Dolly Parton inks book deal with indie publisher

This content has been archived. It may no longer be accurate or relevant.

From Page Six:

Dolly Parton has inked a book deal, sources exclusively told Page Six.

But the hot property by the singer went to smaller indie publishers Chronicle Books and Recorded Books in a joint pact, despite interest from the larger publishing houses.

Publishing insiders said the country-music superstar had interest from major imprints — but that she went with Chronicle and ­Recorded so she could get better terms on the tome’s audio rights.

“She would not go with a major publisher — though many were interested,” a source said.

The source added that Parton opted for the smaller imprints because, “no major publishers are willing to part with audio rights. Dolly wanted a term license that could revert [back to her] in 10 years.”

Link to the rest at Page Six and thanks to Judith for the tip.

Despite what her public persona may imply to some, PG remembers reading that Dolly Parton is a very savvy businesswoman. For PG, the OP adds evidence that this is true.

5 thoughts on “Dolly Parton inks book deal with indie publisher”

  1. Dolly Parton has always been a very good business woman. It’s one of the big reasons she has had such longevity in the entertainment business. She just showed that it’s still going strong!

    I love the story about one of her songs. Elvis Presley wanted to record “I Will Always Love You.” She was excited about it, but then ‘Colonel’ Tom Parker demanded that she sign over 50% of the publishing royalties of the song to them. The Colonel knew the value of that intellectual property. He wanted a part of that property from then on, no matter who recorded it. Otherwise, they wouldn’t record the cover.

    Dolly also knew of the value. It had already been a hit for her. It was bringing in money for her and her family. She said no despite pushback from people around her who told her she was crazy.

    Time proved she was crazy like a fox. She totally did the right thing. She made enough, she says, from Whitney Houston’s version to buy Graceland (if she’d wanted to).

  2. Incorrect use of terms: there have always been small publishers, and possibly they’re independent of some of the pressures of the big houses and can offer more generous terms, but that’s not what most people think of when something refers to ‘indie.’ Not on this blog, anyway.

    Either she calls the shots (in which case she’s the publisher, however much help she contracts out), or she doesn’t, and it’s just another publisher, however small.

    Wise of her – she has many fans. Why shouldn’t she get the best possible terms from whichever company she chooses?

Comments are closed.