This week we fondly look back at Frankfurt 2021 with special guest, literary agent, and host of the Make Books Travel podcast, Marleen Seegers; an opinion piece by TRF agent Kathryn Willms on receiving passes; and our first in-house panel discussion on the Bad Art Friend drama, made famous by Robert Kolker in the NYT magazine, featuring editor Diane Terrana, agent Natalie Kimber, brand manager Anne Sampson, and moderated by Kathryn Willms.
This week we fondly look back at Frankfurt 2021 with special guest, literary agent, and host of the Make Books Travel podcast, Marleen Seegers; an opinion piece by TRF agent Kathryn Willms on receiving passes; and our first in-house panel discussion on the Bad Art Friend drama, made famous by Robert Kolker in the NYT magazine, featuring editor Diane Terrana, agent Natalie Kimber, brand manager Anne Sampson, and moderated by Kathryn Willms.
Welcome back to Asia provocateur, season two, we know you missed us and man, we missed you too. So this week we have a look back at Frankfurt, the first major book there to return to in person meeting.
Speaker 2:So you could really get into the subject matter. It wasn't just like, oh, here's three titles, bam,
Speaker 1:Bam, bam, agent Catherine. Wilms on the most ubiquitous thing in our work and yours rejections, AKA passes.
Speaker 3:We put that little proposal or manuscript gently into our outbox and we say, go forth with the proposal, fly
Speaker 1:And tackling or trying to, at least the issues brought up by bad art friend.
Speaker 3:It's pure evil. Only one person made money off any of this. And he got away. Scott free.
Speaker 1:It's been a few months now since the Frankfurt book fair and this year was different because of COVID and Canada being the guest of honor, two years in a row, it was a highlight for us as one of the few agents from north America who attended. So we arranged this panel to look back the Frankfurt book fair. Uh, this is kind of a postmortem. So with me today is our own rights manager, Millie Ruggiero. Hi Millie. Hi. Hi. Hi. Good. Good to see you again. And we have a special guest who is Marlene Seagers from two CS agency. Hi Marlene.
Speaker 2:Hi Sam. Thank you for having me
Speaker 1:Great to have you here. So I'm gonna with this Canada thing because I think it's interesting. Um, do you feel like the attendees now have a better sense of Canadian writers and Canada's place in, in the international book world? Uh, let's start with Marlene. Oh, all right.
Speaker 2:<laugh> um, uh, I've definitely noticed in actually the buildup of, uh, what was supposed to be and what still was Canada, the, um, FBM 20, 20, a lot of interest, an increase of interest for Canadian authors and, and I've especially noticed, um, like an increase in interest in like underrepresented voices from Canada, like first nation authors, um, amongst others. Um, so Canada was on a lot of people's minds also of, because of that. And everybody just, uh, was, was rooting for this year to, to actually happen, which it did albeit smaller. But, uh, so I'm, I'm very happy about that.
Speaker 1:Thank you. So that means our diplomatic efforts are working to promote Canada, the brand and Millie. We were together at the rights factory table, but I didn't, I knew know you went out because, you know, I'm at that age where I get tired and you're, you're not, and I know that you were out talking to people. How, what was your sense of how, uh, was there a shift in how Canada was perceived or was it kind of like, oh, it's Canada, they're just gonna they're the same as before.
Speaker 4:No, I think there was like lots of initiatives also going on with the Canada perspective anyway, because I, I saw also for the charter book fair, they actually did some kind of, uh, initiative there for, for Canada anyway, for writers and as well as, as publishers. So I think there will be lots of things going on going on for writers and the publishers and, uh, for agencies as well. So I think there is a really good sense of that.
Speaker 1:So do, so do you think it worked, is there a bigger awareness now?
Speaker 4:Yes. It worked, it worked, yes. There is a bigger awareness. Absolutely.
Speaker 1:<affirmative> um, so one of the well things I liked and I know other people, uh, I spoke to like this too, was the casualness and the comfort of it. Um, you know, rather than the craziness of people running around, being late for meetings and pitching each other on the fly on the way to a meeting, you know, how did you find it like this year? Did you enjoy I the kind of quietness, even though I'm not sure it was that quiet for you, but I wanna hear about it. And, and were you excited or disappointed in the attendance? Um, so Marlene first.
