In working on prescriptive non-fiction, I’ve noted a phenomenon among authors that I’ll call the “there’s nothing out there like it” fallacy. Interestingly, it seems to affect a disproportionately expert population—physicians, nutritionists, psychologists, trainers, counselors, and attorneys—writers with professional credentials whose proposed book emerges from a considerable knowledge of their target market. Indeed, the fact that these people come in daily contact with their would-be book buyers should mean that they have a better sense than anyone of the information their patients/clients lack. In theory, these experts are ideally positioned to perceive a book-shaped hole in the market. But interestingly enough, this is not always the case.
There are a few reasons; because the general public may be demonstrably in need of information (or perhaps just reluctant to implement it) it does not always follow that there’s a dearth of books on the topic. In my experience, experts may know their audience inside and out, but they don’t necessarily have a clear sense of the competition. Acquiring editors, meanwhile, have an overdeveloped sense of the books in the field; usually they’ve published them. (Agents do too, which, apropos of the recent discussion, is another reason why we’re handy). Busy professionals, even those who assiduously keep up with the relevant journals, rarely have the time to read books aimed at a general audience. They do, however, hear their clients/patients complain that there is a shortage of reliable information “out there.” They field the same questions again and again. They rightly perceive their clients’ points of confusion, and may be especially gifted at untangling complex information, or perhaps they’ve created a program that gets amazing results. It is not so very difficult to therefore imagine that all this would merit, even demand, a new book.
Maybe so. But in order to test this premise, writers need to do significant research, not only on Amazon.com, B&N.com, Booklist, Publishers Weekly, or Publishers Marketplace, but also in multiple bookstores and libraries. No single source is especially reliable: on-line searches may be too broad or too narrow; looking at the bookstore shelf may not give an accurate sense of all that’s actually on offer; libraries don’t necessarily reflect all the newest entrees. Ideally, aspiring authors should read, or at least skim, the likely competition, with a dispassionate eye (does the world really need another book on this subject) and in hopes of spotting an opening. If “nothing out there” really means “there’s nothing out there written by me,” bear in mind that publishing houses find this a persuasive argument only insofar as the “me” in question has one or more of the following: a national platform; a media profile; conducted groundbreaking research; a fresh approach to the subject at hand. It is this last aspect that is most tractable. It is true that most nonfiction is platform driven, but it is also concept-driven, and teasing out a hook—which is not so much a gimmick as a clever, easily-grasped, organizing principle—is essential. Finding a way into your subject that has not been done and done again is difficult, but not, I think, so difficult as acquiring the MD, MBA or PhD to begin with!
-Jessica
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Cell phone novels in English?
There's long been a cell phone novel craze in Japan, and I've been rather fascinated by them. These are books written on cell phones, meant to be read on cell phones. Not even big iPhone or DROID screens, but on those little phone screens. Now, I know I'm the guy who loves gadgets and ebooks and all that, but this is one of those things I've never understood. And, I never thought they'd come to the English-speaking world. But lo and behold, I see an annoucement on Publisher's Marketplace the other day: "Joseph Nassise and Jon Merz's THE CERBERUS PROTOCOL - Book One in the HELLstalkers series, claiming to be the first English thriller series written exclusively for mobile phones..."
Is this the future of the novel? I don't know. From the partnership agreement with Vodaphone, this doesn't seem like something that'll be in the US straight off the bat. I wonder how it'll be distributed and how money will be made, and I wonder how large the audience will be. I'll be watching this one closely!
What do you think? Would you read some sort of serialized novel on a small screen? Would you pay for it? Or would you sign with a particular carrier to get such exclusives? Anyone want to try writing such a thing?
-Michael
Is this the future of the novel? I don't know. From the partnership agreement with Vodaphone, this doesn't seem like something that'll be in the US straight off the bat. I wonder how it'll be distributed and how money will be made, and I wonder how large the audience will be. I'll be watching this one closely!
What do you think? Would you read some sort of serialized novel on a small screen? Would you pay for it? Or would you sign with a particular carrier to get such exclusives? Anyone want to try writing such a thing?
-Michael
An open letter from Jeff Rivera
Jeff Rivera of Galleycat, who wrote the post that Miriam linked to yesterday and a response to Miriam's response, asked us to post the following open letter. Since our commentary on his post spurred so much interest here, we're happy to oblige:
Dear DGLM Community:
I enjoyed reading your blog posting on November 10, 2009, responding to my post on GalleyCat entitled, Literary Agents, bah! Who Needs Them? I thought your response was valid, respectful and you made excellent points in it. I read your blog fairly regularly and enjoy your other posts as well.
I also read through every one of your readers' comments, including those who referred to me or my post as "stupid", "idiot" or "horrifying".
I was rather taken aback by the stir my post caused on the internet on both sides of the fence as well as its follow-up piece yesterday entitled, Literary Agents React!. I received an equal amount of support letters as well as letters of debate.
I invite those critical of my post to re-read it and they may notice that not once in the post did I ever state my personal opinion was that literary agents were not needed. Rather, I only posed a question that I believe we ought to ask, a question many of my friends, both authors and literary agents have asked. I then asked for an open discussion which I believe is healthy for our community of writers, literary agents and other book publishing professionals to have.
The post provided two professionals who were pro and two professionals that were con. If I wanted to state my personal opinion, the post would have been entitled an op-ed piece.
My personal opinion, for the record, is that of course there will always be a need for literary agents. We need someone with a good eye for what is good and enjoyable literature, and who has keen sense of what readers really want to read.
However, I am open hearing from those who believe the opposite, that there will not be a need for literary agents. And, I would never refer to those who differ from my personal opinion as "stupid" or "idiot."
The title of the blog along with the illustration of Scrooge, and his coin term "bah, humbug", I hoped would clue readers in that the title was done tongue-in-cheek and not to be taken seriously.
My job as a correspondent at GalleyCat is only to provide an open forum to question the way we have done business for over a hundred years and to ask the questions many of our readers have asked themselves but did not have an opportunity to ask in a public way.
I do apologize if some readers found the post offensive but once again, I invite them to re-read it with an open mind. I look forward to hearing all opinions and I thank you for this opportunity to respond to the DGLM readers, of which I am one.
Sincerely,
Jeff Rivera
Correspondent at GalleyCat
(This note is a personal open letter, not representative in any way as the official word of Mediabistro or GalleyCat)
Dear DGLM Community:
I enjoyed reading your blog posting on November 10, 2009, responding to my post on GalleyCat entitled, Literary Agents, bah! Who Needs Them? I thought your response was valid, respectful and you made excellent points in it. I read your blog fairly regularly and enjoy your other posts as well.
I also read through every one of your readers' comments, including those who referred to me or my post as "stupid", "idiot" or "horrifying".
I was rather taken aback by the stir my post caused on the internet on both sides of the fence as well as its follow-up piece yesterday entitled, Literary Agents React!. I received an equal amount of support letters as well as letters of debate.
I invite those critical of my post to re-read it and they may notice that not once in the post did I ever state my personal opinion was that literary agents were not needed. Rather, I only posed a question that I believe we ought to ask, a question many of my friends, both authors and literary agents have asked. I then asked for an open discussion which I believe is healthy for our community of writers, literary agents and other book publishing professionals to have.
