism in this country, I am deeply interested also in the opportunity to make of the Mormon motion picture a powerful, even though implicit, agent in the defense of human liberties in this nation. I assume that Mr. Zanuck is also interested in the work of this Committee and of similar agencies, and would be glad to have called to his attention these potential possibilities in the Mormon story. To interpret the Mormon story as anything essentially except a long and bitter struggle for conscience and liberties will be to distort and misrepresent it. The theology was only the raison d'etre of that struggle.

2

I feel that if Mr. Zanuck were advised of the facts set forth in this letter he would realize that in buying my novel he would be buying a hell of a lot more than nuisance value or a few dispensable suggestions for Mr. Bromfield to work with. He would be buying an interpretation of the movement which he cannot find elsewhere in the records and which I feel must be essentially the interpretation that Mr. Bromfield will be impelled to place on the story. He would be buying a movement-in-perspective that is the twelve-year labor of a man who sees the story from the inside and the outside.

If Mr. Zanuck should by any chance wish to employ me in an anonymous advisory capacity I am open to an offer, not because primarily of the money or because I have any ambitions toward Hollywood, but because I am vitally interested in the threat to human liberties in the world today and should like to see the Mormon story produced in a way to make it an implicit voice against persecution and reaction.

Nov 22

Dear Nowell:

I don't know why you sent Methuen April to me. In the first place, it's in page proof. In the second, what in hell difference would it make if I didn't like their changes? In the third, I'm too buried under the cargo of suggestions from you and Aswell to have any time for anything except this job and revision. So I'm not even looking at the stuff. One thing: if the asses are going to list my former books, they might as well list all of them. On Forgive Us they didn't even get the titles right; and what determined their choice lies between them and God.

If you want the stuff back, tell me. I don't suppose it's necessary to return it. Just say it's all ok by me and let them go ahead.

Nov 17

Dear Nowell:

One carbon is with Margaret, one with Gipson. Have air mailed M to send her carbon to you at once at New Bedford; and when you have finished you will return it to her unless a note from her says she has finished.

To tell you the truth I had intended to revise the last chapter again, but perhaps not along lines you have in mind. There's no need to write of the matter, though, until I have comments from the three of you. Of course you miss the point in your wire that Levi couldn't establish the order merely because a bunch of farmers were jubilant. After all, farmers don't control such matters. Nor does he yield because of love of Joan: his slow yielding under all his 'unyielding' should be clear to the alert reader throughout the last fifty pages. That the two were in love should also be clear long before the declaration of it.

But I'll wait. I'm working like hell on Part I now and Ed advises me that II has gone to M, and should reach me soon. Ed also says Carl Van Doren has replaced DeVoto. Van Doren has never liked my stuff and has said so.

Hagerman, Idaho

Sept. 25, 1940

Dear Nowell:

Thanks for the account of the Brigham Young. I had seen it, and observed that they
used some of my dialogue and some of my ideas, even if the book had only nuisance value.

I sent the Guild what I thought I owed them: $22 as 1/2 of 1⅓ of $4400 for movie sale; $15 on earnings assessment; and $5 dues, though why there should be both assessments and dues, God only knows. If they figure I owe them more they can write and tell me. If they think I'm going to pay assessments on what I don't receive, that is, on my commission to you, then they can have my resignation. Not even a rapacious tax-mad government assesses a person on what he does not receive.

In spite of your eloquent pleas in behalf of the Guild, I am not convinced that it is
what it should be. Last winter I wrote for a point of information, sending to Silcox
a self-addressed and stamped envelope for reply. She ignored me. Perhaps the lady
is too busy acting as agent for authors to fulfill the duties for which we pay her a
salary; and if it is true that officers of the Guild also act as agent, I am flatly
opposed to it. I am flatly opposed to their stupid method of assessing. An author
who earn $10,000.01 pays as much as an author who earns $20,000; and the latter pays
as much as a Norris. The assessments should be graduated in the way of income taxes.
I am opposed to all political activity in the League and Guild that is not in the direct
interest of writers. I am opposed to domination of it by any political faction.

You once wrote that I am Scotch; and you once wrote that I have enough now to live on comfortably the remainder of my life. It may interest you to know that of the gross, commissions, taxes, alimony, etc. will leave me less than 40%. And I have more damned dependents than you ever dreamed of. So call me Scotch if you will, but I'd like a bed to sleep on and beans to eat while milling the rest of my years into the series; but of bread and beans I have no assurance unless novels to come pay more than I expect them to.

Yrs.

Nov 4

Dear Howell:

This is my last attempt at the title racket. If none of these click
with you, then City of Illusion it will have to be. I can find only
two possibilities among westernisms:

THE GLORY HOLE

is a western term for an unusually rich bonanza. Bonanza itself has
been used in two books about the Lode. A western expression with which
you are doubtless familiar is

HIGH, WIDE AND HANDSOME

Borrascs is not in my dictionary. It must be a westernism. It
means literally worthless earth, send; figuratively, the end of
the riches in a mine, and so:

AND THEN BORRASCA

Other suggestions:

AT RAINBOW'S END
SUN MOUNTAIN
MIRAGE ON SUN MOUNTAIN
LOKI IN BROADCLOTH
SILHOUETTES IN NIGHTSHADE

If you should take a fancy to any of these you can get in touch
with Ed.

I'll be away for three days beginning tomorrow; and upon my return
likely there'll be a letter from you.

In drawing contract on this book I'm much less interested in advance
payment (it means very little) than in advertising and Harper's really
getting behind the book. Perhaps the magazine can use some chapter.

Yrs,

Hagerman, Idaho

November 14, 1940

The Authors' Guild
New York, New York

Attention Mr. Robert Fleischer

Gentlemen:

Some time ago I sent a check for $45, covering, I supposed, my dues for 1939. Under date of Oct. 28 of this year I have a statement which asks for another $37, the breakdown of which is as follows: semi-annual dues in the Guild to March 31, 1941, $7.50; "Literary assessments" Oct. 1, 1940 to March 31, 1941, $7.50; and Motion picture assessments to March 31, 1941, $22.00. I am frankly confused. I've received no money from motion pictures since 1939. How can "literary assessments" be levied on the six months ahead of me when not even I know what my earnings will be?

The check I sent was intended to cover 1939, including assessment ($22.00) on motion picture earnings, assessment on my other earnings, and dues. If I owe more than that, please send me a break-down statement. Miss Nowell, I think, has furnished you with a statement of my earnings for that year.

Now and then I have written Miss Nowell what she took to be impatient and truculent letters in an effort to find out what the Guild is, what it is doing, what rights I have as a member. Since being a member I've never received from the Guild anything except statements of what I owe. If there is an annual statement issued of what the Guild is doing, its program, or anything else to advise members of its activities, I've received none. I am, therefore, pretty much in the dark.

I have also offered certain criticisms. Letters from Miss Nowell have clarified a few matters and corrected some misapprehensions. The criticisms still standing in my mind I'll repeat here. I don't see why there are both dues and assessments. I can't see much fairness in the method of assessments. For instance, if an author earns $20,000.01, he owes as much as an author who makes $200,000. If one author earns $19,999.99, and another $20,000.01, the latter earns two cents more but owes $15.00 more. It would seem more reasonable to me to have a more graduated scale such as that in federal income tax. I feel also that an author should be assessed on his net and not on his gross earnings: because the professional expenses of some authors are so much greater or much less than of others. Perhaps the fairest way of all would be to assess authors on their federal income tax returns.

Dec. 9, 1940

Dear Nowell:

I always appreciate your laying matters before me when you are in doubt; but after reading what you call your "tremendous missive" I do not feel qualified to say a word for either gent. You're the one who knows them. All I can say is this: lay aside all your likes and dislikes, prejudices, and woman's emotions, and let your canniest intelligence and judgment choose. Why not give the gent so much time, say two or three or four weeks after getting galleys to make a satisfactory sale, reserving the right to let another try at the end of that time? Or wouldn't that be wise? Geller seems to me, on the basis of Children, to be a man who grabs at any offer, and you're somewhat that way yourself. I recall that when I was in Santa Fe you wired me, urging me to accept $2500 and I wired no.

Now in regard to negotiations on City---if it comes to that: it is very difficult to reach me by telegraph. It can be done if the Goading operator, the Western Union in Goading, that is, is told that a Hagerman messenger will be paid. The messenger will cost a dollar or two each time; but I pray you not to wire except in very urgent cases, not because of the dollar or two, but because I have to make a journey of many miles to answer you.

In my opinion, any offer around $5000 would be for 'nuisance value' and as I told you I'm not interested because such an offer would be a bluff. If any producer wants this story he will pay for it; and when they pay for a story I don't think they are inclined to imagine they can get under about $25,000. It all depends on how bad they want it and whether there is competitive bidding.

I also remember last time you said we'd ask $15,000, knowing we'd not get it, but putting our price high for bargaining advantage. If we are to set a price this time, say "Fisher wants $75,000, declaring it's better movie stuff than Grapes of Wrath."

As for angles, there are plenty of them and perhaps you'll wish to send the sheet herewith to the agent. Your synopsis hardly did justice to what the Hollywood fry could find in the story.

The carbon is in rather bad shape but I am sending it today by express.

As for Lucky Baldwin, he was a gyp and plunger who covered the country. He was in and out of V City but had no more to do with the Comstock than Abe Lincoln.

Ed's fifth short batch reached me two days late because IT LACKED 12¢ POSTAGE!

Yrs,

Don't take too much for granted in those agents. They're pretty dumb after all; so you'd better take the inclosed page, revise, expand as you see opportunities, and send it for the agent to ponder and by guided advice as he reads

I don't know why Ed is yowling about air mails on returns. He has sent 195 pages to date and 173 of them are back on his desk.

I might drop Bette Davis a note, asking if she'd like to see the galleys? Or do you advise against it?

If the angle were Eilley-Sandy and their struggle to be or not to be social snobs, Davis and Howard could make a swell team. But I doubt if Howard could bring himself to say ain't and thet-ther!

