Mike Barnard, publisher of Macmillan’s almost equally derided and applauded ‘first novels’ imprint, Macmillan New Writing has written and published a book about the genesis of the imprint. ‘Transparent Imprint’ tells the story of ‘how a publisher’s decision to tell the truth to authors stirred up a storm’. The choice of cover quote given by Jonny Geller of literary agent Curtis Brown says it all: “I don’t think there’s a hope in hell of this succeeding.” When the imprint was launched there were stories that authors would have to pay for their own editing, the books would only be printed on demand, and bookshops would not touch them. A year on, bookshops are taking stock, libraries are buying them and the initiative is gathering momentum and press coverage. The book’s publication coincides with the launch of MNW’s first titles. You can purchase a copy for £10 direct from the MNW website or, if you work at Macmillan, you can download a PDF version from the company intranet .

And perhaps some of MNW's detractors would like to follow this piece by Michael Fuchs to read what one of the authors thinks of us.

And talking of innovative new imprints, BBC4’s drama ‘The Chatterley Affair’ broadcast on Monday evening was an interesting interpretation of the 1960 obscenity trial over the publication of Lady Chatterley’s Lover and a great reminder of the origins of the Penguin imprint. It used a fictional love affair between two jurors on the trial to illuminate the subtle moral arguments and the social impact of this great English novel. The two jurors in question, a beautiful upper class young woman and a working class clerk, play out the book as they embark on their own love affair, which, crudely interpreted, could just prove the prosecution’s case … but a colourful array of witnesses for the defence including bishops, professors and new graduates, argue the case for the novel’s literary merits and ethical standpoint. Particularly enjoyable was the moment when Penguin’s founder stands up in the witness box to state that he is willing to go to prison if the book is banned, as he ‘believes it was right to publish this book,’ proving that publishers have always been a contrary and ideological bunch.. And the subtle layers of hypocrisy are played out beautifully as two conservative male jurors deride the book as ‘dirty’ whilst simultaneously leering jealously over the affair of the two young lovers.