The post provided two professionals who were pro and two professionals that were con. If I wanted to state my personal opinion, the post would have been entitled an op-ed piece.
My personal opinion, for the record, is that of course there will always be a need for literary agents. We need someone with a good eye for what is good and enjoyable literature, and who has keen sense of what readers really want to read.
However, I am open hearing from those who believe the opposite, that there will not be a need for literary agents. And, I would never refer to those who differ from my personal opinion as "stupid" or "idiot."
The title of the blog along with the illustration of Scrooge, and his coin term "bah, humbug", I hoped would clue readers in that the title was done tongue-in-cheek and not to be taken seriously.
My job as a correspondent at GalleyCat is only to provide an open forum to question the way we have done business for over a hundred years and to ask the questions many of our readers have asked themselves but did not have an opportunity to ask in a public way.
I do apologize if some readers found the post offensive but once again, I invite them to re-read it with an open mind. I look forward to hearing all opinions and I thank you for this opportunity to respond to the DGLM readers, of which I am one.
Sincerely,
Jeff Rivera
Correspondent at GalleyCat
(This note is a personal open letter, not representative in any way as the official word of Mediabistro or GalleyCat)
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Children's Book Corner: Beware!
As a mother of four small children, I found this recent article from the New Yorker about today's children's books to be thought provoking, especially since I own many of the books he talks about and read them often to my kids. I don't think there's any question that reading to your children is one of the greatest gifts you can give them, but is what you read worth reconsidering in some cases? I tend to insert my own ideas into books that I feel conflict with my own parenting style (like in the first Olivia book, when Olivia doesn't want to take her nap, I always add "but she does it anyway," because the last thing I need is a nap strike in my house!), at least until my kids are big enough to read them on their own.
What are your favorite children's books? And after reading this article, do you have any new thoughts on what are your least favorite?
-Stacey
What are your favorite children's books? And after reading this article, do you have any new thoughts on what are your least favorite?
-Stacey
Who needs an agent? You do.
Do you ever feel like you want to take everyone involved in the publishing business--writers, agents, publishers, and the interns who open the mail--and shake them until their teeth rattle? Probably not, right? Well, I usually don’t either. But then I read a piece like this one in Galleycat and, well, you know....
At the risk of sounding self-serving, every serious author needs an agent. Not just any agent, of course. You need a good agent. One who is an advocate, who is willing to fight for you and who is able to tell you when you’re being unreasonable and doing your career more harm than good. You need someone who’ll tell you they believe in you when you think you’re the biggest literary fraud since James Frey (who is actually a very good writer despite his questionable morals). You need someone who asks about your ailing grandmother and vets your contracts. You need someone who will look at your royalty statements and make sure that the publisher isn’t holding a 75% reserve for returns. You need someone who is willing to try to place foreign rights to a book that is so hopelessly American that no one outside of the 50 states would want to read it. You need someone who will do battle with your publishing team and make sure they still like you despite the fact that you aren’t always discreet about them in your Facebook posts. You need someone who’ll see you through the process from idea to publication to the inevitable disappointment when the publicity for your book is done with before you noticed it had started. And, you need an agent because in these trying times, we’re sometimes the only people who offer continuity and stability in what everyone hopes is a long career.
So, how does the digital revolution change the fact that you need an agent? Not at all. Sure, you can upload your manuscript on the internet yourself and you can do all your own accounting when you start selling the downloads. But, if you’re serious about writing books, you’re still better served having someone else handle the business side of being published.
There is no question that agents, as well as publishers, need to get with the program when it comes to e-books and all things digital. There is a woeful amount of ignorance about this revolution and lots of needless resistance and hand wringing. In the end, however books get into a reader’s hands is irrelevant. The process by which they get there, who sifts through the good, the bad, and the absolutely unreadable, and who takes care of the administrative side of things while you hone your craft, should not change. I would argue that with so much content out there for the taking (or downloading), now more than ever we need agents and publishers to be better gatekeepers and advocates. Otherwise, I will begin to fear for the future of books, and not just because they don’t come in paper packages any more.
-Miriam
At the risk of sounding self-serving, every serious author needs an agent. Not just any agent, of course. You need a good agent. One who is an advocate, who is willing to fight for you and who is able to tell you when you’re being unreasonable and doing your career more harm than good. You need someone who’ll tell you they believe in you when you think you’re the biggest literary fraud since James Frey (who is actually a very good writer despite his questionable morals). You need someone who asks about your ailing grandmother and vets your contracts. You need someone who will look at your royalty statements and make sure that the publisher isn’t holding a 75% reserve for returns. You need someone who is willing to try to place foreign rights to a book that is so hopelessly American that no one outside of the 50 states would want to read it. You need someone who will do battle with your publishing team and make sure they still like you despite the fact that you aren’t always discreet about them in your Facebook posts. You need someone who’ll see you through the process from idea to publication to the inevitable disappointment when the publicity for your book is done with before you noticed it had started. And, you need an agent because in these trying times, we’re sometimes the only people who offer continuity and stability in what everyone hopes is a long career.
So, how does the digital revolution change the fact that you need an agent? Not at all. Sure, you can upload your manuscript on the internet yourself and you can do all your own accounting when you start selling the downloads. But, if you’re serious about writing books, you’re still better served having someone else handle the business side of being published.
There is no question that agents, as well as publishers, need to get with the program when it comes to e-books and all things digital. There is a woeful amount of ignorance about this revolution and lots of needless resistance and hand wringing. In the end, however books get into a reader’s hands is irrelevant. The process by which they get there, who sifts through the good, the bad, and the absolutely unreadable, and who takes care of the administrative side of things while you hone your craft, should not change. I would argue that with so much content out there for the taking (or downloading), now more than ever we need agents and publishers to be better gatekeepers and advocates. Otherwise, I will begin to fear for the future of books, and not just because they don’t come in paper packages any more.
-Miriam
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Queries: It's not about the details
In my agent travels, I find that most of the questions I get from aspiring authors are about queries. And that makes sense: everyone (including myself) will tell you that your query is an important weapon in your agent-getting arsenal. So, having been told that the difference between publishing superstardom and form-rejection comes down to one page, authors obsessively work on their queries. But that’s not quite right: what they do is obsess. And I think a lot of times they can’t see the forest for the trees. They ask agents what font or paper stock they should use, whether HTML email or plain text is better, or if their bio should be longer or shorter or more personal or more formal. They receive conflicting advice from different websites, agents, editors, author friends, and spouses. And then they have a nervous breakdown.
Ok, that last part may have been a bit of an exaggeration, but I don’t think it’s that far off. Writers, who tend to be obsessive anyway, get downright crazy about query details, and I really don’t blame them. We publishing professionals haven’t helped the situation, what with all of our dire warnings about doing it perfectly or else. So I want all of the writers out there to pay attention: if you’re reading this blog, if you’re paying attention when publishing pros give you advice, if you’re going to good, appropriate conferences, you don’t need to panic. This is the catch-22 of it all: when agents go on and on about bad queries and what-not-to-do, they’re preaching to the choir! Anyone savvy enough to be paying attention is probably doing it right in the first place. I don’t mean that all of you have winning queries that will score them an agent and publication, but I doubt any of your are going to wind up the cautionary query tale that you hear at conferences.