About 3 pages are missing from the carbon, including 16. You'll have to get copies from Harper or let it go without them. I guess they don't matter for the purpose you have in mind

Dec. 9, 1940

Dear Nowell:

I always appreciate your laying matters before me when you are in doubt; but after reading what you call your "tremendous missive" I do not feel qualified to say a word for either gent. You're the one who knows them. All I can say is this: lay aside all your likes and dislikes, prejudices, and woman's emotions, and let your canniest intelligence and judgment choose. Why not give the gent so much time, say two or three or four weeks after getting callings to make a satisfactory sale, reserving the right to let another try at the end of that time? Or wouldn't that be wise? Geller seems to me, on the basis of Children, to be a man who grabs at any offer, and you're somewhat that way yourself. I recall that when I was in Santa Fe you wired me, urging me to accept $2500 and I wired no.

Now in regard to negotiations on City---if it comes to that; it is very difficult to reach me by telegraph. It can be done if the Gooding operator, the Western Union in Gooding, that is, is told that a Hagerman messenger will be paid. The messenger will cost a dollar or two each time; but I pray you not to wire except in very urgent cases, not because of the dollar or two, but because I have to make a journey of many miles to answer you.

I also remember last time you said we'd ask $15,000, knowing we'd not get it, but putting our price high for bargaining advantage. If we are to get a price this time, say "Fisher wants $75,000, declaring it's better movie stuff than Grapes of Wrath."

Yrs,

Don't take too much for granted in those agents. They're pretty dumb after all; so you'd better take the inclosed page, revise, expand as you see opportunities, and send it for the agent to ponder and by guided as he reads

I might drop Bette Davis a note, asking if she'd like to see the callings? Or do you advise against it?

Oct 4

Dear Nowell:

Well, I suppose before this you've seen the De Voto pronouncement in
October Harper's and understand what I meant when I said he'd jump on
my Mormon book with both of his violently opinionated feet. He is so
prejudiced, so convinced beforehand, that the book can't be written
(unless, of course, he were to do it!) that as soon as he sees it he'll
feed it down the wind. Prize? Not if I know anything. In his article
he alludes to me as a 'novelist' who, rumor says, is busy on the job;
but Lord, O Lord, his effort will be a colossal flop. Has Aswell seen
De Voto's speech? If not, call it to his attention and communicate to
him the sentiments herein. I've wondered by Harper's took on that
sulking adolescent who is so inept and stupid that he whooped the Stegner
Remembering Laughter to the skies, though for anyone who has read since
the first grade it is only a feeble and flagrant imitation of Ethan Frome;
and who went to violent war against Tom Wolfe. Authors have a hard time
making headway against these asses who, frustrated in their own efforts
to write, turn maliciously around and try to destroy those who have more
talent. That's De Voto---but he's now the bright boy in the American
literary critical world since Wilson waded below his depth and Fadiman
turned out to be the pontifical moron which I always suspected he was.

Yrs.

Hagerman, Idaho

Feb 10, 1947

Dear Liddy:

Another ghost from your past! I have today a letter from Dorothy Fiske of Harper and Bros., transmittin monies from Grunbaum from Forlag of Copenhagen, on Children of God and the first three volumes of the tetralogy. She quotes Grunbaum as saying that advances on Danish rights on Children and City of Illusion, 750 krona each, were paid in 1943.

I have no record of any advances; I have no copy of a contract on City;
I have no copies of contracts on the 1st 3 volumes of the tetralogy.
The only thing I have is copy of a contract on Children, drawn in Nov.
1939. Why in the world would advance on that be paid in 1943? I don't
know if you acted as agent for Caxton and me on the tetralogy with For-
lag; or, if you did, why I have no copies of contracts.

Can you throw any light on these matters from your records?

In going through my records I observed that you entered into contracts
on Children in Italy, Hungary, Switzerland, Sweden, and possibly one
other—I don't recall offhand. Since you are stuck with the job of
writing a letter to me, can you give me any notion of what the status
of these contracts might be today—whether the war canceled them or
held them in abeyance?

And how are you and the children? Two of them now?

My records show that Hungarian and Swiss advances were paid in
1940

added: "Robert Linscott, the head editor at Random House, would, we feel confident, stand behind you". You say he is in the retread department, and I think you are wholly right in saying that Cerf is the only boss there. And when you say that he is very Jewish, I wonder if I should bother to pursue Random House any farther. I asked them to rate various publishers on various items--financial position, quality of editor, interest in belles-lettres, etc. They commended Brooks; said Scribner was weak now in b-1 editors, etc. Collins suggested when Henle released me: H-M, Lippincott, Scribner, Viking, Sloane.

So I have been working largely in the dark, as one must out here in Idaho.
And it is dark. IF No is your answer, then I shall not choose an agent until I have
talked with some of them, which means I shall have to go to NY.

I have told Maule I'd send him vol 7 about Apr 6, and would have vol 6 ready
about June 1. Maule has said he is "tremendously" interested—which means nothing at
all. You suggest that he's merely a fixture upstairs. If I do send to him, I'll send
a copy of the material of which a carbon is inclosed herewith.

You have to give me an answer to this, tentative, no, or otherwise, before the end of this month, for I have a date with Maule. And anyway, you have written Aswell and Scribner in my behalf, and bless your soul, Liddy, if anything comes of either, you are the agent on the contract and you'll have to take your commission. Your friendship is wonderful but I won't let you work for nothing.

As for the Wolfe item, forget it. I'll bury it.

Affectionately,

Sept 4, 1950

Dear Liddy:

I have your letter of Aug. 29. Never will I embarrass
you so please relieve your mind of that anxiety. But I was aston-
ished and saddened by your letter. Your comments on contemporary
psychology in would be unworthy of a high school freshman with an
IQ of 90. Life is brief, nothing is important, and people only
make themselves pathetic when they resist the most obvious truths.
As for never saying anything about me that would embarrass me, the
answer is that you couldn't. I don't give a holy damn what you say
about me, when, how, or to whom. As for your saying that you could
not have made male identifications—gal, your next sentences prove
it beautifully. What did Opal identify with? A penis, like you.
And I'd throw her into the river if she weren't smart enough to
know it. Why don't you get my brother's most recent book, The Meaning
and Practice of Psychotherapy, Macmillan, and read it? You'll find
yourself in a lot of its pages. I'll lend you my copy if you'll read
it.

I'll redo the Wolfe thing and there'll be no hint of you
anywhere in it.

Love,

Hotel Sussex

116 W 72 NYC

Jan 19

Dear Liddy:

You're so damned swell that you make me feel like a heel and good God I
may be. Am I glad or sorry? you ask. Both. Glad that I may have a real honest-to-
God agent with me again, sorry that I pestered you so much about it. And I still don't
know what I should do, except to give you a picture of how things are. When Collins said
he could never sell the Jesus book I said, all right, you'd better give me a release and
he said, hell, you're free, we've never had any contract, go ahead. But he added, Of
course if you write a book that can be sold I hope you'll let me have it. I am to see
him the 27th after he returns from sunning his rich bones down in the Bahamas. It's
Edith Haggard who floors me more than Collins: I had never met her, knew only that she
always returned short non-fiction things saying she could not sell them. Well, she's
one of these blondes who spend more on their hair, face and hands than I earn; smokes
her fancy cigarettes not with a tube holder but with a fancy crablike gold gadget with
which she delicately takes it up; and has more poses than Orson Welles. What a person
to handle short stuff from a guy like me!...Have had some frank talks with some persons
here including Silcox and they have all said one thing: no publisher will publish a novel
that is likely to be very offensive to the Roman Church. If true, that let's me out and
when I get the money I'll have to publish them myself. As for agents, I asked Maule; and
he thought and thought and mentioned Ives and McIntosh and decided at last that Russell
and Volkenning would be best for me but says Curtis Brown is one of the best, etc. I
asked Silcox about publishers and she took the list and ran through it and said she
couldn't see a one who might be bold enough to stand up to the Church. Haven't heard
yet from Alsberg and Hastings; at Maule's request wrote him a letter which he will show
to Haas of Random, leading maybe to a talk. At the moment am trying to get out an
article or two to help pay for the European trip. As for publishing books I guess you
may be right: do something else that a publisher is interested in, then bargain if I can
We were touched to hear that you have difficulty supporting yourself and daughters.
Can't imagine where I got the idea you were a person of means. And since Collins is
wealthy and you're not all the more reason I'd like you in on it if I do get out some
things that will sell. I guess the thing to do right now is to rush around here another
ten days as I have been doing and see what comes of it. Looks as if we shall leave
Feb 1. Opal has a siege but is up and the ear is better but thanks for Dr Chickering's
name just in case.

