Long time since I published a blog, way back in 2011, an eon in this write-it-as-soon-as-you-think-it age. That's because I have had to come to terms with the inevitable--that tomorrow's literature will be read on ebooks, and that content will be mostly ephemeral best sellers that won't even make good movies. Publishers will not take chances with ebooks that don't sell except to a small audience. Well-written, well-thought-out adult books will disappear. Even today, anyone with access to the Internet can declare herself or himself an author, and publish an ebook one at a time sans any sign of editing, often at point of purchase. Are you an author? Me, too.
In a recent Jason Epstein article on the future of book publishing, he noted that on cyberspace book shelves today, Keats's nightingale exists alongside Anne Mary's haiku. Traditional publishers with their necessary editing, fact checking, proof reading, storage, back lists, etc. will go out of business in the face of cheap, ubiquitous, albeit mostly irrelevant, ebook publishing. The time has come for us conventional publishers to serve ourselves more realistically. If we don't design new and original ideas about Internet publishing, we're only a heartbeat away from being obsolete or dead.
However, I see us climbing slowly onto the Internet bandwagon. We're starting to change our priorities a little. To compete with the vampires that ebook readers love, we are finally treating mystery titles like quality fiction, and not as dismissive "genre" fiction. I have convinced myself that mystery titles often feature plots you wouldn't laugh at and some stylish writing to boot, but I can't help feeling guilty when I publish Dying on the Dot instead of my version of War and Peace. Maybe enough twitnits and dogbloggers will like mysteries almost as much as they do those wildly-popular zombies and werewolves. Maybe we old fogies can scoop up some of that hysterical enthusiasm, too, if we fight back with something tougher than principle. Even allowing that "information must be free" is nonsense, that our authors can't eat air and neither can we, we MUST learn to live with digital files in the less-than-genteel modern publishing world. Traditional publishers, let's get cracking on learning to publish, sell and flog our brands online. Once we're a presence there, we can always cheat a little. There will always be room to publish a few choice titles between hard covers, just as we've been doing since Gutenberg!
Barbara Phillips
For Epstein's exciting article about the future of publishing in the NY Review of Books for March 11, 2012, go to newyorkbooks.com.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Saturday, October 1, 2011
The publishing house I am associated with is called Bridge Works Publishing Co. It is now 20 years old. The first year of our existence Bridge Works published a collection of my short stories, called GOODBYE, FRIENDS. It seemed to me that after many years of writing freelance for magazines and newspapers and selling three stories to small literary magazines and a newspaper, I had paid my dues and should be able to produce an acceptable work of publishable fiction. Principals of small independents do this regularly, publish with their own houses, and for many reasons--too many rejections from the wider publishing world, a burning desire to get their works out to the public, to augment their lists. A cynic would call this no more than vanity publishing. For that reason, I was reluctant to publicize GOODBYE, FRIENDS too much, because I had (and still have) a residual hesitation about the legitimacy of publishing myself. Thus, I must admit unhappily, GOODBYE, FRIENDS had very little publicity and an even shorter shelf life. Many of my friends never heard of my book.
With this phony (to me) short cut to publication always weighing on me, I turned my hand to editing and over 20 years have become proficient in book doctoring. Today, publishers and agents without editors they can rely on turn to me for freelance work.
In the meantime, self-publishing via the Internet has gone legit. Amazon sells self-published material and, as far as I can tell, the interest in it is as great as the material coming from Random House. And while I can attest that the quality of most self publishers would not cause Ernest Hemingway or Martin Amis to lose any sleep, amid the welter of opinion and imagination are some adult works that are not totally embarrassing.
No, more problematic than the legitimacy of self-publishing today is that the young don't read long-form content, preferring to get their opinions and kicks on Twitter, while adults clamor for young people's works (see Harry Potter and Anne Rice's vampires), rather than challenge their intellects or imagination. The truth is, today we don't know a good book from a bad book and what's worse, nobody cares.
Even with this state of affairs, I have decided to challenge myself to write another work of fiction. For 20 years, I didn't have the courage to risk more rejection, more advice to give up. Maybe I will even have to publish the work myself just as I did 20 years ago. You might call me a slow starter and and an even slower learner!
B. Phillips
With this phony (to me) short cut to publication always weighing on me, I turned my hand to editing and over 20 years have become proficient in book doctoring. Today, publishers and agents without editors they can rely on turn to me for freelance work.
In the meantime, self-publishing via the Internet has gone legit. Amazon sells self-published material and, as far as I can tell, the interest in it is as great as the material coming from Random House. And while I can attest that the quality of most self publishers would not cause Ernest Hemingway or Martin Amis to lose any sleep, amid the welter of opinion and imagination are some adult works that are not totally embarrassing.
No, more problematic than the legitimacy of self-publishing today is that the young don't read long-form content, preferring to get their opinions and kicks on Twitter, while adults clamor for young people's works (see Harry Potter and Anne Rice's vampires), rather than challenge their intellects or imagination. The truth is, today we don't know a good book from a bad book and what's worse, nobody cares.
Even with this state of affairs, I have decided to challenge myself to write another work of fiction. For 20 years, I didn't have the courage to risk more rejection, more advice to give up. Maybe I will even have to publish the work myself just as I did 20 years ago. You might call me a slow starter and and an even slower learner!
B. Phillips
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Today, I am pasting into my blog the second half of the talk I gave to the Cosmopolitan Club in NY in June 2011. Thus concludes my position statement on the role of the editor in book publishing.
IN MY OWN PRESS, CHOOSING WHO WILL MAKE THE CUT SHOULD BE EASY, BECAUSE I ALONE DECIDE WHAT WE WILL PUBLISH. I AM A COMMITTEE OF ONE, THE MOST EFFICIENT KIND. I CAN TELL FROM THE FIRST PAGE OF A MANUSCRIPT WHETHER IT CAN BE TRANSFORMED INTO A PUBLISHABLE TITLE THAT WILL APPEAL TO READERS. MOST OF WHAT I CHOOSE IS INITIALLY ROUGHER THAN SUBMISSIONS TO THE LARGE PRESSES BECAUSE IT’S A GIVEN THAT IF A SMALL PRESS RECEIVES A SUBMISSION, IT HAS BEEN THE ROUNDS OF THE BIGGIES, UNTIL IT FINALLY LANDS IN MY MAIL BOX, SOMEWHAT TATTERED AROUND THE EDGES. THAT’S WHY MOST OF OUR AUTHORS ARE FIRST-TIME WRITERS. BUT THERE’S GOOD NEWS TO THIS SITUATION. MOST OF THESE FIRST-TIMERS HAVE BEEN REJECTED AND EJECTED FROM THE BIG PUBLISHERS SO OFTEN THEY HAVE LOST ALL HOPE IN THEIR PRECIOUS BABIES. BUT NOW….HEY, IT’S NOT RANDOM HOUSE, BUT I’M GOING TO BE PUBLISHED!!!
AND, SOMETIMES THROUGH THE ODDEST OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE RIGHT PHASE OF THE MOON, I RECEIVE A MANUSCRIPT THAT IS PRACTICALLY PERFECT. I BRIEFLY PONDER WHY FARRAR, STRAUS AND GIROUX TURNED IT DOWN. THEN I DO A LITTLE JIG. I’VE GOT A LIVE ONE, THAT RAREST OF BIRDS, A GOOD WRITER WHO CAN PUT IT ALL TOGETHER IN A CLEVER, UNDERSTATED WAY WITH LITTLE HELP FROM ME. I WORKED WITH ONE GENTLEMAN WHO HAD ALREADY PUBLISHED TWO WORKS, BUT HE HADN’T BEEN EDITED IN EITHER OF THEM. MAYBE HIS FORMER EDITORS WERE SCARED OF HIM. I CERTAINLY WAS. HE WAS A FORMIDABLE MAN, A HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICER, ERECT, TALL, SERIOUS IN DEMEANOR AND WRITING STYLE. BUT BECAUSE HE WAS INTERESTED IN LEARNING THE EDITING PROCESS, HE RARELY COMPLAINED ABOUT ANY CHANGES AND WE HAD A WONDERFUL, NO-STRESS TIME TOGETHER. HIS WORK WAS PERHAPS MY FAVORITE OF ALL--A SAD, BUT HIGHLY AUTHENTIC STORY ABOUT THE TRAGEDY OF PUSHING ONE’S CHILD TOO HARD TO GAIN A SELECTIVE COLLEGE ADMISSION. WE KNOW THIS HAPPENS ALL TOO OFTEN—THE PUSHY PARENTS, THE HAPLESS CHILD VICTIM. MY AUTHOR KNEW THE SITUATION FIRST HAND. AND WE BOTH KNEW BEFORE WE STARTED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO HAPPY ENDING. I DON’T KNOW; MAYBE I GOT HIS MS BECAUSE I’M KNOWN AS THE EDITOR OF UNHAPPY ENDINGS.