But, the question the remains: what am I looking for, if it’s not all of those little details? What I’m looking for is a unique idea and good writing. I’m looking for an authentic, interesting voice--yes, voice in your query. I’m looking to get a feel for your style in just a couple of paragraphs. I’m looking for you to describe your book, whether it’s commercial or literary or in between, in a way that makes me want to keep reading. In October, I linked to a great query example, the one that Lisa McMann had written for Wake that was recently in Writer’s Digest. It was exactly I’m looking for: it was unlike any query I’d received before (or since). How so, you ask? It was entirely unique to Lisa and her book. It didn’t follow any formula or template. It gave me the information I ask for, but it did so in a way that was different. And I can promise you, all of the successful queries I’ve read have done the same thing.
I’m sure this will spur many questions, but I’d like to have a saner, more humane query discussion with aspiring authors, one that focuses on ideas, narrative, and writing instead of on boring details like font and word count. A little common sense in putting together a presentable query, plus a killer idea and great writing, and you’re all set!
- Michael
Ok, that last part may have been a bit of an exaggeration, but I don’t think it’s that far off. Writers, who tend to be obsessive anyway, get downright crazy about query details, and I really don’t blame them. We publishing professionals haven’t helped the situation, what with all of our dire warnings about doing it perfectly or else. So I want all of the writers out there to pay attention: if you’re reading this blog, if you’re paying attention when publishing pros give you advice, if you’re going to good, appropriate conferences, you don’t need to panic. This is the catch-22 of it all: when agents go on and on about bad queries and what-not-to-do, they’re preaching to the choir! Anyone savvy enough to be paying attention is probably doing it right in the first place. I don’t mean that all of you have winning queries that will score them an agent and publication, but I doubt any of your are going to wind up the cautionary query tale that you hear at conferences.
But, the question the remains: what am I looking for, if it’s not all of those little details? What I’m looking for is a unique idea and good writing. I’m looking for an authentic, interesting voice--yes, voice in your query. I’m looking to get a feel for your style in just a couple of paragraphs. I’m looking for you to describe your book, whether it’s commercial or literary or in between, in a way that makes me want to keep reading. In October, I linked to a great query example, the one that Lisa McMann had written for Wake that was recently in Writer’s Digest. It was exactly I’m looking for: it was unlike any query I’d received before (or since). How so, you ask? It was entirely unique to Lisa and her book. It didn’t follow any formula or template. It gave me the information I ask for, but it did so in a way that was different. And I can promise you, all of the successful queries I’ve read have done the same thing.
I’m sure this will spur many questions, but I’d like to have a saner, more humane query discussion with aspiring authors, one that focuses on ideas, narrative, and writing instead of on boring details like font and word count. A little common sense in putting together a presentable query, plus a killer idea and great writing, and you’re all set!
- Michael
Chasya’s Question Corner is live!
Thanks to everyone who sent in their questions! As I mentioned in my post last week, I’ll be choosing one or two of your questions a week and answering them here. There were a lot of really good ones and I hope to answer as many of these as I can, so if you don’t see yours here today it doesn’t mean that we won’t be responding to it later. What I mean to say is, stay tuned!
If you have a question, please send it to news@dystel.com. All questions will remain anonymous:
One of our readers asks:
“I have a novel (debut) that was read by 6 editors 5 years ago (2004).
They praised it but were also consistent in why they didn't want it.
I have (after have children, etc. etc.) fully revised it, and in
effect it is a completely different narrative, but with the same
characters, setting, tone. The agent who shopped it left the agency
and we parted ways--we had no formal agreement (the deal was, if they
weren't successful placing my novel we'd have no contract). My
question is, when querying agents now, do I mention the novel's past
in the query, or wait until the agent has had a chance to read it and
connect to it? I am afraid of turning them off....concerned that they
won't read the novel with the same eye if they are aware someone else
rejected it, even if it was five years ago and quite different.”
Answer:
A quandary, indeed. How much does one disclose when it’s tough enough getting any attention as a first-time author?
The answer is actually pretty simple: It’s very important that you are completely up front about the history of your project when approaching an agent. The surest way of “turning them off” is by not being honest about the manuscript. And you don’t want an agent to think that you are being dishonest.
If you’re waiting until an agent calls with interest in the project to inform them of the history behind it, they will want to know why this didn’t come up in your initial query. Even if you mean no harm and your intention is to let the work speak for itself, it comes off as underhanded. We’re not just assessing if we’re interested in or in love with a book--we’re reading it to figure out if we feel we can sell it. If it’s been seen before, that’s an important factor. In some cases, it may help to know that a project was strong enough to get an agent once before.
If you are, in fact, letting the work speak for itself, then disclosing this information shouldn’t really matter. We understand that fiction is very subjective, and we know that a manuscript that doesn’t necessarily speak to another person’s taste is not any reason to not give it due consideration. We also understand the business, and can tell you that if your manuscript has been to every fiction editor out there and hasn’t undergone any changes, they most definitely do not want to see it again. Editors are swamped--buried in reading and juggling more hats than ever before. If they’ve turned something down it’s usually for good reason, and they don’t have the luxury of giving something a second read. A prospective agent will have to make a judgment call about whether they think that the number of editors who have seen something (and the kinds of changes) make a difference in whether or not they think they can sell. However, if an agent truly does see your talent, even if they don’t think they can sell that book, they might recommend moving on to another project first, and if that succeeds, going back and trying to shop the original manuscript.
We must rely on our authors to be forthcoming about their work in order to serve them best. Being evasive or holding back really only leads to feelings of mistrust and can put an agent in an awkward position. It’s not a good way to start, so be sure to provide these details from the get-go.
Another reader asks:
“This is probably a no, but does anyone in your organization represent children's book authors?”
Answer:
In fact, the answer is a yes. Michael Bourret represents young adult and middle grade, along with a very select group of author/illustrators. Jim McCarthy, Lauren Abramo and Stacey Glick all represent YA and middle grade, as well.
-Chasya
If you have a question, please send it to news@dystel.com. All questions will remain anonymous:
One of our readers asks:
“I have a novel (debut) that was read by 6 editors 5 years ago (2004).
They praised it but were also consistent in why they didn't want it.
I have (after have children, etc. etc.) fully revised it, and in
effect it is a completely different narrative, but with the same
characters, setting, tone. The agent who shopped it left the agency
and we parted ways--we had no formal agreement (the deal was, if they
weren't successful placing my novel we'd have no contract). My
question is, when querying agents now, do I mention the novel's past
in the query, or wait until the agent has had a chance to read it and
connect to it? I am afraid of turning them off....concerned that they
won't read the novel with the same eye if they are aware someone else
rejected it, even if it was five years ago and quite different.”
Answer:
A quandary, indeed. How much does one disclose when it’s tough enough getting any attention as a first-time author?
The answer is actually pretty simple: It’s very important that you are completely up front about the history of your project when approaching an agent. The surest way of “turning them off” is by not being honest about the manuscript. And you don’t want an agent to think that you are being dishonest.
If you’re waiting until an agent calls with interest in the project to inform them of the history behind it, they will want to know why this didn’t come up in your initial query. Even if you mean no harm and your intention is to let the work speak for itself, it comes off as underhanded. We’re not just assessing if we’re interested in or in love with a book--we’re reading it to figure out if we feel we can sell it. If it’s been seen before, that’s an important factor. In some cases, it may help to know that a project was strong enough to get an agent once before.