I must not consume more of your time until I have something definite to
say

Our best,

Jan 28

Dear Liddy:

I suppose I'm to drunk to write this tub I'll try while Opal
is getting ready to go to dinner with a publisher who doesn't want me.
I had lunch today with Charles Angoff (on me!) and he is a seductive guy who
will I think do everything he can to see that I get these series novels
published. Jesus is now with Gorham Munson of Hymitage House but he
offers no promise; and Hiram Haydn absolut3 fiction boss--he says--of
Bobbs Merrikill says he want to see it. God, baby, am I drunk!
And do I care? Not by the shrunken cunt of a mummie. But Angoff
thinks the R F Press will go with me on the series; and the other
books are up to me. I asked him about Haggard and he said no
not for you so would you want to do my short things? I don't know
what and Liddy I'm getting where I don't give a damn. You can be worn
out trying to keep integrity, trying to be fair to the best in this
race. Jeeps, am I drunk -and two hours from now we will have dinner
with the Harry Maules! Bush on the Maules. Bush on everything. You
work your mind out in this life and come to this ratrace city and
find--Cerfs. So what the hell. I'll still go on I suppose doing
the best I can for the Roger Bacons who rotted in dungeons--for the
Bronos who burned at stakes--and I won't say to the hell with it because
all that we have today comes from such men. But I know that in this
commercial world I'm an ass. Suppose the novel after it has cleared
Gorham Munson and Hiram Haydn will go to Charles Angoff to see what
he can do. Liddy, dear, we have to go out to dinner, god knows why
and for no reason. Goodbye, friend, and to hell with it

Vardis

Jan 29

Dear Liddy:

Reporting The novel is now with Gorham Munson at Hermitage Press but over a luncheon through which he gulped martinis he held out little hope. If he says no, as he will, it goes next to Hiram Haydn who tells me he is sole boss at Bobbs-Merrill--of novels, that is. If he says no I think there is a Jewish house that will take them on--at least Charley Angoff who is an editor there (without pay) thinks so. I am willing to waive royalties on the first 2000 (am I crazy) but remember that they will leave me free to seek where I will on contemporary and other novels....The NYU Press volume of essays on Wolfe is out and I have just read a pre-publication rev by Burton Rascoe in his syndicated column. It is fantastic. If you miss it I will lend you my copy to read: it will make your hair stand up....Prof Cargill sends a note saying that you said (to whom?) that you think my essay on Wolfe is the best yet written. If you meant it--I mean if you said it--I am of course as pleased as a child. A lot of people I've been seeing gossip about W and one of them told me the rumor is widespread that you are one of the women he "laid". I said hell no, that at the time you were in love with another man--thinking all the while that I don't know if you were and that it's nobody's business. Why am I never the subject of such spicy rumors?....We leave Sun morning for the sticks and since we shall be driving a car out for a friend we'll not be in Hagerman before about Feb 10....The Harry Maules took us out to dinner last night and as usual I was stinking. I sometimes wonder if I'm on the Scott Fits Gerald road--I don't think so, I can't afford to think so. The next year will tell.... Look said no, Reader's Digest said no: I don't know if Haggard will sell anything. IF--IF--IF you should really decide you want to be my agent I will break with Collins--but not unless I feel that you really would want to. You've been too swell a friend for me to drag you into my problems. I was told--you scalawag--that all these years you have been Nancy Hale's agent--or did you tell me? But I guess she was something that impinged with irresistible strength on your motherhood. Poor gal. Has she shot her wad? NYC is a rat race and I have been one of the most harassed rats in it. I'M goddamned glad to be going back to the smell of the sagebrush, the waterfalls, the quiet....Let me know if you see the Rascoe review

Our love,

April 24--54

Dear Liddy:

Well, bless you, I guess I'm just not the guy you who
has the common touch. Now and then I try to get it and come a-cropper
with that kind of thing. I'm up to my ears now in the first of the
contemporary novels but I'll have it done in the rough in a month; and
then, taking a week off before rewriting, I may try to make a short
story of amigo.

If you are going to do a biography of Wolfe you certainly
will be busy, and who better than you could do it?--for I assume that
you can be objective, and that you will not gloss the more unpleasant
things. For if you did that--and you won't--some later biographer would
make you look as silly as certain biographers who tried to cover on
Wordsworth and Keats.

I still don't know what I'll do about Curtis Brown. I had
supposed that if one's agent says something will not sell, the author
has a right to let another agent try, if another should want to. But
the ethics in these matters eludes me. Anyway, if I should do a short
story and it should sell you will have to take your commission, even if
it isto be in the form of a gift.

As for the Jesus, Munson said no: (1) that hard-cover
novels are now such a problem as to "paralyze an editor"; and (2) that
the story rests on "such a scholarly foundation" that it could have no
appeal to a "mass-audience." Hiram Haydn has it now but has not been
able to get to it, what with the rush of fall deadlines. I think my
chance with him is fifty-fifty but I am always wrong in those things.

Our love,

May 14, 1954

Dear Liddy:

I am about to begin rewriting the book but hell it may not be
anything a publisher will want. Opal and I have been having a
few drinks and since we have just read an article about the poor
pathetic moron named Barbara Hutton and her Rubirosa we came to
the conclusion that here is a novel: the American poor little rich
girl. Has it been done on that scale? I think I could do it.
I have the thought that in the end Barbara, who, poor thing, has
never found love, and Tommy Manville, poor creature, who has got
the habit of proposing to every woman he meets, should in the end
come together and realize that they if not made for one another
at least might as well shack up for what is left. Opal thinks that
should not be the conclusion. It doesn't matter. One godawful
movie could be made of the story and I'd like to know what you think
of it. There would be some Gabor bitches in it. What women do to
women, especially to morons.

If this is a story that you could promote let me know. Don't get
any wrong ideas. I'm not selling out. It would be a pathetic and
dreadful story, an American story.

Aug 23--54

Dear Liddy:

No doubt this will cross a letter from you. A matter or two have occurred to me since I wrote. First, I have suspended membership in the Authors League. Dues now are $25, not too much if an author is earning anything. But that's not my quarrel with them. Again and again and again, when desperately pressed, I have written Sillcox for a bit of advice, sending air mail envelope, begging her for only a word; and save once never got a reply. But the clique in NYC can get all the time they want. In fact the League is nothing but the NYC clique. Further, they now assess members 2% or 3% (I forget the exact sum) of the gross on earningover a certain amount, rather low, but not as low as mine have been; and so if I should get out a novel, say, HB, that does well, why should I dig up to them when they have refused even to write me a line when I most needed it? Not that I am stingy; no, but that I resent their attitude to those who can't walk into the office. God, I walked in last Feb. and Sillcox talked to me for two hours and would have talked another two; and I was thinking, Not so busy for those who call, but too busy to write one sentence to those 2500 miles away. But if we do get going and you want me to return, all right, I will.

A Goat for Azazel will be completed in the morning. I wrote you that it is just too damned intellectual to interest any publisher; but in going through the last 50,000 words, revising, I'm not so sure. It may have a lot more impact than I thought. In any case, it moves me--more I think than the Jesus. But I'm a queer guy.

The other thing I forgot to say is that the series volumes do not have to be published in order. I mean that if you were to look at 9, or perhaps better, 10, and say, yes, I think I can find a publisher for this, then ok. It is better for the enlightened reader to take them in order, for his own fullest understanding; but publisher-wise, not necessary at all.

Wrote Charles Angoff and asked him if he wanted to look at the Jesus. And by the way, I have (after anguish and furies) decided to revise parts of it in the light of your suggestions, to see especially if I can help the sagging middle and cut down some of the Sirena-Zilla bickering; but I'd not imagine I can go all the way you suggest, or that when I have done what I can the damned thing will be noticeably more publishable than it is.

The Hudson-Bay is taking shape in mymind. I think we shall do something with that, if I live to write it. And as Opal would say, Why shouldn't I?

Love,

Oct 18--54

Dear Liddy:

I'd have no objection at all to Goat's being published as non-fiction possibly under its present title with subtitle, An Essay on Christian Origins in Narrative Form. Or some such. This, you will remember, is the book that threw Gipson into an awful fury. He said it was anti-Christian and implied it was pro-Jew. Maybe I ought to offer it to that Reconstruction F Press. Anyway before long I'll get the two missing pages to you. I know they went to Ciardi.

If Martin's Press says no, sure you approach Purdy, saying his good friend Louis Freedman suggested it. You take care of that with Martin's as you please. And send Gangsters anywhere you want to or give it away. It's pretty silly of Shir-Cliff it is hard to believe in the sanity of Bob. A jury found him insane, didn't it? I guess S-C missed the parable entirely---or possibly he is the crazy one. He also says it is approached with so much indignation--yes, by the central character, not by the author. Good Lord! I sometimes wonder if publishers' editors are bright.

Now the 10th, PEACE LIKE A RIVER, about which I have written you that I think it has a good sales potential, will be ready by Nov. 10. I suppose your tendency will be to say I am trying to rush things, that I'd better lay it away and see what happens to Jesus; but my idea is to send it out. I don't care which book appears first. I just want something published to tone my ego up a bit, with which I'm having a lot of trouble these months. Some editor at Harcourt said they'd like to see a novel of mine--a year or two back. Or if you read and liked it you might wish to sound out Aswell or some friend at Scribner's. If some publisher liked it and followed with Hudson's B, maybe then if he had done well with those he would go along with Jesus and possibly Goat, or if not Goat, then XIIIth and 12th.

I'm aware I'm putting a hell of a lot of reading off on an overworked woman but you're over the worst of it. In November I want to try some revisions you suggested on Jesus and then get 11th in final form before March. Don't tell me I'm working too hard. I know it but I'm not getting any younger and time presses.

Love,

Vader

* Think they saw the Jesus Bill
am not sure

Hagerman

Oct 22-54

Dear Liddy:

In 1949 I wrote Collins that I might do another American historical. His reply may interest you: "I couldn't but be excited by what you said. Should you decide to do it I know of exactly the man and the place to go for what I think would be a handsome contract and advance. Ed Aswell is a tremendous admirer of your work...and I think would pay handsomely and promote heavily a book by you."

That was an overstatement! As you know he did not want volumes 6 or 7. But it occurs to me that if we get nowhere with St. Martin's or Putnam's you might wish to sound him out on Jesus and HB. In that case you may tell him that I would do my best to put the Jesus in better shape in line with your and his suggestions. In cleaning out letter files recently for storage I ran through a lot of letters from Aswell in years past (I was rather shamed by some of the things I wrote him!---I was pretty stiffnecked in those years) and observed that on City of Illusion he did not always agree with your suggestions; but on the Jesus I imagine the two of you would agree in the main.

This is only a thought. I'd not in that case mention GOAT to him. I'm wondering if I should sound out Ed Darling of Beacon Press on that, saying I'd be willing to publish it not as a novel but as an extended essay. Beacon doesn't publish novels.

While I'm about it, Richard Bransten of Rinehart, on rejecting the book on writing, wrote Collins: "I am a great admirer of Fisher. I like some of his work very much. I think he is a very civilized writer which is not a bad thing nowadays." Thought you might want to keep this in mind, if nothing else pans out.