LIKE MOST EDITORS, I HAVE MY OWN RULES AND PRACTICES. EDITING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE. ONCE YOU VENTURE BEYOND THE CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE, YOU’RE ON YOUR OWN. HOW I WORK WITH A MANUSCRIPT IS COMPLETELY, UTTERLY MY OWN DESIGN AND EXECUTION. I START WITH THE PRELIMS. AS SOON AS THE CONTRACT IS SIGNED, I TRY TO SPEND SOME QUALITY TIME DETERMINING THROUGH EMAILS AND PHONE CONVERSATIONS THE WRITER’S ABILITY TO MAKE CHANGES TO HER WORK WITHOUT FREAKING OUT. BEFORE PUTTING ONE DELETE ON THE PAGE, I SPEND A LOT OF TIME PRAISING WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT THE WORK AND WHY I LIKE IT. THIS IS MY DISARMING TACTIC, MY REASSURING TACTIC, MY PERHAPS HYPOCRITICAL TACTIC. IT MOSTLY WORKS, BUT NOT FOR LONG ENOUGH. ALL TOO SOON, MY OPTIMISM IS TRIED, I SEE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A SLOG, WHILE THE AUTHOR, ALTERNATELY DESPAIRS AND CONTEMPLATES MY DEMISE. EXASPERATED, HE GOES, “WHY DID YOU TAKE THIS BLEEPING MANUSCRIPT IF YOU BASICALLY DON’T LIKE IT?” THIS REQUIRES MORE REASSURANCE ON MY PART, AS I CONTINUE TO COUNTER THAT THE WORK AS A WHOLE HAS MERIT. BUT PAGES 1-35 MUST GO. YOU SEE THAT DON’T YOU? YOU SEE THAT IT WILL MAKE THE NOVEL TIGHTER, STRONGER? THE AUTHOR DOES NOT SEE THAT AT ALL. THE AUTHOR IS GAZING AT MY THROAT.
THEN, AFTER THE OPENING ACTS, IT’S ONTO THE MAIN EVENT, LINE EDITING, WHERE THE TWO OF US GO OVER LINE BY LINE, PARAGRAPH BY PARAGRAPH, CHAPTER BY CHAPTER, THE ENTIRE WORK. IT’S MY JOB TO ENSURE THAT THE PLOT STRUCTURE IS SOLID, THERE IS LITTLE OR NO REPETITION, THE CHARACTERS ARE WELL-ROUNDED, THE PHYSICAL SETTING IS AUTHENTIC AND HELPFUL TO THE STORY. I TRY TO ENGAGE THE AUTHOR IN JOINING ME IN WHAT I CALL MY LITERARY CONVERSIONS. I HAVE LEARNED THAT I CAN NEVER GET HIM OR HER TO AGREE WITH THEM ALL, BUT I KEEP PROSELYTIZING ANYWAY.
NO. 1) NEVER START A STORY WITH THE WEATHER. I LEARNED THIS FROM ELMORE LEONARD, A MASTER OF THE THRILLER GENRE, WHO WRITES IN A WAY I ADMIRE, MINIMALIST SPARE. I BREAK THIS RULE OFTEN, UNFORTUNATELY. PROBABLY BECAUSE I GREW UP READING BOOKS THAT BEGAN ‘IT WAS A DARK AND STORMY NIGHT”. BUT THAT WAS THEN AND THIS IS NOW. MY NO. 2RULE ) MAKE THE FIRST PARAGRAPH SO GRIPPING, SO EXHILIRATING, THAT THE READER CAN’T RESIST GOING ON. IF YOU ONLY KNEW HOW MANY BOOKS HAVE BEEN THROWN DOWN IN DISGUST AFTER THE FIRST PAGE, YOU’D UNDERSTAND MY ADAMANCE ON THIS POINT. 3) WRITE TIGHT. DON’T RAMBLE. THERE’S A LOT OF COMPETITION OUT THERE. YOU MIGHT BE AWARE OF TWO HIGHLY LAUDED RECENT TITLES: LIFE BY THE ROLLING STONE KEITH RICHARDS AND THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MARK TWAIN, BOTH MORE THAN 500 PAGES. (I THINK THE MARK TWAIN IS ALMOST 800 AND THAT’S JUST VOL 1.) WHAT ARE THE PUBLISHERS THINKING OF EVEN THE LIKES OF US BOOKIES ARE NOT GOING TO BE CAPTIVATED BY SUCH LANGUAGE HYSTERIA. I FEEL THAT IF A NOVEL CAN’T FIND OIL IN 300 PAGES OR LESS, THEY SHOULD STOP BORING. 4) GO EASY ON ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS. FOR SOME REASON, THERE IS A SUPERFLUITY OF THESE TWO PARTS OF SPEECH IN ROMANCE NOVELS. AND 5) THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE OF ALL, ALWAYS WRITE WITH THE READER IN MIND. SINCE WE PUBLISH MOSTLY NOVELS, I IMAGINE THAT MY READER IS GENERALLY A COLLEGE-EDUCATED WOMAN, OCCASIONALLY A MAN, WHO ENJOYS A GOOD MAIN-STREAM READ, ENTERTAINING BUT POSSESSING, HOPEFULLY, SOME NEW IDEAS TO BE THOUGHT ABOUT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH ALL THESE VITAL CONVERSIONS, THE EDITORIAL/WRITER RELATIONSHIP IS NOT FOR SISSIES. BUT I STILL BELIEVE, IN SPITE OF CERTAIN EVIDENCE OF HYSTERICS AND FOUL LANGUAGE THAT HAS COME MY WAY, THAT THE MAJORITY OF EDITED WRITERS, NO MATTER HOW RELUCTANT, EVENTUALLY EXPERIENCE AT LEAST A SMALL FRISSON OF SATISFACTION. THERE WILL BE NO COMPLIMENTS AT THE END, BUT I BELIEVE HE RECOGNIZES THAT HIS WRITING HAS BECOME SMOOTHER, CLEARER, MORE FELICITOUS, MORE STYLISH. AND THAT ANTAGONISM OF THREE WEEKS EARLIER WHEN I SUGGESTED THAT IT ISN’T A GOOD IDEA TO GIVE TOO MUCH EMPHASIS TO A CHARACTER WHO IS KILLED OFF IN THE FIRST CHAPTER AND, FURTHERMORE, TELLING THE STORY WITH TOO MANY POV’S IS HARD TO DO SUCCESSFULLY UNLESS YOU ARE WILLIAM FAULKNER, HAS SOMEWHAT WANED. WORN DOWN BY MY PERSISTENCE. NOW THE AUTHOR WANTS NOTHING BUT THE END OF THE PROCESS, FOLLOWED BY A GOOD, STRONG DRINK.
I CAN HEAR YOU THINKING, “SO, WHY DO YOU TORTURE YOURSELF AND THE WRITER LIKE THIS? WHY NOT REJECT HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE AND SAVE BOTH OF YOU A LOT OF TROUBLE?”
THE ANSWER IS TWO-FOLD. FIRST, THERE MUST BE A BIT OF THE MASOCHIST IN MANY EDITORS. WE FIND A BEAUTIFUL PUZZLE THAT HAS POSSIBILITIES LURKING AMID THE INCOHERENT AND THE INCHOATE, IF ONLY WE CAN CONVINCE THE AUTHOR THAT THE CHANGES WILLBE MODEST AND REQUIRE, AT THE MOST, A PAGE OR TWO OF REWRITE. AND MORE OFTEN THAN I LIKE TO ADMIT, I HAVE PLUNGED IN WITHOUT ADEQUATELY TESTING THE WATER FOR SHARKS. INSTEAD, I, WHO LOVES WRITING NOT WISELY BUT TOO WELL, FIND MYSELF ACCEPTING A MS BECAUSE I LIKE ONLY ONE OF THE MANY ELEMENTS OF THE WORK, PERHAPS JUST THE CONCEPT OR ITS EXOTIC SETTING OR THE HORSE THE HERO RODE IN ON.