If you are, in fact, letting the work speak for itself, then disclosing this information shouldn’t really matter. We understand that fiction is very subjective, and we know that a manuscript that doesn’t necessarily speak to another person’s taste is not any reason to not give it due consideration. We also understand the business, and can tell you that if your manuscript has been to every fiction editor out there and hasn’t undergone any changes, they most definitely do not want to see it again. Editors are swamped--buried in reading and juggling more hats than ever before. If they’ve turned something down it’s usually for good reason, and they don’t have the luxury of giving something a second read. A prospective agent will have to make a judgment call about whether they think that the number of editors who have seen something (and the kinds of changes) make a difference in whether or not they think they can sell. However, if an agent truly does see your talent, even if they don’t think they can sell that book, they might recommend moving on to another project first, and if that succeeds, going back and trying to shop the original manuscript.
We must rely on our authors to be forthcoming about their work in order to serve them best. Being evasive or holding back really only leads to feelings of mistrust and can put an agent in an awkward position. It’s not a good way to start, so be sure to provide these details from the get-go.
Another reader asks:
“This is probably a no, but does anyone in your organization represent children's book authors?”
Answer:
In fact, the answer is a yes. Michael Bourret represents young adult and middle grade, along with a very select group of author/illustrators. Jim McCarthy, Lauren Abramo and Stacey Glick all represent YA and middle grade, as well.
-Chasya
Monday, November 09, 2009
Everyone's got something to say
Ah, NaNoWriMo. That time again already?
For those not already in the know, that stands for National Novel Writing Month. Launched in California ten years ago, it’s essentially a communal writing experience. Over the course of one month (no more!), people are encouraged to write a 50K word novel. The program emphasizes “quantity over quality,” which I find pretty delightful. It celebrates the fact that writers write, and for a lot of people, it’s the first chance they have to finish a novel. Because whether it’s good or bad, the act of completing a novel is, in itself, something to celebrate. I know a lot of NaNoWriMo participants past and present, and it’s always great to see the enthusiasm that comes out of the process.
Of course, there’s also something intimidating about NaNoWriMo: the aftermath. Apparently 676,900,348 have already been written by participants this year. Lord, December’s going to be a busy reading month...
So have you all already joined in the fun? Are you working your way through your 50K words? And if so, what are you doing on our blog? Get back to work!
-Jim
For those not already in the know, that stands for National Novel Writing Month. Launched in California ten years ago, it’s essentially a communal writing experience. Over the course of one month (no more!), people are encouraged to write a 50K word novel. The program emphasizes “quantity over quality,” which I find pretty delightful. It celebrates the fact that writers write, and for a lot of people, it’s the first chance they have to finish a novel. Because whether it’s good or bad, the act of completing a novel is, in itself, something to celebrate. I know a lot of NaNoWriMo participants past and present, and it’s always great to see the enthusiasm that comes out of the process.
Of course, there’s also something intimidating about NaNoWriMo: the aftermath. Apparently 676,900,348 have already been written by participants this year. Lord, December’s going to be a busy reading month...
So have you all already joined in the fun? Are you working your way through your 50K words? And if so, what are you doing on our blog? Get back to work!
-Jim
Jane's dream
The Wall Street Journal on Friday the 6th reported that Borders was going to close 200 of its Waldenbooks stores. True these are mall stores only, but it seems to me it was only yesterday that the chains were springing up every where. It appears that one of the reasons this is happening is that internet sales of books have greatly increased over the last several years taking buyers from the mall bookstores. The Journal also postulates that another reason for the move is the deep discounting of the bestselling books that has been announced.
My dream is that the closing of these mall stores might encourage one or two--or hopefully many more--entrepreneurial souls to open new independent bookstores. With the new readers that I hope are being created by books available electronically and by this deep discounting, perhaps there can be a big enough market to once again support these wonderful outlets for reading.
Do any of you have a favorite independent bookstore?
-Jane
My dream is that the closing of these mall stores might encourage one or two--or hopefully many more--entrepreneurial souls to open new independent bookstores. With the new readers that I hope are being created by books available electronically and by this deep discounting, perhaps there can be a big enough market to once again support these wonderful outlets for reading.
Do any of you have a favorite independent bookstore?
-Jane
Friday, November 06, 2009
Welcome to DGLM, Rachel Oakley!
I’d like to formally introduce myself to all our blog readers out there, as I’ve recently joined the team here at DGLM as Jane's assistant, and couldn’t be more excited about it.
I think a little information on my background is the best way to begin my first blog, so here goes...
I moved to the United States as a teenager, but returned to my home country of Australia to go to college. I started my freshman year in college thinking I was going to be a psychologist. In my second year of college I decided I was going to major in French. Then, in my third and fourth years of college, I decided it was time to follow the things I was passionate about and ended up as an English and Philosophy major.
During college I worked as an Editorial Assistant, and I occasionally wrote for the local women’s interest zine. I was always trying to get more than a foot in the door of publishing. So, moving to New York and working in publishing--particularly in a literary agency--has always been a goal of mine.
There was one question asked by a reader a few blogs ago about why agents do agenting, and I want to answer why I love working in an agency. Of course, I love books, and I like to write, but I think the one thing I truly love about working in a literary agency is that I get to see the entire process of publishing, from a rough manuscript to a finished book on the shelves. I have the opportunity to read things I wouldn’t ordinarily read and have different ideas presented to me--I find it all very exciting!
I’m looking forward to my future with DGLM, writing more blogs and hearing your opinions.
Over and out,
-Rachel
I think a little information on my background is the best way to begin my first blog, so here goes...
I moved to the United States as a teenager, but returned to my home country of Australia to go to college. I started my freshman year in college thinking I was going to be a psychologist. In my second year of college I decided I was going to major in French. Then, in my third and fourth years of college, I decided it was time to follow the things I was passionate about and ended up as an English and Philosophy major.
During college I worked as an Editorial Assistant, and I occasionally wrote for the local women’s interest zine. I was always trying to get more than a foot in the door of publishing. So, moving to New York and working in publishing--particularly in a literary agency--has always been a goal of mine.
There was one question asked by a reader a few blogs ago about why agents do agenting, and I want to answer why I love working in an agency. Of course, I love books, and I like to write, but I think the one thing I truly love about working in a literary agency is that I get to see the entire process of publishing, from a rough manuscript to a finished book on the shelves. I have the opportunity to read things I wouldn’t ordinarily read and have different ideas presented to me--I find it all very exciting!
I’m looking forward to my future with DGLM, writing more blogs and hearing your opinions.
Over and out,
-Rachel
DGLM Poll-a-thon
Thanks to all of you for the great feedback in the comments on our post about changing things up around here. I've turned that feedback into some handy polls, so we can get a better sense of what all of you would like to see. And while we'll still have to decide how much of the feedback we're getting it'll make sense to run with, we are eager to hear from you.
And let me apologize in advance if these polls don't actually work--I'm trying some advice I found on a message board to put the polls in the posts rather than the sidebar, but as we've seen, when I get near HTML code, colors tend to go wonky. I'll fix 'em if this doesn't actually do the trick. Wish me luck!
-Lauren
And let me apologize in advance if these polls don't actually work--I'm trying some advice I found on a message board to put the polls in the posts rather than the sidebar, but as we've seen, when I get near HTML code, colors tend to go wonky. I'll fix 'em if this doesn't actually do the trick. Wish me luck!