Love,
Valder

Liddy:

Reply came at last but doubt if
it leads to anything there

Vardis

Darling is not an editor but in charge
of promotion

Hagerman

Nov 5, 54

Dear Liddy:

I am today sending what I hope is the final version of vol.10,
about which I have written you that having a good sales potential
it is more publishable than some others, though I may be as
crazy as hell. You will know after you've read it and you'll
be getting an expanding view of what I am trying to do. Am not
sure about the last two chapters--they may need redoing or undoing--
but up to that point I think the book has what Aswell calls reader
impact.

St. Martin's are taking their time, aren't they? And as for
Ed Darling I have as yet no word but I see by the Literary
Market Place (1954-5 edition) that Darling is not listed with
Beacon Press. He may not be there. Or possibly someone there
has written you to send Goat over. As for Putnam's no doubt you
know the name is Theodore Purdy, listed as V.P. and exec. ed.

No word yet from Beacon; suppose we may as well forget it.
Should I move on Reconstruction Foundation with Goat? Angoff
can't very well wait forever without getting ideas

Dec 17--54

Dear Liddy:

Well, Jesus! He has had the ms. almost three months and hasn't even read it. It makes an author want to declare war on all publishers....From what you feel about him his answer will be no, so it is what to do then. This is my schedule. Next week I'll complete the rewriting of ll. The month of January I'll give to revisions of the Jesus. I expect to start writing the HB early in Feb.

Now I'd like of course to get on someone's next fall list and you will know about what time in the spring the fall lists are closed. If you should decide later to move on Aswell--or any other who might seem more likely to you-- then submission of the Jesus would have to be made in time for a decision before fall lists close. That means there will not be any three months for Purdy to fool around so I'd suggest that if the thing comes back from Martin's and if you decide then on Putnam's that you tell Purdy flatly you like a decision by WHATEVER DATE SEEMS NECESSARY TO YOU to give Aswell or another reasonable time before lists close. And I'd not let Mackenzie have much more time for we don't have the time, do we?

Best,

Rewritten pages of Jesus would reach you in time for the try after Purdy if old Fisher doesn't come down with flu or something. Have been thinking that this Martin's outfit from what I gather is quite a publisher of religious books

Sure tell Martins Purdy or anyone I'll make revisions

Hagerman, Idaho

Dec. 17, 1954

Mr Hiram Haydn, Editor
Bobbs-Merrill Co.
468 4th Ave
New York City

Dear Hiram:

If I make revisions in the Jesus novel according to your
suggestions of what should be done and if I guarantee you
the Hudson's Bay novel as your first option and if I don't
bother you with the gangster story or anything like it,
then will you take the Jesus?

Some literate persons have been reading it and agree with
you that it lags in the middle and needs firming up along
there and I've been persuaded to do it and shall do it
right away.

In any case the best of the season to you

Liddy: you suggested some such move as this once before and
I decided to put out the feeler to see what happens. I should
have a reply before you have to move after getting no from
Martins. I have to go to eastern Idaho to see the old folks
and grieving sisterinlaw and if you should need to air mail
me I can be reached 289 East 19th, Idaho Falls, Idaho the
26-7-8--the 8th till noon; but if you write me there better
send carbon to Hagerman. Of course Haydn's reply will probably
come while I'm gone so shall not see it till 29th. But no doubt
the thing with Martins won't wind up before then

Don't know how publishers would feel but I strongly feel that the
Jesus should be published in the fall because of its subject matter
Read the other day that almost half the books sold in this country
are sold in the month of Dec. Remember Wolfe's saying that Look
H A had a good Christmas sale because of the title? A title like
Jesus Came Again should in this atom age

Guess that's all Will let you know instanter what Haydn says, if
anything How can he dodge a novel he is "ready to defend to the
death" with Hudson's Bay offered to follow it?

ESTABLISHED 1838

THE BOBBS-MERRILL COMPANY INC.
PUBLISHERS • • • INDIANAPOLIS 7

HIRAM HAYDN
NEW YORK EDITOR

468 FOURTH AVENUE
NEW YORK 16
MURRYHILL 4-6950

December 22, 1954

Mr. Vardis Fisher
Hagerman, Idaho

Dear Vardis:

What complications we mortals make. In the last
several months I have come to the decision of leaving
Bobbs-Merrill and going to Random House, which I shall
do on January 1st.

Because of the differences in size and nature of
the lists, this makes a different situation; also, because
of difference in the attitude of the house toward fiction;
and finally because I shall not have there, as I had here,
the ultimate editorial veto, so the whole situation requires
a little thinking and mulling over. Have you done any of
the Hudson's Bay novel? This might play a part in their
decision up there, and as I said just above, they do have
to be consulted in a fashion that was not required here.

At any rate, do write me again including this information --
at Bobbs-Merrill until the first, or at Random House after that.

Yours,
Hiram Haydn

Hiram Haydn

hh/1b

Author: Fisher, Vardis, 1895-1968.

Title: Vardis Fisher papers, 1870-1984.

Quantity: 13.00 linear ft.

Summary: Personal and family correspondence, writings, printed material, photographs and audiotapes.

Finding aids: Unprocessed collection. Preliminary finding aid available. For further information about these and related holdings consult the Public Service Desk.

Subjects (Library of Congress): Fisher, Vardis, 1895-1968.
Authors, American--20th century--Archives.

<table><thead><tr><td>LOCATION:</td><td>CALL NUMBER:</td><td>STATUS:</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>BEINECKE<br>(Non-Circulating)</td><td>ZA Fisher</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>BEINECKE<br>(Non-Circulating)</td><td>Uncat ZA MS</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

publishers answering a questionnaire I sent them said they would publish more one-act plays if good scripts were available.

How do you write the one-act play? The first requirement, which you probably get tired of hearing, but which is only repeated

learn from.

Unlike other types of literature, one-act plays still adhere to fairly rigid rules and traditions. An old man named Aristotle, who lived a few thousand years ago, had some words to say about drama which

28

Hagerman, Idaho

Jan. 3, 1955

Mr Hiram Haydn
Random House
New York City

Dear Hiram:

Well, you certainly move around and seem to improve your situation each time. You're about at the top now, aren't you?

Bob Linscott was my editor at Houghton Mifflin, Harry Maule at Doubleday. I know both men; in fact the Maules have been our guests here. Last Feb. I had lunch with Maule and talked about the remaining novels in my series and he asked me to write out what I had said to him so that he could lay it before Haas (is that the name?---Cerf was off on vacation). Then Maule wrote me a lengthy letter to tell me that in council (apparently they hold councils there) they had not been uncontrollably enthusiastic about me, adding that the religious angle was definitely an aspect of it. That is, RH didn't want to tangle with the Roman Church (God bless it). Nobody at Random has read the Jesus or any of the others, now ready.

I've no pages of the Hudson's Bay but I'd not think an editor needed to worry about the sales appeal there. I'm frankly writing it to fill a purse that needs filling.

It's not for me to suggest anything to you. You're a wise old editor and you'll know whether you should forget the whole thing or sound it out there--and if you do sound it out don't forget to tell them what you wrote me, that you would defend to the death the view that it (the Jesus) is an extraordinarily fine novel. You may also tell them that I'm rewriting it and that it will be quite a lot better.

Yrs,

Jan 19

Liddy: just to say (1) I worry so much about you with sick daughters and so much work to-do that I have even dreamed about it—you must not neglect your own affairs for me.

And (2) that the J is-going swell--am over all the bad spots--all the big objections you raised--and shall have new version ready to shoot off Jan 28

And (3) if Ed is on jury duty and can't get at the reading
suggest you get off quick note to Jack Goodman, V P and Exec.
Ed. Simon and Schuster (Marshall Field owns this thing now, you
know, and wouldn't care a hoot maybe about Roman C) or to
Miss Frances Phillips, V P and Editor, Wm Sloane Associates
425 4th Ave, demanding in either case a fast decision. Or may-
be you have someone up your sleeve if Ed is out. Anyway, I
hope the daughter is well out of danger and you are all well--
**and stay well**

Vardis

Jan. 20, 1955

Dear Liddy:

After in great haste getting the card off to you yesterday I took a quick turn through your letters to see what you had suggested to me in the way of publishers. You once suggested a LeBaron Barker at Double-day and again, a Marjorie Fischer at Messner and of course you may wish, if Ed is not now available to us, to try one of them. I suggested Simon and S because in another letter to me you said they were possibly the smartest monkeys in the game—and also because they have never seen anything of mine. As for Sloane, Sillcox told me they are smart but often too close to bankruptcy, though I think in the last year or so they found a financial angel in a Texan or some such. Probably what you'd like is a list of the better publishers who have *never* been offered anything of mine.

But maybe Ed is available and I'm just romping around over this for no good reason.

I hope your daughters are well by now. Why in the world do you have so much sickness in your family? Your correspondence is full of it. Is it just bad luck or what the hell.

Love

Liddy:

A note from your mother has just come saying you have "bronchitis, flu, etc." and God knows what the etc. means. I'd think the other two were plenty. We are worried about you and you simply must not take on any burdens for me while you are ill. It might be best in view of all this for me to write Ed, only briefly, saying that you would later lay it before him—only to ask if he can give a three weeks' decision etc. But I'll not do this of course if you say no—so herewith is an airmail card that needs only a check in one item.

