No one in his right mind would question acknowledgments that are legally necessary. I assumed we had a common understanding of that, but apparently I should have spelled it out.

Again, my concern is about including sources not legally required. Not even publishers insist on this. My novel I Killed Hemingway drew heavily on several excellent biographies of Ernest Hemingway. I did not acknowledge any of them inside the book because to do so would have damaged the effectiveness of my concept–nor did St. Martin’s or Picador or their lawyers (!) even suggest it.

Novels are inventions; even when “fact-based” they enter the world as products of imagination. That is a vulnerable state, and the point of my post was and is that novelists should be prepared to nurture and protect it. Where FICTION is concerned, that means resisting the urge to thank in print every source that ever inspired the writer.

On occasion I’ve wrestled with my publishers over issues of permission and attribution. Sometimes I won, sometimes I lost. If I’ve learned anything, it’s how quickly house lawyers will run to tell you you’ve crossed a line. But that’s their job. It’s the novelist’s job to make their story as close to 100% successful as possible. Full stop.

I stand by my post.

Protip: if you’re writing a blog about writing, don’t undermine your own authority by revealing a profound ignorance of publishing. Acknowledgments of direct source material are not discretionary. They are made for legal reasons and to ward against accusations of plagiarism.