-Lauren
Where should the DGLM blog live?
Which type of post would you like to see most often?
Show or Tell?
Give me more... (Choose as many as apply.)
Give me less... (Choose as many as apply.)
The new Oprah: Glenn Beck?
This New York Times article on Glenn Beck as the Oprah of the thriller community could have larger implications for the publishing business if Beck's popularity stays at a high (though hardly anyone has the longevity of an Oprah). But it strikes me as an odd and interesting mix of elements to have such a significant impact: one, because he's so conservative and publishers and authors tend to be more liberal, and two, because he focuses so heavily on one genre, thrillers. That said, in my mind, it's nice to see both sides getting along and any outlet that helps to sell books in this market is worth looking at very seriously, especially since we hear Oprah, who has had her share of ups and downs when it comes to book publishing, might be moving on in the next couple of years.
-Stacey
-Stacey
Thursday, November 05, 2009
California dreaming
As my clients know, and as many of you may have heard, I’m moving to Los Angeles at the end of this month to open up a West Coast office for DGLM. I’m really excited about starting something new, and I think it’s a wonderful opportunity for my clients, the agency and me.
I’ve had a few questions about how this will work, so I’ll try to address those here. First and foremost: I want to be very clear that I will continue to agent my amazing clients, and I remain on the lookout for exceptionally talented new authors. I’m a literary agent, and that’s not going to change.
Though I’ll be living and working in L.A., you can expect to see me in New York. Often. I’ll be back at the end of January for more than a week (I’ll be attending the SCBWI Winter conference to do the roundtables on January 29), meeting with editors, publishers and, of course, authors. There will be several trips like that throughout the year, so you New Yorkers can breathe easy (or not!).
I’ll be working New York hours, at my desk about 9:30 AM – 7 PM Eastern time, and I’ll be at my new phone number, 310-363-0252. That number is already live, so feel free to call me there any time (it’s forwarded to ring me wherever I am). My email remains the same: mbourret@dystel.com. I’ll still be on Twitter, where I’ll try to be more active--computer issues have kept me off a bit that past couple of weeks--and you’ll see me blogging more than before.
Speaking of Twitter, I asked my followers there for questions they wanted answered about the move. Either they’re all comedians or already knew everything, but here are a couple of questions and answers:
Question: Is it true that people sparkle in LA? :)
Answer: I don’t know, but I’ll find out and will let you know.
Question: Could you cover submission guidelines and how to submit, if that's changed?
Answer: Great question! I’m now only accepting email queries. Please do not mail queries to the New York office. (Though all other official mail should still go to the New York office.)
Question: Do you remember driving? I would love to see how that's treating you.
Answer: I actually drive several times a year, and I didn’t grow up in NYC, so driving isn’t going to be new. Getting a car, however, is a very bizarre notion. I’m going to have to bring a friend because I have no clue how it works!
-Michael
I’ve had a few questions about how this will work, so I’ll try to address those here. First and foremost: I want to be very clear that I will continue to agent my amazing clients, and I remain on the lookout for exceptionally talented new authors. I’m a literary agent, and that’s not going to change.
Though I’ll be living and working in L.A., you can expect to see me in New York. Often. I’ll be back at the end of January for more than a week (I’ll be attending the SCBWI Winter conference to do the roundtables on January 29), meeting with editors, publishers and, of course, authors. There will be several trips like that throughout the year, so you New Yorkers can breathe easy (or not!).
I’ll be working New York hours, at my desk about 9:30 AM – 7 PM Eastern time, and I’ll be at my new phone number, 310-363-0252. That number is already live, so feel free to call me there any time (it’s forwarded to ring me wherever I am). My email remains the same: mbourret@dystel.com. I’ll still be on Twitter, where I’ll try to be more active--computer issues have kept me off a bit that past couple of weeks--and you’ll see me blogging more than before.
Speaking of Twitter, I asked my followers there for questions they wanted answered about the move. Either they’re all comedians or already knew everything, but here are a couple of questions and answers:
Question: Is it true that people sparkle in LA? :)
Answer: I don’t know, but I’ll find out and will let you know.
Question: Could you cover submission guidelines and how to submit, if that's changed?
Answer: Great question! I’m now only accepting email queries. Please do not mail queries to the New York office. (Though all other official mail should still go to the New York office.)
Question: Do you remember driving? I would love to see how that's treating you.
Answer: I actually drive several times a year, and I didn’t grow up in NYC, so driving isn’t going to be new. Getting a car, however, is a very bizarre notion. I’m going to have to bring a friend because I have no clue how it works!
-Michael
Driving sales in the long term
For the past several days I’ve been editing a fascinating proposal by one of my clients, an economist who specializes in analyzing global entrepreneurship. Despite working in the so-called “dismal science,” he makes an encouraging case that this is an era of singular opportunity. He warns, however, that “yesterday’s powerbrokers can be counted on to paint opportunity as threat and dig in their heels against change.”
Although his book focuses on more far-flung examples, I wondered how this lens might be applied closer to home. Indeed, book publishing, and more broadly print media, feels distinctly threatened (a theme Miriam took on not long ago). It’s not only the New York Times that reports that the sky is falling, when I meet with editors especially, conversations often circle a drain of dispiriting themes, including: diminishing readership for books, intense competition for a decreasing number of publicity spots, and no guarantee--even when the stars and media align--that a given book will sell. Certainly, it’s clear to see that most everyone in publishing is working hard on behalf of their projects, but traditional models, especially in publicity, are no longer yielding the same results. There are likely any number of reasons this is so, subject, in fact, for another blog, but the upshot is that many books never get the sought-after spot that throws open the door to bestellerdom, and in cases when they do get it, and an author lands an interview with Terry Gross, trades banter with Jon Stewart, or has a substantive review in the NYTBR, sometimes nothing happens.
It is a pervasive problem, damaging to houses but crushing to authors. Houses (must) turn their attention to another book, as the so-called publicity “window,” open for all too brief a moment, slams shut. But for authors, cutting losses is not so easy. So, I wondered, combing through Bookscan numbers, is anyone looking at this grim picture and finding opportunity? Inspired by my economist client, I decided to look for book-business examples of entrepreneurs who are adapting to, and not bewailing, the changing media landscape. For my first “case study,” I did not have to look too far.
The staff of DGLM met recently with Fauzia Burke, a former marketing manager at Holt, who some years ago began her own internet publicity firm, FSB Associates. Cognizant that traditional publishing houses don’t have the staff or resources to pursue internet publicity with the same energy that they pursue the more traditional high impact gets--TV, radio and print--she and her team pitch bloggers, web magazines, communities of enthusiasts to spread the word online, where book sales are only a click away. Burke made a variety of convincing arguments for why this is effective, but the one that struck me as most interesting is that internet publicity does not have to happen in the brief window of time--say six weeks after pub--while the book is “news.” Bloggers, much like the New York Review of Books, don’t care so much about publication dates. Which is important. Because, as Miriam pointed out--books are supposed to be around for the long-haul, not have the literary equivalent of a blockbuster opening weekend then end up in the remainder bin. The idea that on-line promotion can help drive long term sales, or breathe new life into projects whose sales were disappointing is not necessarily a new one nor is it a silver bullet. Connecting an author with communities of like-minded readers on-line requires about as much virtual legwork as finding these folks in the real world, but especially as traditional media contracts, it’s well worth exploring. On-line promotion does not necessarily rely on a rolodex of producers and editors. Anything that helps move the industry away from the blockbuster model, which makes failures of far too many books, is, in my eyes, welcome.