SO I TAKE MANY MORE CHANCES THAN I SHOULD. I WORKED ONCE WITH A GUY WHO HAD SERVED TIME IN JAIL FOR A YOUTHFUL DRUG OFFENSE. HE WROTE A MARVEL OF A NATURALISTIC NOVEL BASED ON HIS EXPERIENCES. THE STORY CENTERED AROUND A SOCIOPATHIC JAIL BIRD AND THE SORRY AFTERMATH OF HIS FREEDOM. IT WAS A RAW AND TOUGH STORY, AND I WANTED THE WORK EVEN THOUGH I KNEW IT WOULDN’T BE MOST READERS’ MEAT AND POTATOES, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS THE BEST DEPICTION OF PRISON LIFE THAT I WOULD EVER GET TO PUBLISH. TO ME, THAT WORK WILL ALWAYS BE A TOP NOTCH ORIGINAL. BUT WHAT HAPPENED? TODAY THAT GUY IS A PRIZE-WINNING YOUNG ADULT WRITER. I OFTEN ASK MYSELF: WHICH WAS MY BIGGEST MISTAKE--MY HEAVY HANDED EDITING THAT I THOUGHT WAS ONLY APPROPRIATE FOR SUCH A SUBJECT AND THAT HE COULD DEAL WITH OR, JUST AS I FEARED, THE SUBSEQUENT INDIFFERENCE OF THE READING PUBLIC? WHICHEVER OR BOTH, I’LL NEVER KNOW, BUT I HOPE (BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER READ HIS YA WORKS), HE ISN’T TEACHING YOUNG PEOPLE HOW TO GET OUT OF JAIL FREE.
AND EVEN WHEN FINALLY, AFTER PAGES AND PAGES OF DELETIONS AND REWRITING, THE HEROINE HAVING BEEN CHANGED FROM A SEXY BABE TO A TRANSVESTITE AND THE SETTING MOVED FROM DAYTON, OHIO, TO MALIBU, THAT TITLE GOES OUT INTO THE WORLD, BUT THE AGONY IS NOT OVER. REALLY, IT’S JUST STARTING. WILL IT GET ROTTEN REVIEWS? WILL IT GET A REVIEW AT ALL? WILL ANYONE OTHER THAN THE WRITER’S MOTHER READ IT? I REMEMBER A YOUNG WOMAN FROM THE MIDWEST WHO SENT ME WHAT IS KNOWN AS ‘CHICK LIT’, A ROMANCE NOVEL, ONE OF MY FEW NOVELS WITH A HAPPY ENDING. BUT A WORK OF SUCH CHARM, SUCH HUMOR. IT WAS ABOUT A HOMEY BEAUTY PARLOR THAT SERVED AS A SHRINK’S COUCH FOR BOTH CUSTOMERS AND EMPLOYEES. WE SLAVED OVER THAT WORK, STRUGGLING TO SAVE THE GOOD PARTS AND DELETE THE MAJOR IRRELEVANCIES. AND WHEN WE FINISHED AND I HOPED THE AUTHOR WOULD BE PLEASED WITH THE RESULT, SHE THREW A FIT WHEN I TOLD HER NOT TO GET UPSET IF THE NYTIMES DIDN’T REVIEW HER BOOK. SHE CRIED OUT, “CAN’T YOU MAKE THEM?”
TO MY UTTER SURPRISE, WHILE I WAS CORRECT AND THE NYTIMES DID NOT REVIEW THE WORK, WORD OF MOUTH AMONG READERS AND BOOK SELLERS MADE PATTY JANE’S HOUSE OF CURL THE MOST FINANCIALLY SUCCESSFUL TITLE BRIDGE WORKS EVER PUBLISHED. (THE AUTHOR’S SEXY BOOK JACKET PHOTO DIDN’T HURT, EITHER.)
BUT BECAUSE SHE NEEDED SUCH HEAVY EDITING, WE ELECTED NOT TO TAKE HER ON FOR A SECOND WORK, WHICH WAS NOT AS COMPELLING AS THE FIRST, FEELING THAT THE EDITING WOULD BE TOO MUCH OF A LOAD. THAT WAS A FIRST CLASS MISTAKE. SHE WENT ELSEWHERE AND HAS BECOME A STAPLE IN THE CHICK LIT FIELD. ON THE OTHER HAND, SINCE SHE WOULD ALWAYS RESENT ME FOR NEVER GETTING HER REVIEWED BY THE NEW YORK TIMES, MAYBE I WAS SMART ENOUGH TO QUIT WHILE I WAS AHEAD.
SOMETIMES, IT ONLY TAKES THAT ONE SUCCESSFUL TITLE FOR WRITERS TO ANNOUNCE THAT WITH SPELLCHECK AND THEIR OWN SELF-CONFIDENCE, FROM HERE ON THEY WILL EDIT THEMSELVES. ONE OF OUR AUTHORS, PRONOUNCED A NATURAL” BY NO LESS THAN MICHIKO KAKUTANI, DID JUST THAT. HE WAS AN ENGLISH PROFESSOR, AN OLDER WRITER TO BE STARTING OUT. BUT HIS FIRST NOVEL WAS AN ABSOLUTELY PITCH-PERFECT MELD OF TRAGIC-COMEDY. HIS STORY WAS ABOUT A GROUP OF ELDERLY DENIZENS OF A RETIREMENT HOME PUTTING ON THE PLAY, HAMLET. I WAS SO IMPRESSED AT HOW WELL THE AUTHOR PORTRAYED THESE OLD FOLKS, KNEW THE CHARACTERS, THEIR FOIBLES, THEIR WEAKNESSES, THEIR HUMOR. ALL HE NEEDED TO CHANGE WAS THE COLD AND UNCOMPROMISING PERSONA OF HIS ELDERLY PROTAGONIST. WE GAVE THIS MAN, A HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR, SOME EMOTIONS AND SOME WEAKNESSES. THE PRINCE OF WEST END AVENUE TOOK OFF IN SALES AND AWARDS. AFTER A SECOND TITLE FOR US, THE AUTHOR LEFT TO GO ON TO A FANCY AGENT AND A BIGGER PUBLISHING HOUSE, WHEREUPON HIS EGO, BOLSTERED BY FAME AND FORTUNE, CAUSED HIM TO PRONOUNCE IN PUBLIC THAT HE PERSONALLY FELT EDITORS WERE UNNECESSARY. I WON’T BE SO IMMODEST AS TO SUGGEST THAT THE MORAL IS OBVIOUS, BUT THIS PARTICULAR WRITER SUBSEQUENTLY DROPPED OUT OF SIGHT. TO US LITERARY MEDDLERS, A WRITER, NO MATTER HOW SKILLED, WILL ALWAYS NEED SOMEONE OBJECTIVE TO HELP POLISH HIS MATERIAL, SOMEONE TO BE A SURROGATE FOR THE READER. WHAT GOES ON TO ACCOMPLISH THIS IS AS UNCLEAR TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD AS A SUCCESSFUL MARRIAGE, BUT MAYBE I HAVE GIVEN YOU SOME HINTS.