Speaker 2:Yeah. So<laugh> indeed. We, we, we did have, uh, both my colleague, Chris and I, uh, who were there. We had two tables. We, we did have quite a few meetings. I think it was also, um, you know, we celebrated a or 10th anniversary this year at the fair. So we had flags and balloons and we even had two bottles of champagne that were offered to us. And, um, and it was, yeah, I mean, as you say, it was, it was a lot quieter. Um, I mean just a space that we had, we actually saw the color of the carpets on the floor of the aged center and also of, of the funk for the ho. Um, and, uh, but it was, I mean, all the meetings they just started, everybody was just so grateful to be there. So going into a meeting with that dynamic is just so pleasant and, um, it was, there was this great feeling of we made it, we are still here. And, um, so, so that just brings this, this great, um, yeah. Connection already, even before you start pitching titles or talking about like what what's been going on in their lives for the last 18 months, the, you know, everything was just, um, much more focused, much more concent rated. Um, the buzz there's usually, there's like a huge buzzing background noise. That's always there that makes you have to basically scream at people. And the more you go into the week, the less voice you have left over, you know? So I always that's
Speaker 1:Voice, that's kind of the, it's true. You get that Frankfurt flu, they call it, but that's because there's a thousand people in the right center usually. Right. Exactly. And, and now is like maybe a hundred at the most at, at that
Speaker 2:Time. Yeah. So you could just really take your time, speak at a regular volume level, um, and, and really have profound meetings. You could really get into the subject matter. It wasn't just like, oh, here's three titles, bam, bam, bam. And then they had to go off to their next meeting and it didn't wanna be late. No, it was all very, um, very efficient and very, very pleasant.
Speaker 1:Okay. And Millie, I was with you for a lot of the meetings and you seemed to be really enjoying the relaxed. So how did you find it compared to previous frankfurts? I guess
Speaker 4:I think it gives actually a very positive restart anyway, because we all needed to, to have this kind of situation again, like going back to the Frankfurt book fairs thing, there, meeting all the people we actually know and are in contact with. And it was after two years of pandemic where we were confined at home and just staying there. And it was very impossible to see people like in person stay. So it was, I think I had this kind of feeling in a very positive way to reconnect with people and stay all together and especially be in the publishing environment again as a book fair anyways.
Speaker 1:Awesome. Okay. So, um, uh, last question, but not least. So I noticed this year, last year, it was a bit of a weird situation because they canceled the fair people, moved to online and they said we can save, it'll move online. And half the people didn't go online. And, and the other half did this year, they kind of planned it to be a hybrid fair from the beginning. And I noticed that people started booking meetings in September, you know, that were virtual and, and the pitching period, instead of it being like that week in person, the pitching now has extended to like a few months between virtual and physical. So I guess my question is, how did this work for you? And do you think this is the future of Frankfurt and other book fairs? So let's start with that. Um, Marlene, let's go back to you then. Mm.
Speaker 2:Um, yeah. So first of all, I, I made a point out of not taking any meetings in September. I just<laugh>. I, I, um, I, I did a, like, I think a two month, uh, meeting virtual
Speaker 1:Run. Oh my God. IM so impressed. I said by your negotiation skills
Speaker 2:<laugh> I said, let's meet in October rather<laugh>. And I knew there was, uh, there was going to be quite a bit of meetings and intense meetings. So I just wanted to spare myself and get to Europe in a relative of good, you know, fit state<laugh> ready to not burn out. Yeah, exactly. And I, what I usually do is, uh, actually I, I do travel to Europe, uh, around the Frankfurt and London book fairs for five to six weeks already. So for me, it has never been just, you know, constricted to the one week of meetings at the Frank foot book fair. Um, and, uh, I, what I, what I used to do was I had a week of meetings in Amsterdam, a week of meetings with 10 days in Paris. Oh my
Speaker 1:God. I, I love the
Speaker 2:European tour.<laugh> exactly the European it's like
Speaker 1:London, Paris for grid. Like there's the whole list
Speaker 2:Of, uh, the good thing is though that all those meetings were all in person. So you don't have that zoom fatigue that kind of sneaks up on you. Um, and so I think what will happen next year is now I have the, um, the opportunity and I'm, I'm fortunate enough to, to have, um, a team to, it has grown in the last couple of years. So I am actually during the pandemic, I grew a lot more, um, attached to where I live in California, small town called OHI. And I, I really just the idea of being on the road for five to six weeks on in a row is less appealing to me now. And at the same time I have this great team that has stepped up. So they will be able to take over, uh, some trips of mine, for instance, Chris, um, she now sells into France, so she's definitely gonna go visit Parisian publishers and, and elsewhere, they're not just in Paris. Um, and, uh, I have, now we have like an in-house Italian co-agent, so she meets with publishers in Italy. So I already can like, let go of that. And so I will probably still travel to Europe for like three weeks or so. And, um, but not tho not those long meetings anymore. And then probably what has, I don't know what if that's the same for you, but it's, it's a lot easier now for me to just propose like, Hey, let's have a phone call or let's have a zoom meeting just like at random moment, we don't have to necessarily wait anymore until there is an actual book fair.
