Gina: Please remind me: why did we think editing an anthology was a good idea?

Susan: Well, first of all, we thought it was doable, that is to say that we could work together on it and could make it happen around and during the rest of our lives jobs, kids, moves across the country, other books. Also, we thought it made good use of our various skills as writers and editors and that the mother-nanny relationship had not been fully explored. We wanted to work with real writers, good ones, ones that we admired, and we wanted to be able to do a project together using e-mail and phone and get paid and contribute to American literature. But I don't remember ever thinking it was fun.

Did you have fun?

Gina: It was fun when we met at that fancy Indian restaurant in NYC to celebrate our 40th birthdays and the seemingly immanent sale of the anthology...of course negotiations dragged on for six more months, but that moment of shining possibility and lemon drop martinis was fun. Editing the book may not have been fun per se, but there were some thrills and satisfactions.

What was the name of that restaurant?

Susan: I think that restaurant was called Table. Yes?

Gina: Tabla, I think.

What did you like best about the process of editing the anthology?

Susan: What I liked best about the editing process was helping some of the writers work through structural difficulties to find the best of their nanny stories and write it out (like Meg Waite Clayton or working with Andrea Nakayama or Kym Pinder). They are writers but hadn't tried such a personal essay for such a huge public audience before, so there was a lot to consider in terms of their essays what to leave in and out, and how to build a coherent narrative.

What did you enjoy most?

Gina: It was a happy day for me when Susan Orlean so graciously blurbed the book. Really, each yes that we got along the way was exciting. Putting together the anthology was like throwing a party and then being amazed by all of the incredible people who showed up. I was personally inspired by the work ethic of many of our contributors Elizabeth Graver and Jackie Mitchard, in particular, were model citizens who delivered their sterling essays early. I also enjoyed getting to know (mostly via e-mail) writers who I profoundly respected, but who terrified me as well...like how shocking and delightful it was when Daphne Merkin started signing her e-mails "xo" or when I moved to New England and Katharine Weber gave me advice about buying firewood. Also, our editorial collaboration meant the world to me. In fact, I'd say it's the thing that I'm proudest of relating to the book. My sincere advice to anybody considering editing an anthology: Do it with a partner!

What did you least enjoy?

Susan: Well, killing those two essays was hard. And having to tell a hard-working writing mom that some deeply emotional part of her story didn't quite work was hard. Personally, I found adjusting to the publisher's suggested title of "Searching For Mary Poppins" difficult (our original title was "The Other Mother"), and I found adjusting to the cover image they chose difficult. But I agree that the collaboration was the best thing of all. When did we meet at Sewanee, was it 1998? Your daughter was four and you lived in Mexico; I lived in West Virginia and was childless. We've each moved twice, and I've had two kids since then. Having a chance to be in touch for work as we supported each other through our lives was amazing. As you know, I'm sometimes frustrated with what I sense is a lack of support in the culture for the perils of working motherhood, but being able to support each other as we worked, mothered, and made a book gave me quite a bit of hope.

Would you edit another anthology?

Gina: Show me the money.

What was the most disappointing thing?

Susan: The most disappointing thing was that the book didn't change the world. I'm serious. I know that sounds ridiculous, but I want so much for working motherhood to be easier a,nd I thought this book would start a dialogue, and the dialogue would lead to change. Call me crazy.

What about you?

Gina: Not exactly disappointment, but an unexpected occurrence was that it was weird that this anthology seemed to take off more with nannies than it did with mothers. How various nannies blogged about it and wrote to us directly, but so far, very few mothers.

Our editor asked us to organize the book so that certain themes or some theme would arc across the collection, hence Mary Poppins. Do you remember how we chose her?

Susan: I do. I remember that we were each a little surprised at how many of the contributors made reference to Mary Poppins as some kind of “ideal” nanny. One of us remarked that it must have been the movie Mary Poppins they were thinking of because in the books she is, well, a little “bitchy.” Some of those references were lost in the editorial process, but many remained. We also thought that the arc of the movie was a good map for the stages in the mother-nanny relationships: the finding, the honeymoon, the troubles, the realizations, the saying good bye.

Did the book or working on it teach you anything?

Gina: Ugh. Can I have another question?

Susan: Yes, how about this question: Can you ever read an anthology the same way again?

Gina: Well, I was critical to begin with and now I'll probably be even more so, as it's easy to spot lazy editors. We made a concerted effort to include a diverse range of voices, and it annoys me to see anthologies in which 90% of the contributors live in Park Slope. Also, we asked a lot of authors pushing some contributors through as many as six drafts. One author who's contributed to several recent anthologies commented that we were the most probing and meticulous anthology editors she'd encountered. Our book may not be perfect (though I haven't heard of any type-os), but nobody can say we were lazy.

Our tireless publicist booked a ton of radio interviews for this book. Care to discuss your experience as an anthology spokesmodel on AM talk radio?

Susan: Anthology Spokesmodel . . . I like that. Being on the radio was a profound education for me because I'm a radio producer. I've coached so many people through the process of being a guest, but I haven't been a guest myself. First of all, as you know, it's surreal to talk to someone in public via the phone or an ISDN studio line, you are conscious of the fact that strangers are listening so the conversation isn't intimate, yet you're alone, in a quiet room talking with one other person. I think the universality of the story so many working mothers who have in-home childcare stories struck me when I went on the radio and heard from listeners. Also, I was struck by the fact that there are so many ways to be a good mother. I hope our book makes that clear. The conversations I have participated in on the radio and at readings make it abundantly clear that there are as many versions of good mothering as there are mothers.