Please don't bother with my problems again until you are well

V

Liddy: revised-rewritten ms. will go to you insured mail morn-
ing of 29th; have met nearly all your objections tho could not
feel all 1st synagog scene should be thrown out, nor agree in al
instances on where chapters should begin-end; and yielded to you
and brought Lucia back but to have her find child (you did not
suggest it) would be absurdly improbable. Think the story vastly
improved at least from reader appeal angle and certainly in some
ways from angle of art. Haydn says no soap, that Maule tells him
he did best to interest the two Jews in the Jesus and couldn't
So to hell with all the cerfs who are worse serfs than they know
You may tell Ed I shall begin writing HB Feb. 3....Very sorry
you are ill and you must not run any risks: like a fool when I
had a strep throat and fever 104 I revised on Children of God--
let fever go down to 101, then write till up to 104: it was
stupid, so don't you impair your health....Can't read what you
say about where gangsters is but think-you say Goat went to Kohn

V

Feb 28--55

Dear Liddy:

Your letter has just come and relieves my mind some, though it
appears that you are still away under par. Take care of your-
self till you get your bounce back....No, Ed never saw the Jesus
but only 7, which he thought had too much background---I cut it
a lot after he read it. He might just possibly like the Jesus as
a salable item but more likely not. I should think he will find
plenty of 'reader impact' (His words) in the present version. If
he declines I wouldn't know if we ought to take his advance offer
on HB or what---maybe you'd like to read the first 30,000 words---
for by the time I hear from you I'll have that many written. As
for the series I may have to go to one of these "cooperative" outfits--
Vantage, Exposition, Pageant, etc. They're not so bad if a book
caught on--and one does now and then: Vantage brought out the thing
of the Tea House August Moon or whatever it is that went into a hit
play. But if Ed says no you may wish to try further though I don't
want you to so exhaust yourself that you wish I'd never been born....
As for the Satan I intended the reader to interpret the conclusion as
he pleased. We can take that up if we ever get to it....Didn't intend
to suggest anything in Macleans--just to wonder about it.

Love,

March 22--55

Dear Liddy:

Have your letter of 16th and honestly it is I, not you, as Opal says,
who should be booted all over the lot. I did not write to Ed, not
any kind of letter, not at all; and I'll not even let him know that
you showed me hisn. I feel all right toward him now--hell, I've known
ever since I saw and had the long talk with him in 1939 the kind of
person he is--nice enough in his way, maybe damned swell, but with
dollar signs rather than art in his eyes. I got back on to HB fast,
as my card advised you; I think (Opal says so) I am again going great
guns--I have the whole story opened up ahead of me now. Try if you will
the Jesus another two or three times and if no go then I'd suggest we not
tie it any longer to the HB kite but that you take the HB into the open
market for the best you can do.

Enough now. Please don't feel you were to be reproached. I'm the kind
of guy who will blow his top in self-pity and raise unholy cain for a
day or two but the old German in me kicks me back to the job and I go
on again.

Liddy:

Charles Angoff's business address is
General Electric Bldg
51st and Lexington

His home address when I was there was the one you have. I
think Kohn puts a ms. out to a lot of readers but I see no
reason why you should not prod A, since you know him well.
Tell him I am wondering if anything is happening. In fact
A's finding out that his old friend Liddy is my agent will
do me no harm'

HB still goes well, Opal says. I don't know--but
it's going--over 60,000 words in the rough

Liddy:

I've looked over my HB carbon and I can do all right
with it if you should wish to keep your copy with the idea
possibly of showing it. It seems to get us nowhere just to
show the Jesus with HB as lure, so I do wonder if it would
not be better to tell these people that if they find the
Jesus publishable they may have a look at the HB, pointing
out that this is only the first draft and will be polished up
and fattened a bit and will have a stronger conclusion. Per-
haps I should have told you for your information that a lot
of the people are actual--Colin, Selkirk, McNeil, the Jim who
fights the duel with him and the duel; John Clarke, McLoughlin
and about all of them except David, Bowman (based on a pedlar
Jim Dugald, Pierre, Payette, Sunday and the Indian chiefs
Again I say to hell with public domain

Vardis

June 15, 1955---LATER

Dear Liddy:

Jesus! as David might say. May 21--22--23 etc. you wrote: "Don't you think it is really good, really great?...you must have been carried away by this or it couldn't be so wonderfully strong and vivid, and capable of carrying away your reader...."

June 11 you wrote: "you really need to write almost a whole new book."

May 21 you wrote: "I was damn near what reviewers used to call 'spell-bound'. The color and the drama and the life of the northwest, and the whole thing, cruelty, beauty, tragedy, wildness--everything, are unexcelled."

June 11 you wrote: "But it isn't--to me--100% grade A Fisher: it is more the sort of thing that a Fisher might turn out if he went to work in the studio of, say, MGM."

May 21 you wrote: "The love story is Really Something: it is perfectly beautiful and beautifully done."

June 11 you wrote: "No reason why she should soften towards him, no logical sense of progression in the relationship."

I could go on and on. I suppose the thing to say, now that I'm sitting with a drink, is this: that (1) I drubbed you into taking me back and being my agent; (2) that you already had more burdens on your hands than two women should have; and (3) that possibly now, having had me back some time you wish the hell you hadn't. In that case be frank with me: just say you've too much else to do: in that case let me reimburse you for postage, express etc. and pay you for your time.

If on the other hand you choose to go on, not out of sympathy for me but at least in part in self-interest there, then in heaven's name make up your mind to something and realize that I am not Children of God and City of Illusion. I have published better books. Since big sprawling Children of God is only one in almost 20 novels I have published, and unlike all the others, why in the world should you assume that it is essentially me at my best? Take it from me at my riper age, it's not much good. I have much smaller novels, each of which is worth a half a dozen of it. And when in hell did Carnegie sit in City of Illusion?

I have a feeling that I haven't been fair to you. I beseeched you like a lost lubber in Klagenfurt to return to me and out of the boundless goodness of your heart you did. I know how little you wanted to. It worries me, then, not only that we have got nowhere but that you seem to have the wrong idea of me as a writer. Doing the big sprawling Hudson's Bay thing from the beginning up to, say, 1820 seems to me to be a nightmarish waste of time for anyone. But to do what I have tried to do, to get the feel and smell and sight and sound and taste of these tremendous men in a more tremendous country into a book---of men in a country so big that they could only try, but never accept, the challenge; in a country where the strong had to become cruel to survive, and the weak had not even a squaw to mourn their passing; where possibly now and then a David did hang on to his tenderer emotions, as the letter home should reveal; where a Jim Dugald could only smoke and brood quietly over what had happened to him, yet never admit that he would have had it any other way; where all the goodness in a John Bowman effloresces into cynical opportunism; where a woman with white memories and Indian training has to surrender to tenderness....

But for Christ sake, do I have to draw the whole thing out, as if my readers were all morons? And if so, it's not worth the bother.

In any case I think of you, and shall, as one of my few (half-dozen) dearest friends---as one indeed who has given too much of herself to me.

I slipped an extra carbon in to make for you a copy of this page, most of it new material. THAT IS, THAT WAS, THE CONFLICT, JUST AS IT SAYS THERE. There was no knock-you-in-the-eye sort of thing you seem to have in mind and the persistence of your belief in what would be historically false is simply out of this world

Yes, I am positive the thing to do is to write Dugdale that before long you can show him about the first third of the novel, revised—and I say this the next day after thinking of the matter much of yesterday and half the night

That was a raw deal from Kohn—six months and then not a word about who read it or what was thought about it. Better hold it there meanwhile if all these things are not getting too much in your way

You talk endlessly about conflict. Well, there are all kinds. The thing built to the crisis in the invasion by HB of the Athabasca and John Clarke (the name is not invented) and his men STAGGERED AROUND FOR MONTHS AND MOST OF THEM STARVED TO DEATH WITHOUT EVER SEEING THE ENEMY.

That's the kind of story it is. Nothing in the whole conflict was more essential than the buffalo hunt, which you perhaps thought extraneous. It was, Pennican, Pennican, who's got the Pennican?—and the pedlars got more and more of it.

Dear Liddy

No, if Harcourt declines, don't send GOAT to Swallow---only RIVER and SATAN: send GOAT and the gangsters to me. I intend to rewrite GOAT. Send the two to Swallow express collect. Send the two to me parcell post insured---no, don't insure, they're not worth it

Since Wheelock is such a good friend of yours you might tip him off that taking to Sept may be too long---that if Harcourt say no you could slip him 13 chapters of HB but that I am impatient and moving on Swallow soon as Har. say no if they are to say no. Uhlan of Exposition writes again, in sistent I go with him. Please read Dempsey's article in last Harper's on "co-operative" publishers and tell me what you feel about it

love

Aide

A complete list of markets for original paperback novels is included in the *Writer's Year Book* with the editorial requirements of each. There is no need to repeat this lengthy data here in full, but for convenience, here are the names and addresses of these firms.

Ace Books, Inc., 23 West 47th St., New York 36; Editor, Donald A. Wollheim.

Saw here in article by
Ben Appel no east
you know them well

Avon Books, 575 Madison Ave., New York 22; Editor, Charles R. Byrne.

Ballantine Books, 404 Fifth Ave., New York 18; Editor, Stanley Kauffmann.

Dell Books, 200 Fifth Ave., New York 10; Editor, Knox Burger.

Gold Medal Books, Fawcett Publications, Inc., 67 West 44th St., New York 36; Editor, William C. Lengel.

Lion Books, Inc., 270 Park Ave., New York 17; Editor, Walter Fultz.

Permabooks, Doubleday & Co., 575 Madison Ave., New York 22; Editor, Mel Evans.

Popular Library, Inc., 10 East 40th St., New York 16; Editor, Charles N. Heckelmann.

Pyramid Books, Almat Publishing Corp., 444 Madison Ave., New York 22; Editor, Ray Compton.

a national fraternity of Western authors, editors and researchers, are available from Peter A. Decker, 51 East 42nd St., N.Y.C.

Authentic data on pioneer lawmen, and the desperados they hunted down, can be found in the following books:

Walter Prescott Webb, *The Texas Rangers*.

Eugene Cunningham, *Triggerometry*.

James D. Horan, *Desperate Men*.

## Chicago Markets

*(Continued from page 31)*

100% of most of his rights. The lesser professional usually has to give up from forty to fifty per cent of his movie and reprint rights. It's largely bargaining, so that's why I said royalty is not very standardized.

M. A. Donahue, at 711 S. Dearborn St., Chicago 5, is actually three companies in one. The address is the same on all. The other two are Goldsmith Publishers and Hampton Publishers. No distinction was made as to types of titles published by each company. This house does not want to see unsolicited manuscripts. All the books they publish are for children from the infant stage through the teens. Some of them are staff written. If you have some material which might appeal, contact the company first to see if they are interested. The

McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.

TRADE BOOK DEPARTMENT

330 WEST 42ND STREET

NEW YORK 36, N.Y.