Speaker 1:And so I'm probably, I feel like that's a post pandemic benefit.
Speaker 2:Yeah. So I'm probably going to do more of those random in between meetings and then like, uh, a concentrated trip to Europe, uh, for, for three weeks around Frankfurt around London seems better to stay put<laugh>.
Speaker 1:Okay. And so, Millie, uh, what's your sense? I mean, I know you had a lot of virtual meetings cuz you embraced this whole thing in September and, and what do you think like do, do you feel like with the, were you burnt out from it? Did you have zoom fatigue or how did it go with the combination of virtual and
Speaker 4:Physical? I think as Marlin said before, it is, it's good that now we have the chance actually to, to meet people virtually when anytime we want anyway, we need, especially. But I think, I dunno, we, we had<laugh> in September since September, like almost two months of meetings, virtual meetings and after there was the book first, so it was very, sometimes they exhausting and sometimes positive in a positive way. So, so I dunno if in, uh, in both ways, if we have, I think we have urgencies to get virtual meetings, we actually very open to do so, but uh, I think the physical fair still works kind of in a better way anyway, especially Franco for London and the main ones. Yes. So I think in this way and uh, because I don't know, I, I'm not so sure about having two months of meetings, it actually gives you the chance of in working well anyways,<laugh> so I think it's, uh, yeah, it's better to focus on the focus physical one and if we need for an urgent case to go virtually, we can get with virtually anyways. So it's, uh, is in I, this is my opinion, at least.
Speaker 1:Well, it's interesting times I just read that, uh, there's gonna be a, a lockdown in, in Austria<laugh> and I'm like what's happening and
Speaker 4:Is happening something strange in Germany as well. So
Speaker 2:We, yeah. And Holland too.
Speaker 1:So we, we don't really know. I mean, I would, I'm hoping that we continue with minimal hybrid meetings, but maybe there'll be other cancellations if there's more complications with the pandemic. I mean, it's interesting.
Speaker 2:Yes. Who knows? Yeah. Yeah. I was just to, to talk about the two months of, of meetings. I, I actually did, um, a podcast recording last night, um, for, for my podcast, with our Japanese go
Speaker 1:Oh, by tell, tell us a bit about your podcast so you could get, we plug it here. Oh yeah, sure. To the cause you, I think your audience and our audience is similar.
Speaker 2:Yeah, sure. So, uh, my podcast is called the make books travel podcast. And it's basically the principle is that I interview anybody who is involved in making books travel. So that means either from one language to another or from page to screen or from, um, you know, page to audiobook and, and, um, it's a very broad, uh, a broad sense of the, the travel part. And, um, so I've been, and I started that in the, in the first weeks of the, the lockdown, uh, cuz I was just so frustrated and scared and I wanna talk to people exactly like the Mo the London book fair, just got canceled. Uh, we had no idea what the world was going to look like, um, the following day. Right. And, uh, so I, I just needed to be reassured and, and, and exchange with people. And I thought if I do that in a recorded way and, um, share it with, with, uh, the publishing industry, which is the, the main, uh, audience I, I think of, of my podcast, um, it will be beneficial for a lot of people and, uh, that just turned out to be, um, I think, um, yeah, just a wonderful, um, um, opportunity and, um, I'm really enjoying it. So as I said, I just recorded the, um, last night, an episode with our Japanese co-agent and they haven't traveled also since, um, you know, March, February, March, and most of their clients are in the us and the UK, from what I understand. So, um, she was telling me from the it's, um, una Tamaki from the, the total Mor agency. I don't know if you work with her or with them, but she was saying we have, um, we've had meetings, like she's, we've just wrapped up our Frankfurt meetings. We're almost at the end of November when we, so I'm like, my goodness, this is, this is crazy. And she's like, yeah. And sometimes, or often the meetings last until midnight or Tokyo time.