I AM IMMENSELY PROUD OF THE ALMOST TWO HUNDRED WRITERS WHO HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BY BRIDGE WORKS IN 20 YEARS AND I FEEL VINDICATED, IN MANY CASES, BY THOSE WHO HAVE WON PRIZES, SECURED MOVIE PRODUCTION CONTRACTS OR GONE ON TO LARGER AND MORE DEEP-POCKETED PUBLISHING HOUSES. IT’S GOOD FOR THEM AND GOOD P.R. FOR US, THE FARM TEAM. TOM PERROTTA, FOR INSTANCE, A FIRST-TIME AUTHOR WHO, AFTER GETTING LOTS OF PUBLICITY WITH OUR “BAD HAIR DAY”, A SENSITIVE STUDY OF A BOY’S ADOLESCENCE, LEFT ME IN A HUFF (IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EDITING) FOR A BIG AGENT AND A LARGE PUBLISHING HOUSE. SINCE THEN HE HAS WRITTEN A SERIES OF FORGETTABLE NOVELS THAT, FORTUNATELY FOR HIM, MAKE GOOD MOVIES. (ELECTION, LITTLE CHILDREN.) I’VE ALWAYS FANTASIZED THAT IF HE HAD STAYED WITH ME, HIS SUBSEQUENT BOOKS COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER WRITTEN AND HOLLYWOOD WOULD HAVE COME CALLING, TOO. BUT, LET’S FACE IT. AS I SAID, EDITING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE. WHAT YOU THINK WILL BE FANTASTIC IS IGNORED COMPLETELY, WHILE YOU PERSONALLY DISLIKE YOURSELF IS EATEN UP BY THE READING PUBLIC. YOU WIN SOME, YOU LOSE SOME.
AND THE TRUTH IS, NEITHER OF US, AUTHOR AND EDITOR, WILL EVER BE FULLY SATISFIED AT THE END OF THE PROCESS. NOR CAN IT BE SAID THAT THE PROCESS HAS BROUGHT US CLOSER TO A PEACE TREATY. THE WRITER WILL TELL HIS FRIENDS THAT REALLY VERY FEW CHANGES WERE MADE, BARBARA HARDLY TOUCHED A THING. I AM SURE THAT WHAT I TOUCHED WAS THE MAJOR REASON FOR LIFTING THIS GUY OUT OF ANONYMITY. THERE WAS A MAJOR SCANDAL IN THE WRITING WORLD A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN THE WIDOW OF RAYMOND CARVER, THE CELEBRATED SHORT STORY WRITER, DECIDED THAT SHE (AND BY EXTENSION, HER LATE HUSBAND) WAS DISSATISFIED WITH THE RESULT OF HIS COLLABORATION WITH GORDON LISH, A CELEBRATED EDITOR. SHE WISHED TO REPUBLISH CARVER’S WORKS IN THEIR ORIGINAL, UNEDITED STATE. NOW, SOME SAY THAT IT WAS GORDON LISH’S CAREFUL CUTTING OF CARVER’S OFTEN ROUTINE WRITING THAT MADE THE WRITER FAMOUS AS THE EPITOME OF MINIMALISM. NATURALLY, THE PUBLISHERS REFUSED TO CHANGE A WORD OF THE WORKS THEY HAD SPONSORED. SO, EVEN WHEN AUTHORS ARE UNHAPPY, SOMETIMES EDITORS JUST HAVE TO SAY, “TAKE TWO ASPIRIN AND CALL ME IN THE MORNING”.
BUT WHILE I EXPECT THE WRITER TO STRAIGHTEN UP HER BACK AND HER DOUBTS, AND COME BACK THE NEXT DAY FOR MORE OF THE SAME, I STILL HAVE NOTHING BUT RESPECT AND AWE FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING I HAVE ONLY DONE ONCE, GOTTEN A BOOK PUBLISHED. AND DESPITE OCCASIONAL BACK PATS TO MYSELF, I KNOW FULL WELL THAT IT IS THE AUTHOR’S IMAGINATION AND YEARS OF WORK THAT HAVE BROUGHT THIS TITLE TO THE LIGHT OF DAY. I HAVE ONLY BEEN THE MIDWIFE IN A PROCESS THAT SEEMS LIKE A MIRACLE, A WORK OF ART THAT, WITH LUCK, MAY LAST FOREVER.
SO, I THINK I’VE TOLD YOU ENOUGH ABOUT THAT SO-CALLED VITAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EDITOR AND WRITER. AND WHILE IT ISN’T ALWAYS GOOD TO PULL ASIDE THE CURTAIN TO REVEAL THE PROPS LYING AROUND BACKSTAGE, IN THE END BOOKS AND WRITERS STILL ENTHRALL US ALL. WE INTUIT THAT WE ARE IN THE PRESENCE OF GREATNESS. AND MOSTLY WE ARE. I’VE TRIED NOT TO BE JUST ANOTHER PROVIDER OF LONG FORM CONTENT (WHAT A PHRASE!). I’VE TRIED NOT TO PUBLICLY PRAISE LITERARY WORKS, WHILE PUBLISHING MOSTLY MASS MARKET STUFF, BECAUSE IT SELLS LIKE BAGELS AND BRINGS IN THE MONEY. AND WHILE I REALIZE I’M RUNNING A BUSINESS THAT CAN’T SURVIVE UNLESS SALES ARE GOOD, I HAVE DONE MY BEST NOT TO COMPROMISE WITH QUALITY. I’VE NEVER PUBLISHED FORMULAIC BEST SELLERS, WRITTEN BY COMMITTE. IVE ALWAYS STRIVED TO NURTURE THE BEST WRITERS I CAN FIND, PUTTING OUT THE BEST WORK THAT CIRCUMSTANCES PERMIT. MAYBE NO PULITZERS OR FAREWELL KISSES, BUT I’LL KEEP HONORING BRIDGE WORKS’S AUTHORS WHILE LOOKING FORWARD TO FUTURE SPARRING PARTNERS.
AND JUST A POSTSCRIPT. IF YOU, GOOD PEOPLE WHO HAVE SAT SO PATIENTLY WHILE I RANTED ON, CAN DO ONE THING FOR OUR CIVILIZATION, KEEP PROMOTING READING AND WRITING. IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN OR ARE CLOSE TO FRIENDS’ CHILDREN, HEAP THE BOOKS ON THEM. DON’T WORRY TOO MUCH IF YOU HATE HARRY POTTER OR THINK ZOMBIES AND VAMPIRES ARE HORRIBLY INAPPROPRIATE FOR YOUNGSTERS. IF THE KIDS WILL ONLY READ A BOOK ON A KINDLE OR AN IPAD. BUY THEM A KINDLE. BUY THEM AN IPAD. WHATEVER IT TAKES. LONG AGO, WHILE GOING FOR A GRADUATE DEGREE, I NOTICED A LOT OF MY CLASSMATES WERE NODDING OUT IN CLASS, WHEN THEY WEREN’T YELLING “OFF THE PIGS” OUTSIDE SCHOOL. FEELING DEPRESSED ABOUT THE STATE OF THE WORLD AND ITS YOUNG PEOPLE ONE DAY, I NOTICED A SLOGAN PAINTED ON A WALL THAT READ, “HOOKED ON BOOKS”. I’VE DONE MY BEST TO KEEP THAT APHORISM ALIVE. JOIN ME AND ENSURE THAT THE WORLD WON’T FORGET IT, EITHER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS?
REMEMBER TO HAND OUT TWO QUESTIONS FOR STARTERS.
IN MY OWN PRESS, CHOOSING WHO WILL MAKE THE CUT SHOULD BE EASY, BECAUSE I ALONE DECIDE WHAT WE WILL PUBLISH. I AM A COMMITTEE OF ONE, THE MOST EFFICIENT KIND. I CAN TELL FROM THE FIRST PAGE OF A MANUSCRIPT WHETHER IT CAN BE TRANSFORMED INTO A PUBLISHABLE TITLE THAT WILL APPEAL TO READERS. MOST OF WHAT I CHOOSE IS INITIALLY ROUGHER THAN SUBMISSIONS TO THE LARGE PRESSES BECAUSE IT’S A GIVEN THAT IF A SMALL PRESS RECEIVES A SUBMISSION, IT HAS BEEN THE ROUNDS OF THE BIGGIES, UNTIL IT FINALLY LANDS IN MY MAIL BOX, SOMEWHAT TATTERED AROUND THE EDGES. THAT’S WHY MOST OF OUR AUTHORS ARE FIRST-TIME WRITERS. BUT THERE’S GOOD NEWS TO THIS SITUATION. MOST OF THESE FIRST-TIMERS HAVE BEEN REJECTED AND EJECTED FROM THE BIG PUBLISHERS SO OFTEN THEY HAVE LOST ALL HOPE IN THEIR PRECIOUS BABIES. BUT NOW….HEY, IT’S NOT RANDOM HOUSE, BUT I’M GOING TO BE PUBLISHED!!!