EDWARD C. ASWELL
VICE PRESIDENT

August 24, 1955

Liddy: I didn't say a damned thing except that you said I capture the spirit of the old West better than any other and seemed to have a firmer feeling about me than at any time since reading the early part of C of G. I said you expected a panoramic novel and explained why it could not be that kind

Mr. Vardis Fisher
Hagerman
Idaho

Dear Vardis:

Your letter of August 22nd has just come and delights me no end. I promise you a fast decision on the manuscript. By this I mean that I shall drop whatever else I may be doing and take the manuscript home and read it with no delay it all.

What you say about it sounds wonderful, And Liddy is right about your ability to capture the old West. You have it in your blood--as well as in your nostrils.

The promotion idea for the leading reviewers of the country is certainly a new gimmick if I ever heard of one. To avoid the accusation of discrimination, perhaps each of the reviewers should get the same thing. And a jar of homemade huckleberry jam might be the most likely candidate. I am not trying to settle anything now but am just talking out loud.

The manuscript ought to be here pretty soon after Labor Day, and that will be a good time for me. I shall make my plans accordingly and shall be more than eager and ready to read it when it comes.

ECA:BJ

P.S. I am leaving it to you to communicate with Liddy. In a situation of this kind, I would normally send copies of my letters to an author to his agent--just to keep her posted. But I have not heard anything from or about Liddy now in ten days or so, and I do not want to bother her more than I need to. I think she will be pleased, though.

Sept 7, 1955

Dear Liddy:

Now that I have two drinks in me I can write this damned letter.
Two hours ago the original of HB went off to Ed and the carbon to MacLean's
in Toronto; and by slow mail there is going to you a copy of the note to Ed
with a sachet of western sage and of buffalo bush, which you may think damned
good scents for buffalo and badgers. I have an idea of using them and one
other and small jars of huckleberry jam in promotion of the book. Ed says it's
a new gimmick if he ever heard of one. Well, he's getting bush and sage too.

What I really want to say is that it grieves me to have you try-
ing to release me. That comes from your character. But I feel that this
terrible ordeal for you---and I do sense how terrible it has been, following
your mother---has been, or certainly is now, chiefly psychic or psychological;
and knowing your strength all these years I am sure you will shake out of it,
if indeed you have not. Today I was before the mirrors, measuring the depth
of the wrinkles, the percentage of the gray, speculating on the life expectancy.
Men are much sillier about such things than women. But me, I've never had any
such shock as you have just had. But I know you'll be on top again.

Now, Liddy, you know well I'd not try to prevail on you to go
on being my agent, if you'd just rather not. On the other hand I must be sure
that you're not trying to withdraw because you think it's the right and hon-
orable thing for me. If the HB goes anywhere, and I think it can, I want you
in on it, if you will be happy being in on it.

I did not one concluding chapter but two and Opal says you were
right, they were needed. She feels, yes, and I feel, that the book does now
conclude with enough finality.

I think Ed will make an offer. The question is whether we can
find a better publisher---possibly the question will be whether we should try.
And in regard to that I suppose it is best to wait and see what he says.

All our love,

Oct 17--55

Dear Liddy:

I suppose this will cross yours, for you no doubt have
a copy of Aswell's telegram of Oct 14 (which reached me only today)
saying Want to publish your new novel will write air mail Monday
congratulations on an exciting job stop. Of course I'll not know
how much he means it until I get his letter, which may have a hell
of a lot of qualification and if you will do this and that etc.
I am getting this off today to say if Aswell's offer turns out to be
nice are we going to give Ken McCormick a look? Between us I am not
all convinced that McGraw-Hill is the publisher who would do best by
this---not that I overrate the sales potential in the HB but that
Mc-H are new in fiction and VERY rarely have a novel that gets re-
viewed in the big places. Well, I mean be thinking about it and you
may get a long wire from me after I read Ed's letter. I hope to
God he isn't going to drench my fine glow with a pailful of iced
qualifications---above all that he doesn't again begin to try to get
me to write down---as he did on the other books.

Liddy, we hope you are returning fast to your old
strength and your former self. We hope this damned book makes a pile
of money and we hope it for you as much, maybe more, than for our-
selves. Anyway, it's your baby and after that telegram don't you dare
tell me the kid is no good.

Love,

Having had your mixed-up attitude toward the book you may not
think it can get a decent serialization. Again you may be right
but I wouldn't agree

Do let me have a fast one on this: Swallow has gone to press with the
Jesus with the inscription to you; but be honest now, would you rather
have me inscribe the HB to you?

Aswell---2

Heir

They advised me that the best I could do on maps was to go to Morton's "monumental" (they're word) History of Western Canada. I had an awful time getting hold of that book. On page 424 (or about there) I found the best map known to me, though you should compare it with modern highway maps of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. I can't supply you with a map--- I have one on the wall that I made but as a cartographer I am so infernally inept that I'd want no one to see it. But your cartographer would have no trouble at all with Morton's and the present highway maps.

Well, I guess I have now covered everything. I think it nice of you to call the novel to the attention of a Heinemann scout, though I have felt from the start that Liddy would just about be able to take her choice of London publishers. The HB Company is still a considerable force in the British consciousness---and Canada, of course. As for your postscript, you caught me on the 54-40 and if you and your editors dig no doubt you'll catch some more things---and I'll wish to check through again myself. When a writer has before him such a god-awful pile of notes as I had for this book he's a better man than I am if he doesn't trip up now and then. I've learned that I tripped up in a few instances in Children of God, all quite minor; but nobody has yet pointed out to me a historic inaccuracy in City of Illusion. I think there must be some but you will recall that I was called on to do a real check and double-check on that one. And what, I wonder, has happened to Mr. Swift Paine.

This letter will cross one from you but that doesn't matter. If you're (be to my publisher of this the thing is to get these things worked out without too much delay, though while in NYC I'll have library facilities of a first order with which to check these things.

Liddy:

I'm aware that you're convalescing and a convalescent is nobody to take bulls by the horns and spit in their face or let a bird go from the hand on the chance of a bigger one in the bush. But I do strongly feel that if I can't get together with Ed we'll find a good publisher, maybe even a better one, while I'm in NYC. Ken McCormick (and he's a Scot!) does want a chance at it; so does Hiram Haydn; so, I think, does Harper. There are a lot of other good ones. Sure, we'll go with Ed if he isn't unreasonable---if, as you put it, he doesn't insist on playing God too much; but if I can't work it out with him I'll not be worried. As for being the fair-haired boy in a small list, that has its advantages, and disadvantages too: McGraw-Hill, for instance, don't have, I imagine, such a wad of salesmen blanketing this country as some of the others have. And bear in mind this about Ed, he is very cautious, there isn't much of the gambler in him. So McGraw-Hill's money and effort behind the book could be considerably less than some others might employ.

Well, hell, as you say, let's see what my two letters bring from Ed. Opal suggests that on getting my first letter he probably called you up. If so, I'm at a loss to know what exchange there was between you. Your own feeling for the book was so hugely qualified, your relationship with Ed is so close, your feeling for a bird in the hand so strong, that I can't predict or foresee what you might say to him.

Love,

Stop thinking I'm about to blow my top out here. I've been in this racket a long time. I've been drinking too much for about three years but I'm still a pretty tough old rooster. So take it on that basis

Ed held us up so damned long (so much longer than I expected) on the HB and it is
now SIX WEEKS since Ken McCormick wrote:

Dear Vardis Fisher:

Thanks so much for your personal note on that form letter
about the novels. Please send me one each of the novels and bill me at
Doubleday.

More to the point, I do want to say I am tremendously
interested in a book on the Hudson Bay Company. Please let me see it. It's
good of you to let me know about it.

That from the editor who Luise Silcox told me is "the best in the trade."

At best, after all the delay, I'll have to write him an apology of
some sort. I'll just have to get going with Ed some way, for I can't be silent
with McCormick much longer.

Friday and still no letter What's he up to?

...

Friday evening:

Aswell is beginning to bore me with his goddamned New
England conscience. Just told Opal that his relationship with you is
like that of a brother with an incestuous attachment! Has the guy ever
had a good fuck in his life that submerged his ego?

LAST MAIL ON SATURDAY and still not a word from Ed. Nor anything
more from you, from which I assume he did not call you after getting
mine, or surely you would have got a line right off.

I don't understand this delay at all. I'm getting fed up and will
shoot the carbon to McCormick if I don't hear Monday

Harriman, Idaho

Nov. 4, 1955

Mr Edward C Aswell
McGraw-Hill Book Co
New York, N Y

Dear Ed:

I figured I'd have a letter from you last Wed. and still
none today, so I assume, since by nature you are so prompt, that weather
has again been giving you trouble; or the pressure of business; or some-
thing.

Since we have always played with one another with all our
cards on the table I may as well confess that I was a bit disturbed when
Liddy wrote that you felt a $3,000 advance was the best you could do.
As you know, I'm not an author who has ever made a fuss about advances
but this time I thought it a bit strange for this reason. When you de-
clined the Jesus book you wrote Liddy or me (I forget which) that McGraw-
Hill feels they have to sell 10,000 copies of a novel nowadays to break
even. You'd sure not be making an offer on HB if you felt you'd not
break even, yet a 15% royalty on a $4 book on 10,000 copies would be
$6,000, which is approximately the advance I thought you'd be offering.

It's no great matter of you'd expect to make the book a leader
(which I assume) and put the House's best efforts behind it, which you
surely would. I'm just wondering aloud while waiting to hear from you,
which no doubt I shall soon. We may leave here as early as the 12th and
there is only one address on route which I shall be able to send you and
Liddy, so far as I know now. We'll be plodding along in a 1941 Chevy, and
the weather according to forecasts may be pretty dreadful.

Sunday Nov 6

Dear Liddy:

The local operator didn't want to send it and we hope to God she didn't; but if she did, Aswell got a telegram and you a copy which said: No reply stop assume not interested stop go kill yourself don't stop Needless to say we were hell-roaring drunk and thought it sort of cute; needless to say that on awaking we were horrified. I blew my top---and maybe saved for a while such sanity as I have left.