-Jessica
Although his book focuses on more far-flung examples, I wondered how this lens might be applied closer to home. Indeed, book publishing, and more broadly print media, feels distinctly threatened (a theme Miriam took on not long ago). It’s not only the New York Times that reports that the sky is falling, when I meet with editors especially, conversations often circle a drain of dispiriting themes, including: diminishing readership for books, intense competition for a decreasing number of publicity spots, and no guarantee--even when the stars and media align--that a given book will sell. Certainly, it’s clear to see that most everyone in publishing is working hard on behalf of their projects, but traditional models, especially in publicity, are no longer yielding the same results. There are likely any number of reasons this is so, subject, in fact, for another blog, but the upshot is that many books never get the sought-after spot that throws open the door to bestellerdom, and in cases when they do get it, and an author lands an interview with Terry Gross, trades banter with Jon Stewart, or has a substantive review in the NYTBR, sometimes nothing happens.
It is a pervasive problem, damaging to houses but crushing to authors. Houses (must) turn their attention to another book, as the so-called publicity “window,” open for all too brief a moment, slams shut. But for authors, cutting losses is not so easy. So, I wondered, combing through Bookscan numbers, is anyone looking at this grim picture and finding opportunity? Inspired by my economist client, I decided to look for book-business examples of entrepreneurs who are adapting to, and not bewailing, the changing media landscape. For my first “case study,” I did not have to look too far.
The staff of DGLM met recently with Fauzia Burke, a former marketing manager at Holt, who some years ago began her own internet publicity firm, FSB Associates. Cognizant that traditional publishing houses don’t have the staff or resources to pursue internet publicity with the same energy that they pursue the more traditional high impact gets--TV, radio and print--she and her team pitch bloggers, web magazines, communities of enthusiasts to spread the word online, where book sales are only a click away. Burke made a variety of convincing arguments for why this is effective, but the one that struck me as most interesting is that internet publicity does not have to happen in the brief window of time--say six weeks after pub--while the book is “news.” Bloggers, much like the New York Review of Books, don’t care so much about publication dates. Which is important. Because, as Miriam pointed out--books are supposed to be around for the long-haul, not have the literary equivalent of a blockbuster opening weekend then end up in the remainder bin. The idea that on-line promotion can help drive long term sales, or breathe new life into projects whose sales were disappointing is not necessarily a new one nor is it a silver bullet. Connecting an author with communities of like-minded readers on-line requires about as much virtual legwork as finding these folks in the real world, but especially as traditional media contracts, it’s well worth exploring. On-line promotion does not necessarily rely on a rolodex of producers and editors. Anything that helps move the industry away from the blockbuster model, which makes failures of far too many books, is, in my eyes, welcome.
-Jessica
Attention, Authors: John Irving sympathizes
A word--via Big Think--from one of my favorite authors, John Irving, on the challenges of getting published today. Tempted to shoot yourself, John? Hyperbole much? In any case, writers, he feels your pain.
-Chasya
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
The present of the future
I like the idea that literature is a vehicle for exploring (and exploiting) our anxieties, both personal and cultural. I tend to agree with Cory Doctorow that science fiction has always been more about the present than the future. What do you all think?
-Miriam
-Miriam
THE HELP needed lots of help to get started
There were a number of things I found interesting in yesterday's New York Times piece about Kathryn Stockett's first novel, The Help.
It was Amy Einhorn's first book for her new imprint; it's sold almost 500,000 copies in hardcover, amazing numbers for a literary first novel; and it's a book written by a Southern white author that has two black protagonists. It's been compared to To Kill a Mockingbird. But what really struck the agent in me was that the novel was initially rejected by almost 50 agents before it was picked up. That is a stat that should be inspiring to aspiring authors and probably a little frustrating for us agents who work so hard to find great material and wonder how we missed something that then goes on to be so successful. But that's the way the game is played: you win some, you lose some, and the take-away for me from this story for authors is that confidence in your work, persistence, and of course a good dose of luck and timing, can make all the difference. It's a great success story, and in a time where there are so many grim reports about book publishing, it's refreshing to see a story about a book that got it all right, even if it had some stumbling blocks along the way.
-Stacey
It was Amy Einhorn's first book for her new imprint; it's sold almost 500,000 copies in hardcover, amazing numbers for a literary first novel; and it's a book written by a Southern white author that has two black protagonists. It's been compared to To Kill a Mockingbird. But what really struck the agent in me was that the novel was initially rejected by almost 50 agents before it was picked up. That is a stat that should be inspiring to aspiring authors and probably a little frustrating for us agents who work so hard to find great material and wonder how we missed something that then goes on to be so successful. But that's the way the game is played: you win some, you lose some, and the take-away for me from this story for authors is that confidence in your work, persistence, and of course a good dose of luck and timing, can make all the difference. It's a great success story, and in a time where there are so many grim reports about book publishing, it's refreshing to see a story about a book that got it all right, even if it had some stumbling blocks along the way.
-Stacey
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Introducing Chasya's Questions Corner
Whether it’s an inquiry about queries or curiosity about the publishing industry in general, we know you all have tons of burning questions. Which is why, once a week, I’ll be tackling one or two of your questions on the blog and answering them in a little segment we’re going to call Chasya’s Questions Corner (because who doesn’t like a little alliteration?).
So send me your questions at news@dystel.com with the word question in the subject line and let us know what you want to know!
-Chasya
So send me your questions at news@dystel.com with the word question in the subject line and let us know what you want to know!
-Chasya
Monday, November 02, 2009
What to write next
I’ve heard of writers’ block, but it seems most of my clients are plagued by the question of which of their ideas to tackle next, not where to find an idea. But just in case others out there just don’t know what their next writing project should be, Colson Whitehead offers some suggestions (and a handy printable dartboard!) for novelists stuck in a rut.
Sure, he can be snarky (I balked at his assertion that thriller writers only know five adjectives), but damned if he isn’t funny. And as someone who has had some reallllly awkward dialogue written in dialect cross his desk, I admit I laughed out loud at his recommendation to “invent nutty transliterations of what you think slaves talked like.” He was kidding about that. Seriously. Don’t do it.
-Jim
Sure, he can be snarky (I balked at his assertion that thriller writers only know five adjectives), but damned if he isn’t funny. And as someone who has had some reallllly awkward dialogue written in dialect cross his desk, I admit I laughed out loud at his recommendation to “invent nutty transliterations of what you think slaves talked like.” He was kidding about that. Seriously. Don’t do it.
-Jim
Rationing discounted books
Now, the Wall Street Journal and others are reporting that the big three retailers--Walmart, Target and Amazon--are rationing those selected bestsellers they have been deep discounting. This is ostensibly to prevent other retailers from buying from them in quantity and reselling these titles.
I believe that the only ones who are going to get hurt by the deep discounting and the rationing are those retailers who are doing it. First of all, they cannot continue to sell these books at these prices for a long period of time as they are losing a substantial amount of money by doing so; and limiting the number of copies per customer during the holiday season, especially, should discourage potential consumers and send them elsewhere.