AND, SOMETIMES THROUGH THE ODDEST OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE RIGHT PHASE OF THE MOON, I RECEIVE A MANUSCRIPT THAT IS PRACTICALLY PERFECT. I BRIEFLY PONDER WHY FARRAR, STRAUS AND GIROUX TURNED IT DOWN. THEN I DO A LITTLE JIG. I’VE GOT A LIVE ONE, THAT RAREST OF BIRDS, A GOOD WRITER WHO CAN PUT IT ALL TOGETHER IN A CLEVER, UNDERSTATED WAY WITH LITTLE HELP FROM ME. I WORKED WITH ONE GENTLEMAN WHO HAD ALREADY PUBLISHED TWO WORKS, BUT HE HADN’T BEEN EDITED IN EITHER OF THEM. MAYBE HIS FORMER EDITORS WERE SCARED OF HIM. I CERTAINLY WAS. HE WAS A FORMIDABLE MAN, A HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICER, ERECT, TALL, SERIOUS IN DEMEANOR AND WRITING STYLE. BUT BECAUSE HE WAS INTERESTED IN LEARNING THE EDITING PROCESS, HE RARELY COMPLAINED ABOUT ANY CHANGES AND WE HAD A WONDERFUL, NO-STRESS TIME TOGETHER. HIS WORK WAS PERHAPS MY FAVORITE OF ALL--A SAD, BUT HIGHLY AUTHENTIC STORY ABOUT THE TRAGEDY OF PUSHING ONE’S CHILD TOO HARD TO GAIN A SELECTIVE COLLEGE ADMISSION. WE KNOW THIS HAPPENS ALL TOO OFTEN—THE PUSHY PARENTS, THE HAPLESS CHILD VICTIM. MY AUTHOR KNEW THE SITUATION FIRST HAND. AND WE BOTH KNEW BEFORE WE STARTED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO HAPPY ENDING. I DON’T KNOW; MAYBE I GOT HIS MS BECAUSE I’M KNOWN AS THE EDITOR OF UNHAPPY ENDINGS.
LIKE MOST EDITORS, I HAVE MY OWN RULES AND PRACTICES. EDITING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE. ONCE YOU VENTURE BEYOND THE CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE, YOU’RE ON YOUR OWN. HOW I WORK WITH A MANUSCRIPT IS COMPLETELY, UTTERLY MY OWN DESIGN AND EXECUTION. I START WITH THE PRELIMS. AS SOON AS THE CONTRACT IS SIGNED, I TRY TO SPEND SOME QUALITY TIME DETERMINING THROUGH EMAILS AND PHONE CONVERSATIONS THE WRITER’S ABILITY TO MAKE CHANGES TO HER WORK WITHOUT FREAKING OUT. BEFORE PUTTING ONE DELETE ON THE PAGE, I SPEND A LOT OF TIME PRAISING WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT THE WORK AND WHY I LIKE IT. THIS IS MY DISARMING TACTIC, MY REASSURING TACTIC, MY PERHAPS HYPOCRITICAL TACTIC. IT MOSTLY WORKS, BUT NOT FOR LONG ENOUGH. ALL TOO SOON, MY OPTIMISM IS TRIED, I SEE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A SLOG, WHILE THE AUTHOR, ALTERNATELY DESPAIRS AND CONTEMPLATES MY DEMISE. EXASPERATED, HE GOES, “WHY DID YOU TAKE THIS BLEEPING MANUSCRIPT IF YOU BASICALLY DON’T LIKE IT?” THIS REQUIRES MORE REASSURANCE ON MY PART, AS I CONTINUE TO COUNTER THAT THE WORK AS A WHOLE HAS MERIT. BUT PAGES 1-35 MUST GO. YOU SEE THAT DON’T YOU? YOU SEE THAT IT WILL MAKE THE NOVEL TIGHTER, STRONGER? THE AUTHOR DOES NOT SEE THAT AT ALL. THE AUTHOR IS GAZING AT MY THROAT.
THEN, AFTER THE OPENING ACTS, IT’S ONTO THE MAIN EVENT, LINE EDITING, WHERE THE TWO OF US GO OVER LINE BY LINE, PARAGRAPH BY PARAGRAPH, CHAPTER BY CHAPTER, THE ENTIRE WORK. IT’S MY JOB TO ENSURE THAT THE PLOT STRUCTURE IS SOLID, THERE IS LITTLE OR NO REPETITION, THE CHARACTERS ARE WELL-ROUNDED, THE PHYSICAL SETTING IS AUTHENTIC AND HELPFUL TO THE STORY. I TRY TO ENGAGE THE AUTHOR IN JOINING ME IN WHAT I CALL MY LITERARY CONVERSIONS. I HAVE LEARNED THAT I CAN NEVER GET HIM OR HER TO AGREE WITH THEM ALL, BUT I KEEP PROSELYTIZING ANYWAY.
NO. 1) NEVER START A STORY WITH THE WEATHER. I LEARNED THIS FROM ELMORE LEONARD, A MASTER OF THE THRILLER GENRE, WHO WRITES IN A WAY I ADMIRE, MINIMALIST SPARE. I BREAK THIS RULE OFTEN, UNFORTUNATELY. PROBABLY BECAUSE I GREW UP READING BOOKS THAT BEGAN ‘IT WAS A DARK AND STORMY NIGHT”. BUT THAT WAS THEN AND THIS IS NOW. MY NO. 2RULE ) MAKE THE FIRST PARAGRAPH SO GRIPPING, SO EXHILIRATING, THAT THE READER CAN’T RESIST GOING ON. IF YOU ONLY KNEW HOW MANY BOOKS HAVE BEEN THROWN DOWN IN DISGUST AFTER THE FIRST PAGE, YOU’D UNDERSTAND MY ADAMANCE ON THIS POINT. 3) WRITE TIGHT. DON’T RAMBLE. THERE’S A LOT OF COMPETITION OUT THERE. YOU MIGHT BE AWARE OF TWO HIGHLY LAUDED RECENT TITLES: LIFE BY THE ROLLING STONE KEITH RICHARDS AND THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MARK TWAIN, BOTH MORE THAN 500 PAGES. (I THINK THE MARK TWAIN IS ALMOST 800 AND THAT’S JUST VOL 1.) WHAT ARE THE PUBLISHERS THINKING OF EVEN THE LIKES OF US BOOKIES ARE NOT GOING TO BE CAPTIVATED BY SUCH LANGUAGE HYSTERIA. I FEEL THAT IF A NOVEL CAN’T FIND OIL IN 300 PAGES OR LESS, THEY SHOULD STOP BORING. 4) GO EASY ON ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS. FOR SOME REASON, THERE IS A SUPERFLUITY OF THESE TWO PARTS OF SPEECH IN ROMANCE NOVELS. AND 5) THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE OF ALL, ALWAYS WRITE WITH THE READER IN MIND. SINCE WE PUBLISH MOSTLY NOVELS, I IMAGINE THAT MY READER IS GENERALLY A COLLEGE-EDUCATED WOMAN, OCCASIONALLY A MAN, WHO ENJOYS A GOOD MAIN-STREAM READ, ENTERTAINING BUT POSSESSING, HOPEFULLY, SOME NEW IDEAS TO BE THOUGHT ABOUT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH ALL THESE VITAL CONVERSIONS, THE EDITORIAL/WRITER RELATIONSHIP IS NOT FOR SISSIES. BUT I STILL BELIEVE, IN SPITE OF CERTAIN EVIDENCE OF HYSTERICS AND FOUL LANGUAGE THAT HAS COME MY WAY, THAT THE MAJORITY OF EDITED WRITERS, NO MATTER HOW RELUCTANT, EVENTUALLY EXPERIENCE AT LEAST A SMALL FRISSON OF SATISFACTION. THERE WILL BE NO COMPLIMENTS AT THE END, BUT I BELIEVE HE RECOGNIZES THAT HIS WRITING HAS BECOME SMOOTHER, CLEARER, MORE FELICITOUS, MORE STYLISH. AND THAT ANTAGONISM OF THREE WEEKS EARLIER WHEN I SUGGESTED THAT IT ISN’T A GOOD IDEA TO GIVE TOO MUCH EMPHASIS TO A CHARACTER WHO IS KILLED OFF IN THE FIRST CHAPTER AND, FURTHERMORE, TELLING THE STORY WITH TOO MANY POV’S IS HARD TO DO SUCCESSFULLY UNLESS YOU ARE WILLIAM FAULKNER, HAS SOMEWHAT WANED. WORN DOWN BY MY PERSISTENCE. NOW THE AUTHOR WANTS NOTHING BUT THE END OF THE PROCESS, FOLLOWED BY A GOOD, STRONG DRINK.