Speaker 1:Oh, their time. Yeah. That's why.
Speaker 2:And then sometimes start really early, um, Tokyo time again, to, uh, so it's yeah. I, I, I, when I think about my resistance to not have any meetings in September, I'm like, oh my goodness, how did they, how did, how did they do this? And how did they stay sane? Um, because everything is just, everything is virtual. Everything has been
Speaker 1:Virtual for, well, they have forest bathing over there. They have their, they have their own ways of self. Right, right. Yeah.<laugh> okay. Well, thanks guys. Thanks milli. Thanks Marlene. Thank you. I will. I'm hoping to see you guys in London again. Yeah,
Speaker 2:Me too.
Speaker 1:Me too. Okay. Take care. Take care. Bye bye.
Speaker 3:Bye.
Speaker 1:What does it take to be a good agent? According to Katherine Wilms it's the ability to both give and receive rejection.
Speaker 3:Hello, I'm Katherine and Wilms. And I'm an associate agent at the rights factory. So are you curious about what we're talking about today? Oh, you're thinking of fast forwarding now that you know it's me. You're sure it's gonna be good, but it's just not what you're feeling right now. Oh, honestly. That's cool. I totally understand if you're not interested. Thanks for letting me know. I just really appreciate you even thinking about at listening. That's right. We're talking about passes. One thing that no one tells you when you become an agent is how much time you'll spend saying and hearing no correction. You will never say or hear. No, you will say and hear things that mean no, all the time, a big hurdle in my early agenting days has been passing on queries, stories and ideas and creativity that show up in every agent's inbox, inquiry manager every day are incredible. They're profoundly interesting and different and strange and inspiring, and then occasionally racist. But regardless, every agent knows that it's an act of vulnerability and courage to put them out in the world truly. And then what do we do? We pass on almost all of them.<affirmative> because time, effort, money, sometimes marketplace, and just the cultural and social me. We swim in that shapes what we like and the ones that we do take on are the ones that we can't get out of our heads, or that we find the most interesting or inspiring for often quite personal reasons or the ones that come from people with 500,000 Instagram followers. Those two can be quite inspiring. I joke. And then we take those precious gems, the stories that we most want to be books. And after spending months, sometimes years working with the author to Polish them, we put that little proposal or a manuscript gently into our outbox. And we say, go forth a little proposal fly. Well, we, we hit send and then, you know what happens? Editors have the audacity to say, no, thank you. That's right. They pass actually. Here's what they really say. But far more eloquently. The idea is amazing, but they didn't quite connect with the voice. They love the writing. They feel it will be hard to differentiate in the marketplace. It's just not quite a fit for their list. For my second ever submission, I received what could only be called a short essay. The editor told me she personally connected with a topic. Great. She absolutely adore the writing. Amazing. And then she delved into the meaning of the work providing insights. I never even considered. Wow. I thought, yes, this is what it all means. And then she passed. And honestly, I couldn't have been happier because it truly struck me then that I work in this incredible industry where just brilliant people who love books, take the time to consider each proposal on its merits and really think about it and then share what they think about it. Also, they can pass how cool is. And it just felt like that was the ultimate compliment to me as an agent and to the writer. Well, not the ultimate compliment. That would be an offer
Speaker 1:In October. The New York times published an article that got a lot of buzz. It was called bad a friend, and it really triggered a lot of discussion around our office. This conversation still hasn't died down. So we've convened the very first, all rights factory panel to discuss it.