In this poor economic climate for publishers and booksellers alike it would seem to me that working together to help our industry rather than undercutting each other would be far more constructive and productive.
What do you think?
-Jane
I believe that the only ones who are going to get hurt by the deep discounting and the rationing are those retailers who are doing it. First of all, they cannot continue to sell these books at these prices for a long period of time as they are losing a substantial amount of money by doing so; and limiting the number of copies per customer during the holiday season, especially, should discourage potential consumers and send them elsewhere.
In this poor economic climate for publishers and booksellers alike it would seem to me that working together to help our industry rather than undercutting each other would be far more constructive and productive.
What do you think?
-Jane
The blog it is a-changing
As you may have noticed, the DGLM blog has begun to change just a bit. There’s been more activity around here, and that’s only the beginning.
We’re beginning a gradual process of changing the way we do things. First and foremost, there will be more entries, more regularly, from more agents. And we’ll be paying closer attention to which posts you guys seem most excited about and trying to give you the content you’re looking for. We’re aiming to link more, to post more multimedia, and to start more conversations with you fine folks.
Change will be gradual, but we’re hoping to get feedback from all of you and to incorporate as many of your ideas as we can to build a stronger blog together. We may not be able to take on every suggestion, but we promise to listen and consider what you have to say. And we hope you’ll continue to let us know as we go along as well--and let us know what you think of the changes you see!
So what do you think? What would you like to see from us that we’re not already doing? What should we do more of? Is there anything you see on other blogs, particularly publishing industry blogs, that you’d also like to see here? And which other blogs are you reading? Which subjects do we cover too much and which should we cover more (or at all)? We’re thinking of switching from Blogger to WordPress--yay or nay? Polls and contests would be fun, right?
We're looking forward to hearing your feedback and finding out how we can make this a more fun, helpful, and rewarding experience for us all! Let us know in the comments!
-Lauren
P.S. If anyone can tell me how to convince blogger to change the link color to what the Fonts and Colors screen tells me the link color is, I'd definitely appreciate it! I even tried poking around in the HTML, pretending to know what I'm looking for, and I don't see the bright blue and purple of the links and followed links in the settings anywhere. UPDATED: Thanks for the help! It's fixed now!
We’re beginning a gradual process of changing the way we do things. First and foremost, there will be more entries, more regularly, from more agents. And we’ll be paying closer attention to which posts you guys seem most excited about and trying to give you the content you’re looking for. We’re aiming to link more, to post more multimedia, and to start more conversations with you fine folks.
Change will be gradual, but we’re hoping to get feedback from all of you and to incorporate as many of your ideas as we can to build a stronger blog together. We may not be able to take on every suggestion, but we promise to listen and consider what you have to say. And we hope you’ll continue to let us know as we go along as well--and let us know what you think of the changes you see!
So what do you think? What would you like to see from us that we’re not already doing? What should we do more of? Is there anything you see on other blogs, particularly publishing industry blogs, that you’d also like to see here? And which other blogs are you reading? Which subjects do we cover too much and which should we cover more (or at all)? We’re thinking of switching from Blogger to WordPress--yay or nay? Polls and contests would be fun, right?
We're looking forward to hearing your feedback and finding out how we can make this a more fun, helpful, and rewarding experience for us all! Let us know in the comments!
-Lauren
P.S. If anyone can tell me how to convince blogger to change the link color to what the Fonts and Colors screen tells me the link color is, I'd definitely appreciate it! I even tried poking around in the HTML, pretending to know what I'm looking for, and I don't see the bright blue and purple of the links and followed links in the settings anywhere. UPDATED: Thanks for the help! It's fixed now!
Friday, October 30, 2009
Shhh! People are reading.
This morning on the subway, I had the pleasure of seeing a diverse world of book reading in action. My Sony Reader and I sat down next to a woman reading a book on her Kindle. Across from Mrs. Kindle was a woman reading The Lost Symbol in hard cover. Standing up next to her, a woman read a trade paperback about our post-something-I-couldn’t-make-out world. When Mrs. Kindle got off to switch trains, a young man sat beside me, reading a book on his iPhone. A woman came on the train and stood just in front of him, reading Chris Marie Green’s Midnight Reign. When Mr. iPhone left, not only did this woman sit down in his seat, but she switched books to Nora Roberts’s Bed of Roses. Throughout the ride my end of the train also held a couple Metro and AM New York readers (because it’s hard to argue with free!) and someone reading a current affairs mag, but there was only a single person I saw who wasn’t reading at all and almost everyone was reading a book, in whatever genre or format best suited them. My only regret is that technology thwarted my subway voyeurism--I am, after all, the sort of person who subtly takes camera phone photos of F train passengers reading DGLM titles. I could see from the way the text was formatted that they were reading actual books, but not which books they were reading.
With all the fighting about how we get our content and how much we pay for it and who’s reading the right things and who’s reading the wrong ones, it’s nice sometimes to have a moment to be happy that at least we’re still reading!
-Lauren
With all the fighting about how we get our content and how much we pay for it and who’s reading the right things and who’s reading the wrong ones, it’s nice sometimes to have a moment to be happy that at least we’re still reading!
-Lauren
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Jim McCarthy on having a voice
At a writers’ conference in Myrtle Beach this past weekend, I did two “slush fests.” Writers brought transparencies of the first two pages of their novels to be projected in front of a room, read aloud, and critiqued by two agents. The first, which I did with Holly Root of the Waxman Literary Agency, focused on paranormal and urban fantasy. We worked at a deliberate pace and weighed the pros and cons of each first page. The second, which I did with Scott Eagan of the Greyhaus Agency, was about romance and women’s fiction. We did not work at a deliberate pace. We whipped through more than two dozen first pages and gave very quick critiques that offered a peek into how an agent is really reading as they move through their slush—how quickly decisions are made and for what reasons.
I hope both panels offered a lot of information to those brave souls who opened themselves up to criticism. The paranormal folks all seemed to walk out with smiles on their faces. The romance writers…well, no one poisoned my soup. It wasn’t pretty, but it was honest, and the feedback I got was positive. Everyone who came up to me said they felt they learned a lot. That said, I did notice that no one who thanked me for my honesty had actually had their material we had read aloud. On the plus side, no one cried! I try to be kind and supportive at conferences (I swear!), but I can’t say I haven’t made writers cry. But I only saw one writer in tears at this conference and felt a totally inappropriate sense of joy when I realized I hadn’t met her, so it couldn’t be my fault. Go team!
In any case, one of the things that kept coming up at the slush fests was that there are a lot of things we have our eye on--we’re looking at grammar, tone, and structure; keeping an eye out for clichés; and ultimately looking for that one element that grabs us and that cannot be taught: voice.
Teaching someone to have a distinct voice would be like teaching someone to have a personality. You can coach them on how to pull it out and make it resonate more distinctly, but you can’t actually create it for them. I want to find writers whose work is so distinctive that I could recognize a sentence of theirs out of context. It’s miraculous that anyone can convey enough personality in a handful of words that they make them completely their own. And isn’t that the wonder of great writing? I once got a bottle of scotch in the mail with a note attached but the sender’s name was nowhere to be found. But it only took a note card for me to recognize Phoebe Kitanidis by her style. [Side note: Phoebe is the author of the absurdly fantastic YA debut WHISPER which comes out next year.]