I CAN HEAR YOU THINKING, “SO, WHY DO YOU TORTURE YOURSELF AND THE WRITER LIKE THIS? WHY NOT REJECT HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE AND SAVE BOTH OF YOU A LOT OF TROUBLE?”
THE ANSWER IS TWO-FOLD. FIRST, THERE MUST BE A BIT OF THE MASOCHIST IN MANY EDITORS. WE FIND A BEAUTIFUL PUZZLE THAT HAS POSSIBILITIES LURKING AMID THE INCOHERENT AND THE INCHOATE, IF ONLY WE CAN CONVINCE THE AUTHOR THAT THE CHANGES WILLBE MODEST AND REQUIRE, AT THE MOST, A PAGE OR TWO OF REWRITE. AND MORE OFTEN THAN I LIKE TO ADMIT, I HAVE PLUNGED IN WITHOUT ADEQUATELY TESTING THE WATER FOR SHARKS. INSTEAD, I, WHO LOVES WRITING NOT WISELY BUT TOO WELL, FIND MYSELF ACCEPTING A MS BECAUSE I LIKE ONLY ONE OF THE MANY ELEMENTS OF THE WORK, PERHAPS JUST THE CONCEPT OR ITS EXOTIC SETTING OR THE HORSE THE HERO RODE IN ON.
SO I TAKE MANY MORE CHANCES THAN I SHOULD. I WORKED ONCE WITH A GUY WHO HAD SERVED TIME IN JAIL FOR A YOUTHFUL DRUG OFFENSE. HE WROTE A MARVEL OF A NATURALISTIC NOVEL BASED ON HIS EXPERIENCES. THE STORY CENTERED AROUND A SOCIOPATHIC JAIL BIRD AND THE SORRY AFTERMATH OF HIS FREEDOM. IT WAS A RAW AND TOUGH STORY, AND I WANTED THE WORK EVEN THOUGH I KNEW IT WOULDN’T BE MOST READERS’ MEAT AND POTATOES, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS THE BEST DEPICTION OF PRISON LIFE THAT I WOULD EVER GET TO PUBLISH. TO ME, THAT WORK WILL ALWAYS BE A TOP NOTCH ORIGINAL. BUT WHAT HAPPENED? TODAY THAT GUY IS A PRIZE-WINNING YOUNG ADULT WRITER. I OFTEN ASK MYSELF: WHICH WAS MY BIGGEST MISTAKE--MY HEAVY HANDED EDITING THAT I THOUGHT WAS ONLY APPROPRIATE FOR SUCH A SUBJECT AND THAT HE COULD DEAL WITH OR, JUST AS I FEARED, THE SUBSEQUENT INDIFFERENCE OF THE READING PUBLIC? WHICHEVER OR BOTH, I’LL NEVER KNOW, BUT I HOPE (BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER READ HIS YA WORKS), HE ISN’T TEACHING YOUNG PEOPLE HOW TO GET OUT OF JAIL FREE.
AND EVEN WHEN FINALLY, AFTER PAGES AND PAGES OF DELETIONS AND REWRITING, THE HEROINE HAVING BEEN CHANGED FROM A SEXY BABE TO A TRANSVESTITE AND THE SETTING MOVED FROM DAYTON, OHIO, TO MALIBU, THAT TITLE GOES OUT INTO THE WORLD, BUT THE AGONY IS NOT OVER. REALLY, IT’S JUST STARTING. WILL IT GET ROTTEN REVIEWS? WILL IT GET A REVIEW AT ALL? WILL ANYONE OTHER THAN THE WRITER’S MOTHER READ IT? I REMEMBER A YOUNG WOMAN FROM THE MIDWEST WHO SENT ME WHAT IS KNOWN AS ‘CHICK LIT’, A ROMANCE NOVEL, ONE OF MY FEW NOVELS WITH A HAPPY ENDING. BUT A WORK OF SUCH CHARM, SUCH HUMOR. IT WAS ABOUT A HOMEY BEAUTY PARLOR THAT SERVED AS A SHRINK’S COUCH FOR BOTH CUSTOMERS AND EMPLOYEES. WE SLAVED OVER THAT WORK, STRUGGLING TO SAVE THE GOOD PARTS AND DELETE THE MAJOR IRRELEVANCIES. AND WHEN WE FINISHED AND I HOPED THE AUTHOR WOULD BE PLEASED WITH THE RESULT, SHE THREW A FIT WHEN I TOLD HER NOT TO GET UPSET IF THE NYTIMES DIDN’T REVIEW HER BOOK. SHE CRIED OUT, “CAN’T YOU MAKE THEM?”
TO MY UTTER SURPRISE, WHILE I WAS CORRECT AND THE NYTIMES DID NOT REVIEW THE WORK, WORD OF MOUTH AMONG READERS AND BOOK SELLERS MADE PATTY JANE’S HOUSE OF CURL THE MOST FINANCIALLY SUCCESSFUL TITLE BRIDGE WORKS EVER PUBLISHED. (THE AUTHOR’S SEXY BOOK JACKET PHOTO DIDN’T HURT, EITHER.)
BUT BECAUSE SHE NEEDED SUCH HEAVY EDITING, WE ELECTED NOT TO TAKE HER ON FOR A SECOND WORK, WHICH WAS NOT AS COMPELLING AS THE FIRST, FEELING THAT THE EDITING WOULD BE TOO MUCH OF A LOAD. THAT WAS A FIRST CLASS MISTAKE. SHE WENT ELSEWHERE AND HAS BECOME A STAPLE IN THE CHICK LIT FIELD. ON THE OTHER HAND, SINCE SHE WOULD ALWAYS RESENT ME FOR NEVER GETTING HER REVIEWED BY THE NEW YORK TIMES, MAYBE I WAS SMART ENOUGH TO QUIT WHILE I WAS AHEAD.
SOMETIMES, IT ONLY TAKES THAT ONE SUCCESSFUL TITLE FOR WRITERS TO ANNOUNCE THAT WITH SPELLCHECK AND THEIR OWN SELF-CONFIDENCE, FROM HERE ON THEY WILL EDIT THEMSELVES. ONE OF OUR AUTHORS, PRONOUNCED A NATURAL” BY NO LESS THAN MICHIKO KAKUTANI, DID JUST THAT. HE WAS AN ENGLISH PROFESSOR, AN OLDER WRITER TO BE STARTING OUT. BUT HIS FIRST NOVEL WAS AN ABSOLUTELY PITCH-PERFECT MELD OF TRAGIC-COMEDY. HIS STORY WAS ABOUT A GROUP OF ELDERLY DENIZENS OF A RETIREMENT HOME PUTTING ON THE PLAY, HAMLET. I WAS SO IMPRESSED AT HOW WELL THE AUTHOR PORTRAYED THESE OLD FOLKS, KNEW THE CHARACTERS, THEIR FOIBLES, THEIR WEAKNESSES, THEIR HUMOR. ALL HE NEEDED TO CHANGE WAS THE COLD AND UNCOMPROMISING PERSONA OF HIS ELDERLY PROTAGONIST. WE GAVE THIS MAN, A HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR, SOME EMOTIONS AND SOME WEAKNESSES. THE PRINCE OF WEST END AVENUE TOOK OFF IN SALES AND AWARDS. AFTER A SECOND TITLE FOR US, THE AUTHOR LEFT TO GO ON TO A FANCY AGENT AND A BIGGER PUBLISHING HOUSE, WHEREUPON HIS EGO, BOLSTERED BY FAME AND FORTUNE, CAUSED HIM TO PRONOUNCE IN PUBLIC THAT HE PERSONALLY FELT EDITORS WERE UNNECESSARY. I WON’T BE SO IMMODEST AS TO SUGGEST THAT THE MORAL IS OBVIOUS, BUT THIS PARTICULAR WRITER SUBSEQUENTLY DROPPED OUT OF SIGHT. TO US LITERARY MEDDLERS, A WRITER, NO MATTER HOW SKILLED, WILL ALWAYS NEED SOMEONE OBJECTIVE TO HELP POLISH HIS MATERIAL, SOMEONE TO BE A SURROGATE FOR THE READER. WHAT GOES ON TO ACCOMPLISH THIS IS AS UNCLEAR TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD AS A SUCCESSFUL MARRIAGE, BUT MAYBE I HAVE GIVEN YOU SOME HINTS.