Speaker 3:Hello, I'm Katherine Wilms associate agent from the rights factory. We wanted to discuss some of the implications of that article because the questions that poses about appropriation and plagiarism, the ethics of art and writing communities and trolling by email signoffs are far from being resolved. In fact, they may be some of the most pressing concerns of this literary and cultural moment. So let's get into it. Our first panel is a lovely Nat Kimber, our New York based agent. Hi, next we have TRF editor writer and podcast breakout star, Diane Tiran. Hello, great to be here. And finally we have TRF brand manager, extraordinaire, the brilliant and Sampson. Hi, so excited to get into this. So if anyone hasn't read Robert Corker's article, pause and go. Now we'll see you in hour semi briefly. It's about two writers at, or at least aspiring writers who are part of the same writing community, Don Doland and Sonya Larson. Dawn donated a kidney to a stranger, shared her story story on social media with what some felt was, let's say unconvincing humility, the supposedly inspiring story inspired Sonya to write a short about a white woman with a savior complex who had donated a kidney when Dawn confronted her about it. She initially lied. However, among other things in published versions, sinus character wrote social media posts that were identical to dawns. The short story gained attention publication, and that awards resulting in an ever escalating feud between the writers, Dawn, arguing that her words had been PLA rise. And her story appropriated while Sonya argued, argued, sorry. Initially at first that she did not do this. She did, but also that no one has ownership over a story. And that Don was attempting to ruin her career and stealing attention away from the important insights on race and privilege. The story was making lawsuits abounded discovery happened in said, lawsuits, everyone looked pretty big, bad, sorry, it's a Sega. So my first question is if we ignore the whole plagiarism elements and there was no question of Sonya copying Dawn's actual words, is it fair game for Sonya to use Don's kidney donation story in her work? Can anyone actually ever own a story? Uh, let's start with Diane.
Speaker 5:Okay. So, and just to clarify my answer, I'm referencing personal, not cultural stories. And my answer is no. And here is my short cheeky explanation. Artists have always rendered human experience in their own form, music, dance, painting, oral stories, sculptures, photography, film, and the written story. The book that is a wonderful thing. And we are richer for it. Writers like all artists are inspired by the world around them saying a writer can't write a story inspired by someone else is like saying people can't take picture is of anybody but themselves. So just imagine a world where all the photographs are selfies. That is a dystopia.
Speaker 6:Diane. I agree with you completely. And I think that, um, what, what comes uh, with the stakes of this a are, are that we definitely want as much variety. And with that variety becomes inspiration from others that, um, allows us to like really express our feelings. And in the case of Sonya Larson, she felt incredibly powerful feelings about what it was happening with, um, the kidney donor and how, um, she was reacting to her, um, to her action, um, of Goodwill and, you know, using other people's stories to express our own feelings and how they come up for us can be some of the most powerful art that is out there.
Speaker 7:Yeah. I mean, I would definitely argue that that that's the job description of a writer is to take the world that they see around them and filter it through their own lens and to write about it and to express it for other people to read, like, that's the whole point of being a writer? Um, I think so.
Speaker 3:So if we all kind of agree that yes, you can write a story about or inspired by someone else, theoretically, when does it become problematic? Is it only when it relates to organ donation? Um, and do you wanna start us off on this one?
Speaker 7:Yeah. So we've been talking about this earlier and it kind of reminded me of an interesting kind of thing that had happened in like my life, um, where my mother was an Aboriginal woman who her family was from Alberta, but she grew up in Northern Ontario and she told some kind of like personal family stories to a writer friend of hers who was really inspired by them and then asked my mother's permission to include them in a short story collection. And my mother said, yes, she was flattered that she wanted these stories used. Um, she credited my mother in the short story collection. Um, but at the end of the day, they were stories about, um, an Aboriginal woman and her family and she was a white woman writing about them. So I feel like, you know, morally, maybe she was in the clear because she did have permission to write these stories, but should she have like, you know, um, and I, unfortunately my mother since passed away, so I can't actually ask her, you know, what she feels about it today. Um, and you know, this is also the 1990s and a 2021 lens is very different than a, a lens of the early nineties. Um, yeah. So I think there's definitely a line. Um, I think that maybe writers have to self-police themselves a little bit on, on the stories that we choose to share. What do you think, Natalie?
Speaker 6:I think that, um, that line, um, is often crossed because in the past, no space was made for people to tell their own cultural stories. And that's where we get that term own voices is that, um, it's one thing for rued Kipling to write about, you know, people of color, but it's another thing that at that time, people of color, weren't really able to write their own stories. And we live in a world now where we're making so much space for everybody to write their cultural backgrounds. And so when you given space for people of indigenous, um, and other, you know, marginalized or, um, you know, diverse backgrounds to, to compose their stories, then why should from, you know, another space be given, um, kind of priority over, you know, people to write their own voices. And I think that's where that argument comes from.