A sense of humor has never been very noticeable in Aswell I now assume that he and McGraw-Hill are through with me and the Hudson's Bay story and sitting here with a dreadful hangover and a big wonder in me why in hell I go on living I don't care a hell of a lot.

But I am sorry. It was a crass gross despicable drunken thing to do. Most of the time I keep a tight rein on fisher but when I blow, Liddy, I really blow.

Sorry most of all to do this to you when you are convalescent. But try to smile at it. The world will go on

Love

Addresses---we leave next Sunday--en route:

To but not later than Nov 23

Prof Don Lewis
300 Lucon Drive
Iowa City, Iowa

Maybe to about Nov 28

Emerson Price, Book Editor
Cleveland Press
Cleveland

Monday the 7th: still no letter from Ed. We leave end of this week, shall have time only for another letter from you after you get this. I think we might as well let contract ride along until other is taken care of one way or another I won't just to please his damned New England conscience rewrite such stuff as snow ass-deep to a moose and all that. When he says such words will hurt sales he's crazier than hell. He's crazy about some other suggestions too, such as having David kill the chief instead of the halfbreed. Well, I'll just have to wait see what he says---though maybe after that damned silly telegram he has wahhed his hands of me

You break my heart by saying Ed seemed "hurt and regretful": O God yes, he was so sad 5 years ago when you told him I had some novels begging around and he wrote me that he was so "sad" (the word he used) to be getting in so late---and then a little later sent the cold letter of refusal, as he has done with me much more than once. The poor goddamned author can get drunk and break his heart and puke all over the moon; and a wealthy man who doesn't give a shit about art but only about the fast buck feels hurt, does he? Well, let him go on feeling it

No, you won't have time for any letter to me here after you get this: Saturday forenoon will be last day BUT IF you want an address sooner than Iowa City try Alan Swallow 2679 South York, Denver 10 will carbon care of Lewis

Sunday Nov 6, 1955

Dear Liddy:

The local operator didn't want to send it and we hope to God she didn't; but if she did, Aswell got a telegram and you a copy which said: No reply stop assume not interested stop go kill yourself don't stop needless to say we were hell-roaring drunk and thought it sort of cute; needless to say that on awaking we were horrified. I blew my top---and maybe saved for a while such sanity as I have left.

A sense of humor has never been very noticeable in Aswell. I now assume that he and Macross MILL are through with me and the Hudson's Bay story and sitting here with a dreadful hangover and a big wonder in me why in hell I go on living I don't care a hell of a lot.

But I am sorry. It was a crass gross despicable drunken thing to do. Most of the time I keep a tight rein on Fisher but when I blow, Liddy, I really blow.

Love

<table><tr><td>THIS SIDE OF CARD IS FOR ADDRESS</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>UNITED STATES</td></tr><tr><td>2 CENTS</td></tr><tr><td>POSTAL CARD</td></tr></table>

Elizabeth Nowell
2 Prospect St
South Dartmouth, Mass

<table><tr><td>UNITED STATES</td></tr><tr><td>2 CENTS</td></tr><tr><td>FRANKLIN</td></tr><tr><td>POSTAL CARD</td></tr></table>

Dear Liddy:

we are aghast that you are or were back in the
hospital and hope the card from your mother saying tests
negative are such as stay negative.

as possibly you suspected I slipped the carbon
to McCormick. His wire to me here at Iowa City says:

Dear Vardis Fisher we are enormously enthusiastic about
pemmican and want to publish it as it stands or with any
changes you elect to make its a great novel tried to phone
you without success please call me Monday 6m collect to
discuss terms we are really excited about this book regards

Ken McCormick

2 letters here from Ed one telling me he sold part of Wolfe
letters to Life, that you are out of debt. Hooray. He
wants to take me to lunch and "talk things over" Shall
call Mc Monday to get his terms. Please don't worry. I'm
no damned naive author who gets his blood pressure up In
fact Opal and I have been letting doctors work us over here
in

Hagerman

Nov 12---55

Dear Liddy:

Ed writes that after reading my letter about his
advance offer (I was joshing him really to see what he'd say)
he is confused. I quote: "Your letter of the 4th raises for
the first time a question about the advance, which I thought
had been settled long ago. So did Liddy, because she never
asked whether the $3,000 figure I named could be increased."
You wrote me Oct. 14: "Ed offered $3,000, I tried to get it a
little higher but he said that was what he'd offered before."
Somebody is kidding me.

But don't think I'm taking it seriously. It's
not important. And don't tell Ed I blabbed on him.

The weather is so goddamned awful---reports here
say cars are having a hell of a time in Wyoming---that we have
changed plans and will not drive but go by bus. Addresses I
gave you and dates for them still stand---unless I gave you
Swallow's. We're not going down to Denver.

Hope you're feeling happier today, Liddy

Always,

Nov 20--55

Dear Liddy:

First, Opal and I devoutly hope that the cancer thing in you
has been licked, that you know it has been, that on that score your mind
is relieved. My father is slowly dying of cancer: it is a thing that has
been close to me, emotionally, for some years. We hope also that there will
be a letter along the way somewhere, maybe with Don Lewis, saying that yes,
it was all a silly misunderstanding, that our fine friendship is just what
it has always been, that at least on this HB novel you will act for me; for
there may be a lot of money in it, if we get reasonable breaks.

As you must know, Ed now says there are only two major objections
on his part: the Latitude-Brave Feathers thing, and the "sexual and anatomical"
details. The first can easily be taken care of. The second is a stinger
for me for the reason that I know that some sensational sellers in recent
years have gone in that respect farther than I have gone. In fact, Opal has
in her Cleopatra novel: her agent not only never raised the slightest ob-
jection to such details but has written her that he is "very optimistic" on
selling the book. He will offer first, possibly, to Messner, where you have,
I seem to recall from correspondence, a friend.

So, Liddy, I just don't know if I'll be able to meet Ed's objections
in a degree that would satisfy him. It may be true, as he has suggested, that
he will be willing to publish the novel, if I don't; but in that case would
his enthusiasm, and McDraw-Hill's, not be considerably diminished? You and
I don't want a half-hearted publisher on this---do we? I simply don't know
how to meet it without feeling that I have cut too much guts out of the
book. On the way East I may reread Caldwell's God's Little Acre and mark
some passages for Ed and ask him to read them; for this novel, published
20 or 25 years ago has been, as you know, a sensational seller, not only
here but in many countries abroad. It is simply a fact, in my opinion, that
such "sexual and anatomical" details help to sell novels nowadays and I
certainly don't want to be guilty of castrating a book merely to satisfy
what possibly is a rather prudish attitude---or if not that, an attitude
that is not familiar with what is now being published in that respect. But
we'll work it out somehow for the best publisher we can get, leaving the
book, I hope, with the virile strength in details without which it would be
only another novel. Sitting and thinking about it I have gone over and over
such details as I can recall and can think of none that is at all extreme
save possibly that of the bitch-wolf and dog stuck and the men clubbing the
bitch to death. I think that was not in the book when you read it. That
could be softened---but not the use of such words as fart, piss and shit when
they are merely words in the talk of men who were rough and tough.

I honestly don't think that the McCormick note was, as you put it,
merely a form letter. I happen to know that high on the staff of Pocket Books
I have fans and it is my impression that McCormick is one of them. In any
case it was he who gambled on the tetralogy volumes in Pocket Books; and the
sales of them have covered the advance in each instance, at least on the first
three. I don't know yet about the last one.

Love,

Dec 6--55

Dear Liddy:

The contracts are signed and the check has gone to you. I went around and around over that warranty clause and then went up to McCormick and asked him to add this after the sentence you wanted to cut out: Provided it is mutually understood and agreed that if the Author so elects, the Publisher will not settle the claim or demand out of court, but will, if the Author so requests, take it to court to obtain judgment there.

McCormick said ok fine and the addition was written in the contracts.

As to subsidiary rights. McCormick says that have their own "huge and
aggressive organization" to handle them; that they have sold novel after
novel to Hollywood without going through an agent; that on second serial
they have not only their own separate organization for just that but
(and you have known this) their own syndicate. I suspect he has in mind
a second serial deal considerably larger than, say, a Reader's Digest
reprint. As to foreign rights he is not so eager; says they have to have
25% to handle because of their large and widespread force.

So I suggest that we let them go ahead with Hollywood and second serial, for which, if we do, I'll have to sign a letter-memo that will stand as the contract-agreement. If you would like to handle all foreign rights independently of them, just tell me. On Hollywood and sec. serial I suspect you'll say, well, kid, if they do it, there's no money due me. I don't see it that way. For one thing McCormick is more than willing to consult you at every turn on every deal---he said, in fact, "We can do it acting together." That means I'll pay more than 10% commission but hell I'll be glad to. You can both have 10% if you want it; or if, as I suspect, you say that is too much to me you'll insist in any case on your taking at least 5% of Hollywood and second ser. even if you didn't lift a finger; because, Liddy, I owe you plenty for all the years of free advice, for your god mothering me in times of stress, for all those things. So please don't get too sensitive on me and say no kid and all that.

This has to be settled as soon as possible, so let me know how you see
it.

Love

He told me again today that he thinks they are really going to town
with this book. I'm not naive, Liddy, spite of what you think. I know
it could be a dud. But I do believe they will do their damndest. And
as for titles, come up with some more, if you can. I wanted to send the
carbon to you but Mc says they need both copies for different departments,
that the promotional build-up is to begin right away. Editorial dept. needs
one copy to make some suggestions to me for minor changes---nothingon the
order Ed wanted; the promotion dept needs the other

Dec 9--55

Dear Liddy:

Just got your two letters and shall see McCormick as soon as I can.
I've so damned many things pressing me down here: for one, I am paying Swallow
(over his protest) for 20,000 stamped envelopes and for Bowker to address most
of them and fill and seal with circulars and deliver to the P.O. Over there
again yesterday and the thing is in kind of a mix-up. These business Jews are
tough babies and want their money right now. Which reminds me that my bank account
is so low I am postdating checks, so when that thing comes through from D get my
part over (you would anyway) right off, so I won't go to jail.

