Lucky for us parents, when our children read books, they don't start up a personal relationship with the author.  Very few children ever interact with authors, especially in a non-public manner, and most children (and parents) know little to nothing about the personal lives of the writers (j.k. rowling excepted, right?).

This clause is just too vague to be useful.  It should be more direct -- "if you are convicted of child molestation and can't attend book signings or readings because of a general restraining order against being within 100 yards of any minor, we reserve the right to terminate your contract as a children's author".  Now that's a useful and painfully clear clause.  That's the only sort of thing we NEED to know about a children's author's personal life.

Kristen M.

We Be Reading - http://webereading.blogspot.com

And I thought that Age-Banding was sick. Random House UK is doing that one too.

 ARGH!

 The sad thing is, that writers are now told that to be published or successful you need to 'brand' yourself; you need to present a marketable package of some sort along with your manuscript.

 I think it's a bunch of BS myself, but what can writers do if they want to play the game while publishers own the ball? I foresee (I hope) a lot of UK writers approaching US or Australian markets before ones at home, however, if this sort of thing continues.

 Your last line sums up my feeling absolutely. Thanks for this post.

Susan

stonyriverfarm.blogspot.com

www.carersgroup.com 

Ya know I love the writing of many authors, and I've met a couple whom I am fond of as people, but what they do behind the doors of their own home is none of my business.  The only thing that matters to me is what is within the pages of the book, and if I objected to the book then I'd have the right to keep that book from my child.  

I'm glad to see you mention book age-banding.  I blogged about it in my Leaky Cauldron blog earlier in the week, but it's great to see people speaking out on the practice of the age-banding of books.

Susan I agree that if these trends continue we mightl see more UK authors coming across the pond to US publishers.

Doris

The Leaky Cauldron
Everything Harry Potter.

Fit, Fabulous and Forty the Natural Way! My fitness journey

I could see as acceptable would be something clearly referencing paedophilia. The ambiguous clause cited is litigation friendly. Attorneys representing the publisher must need a bit more business.

What is troubling to contemplate is how such morals clauses might over time make their way into other contracts, and on into employee handbooks.

Guess the answer is to opt out of Random House. Other publishers should be savoring the thought of prominent writers wishing to move on.

It is rather surprising a British publisher did this; It is something I'd expect from within this country.  

nelle

&

llhaesa

Let's remember, shall we, a few of our most beloved children's authors:

Roald Dahl - James and the Giant Peach, etc. Also, a book called Switch Bitch and a story about a woman who bludgeons her husband to death with a leg of lamb.

Shel Silverstein - The Giving Tree, A Light in the Attic.  Also, innumerable adult-themed essays and cartoons for Playboy.  And a song about venereal disease.

Daniel Handler - Series of Unfortunate Events.  Also, Watch Your Mouth, described as an "incest opera."

Kenneth Grahame - The Wind in the Willows.  His own son committed suicide at the age of 20.

Maurice Sendak - Where the Wild Things Are.  Also, In the Night Kitchen, which is often subjected to censorship because it contains, GASP, images of a naked child.

 And on and on and on.  I don't imagine a pure person exists, so I don't expect them to magically appear and guide my children through a fantasy world where nothing lewd appears.  And if such a figure appeared, literary or otherwise, I would probably be very suspicious that they were hiding something truly sinister behind a facade of wholesomeness.

Nonsense and scary too. Little children don't pay attention to who wrote their books. The parents do. That's the only context in which a contract clause like this would make any sense (unless it's specific to pedophilia as someone else mentions). The publishers are thinking that the parents choose the books and so the parents may not buy a book if they hear "bad" things about the author. But anyone who's choosing books for their children based on the author's life is not a book lover who want their children to read quality but a paranoid parent who feels threatened by the world around him/her. Anything might make such a parent choose not to buy the book.

Nordette is a Contributing Editor with BlogHer.com whose personal blog is hosted on another site at this link. Her most recent post on BlogHer at the time of this comment is "Bernie Mac Dies of Pneumonia at 50"