Speaker 5:Yeah. So, um, this is something that all writers struggle with now, uh, as a Canadian writer who, who Annes definitely came here and colonized this land, uh, writing an indigenous story is not a line I would cross generally. I still go back to my, my principle, which is writers can write about anything. Um, they may offend people. They may upset people. They be canceled of course, but, um, it, it's a, it's a principle. I hope we can come back to eventually when everybody is telling their own stories. And then there is the other, the other issue, the what not crossing a cultural boundary, what's a problematic story. What's a problem approach to writing. And I would say that any time you want to trash someone or expose them, and you put details, authenticating details about them personally, in a novel that people will recognize everywhere you are treading dangerously. And, uh, you could be at the very least called a mean person and at the worst taken to court.
Speaker 6:Yeah. I think the devil is definitely in the details and I think it's quite easy for, uh, I, I mean, I would think it's easy for the details to be changed enough that, um, that those lines are not crossed. And clearly there's, people's feelings wrapped up in these stakes, you know, when Larson, you know, took the story, um, of the donor and, you know, and made it her own into something that was, um, you know, trying to you express rage or frustration about white savior complex, she was doing something really important, but because she mucked up the details by actually plagiarizing and using, um, you know, very strong specifics where that person was identifiable. Um, she definitely crossed the line and in that crossing the line, she severely compromised the beautiful message that she was trying to evoke through this very compelling story idea. And I think that's one of the major stakes that gets brought into it because it's not just, you know, other people's feelings and having the transparency to say, Hey, I really love your story. And I'm inspired. Can I use it for a story of my own, you know, going to that person and being open about it, but, you know, then, um, not compromising the integrity of the message you're trying to tell by, you know, really crossing the line ethically.
Speaker 7:And I think it could probably be argued like if as, as a writer, you can't put your own lens on it and your own, like, take enough to change the details. Maybe you're not that good of a writer.<laugh>
Speaker 3:Yeah. I think this is leading us nicely into sort of our next question is, is what do we owe the people whose stories inspire artistic, artistic works? Do we owe them anything? And, um, you know, my, my initial thoughts with that is like, it's kind of a profound question about how to be in the world. Um, cuz I think we're agreeing here that Sonya's FAPA was more one of etiquette than legality in a lot of ways. And you know, she was mocking Dawn and it muddied the other intention of her work, which was to interrogate privilege and racism, you know, can you use your art to settle scores? Sure. You, I think you can, but should you, will it help your art? Um, maybe not.
Speaker 7:Uh, well I was just gonna say, I feel like just as you know, as a writer is entitled to use the stories that they see around them. Those people are entitled to react in the way that they react, you know, their reaction they're fully entitled to, to feel how they feel about seeing themselves in a, in a
Speaker 6:Writer's work. I think in the case of writing somebody's story, that you are, you know, connected to somebody who is an acquaintance or a friend in a writing group in your church group, however that works, you know, just be transparent. Um, don't be creepy.
Speaker 3:It's a good life lesson<laugh> um, okay. So an author comes to you and they've lifted, they've lifted all their dialogue for the Q Andon character in their novel, from their uncle's Facebook page. What do you do Diane?
Speaker 5:Well, um, just to echo what Anne said earlier, if you can't, you know, get across your uncle's insanity and uh, whatever else you want to say about him in your own words, should you even be writing, be very simple NA
Speaker 6:As an agent, I would absolutely shut it down, you know, again, if they couldn't write it in their own
Speaker 7:Words. Yeah. I mean, I'm not an agent, so I wouldn't really be faced with this, um, this situation, but I did have a friend as we were discussing this, uh, this article who's said, you know, I don't think internet word vomit is copyright<laugh> or should be copyrighted. Um, and then I had said, well, you know, she was writing in a group where she thought she was writing to fellow writers. Like what's the difference between that and writing like, you know, posting a short story on a internet forum for other writers to critique. Like it was, it was, you know, on a Facebook post, but it was still her writing. Like it was still something she'd written as a writer.
Speaker 3:I, I have a hot take. This article is very well written. And if it says, expect, sorry, expertly constructed. As I think it is, it's pure evil. Only one person made money off any of this. And he got away. Scott free, the real bad art friend is Robert Colker. Oh
Speaker 5:Right. You deserve a,
Speaker 7:That is fantastic.
Speaker 3:Well, thank you everyone. That was so much fun. And uh, we'll see you all on slack.
Speaker 5:Fantastic. Bye. Bye. Bye.
Speaker 1:That's a wrap folks. Thanks for joining us for episode two of our second season. Thanks to our staff, our guests and Andrew Kaufman, our producer. If you like our podcast, please share your love wherever you listen and on your socials and look for us on subst stack. We'll be back after the holidays with more Asian provocateur.