I was able to snag a copy of one of my favorite memoirs last night. It’s a little tough to find, but Diana Vreeland’s D.V. is the ultimate triumph of voice over content. The woman ran Vogue, operated the costume institute at the Met, and traveled the world. Her memoir is less than 200 pages and she takes up the first pages talking about back plasters. I couldn’t care less about half of what she writes about, but damned if I didn’t eat this book up. She’s irreverent, hyperbolic, bitchy, and pithy. She’s one of a kind, and even when she makes you hate her, you can’t help but being transfixed. It takes some serious nerve to open a memoir with, “I loathe nostalgia.” Oh, realllllly. Well, then, we should have a great time going through your past together. “Nostalgia—imagine! I don’t believe in anything before penicillin.”
Vreeland is the crazy aunt prattling on at Thanksgiving dinner. She might not have anything to tell you, but damned if she’ll stop talking. Her whole book reads like it was written in a single go. And I mean that in the best of all possible ways.
“We both knew there weren’t any marble staircases west of the Mississippi in those days—let alone in Elsa’s father’s house. But that was Elsa—she was just putting on the ritz, keeping things up. Why say you were born in a hovel? Who wants to hear that?” The exaggeration and tone (and her response to her friend’s lies) tell you so much more about this woman that anything she actually says. And while that’s tricky to pull off in nonfiction (since you have to be all honest and everything), it’s hugely admirable in fiction.
If how you’re telling the reader something says more than what you’re telling the reader? Heaven. Because then you aren’t just a writer; you’re an artist. Or in the case of Vreeland, a nutball (not that these terms are by any means mutually exclusive).
I’d love recommendations from anyone who can think of writers with particularly strong voices. I’m always looking for more books to add to my reading list. Call me Sisyphus.
I hope both panels offered a lot of information to those brave souls who opened themselves up to criticism. The paranormal folks all seemed to walk out with smiles on their faces. The romance writers…well, no one poisoned my soup. It wasn’t pretty, but it was honest, and the feedback I got was positive. Everyone who came up to me said they felt they learned a lot. That said, I did notice that no one who thanked me for my honesty had actually had their material we had read aloud. On the plus side, no one cried! I try to be kind and supportive at conferences (I swear!), but I can’t say I haven’t made writers cry. But I only saw one writer in tears at this conference and felt a totally inappropriate sense of joy when I realized I hadn’t met her, so it couldn’t be my fault. Go team!
In any case, one of the things that kept coming up at the slush fests was that there are a lot of things we have our eye on--we’re looking at grammar, tone, and structure; keeping an eye out for clichés; and ultimately looking for that one element that grabs us and that cannot be taught: voice.
Teaching someone to have a distinct voice would be like teaching someone to have a personality. You can coach them on how to pull it out and make it resonate more distinctly, but you can’t actually create it for them. I want to find writers whose work is so distinctive that I could recognize a sentence of theirs out of context. It’s miraculous that anyone can convey enough personality in a handful of words that they make them completely their own. And isn’t that the wonder of great writing? I once got a bottle of scotch in the mail with a note attached but the sender’s name was nowhere to be found. But it only took a note card for me to recognize Phoebe Kitanidis by her style. [Side note: Phoebe is the author of the absurdly fantastic YA debut WHISPER which comes out next year.]
I was able to snag a copy of one of my favorite memoirs last night. It’s a little tough to find, but Diana Vreeland’s D.V. is the ultimate triumph of voice over content. The woman ran Vogue, operated the costume institute at the Met, and traveled the world. Her memoir is less than 200 pages and she takes up the first pages talking about back plasters. I couldn’t care less about half of what she writes about, but damned if I didn’t eat this book up. She’s irreverent, hyperbolic, bitchy, and pithy. She’s one of a kind, and even when she makes you hate her, you can’t help but being transfixed. It takes some serious nerve to open a memoir with, “I loathe nostalgia.” Oh, realllllly. Well, then, we should have a great time going through your past together. “Nostalgia—imagine! I don’t believe in anything before penicillin.”
Vreeland is the crazy aunt prattling on at Thanksgiving dinner. She might not have anything to tell you, but damned if she’ll stop talking. Her whole book reads like it was written in a single go. And I mean that in the best of all possible ways.
“We both knew there weren’t any marble staircases west of the Mississippi in those days—let alone in Elsa’s father’s house. But that was Elsa—she was just putting on the ritz, keeping things up. Why say you were born in a hovel? Who wants to hear that?” The exaggeration and tone (and her response to her friend’s lies) tell you so much more about this woman that anything she actually says. And while that’s tricky to pull off in nonfiction (since you have to be all honest and everything), it’s hugely admirable in fiction.
If how you’re telling the reader something says more than what you’re telling the reader? Heaven. Because then you aren’t just a writer; you’re an artist. Or in the case of Vreeland, a nutball (not that these terms are by any means mutually exclusive).
I’d love recommendations from anyone who can think of writers with particularly strong voices. I’m always looking for more books to add to my reading list. Call me Sisyphus.
Haunted houses
This made me think of all the fictional houses -- haunted or not -- that are characters in their own right. What are your favorites?
-- Miriam
-- Miriam
Seth Godin, right again
Once again, Seth Godin gets it right.
Now, as someone who has a Kindle, I'd argue it does lead one to buy more books (it's so easy that I can't stop!). That aside, what he says is true: Kindle users are a (certain type) of voracious reader. These are the people who evangelize not only the Kindle itself, but also the books they're reading. They're probably also on Facebook, Twitter and Goodreads talking about what books they liked. Publishers should be going out of their way to get their books into their hands, not holding back their hot properties. Honestly, who's going to want the Sarah Palin book after the first month on sale, anyway? All the juicy tidbits will have been quoted at length, rehashed and remixed by time the e-book is released. Seems like a big waste to me.
While there's certainly room to debate and experiment, publishers need to start looking at Kindle and nook and other e-reader owners as allies, not enemies. Once they do, I think we'll see what a boon e-books can be.
(Editor Unleashed via Galleycat.)
- Michael
Kindle readers buy two or three times as many books as book readers. Why? I don't think it's necessarily because using a Kindle leads someone to read more books. I think it's because the kind of person who buys a lot of books is the most likely person to pony up and buy a Kindle. I know that sounds obvious, but once you see it this way, you understand why book publishers should be killing themselves to appeal to this group. After all, the group voted with their dollars to show that they're better.
Now, as someone who has a Kindle, I'd argue it does lead one to buy more books (it's so easy that I can't stop!). That aside, what he says is true: Kindle users are a (certain type) of voracious reader. These are the people who evangelize not only the Kindle itself, but also the books they're reading. They're probably also on Facebook, Twitter and Goodreads talking about what books they liked. Publishers should be going out of their way to get their books into their hands, not holding back their hot properties. Honestly, who's going to want the Sarah Palin book after the first month on sale, anyway? All the juicy tidbits will have been quoted at length, rehashed and remixed by time the e-book is released. Seems like a big waste to me.
While there's certainly room to debate and experiment, publishers need to start looking at Kindle and nook and other e-reader owners as allies, not enemies. Once they do, I think we'll see what a boon e-books can be.
(Editor Unleashed via Galleycat.)
- Michael
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