I AM IMMENSELY PROUD OF THE ALMOST TWO HUNDRED WRITERS WHO HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BY BRIDGE WORKS IN 20 YEARS AND I FEEL VINDICATED, IN MANY CASES, BY THOSE WHO HAVE WON PRIZES, SECURED MOVIE PRODUCTION CONTRACTS OR GONE ON TO LARGER AND MORE DEEP-POCKETED PUBLISHING HOUSES. IT’S GOOD FOR THEM AND GOOD P.R. FOR US, THE FARM TEAM. TOM PERROTTA, FOR INSTANCE, A FIRST-TIME AUTHOR WHO, AFTER GETTING LOTS OF PUBLICITY WITH OUR “BAD HAIR DAY”, A SENSITIVE STUDY OF A BOY’S ADOLESCENCE, LEFT ME IN A HUFF (IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EDITING) FOR A BIG AGENT AND A LARGE PUBLISHING HOUSE. SINCE THEN HE HAS WRITTEN A SERIES OF FORGETTABLE NOVELS THAT, FORTUNATELY FOR HIM, MAKE GOOD MOVIES. (ELECTION, LITTLE CHILDREN.) I’VE ALWAYS FANTASIZED THAT IF HE HAD STAYED WITH ME, HIS SUBSEQUENT BOOKS COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER WRITTEN AND HOLLYWOOD WOULD HAVE COME CALLING, TOO. BUT, LET’S FACE IT. AS I SAID, EDITING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE. WHAT YOU THINK WILL BE FANTASTIC IS IGNORED COMPLETELY, WHILE YOU PERSONALLY DISLIKE YOURSELF IS EATEN UP BY THE READING PUBLIC. YOU WIN SOME, YOU LOSE SOME.
AND THE TRUTH IS, NEITHER OF US, AUTHOR AND EDITOR, WILL EVER BE FULLY SATISFIED AT THE END OF THE PROCESS. NOR CAN IT BE SAID THAT THE PROCESS HAS BROUGHT US CLOSER TO A PEACE TREATY. THE WRITER WILL TELL HIS FRIENDS THAT REALLY VERY FEW CHANGES WERE MADE, BARBARA HARDLY TOUCHED A THING. I AM SURE THAT WHAT I TOUCHED WAS THE MAJOR REASON FOR LIFTING THIS GUY OUT OF ANONYMITY. THERE WAS A MAJOR SCANDAL IN THE WRITING WORLD A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN THE WIDOW OF RAYMOND CARVER, THE CELEBRATED SHORT STORY WRITER, DECIDED THAT SHE (AND BY EXTENSION, HER LATE HUSBAND) WAS DISSATISFIED WITH THE RESULT OF HIS COLLABORATION WITH GORDON LISH, A CELEBRATED EDITOR. SHE WISHED TO REPUBLISH CARVER’S WORKS IN THEIR ORIGINAL, UNEDITED STATE. NOW, SOME SAY THAT IT WAS GORDON LISH’S CAREFUL CUTTING OF CARVER’S OFTEN ROUTINE WRITING THAT MADE THE WRITER FAMOUS AS THE EPITOME OF MINIMALISM. NATURALLY, THE PUBLISHERS REFUSED TO CHANGE A WORD OF THE WORKS THEY HAD SPONSORED. SO, EVEN WHEN AUTHORS ARE UNHAPPY, SOMETIMES EDITORS JUST HAVE TO SAY, “TAKE TWO ASPIRIN AND CALL ME IN THE MORNING”.
BUT WHILE I EXPECT THE WRITER TO STRAIGHTEN UP HER BACK AND HER DOUBTS, AND COME BACK THE NEXT DAY FOR MORE OF THE SAME, I STILL HAVE NOTHING BUT RESPECT AND AWE FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING I HAVE ONLY DONE ONCE, GOTTEN A BOOK PUBLISHED. AND DESPITE OCCASIONAL BACK PATS TO MYSELF, I KNOW FULL WELL THAT IT IS THE AUTHOR’S IMAGINATION AND YEARS OF WORK THAT HAVE BROUGHT THIS TITLE TO THE LIGHT OF DAY. I HAVE ONLY BEEN THE MIDWIFE IN A PROCESS THAT SEEMS LIKE A MIRACLE, A WORK OF ART THAT, WITH LUCK, MAY LAST FOREVER.
SO, I THINK I’VE TOLD YOU ENOUGH ABOUT THAT SO-CALLED VITAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EDITOR AND WRITER. AND WHILE IT ISN’T ALWAYS GOOD TO PULL ASIDE THE CURTAIN TO REVEAL THE PROPS LYING AROUND BACKSTAGE, IN THE END BOOKS AND WRITERS STILL ENTHRALL US ALL. WE INTUIT THAT WE ARE IN THE PRESENCE OF GREATNESS. AND MOSTLY WE ARE. I’VE TRIED NOT TO BE JUST ANOTHER PROVIDER OF LONG FORM CONTENT (WHAT A PHRASE!). I’VE TRIED NOT TO PUBLICLY PRAISE LITERARY WORKS, WHILE PUBLISHING MOSTLY MASS MARKET STUFF, BECAUSE IT SELLS LIKE BAGELS AND BRINGS IN THE MONEY. AND WHILE I REALIZE I’M RUNNING A BUSINESS THAT CAN’T SURVIVE UNLESS SALES ARE GOOD, I HAVE DONE MY BEST NOT TO COMPROMISE WITH QUALITY. I’VE NEVER PUBLISHED FORMULAIC BEST SELLERS, WRITTEN BY COMMITTE. IVE ALWAYS STRIVED TO NURTURE THE BEST WRITERS I CAN FIND, PUTTING OUT THE BEST WORK THAT CIRCUMSTANCES PERMIT. MAYBE NO PULITZERS OR FAREWELL KISSES, BUT I’LL KEEP HONORING BRIDGE WORKS’S AUTHORS WHILE LOOKING FORWARD TO FUTURE SPARRING PARTNERS.
AND JUST A POSTSCRIPT. IF YOU, GOOD PEOPLE WHO HAVE SAT SO PATIENTLY WHILE I RANTED ON, CAN DO ONE THING FOR OUR CIVILIZATION, KEEP PROMOTING READING AND WRITING. IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN OR ARE CLOSE TO FRIENDS’ CHILDREN, HEAP THE BOOKS ON THEM. DON’T WORRY TOO MUCH IF YOU HATE HARRY POTTER OR THINK ZOMBIES AND VAMPIRES ARE HORRIBLY INAPPROPRIATE FOR YOUNGSTERS. IF THE KIDS WILL ONLY READ A BOOK ON A KINDLE OR AN IPAD. BUY THEM A KINDLE. BUY THEM AN IPAD. WHATEVER IT TAKES. LONG AGO, WHILE GOING FOR A GRADUATE DEGREE, I NOTICED A LOT OF MY CLASSMATES WERE NODDING OUT IN CLASS, WHEN THEY WEREN’T YELLING “OFF THE PIGS” OUTSIDE SCHOOL. FEELING DEPRESSED ABOUT THE STATE OF THE WORLD AND ITS YOUNG PEOPLE ONE DAY, I NOTICED A SLOGAN PAINTED ON A WALL THAT READ, “HOOKED ON BOOKS”. I’VE DONE MY BEST TO KEEP THAT APHORISM ALIVE. JOIN ME AND ENSURE THAT THE WORLD WON’T FORGET IT, EITHER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS?