No need replying to the movie things until I've seen Mc. You remind
me of some things in regard to C of G but it was my impression at the time that it
was not Young who scared up an interest in Zanuck but Bromfield, one of the judges,
who wanted to use the book in doing the scenario. I also recall that you got an
offer of $1000 and suggested I accept for it was only 'nuisance value' any way but
I wrote you to ask for $25,000 and dicker. You got five. Remember? Don't think
for a moment that if D handles movie rights (or you) that I'll be for taking the
first offer if it's not damned good; and I not only shall want to be hired as con-
sultant but to do the scenario, as Ruark has been. If you say, kid, you're dream-
ing, well, maybe, but they could assign one of their smartest scenarists to work
with me, with less pay to me to pay him. Ruark got $150,000 (or so the stories
say) to write the scenario of his thing.

Second serial, ok The thing that threw me was that on C of G you
got $5,000 from Reader's Digest and urged me to let Aswell have a fourth---you
said he was saying he felt Harper should have it. But maybe RD is not called
second serial.

As for first serial I thought that was dead. You wrote me in Idaho
that you would try if I wanted you to but you felt there was slight chance of it.
Mc said hell yes, they would hold off publishing to 1957 if you wanted to go
after first serial; I said you felt there was not much chance, he said he agreed
with you, I said ok we'll drop it then, and he set publication date for June or
July. So you'll have to make up your mind fast on that. If you felt the chance
was slight six weeks ago I can't imagine what has changed you---for you say you
hate to "surrender any chance without a murmur." Do you want me to see Brandt?
Or the Collier egg? If I told them what the book is, they or either then called
you, said yes, they really wanted a chance at it, then we could get the carbon
right to you or straight to them. But I don't feel it is worth roughing up D's
plans if you still feel first serial in a big place is a hell of a long shot in
the dark.

OK on you and foreign rights. What Mc said was that no agent has
"the huge and aggressive organization we have for selling foreign rights." But
if you feel you can do as well or better, fine. One thing I had in mind is
whether you will have the time and/or energy for it.

I told Mc, by the way (if I haven't told you) that if they handle
movie I'll expect them to work in close consultation with you. He said, Sure,
by all means. And in that case YOU could take care of such matters as that under
2 in your letter, couldn't you? The author has to approve finally, doesn't he?
and I'd not approve a thing if you didn't. I'm the guy who will be paying 15%
and for the reason that I think possibly both of you together might do better
than either alone. Maybe not. It's impossible to know about such things

Of course I won't call you COLLECT. And if it cost you $166.65
on the C of G Hollywood thing for telegrams and calls, then damn it cut your
bills down.

Love

Dec 13--55

Dear Liddy:

Such a to-do over the check! As I wrote you yesterday it
would take your cheek to me much longer to clear out in Idaho than the
one to you through NY; so there's no reason to wire me. Save your money

I talked with McCormick yesterday; said you wanted to handle
foreign rights; he said, "Fine, fine." I drew up a tentative agreement
on their handling motion picture rights, covering everything you suggested.
He said it sounded all right; will I take it get off three copies and send
to you for signing. In regard to some of the restrictions, such as on
world copyright, he said, "But if we got a real good offer, say, $50,000
you'd be willing not to let any of this stand in the way?" I was thinking
fast, "Fifty thousand, what the hell! I want more than that." But guess
I'm unreasonable. But IF it should get Book of M or Guild sufely the
offer would be bigger or could be forced up. We'll, have to see what comes
but I'M not in a mood to take the first damned offer and I'll tell him that
in a letter before leaving or after my return to Idaho. I'd like you to
let me know about what a reasonable offer would be on, say, such and such
a sale; on a certain sale plus book club; etc. On foreign rights you should
be able to get a lot of them if the book does well here; and as I see it
the book is a natural for British publication since it is about a famous
British company and is laid in Canada. Ask Frere for a 500 pound advance
when the time comes to move on it.

Meanwhile hope your health is rapidly improving and that save
for the loss of parts of you you will again be your old self. Maybe you
are now. You sound much like it. Of the titles I've suggested Mc likes
best so far the simple word Athabasca with subtitle. Not bad but we'll
try to do better. He likes Guthrie's The Big Sky but I never thought it
so hot; all skies are big---just as big here as out west. Gave the wrong
address to Swallow, and so proof has gone astray, circulars, my mail from
Hagerman. It's a hell of a mess, with me running to branch post offices
and getting nothing, learning nothing.

Forget the check. It'll take a month for it to clear through
the Idaho bank. I just had to have it there by the 20th because I postdated
a check for $2100 that date on a car

love

THIS SIDE OF CARD IS FOR ADDRESS

POSTAL CARD

Dec 29--55

Dear Liddy, you poor sick woman:

The ms. is going off to you this afternoon along with novel 11, which is the only one of mine that ever kept Opal up past midnight. It must have something. In regard to the Jesus, which you can now look over, though without the other copy for comparison, I did, as my postcard told you, my best to meet all your suggestions and met practically all of them. Opal agrees with me that it is now tighter and more constantly on the track, with greater reader impact. May God and Aswell like it. But, Liddy, don't try to "persuade" Ed to take me on. To hell with that. We have a good thing to offer him, because the HB novel *will* have the kind of reader appeal publishers like--more than Children of God or City, and you may tell him that. All right, we're offering him a good publishing deal, so why try to persuade him? As Pope said, to change him a little, a publisher convinced against his will is still a lousy publisher still. I'd just put it up to him as you see it--he'll take you seriously, knowing that you don't go off your rocker about these things. And if he says no, hell, there are a lot of good publishers who have never had a chance to reject anything of mine. AND DO TELL HIM I INSIST ON A REASONABLY FAST DECISION.

When you are feeling yourself again drop me a note to advise what happened to gangsters at gold medal and what excuse Kohn gave for not even replying to me.

We are going to Boise for a couple of days to relax and for me to get my breath. I did that god damned Jesus clear through in 28 days and never before in my life have I driven myself so hard at a typewriter. But I had to keep my schedule on HB. Back home Jan. 31, more pondering of notes, then about the 3rd off on the HB.

And you take care of yourself and get well.

Love,

Vito

THE
Manger
HOTEL

EAST 13th STREET & CHESTER AVE.
CLEVELAND 14, OHIO

Jan 5--56

Dear Liddy:

Well, here we are this far on the way back---it is
a long way---remember? Had a final get-together with Mc Friday
but nothing important--looking at jacket suggestions. I still
don't like title The Stream Runs Fast but guess am stuck with it
Two clippings to indicate that Zanuck must have big money around
If he can spend seven hundred million on 34 pictures and give
the stupid M Monroe 8 million for four pictures then he can
dig up some jack for the HB if he gets it. Just keep these two
clippings before you in case you are tempted to think in small
sums

It was a delight for both of us to see you, and
daughter Clara, with whom Opal quite fell in love. Hope you
had a profitable journey out of your hermitage. Can be reached
at Don Lewis home the 11th, at Swallow's from 15th-18th

Yes, Mc laid before me the suggestions for
other historicals which emanated from Le Barke. I wrote him
a sweet note from Philadelphia saying that if HB makes B of M
or Guild I'll be encouraged to get frightfully busy on something
in the list

Love

NEW YORK CITY
GER VANDERBILT - MANGER WINDSOR

ROCHESTER, N. Y.
MANGER ROCHESTER

BOSTON, MASS.
THE MANGER

Hotels under Manger Ownership Management

CLEVELAND, OHIO
THE MANGER

WASHINGTON, D. C.
MANGER HAMILTON - MANGER ANNAPOLIS
MANGER HAY-ADAMS

GRAND RAPIDS, MICH.
MANGER ROWE

SAVANNAH, GA.
MANGER SAVANNAH

Jan 19--56

Dear Liddy:

We arrived today and I've been for some hours catching up on the goddamned mail. You're the last one. Gollanzc or however he spells it is an ass and a nut as you know but you go ahead and get the best offer with a super British car for both of us, delivery in London. We had a godawful time NYC to here---parties---parties--parties and bad roads and this morning in Utah a wreck with dead people laid out all over the pavement and the fishers missing plunging into it on account of smog by a hair. It was so bad that Opal puked.

McCormick writes I stand no chance at a book club because of "scatalogical" details. Some have made it with more. So what?

Opal loved your daughter and likes you. I love you and like your daughter.

CLASS OF SERVICE

This is a fast message
unless its deferred char-
acter is indicated by the
proper symbol.

WESTERN UNION

TELEGRAM

W. P. MARSHALL, PRESIDENT

(32).

1201

SYMBOLS

DL = Day Letter

NL = Night Letter

LT = International
Letter Telegram

The filing time shown in the date line on domestic telegrams is STANDARD TIME at point of origin. Time of receipt is STANDARD TIME at point of destination

BA055 PRA074

1956 JAN 21 PM 3:39

PR PKA072 PD=GOODING IDA 21 129PMM=

ELIZABETH NOWELL:

=2ND PROSPECT ST SOUTH DARTMOUTH MASS=

=CONGRATULATIONS OK ON FRERE OFFER. WILL CONSENT TO ANY

CHANGES DEMANDED=

:VARDIS FISHER HAGERMAN IDAHO=

TELEPHONE No. 29789

TELEPHONED TO MOTHER

TIME 340P

BY DB TO BE ML-D

ATTEMPTS

TO

DELIVERED

Dear Liddy:

Yes, I got the note dictated to Clara but haven't been aware a reply was expected at once. If there's no tax advantage they just as well pay you the money but I suggest we have payment divided between this year and next. I don't want all my money piling up in one year. Doubleday's pub. date is July 5. I assume that is definite.

Not a review yet on the Jesus but apparently the NYTimes has assigned it and I know of at least two reviewers of standing trying to get it for the SatRev. 'hose bums just don't want to review me any more but a certain Jew in Brooklyn is working his head off for me. I've never known anything like the way he is needling dozens of persons to get attention for the book. Apparently intellectual Jews like what I did with the Jesus legend

V