Imagine you discover a lost manuscript. You read it and it has a profound effect on you. You want as many people as possible to discover it and be affected as you were.
Publishers tell you that there is no market for re-discovered literature. But a big publisher is required for the book to have the scale of distribution it deserves.
After a while you see the solution. This is a lost manuscript and nobody would know if you were to put your own name on it, market it as something brand new and get all the buzz that would come from the reviews and best seller lists.
Would you do it? Would you condemn someone who did?
Cheap Talk 
8 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 19, 2011 at 5:16 am
joshgans (@joshgans)
Uh oh. What have you done?
December 19, 2011 at 5:34 am
galudwig
Very interesting question! I’m tempted to answer it based on my intuition, but I’d have to think about it a bit more.
Intuitively though, I think the answer would be to put my name on it, market it as brand new and get all the buzz when it becomes popular (if others see great value in it like I did). But afterwards, I’d come clean about the origin of the work, and accuse the publishing industry for almost having denied so many people the opportunity to rediscover an old treasure as well as probably having lost many other treasures due to its erroneous policy. This negative publicity, coupled with the realization of the publishers that there *is* in fact a market for rediscovered literature might make them rethink their ways or spur competitors to specialize in exactly this niche. On the other hand, if the manuscript is not successful, the publishers were right all along.
Alternatively, I could publish it myself online as an e-book, couldn’t I?
I would not condemn someone who put their name under an old book which would have been lost before, even if they didn’t come clean about it.
December 19, 2011 at 5:49 am
valter
Isn’t it a common literary device for the author to pretend that he/she has found a lost manuscript and is glad to offer the public his/her translation, summary or adaptation for contemporary audiences?
In this case, you could pretend to pretend (in order to convince the publisher) which makes you sincere – sort of.
Other possibilities for the morally squeamish: you may donate the proceeds to charity, ask a trusted agent to make the truth known at a later date, etc.
(but, in practice, wouldn’t you just write a blog post about it and put a link to a PDF version of the manuscript?)
December 19, 2011 at 8:07 am
jon G
A little known fact of Library science is that if you claim something is spirit writing, AKA written via a ghost, it is to be cataloged under the name of said ghost : Nero, Shalespeare, Napoleaon…
The reason being is that who are we (as mere people and librarians) to make the decision as to who actually wrote it, and if there is a spirit world!
I’d publidh it under some famous name and claim it came from beyond. Then tell James Randi that the exhersion appears tohave totally strained my spirit writing ability and I cannot take the million dollar challenge.
December 19, 2011 at 9:45 am
Dylan
I would publish it under a pseudonym, overcoming the problem of “no market for re-discovered literature,” thus avoiding stealing another’s glory. I would be disappointed if another instead stole the glory. But then again, it is all too easy to project that I would not succumb to the powerful draw of fame and fortune, even if ill begotten, should I stumble up on it…
December 19, 2011 at 10:23 am
Michael Webster
I like jon G’s approach – especially if the manuscript is one of a kind and no follow up or on is possible.
December 19, 2011 at 11:33 am
Ya'ir Aizenman (@YairAizenman)
Isn’t this the exact dilemma E.B. White faced when he wanted to make Strunk’s Elements of Style known to a wider audience? His solution was pretty elegant: Make a few edits, publish under both of your names.
No need to get into knotty ethical dilemmas.
December 23, 2011 at 11:19 pm
mary
I like jon’s solution. Couldn’t you work it into fiction as a discovered manuscript? Surely you could come up with some clever way to repurpose the key content?