REMEMBER TO HAND OUT TWO QUESTIONS FOR STARTERS.
IN MY OWN PRESS, CHOOSING WHO WILL MAKE THE CUT SHOULD BE EASY, BECAUSE I ALONE DECIDE WHAT WE WILL PUBLISH. I AM A COMMITTEE OF ONE, THE MOST EFFICIENT KIND. I CAN TELL FROM THE FIRST PAGE OF A MANUSCRIPT WHETHER IT CAN BE TRANSFORMED INTO A PUBLISHABLE TITLE THAT WILL APPEAL TO READERS. MOST OF WHAT I CHOOSE IS INITIALLY ROUGHER THAN SUBMISSIONS TO THE LARGE PRESSES BECAUSE IT’S A GIVEN THAT IF A SMALL PRESS RECEIVES A SUBMISSION, IT HAS BEEN THE ROUNDS OF THE BIGGIES, UNTIL IT FINALLY LANDS IN MY MAIL BOX, SOMEWHAT TATTERED AROUND THE EDGES. THAT’S WHY MOST OF OUR AUTHORS ARE FIRST-TIME WRITERS. BUT THERE’S GOOD NEWS TO THIS SITUATION. MOST OF THESE FIRST-TIMERS HAVE BEEN REJECTED AND EJECTED FROM THE BIG PUBLISHERS SO OFTEN THEY HAVE LOST ALL HOPE IN THEIR PRECIOUS BABIES. BUT NOW….HEY, IT’S NOT RANDOM HOUSE, BUT I’M GOING TO BE PUBLISHED!!!
AND, SOMETIMES THROUGH THE ODDEST OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE RIGHT PHASE OF THE MOON, I RECEIVE A MANUSCRIPT THAT IS PRACTICALLY PERFECT. I BRIEFLY PONDER WHY FARRAR, STRAUS AND GIROUX TURNED IT DOWN. THEN I DO A LITTLE JIG. I’VE GOT A LIVE ONE, THAT RAREST OF BIRDS, A GOOD WRITER WHO CAN PUT IT ALL TOGETHER IN A CLEVER, UNDERSTATED WAY WITH LITTLE HELP FROM ME. I WORKED WITH ONE GENTLEMAN WHO HAD ALREADY PUBLISHED TWO WORKS, BUT HE HADN’T BEEN EDITED IN EITHER OF THEM. MAYBE HIS FORMER EDITORS WERE SCARED OF HIM. I CERTAINLY WAS. HE WAS A FORMIDABLE MAN, A HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICER, ERECT, TALL, SERIOUS IN DEMEANOR AND WRITING STYLE. BUT BECAUSE HE WAS INTERESTED IN LEARNING THE EDITING PROCESS, HE RARELY COMPLAINED ABOUT ANY CHANGES AND WE HAD A WONDERFUL, NO-STRESS TIME TOGETHER. HIS WORK WAS PERHAPS MY FAVORITE OF ALL--A SAD, BUT HIGHLY AUTHENTIC STORY ABOUT THE TRAGEDY OF PUSHING ONE’S CHILD TOO HARD TO GAIN A SELECTIVE COLLEGE ADMISSION. WE KNOW THIS HAPPENS ALL TOO OFTEN—THE PUSHY PARENTS, THE HAPLESS CHILD VICTIM. MY AUTHOR KNEW THE SITUATION FIRST HAND. AND WE BOTH KNEW BEFORE WE STARTED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO HAPPY ENDING. I DON’T KNOW; MAYBE I GOT HIS MS BECAUSE I’M KNOWN AS THE EDITOR OF UNHAPPY ENDINGS.
LIKE MOST EDITORS, I HAVE MY OWN RULES AND PRACTICES. EDITING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE. ONCE YOU VENTURE BEYOND THE CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE, YOU’RE ON YOUR OWN. HOW I WORK WITH A MANUSCRIPT IS COMPLETELY, UTTERLY MY OWN DESIGN AND EXECUTION. I START WITH THE PRELIMS. AS SOON AS THE CONTRACT IS SIGNED, I TRY TO SPEND SOME QUALITY TIME DETERMINING THROUGH EMAILS AND PHONE CONVERSATIONS THE WRITER’S ABILITY TO MAKE CHANGES TO HER WORK WITHOUT FREAKING OUT. BEFORE PUTTING ONE DELETE ON THE PAGE, I SPEND A LOT OF TIME PRAISING WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT THE WORK AND WHY I LIKE IT. THIS IS MY DISARMING TACTIC, MY REASSURING TACTIC, MY PERHAPS HYPOCRITICAL TACTIC. IT MOSTLY WORKS, BUT NOT FOR LONG ENOUGH. ALL TOO SOON, MY OPTIMISM IS TRIED, I SEE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A SLOG, WHILE THE AUTHOR, ALTERNATELY DESPAIRS AND CONTEMPLATES MY DEMISE. EXASPERATED, HE GOES, “WHY DID YOU TAKE THIS BLEEPING MANUSCRIPT IF YOU BASICALLY DON’T LIKE IT?” THIS REQUIRES MORE REASSURANCE ON MY PART, AS I CONTINUE TO COUNTER THAT THE WORK AS A WHOLE HAS MERIT. BUT PAGES 1-35 MUST GO. YOU SEE THAT DON’T YOU? YOU SEE THAT IT WILL MAKE THE NOVEL TIGHTER, STRONGER? THE AUTHOR DOES NOT SEE THAT AT ALL. THE AUTHOR IS GAZING AT MY THROAT.
THEN, AFTER THE OPENING ACTS, IT’S ONTO THE MAIN EVENT, LINE EDITING, WHERE THE TWO OF US GO OVER LINE BY LINE, PARAGRAPH BY PARAGRAPH, CHAPTER BY CHAPTER, THE ENTIRE WORK. IT’S MY JOB TO ENSURE THAT THE PLOT STRUCTURE IS SOLID, THERE IS LITTLE OR NO REPETITION, THE CHARACTERS ARE WELL-ROUNDED, THE PHYSICAL SETTING IS AUTHENTIC AND HELPFUL TO THE STORY. I TRY TO ENGAGE THE AUTHOR IN JOINING ME IN WHAT I CALL MY LITERARY CONVERSIONS. I HAVE LEARNED THAT I CAN NEVER GET HIM OR HER TO AGREE WITH THEM ALL, BUT I KEEP PROSELYTIZING ANYWAY.
NO. 1) NEVER START A STORY WITH THE WEATHER. I LEARNED THIS FROM ELMORE LEONARD, A MASTER OF THE THRILLER GENRE, WHO WRITES IN A WAY I ADMIRE, MINIMALIST SPARE. I BREAK THIS RULE OFTEN, UNFORTUNATELY. PROBABLY BECAUSE I GREW UP READING BOOKS THAT BEGAN ‘IT WAS A DARK AND STORMY NIGHT”. BUT THAT WAS THEN AND THIS IS NOW. MY NO. 2RULE ) MAKE THE FIRST PARAGRAPH SO GRIPPING, SO EXHILIRATING, THAT THE READER CAN’T RESIST GOING ON. IF YOU ONLY KNEW HOW MANY BOOKS HAVE BEEN THROWN DOWN IN DISGUST AFTER THE FIRST PAGE, YOU’D UNDERSTAND MY ADAMANCE ON THIS POINT. 3) WRITE TIGHT. DON’T RAMBLE. THERE’S A LOT OF COMPETITION OUT THERE. YOU MIGHT BE AWARE OF TWO HIGHLY LAUDED RECENT TITLES: LIFE BY THE ROLLING STONE KEITH RICHARDS AND THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MARK TWAIN, BOTH MORE THAN 500 PAGES. (I THINK THE MARK TWAIN IS ALMOST 800 AND THAT’S JUST VOL 1.) WHAT ARE THE PUBLISHERS THINKING OF EVEN THE LIKES OF US BOOKIES ARE NOT GOING TO BE CAPTIVATED BY SUCH LANGUAGE HYSTERIA. I FEEL THAT IF A NOVEL CAN’T FIND OIL IN 300 PAGES OR LESS, THEY SHOULD STOP BORING. 4) GO EASY ON ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS. FOR SOME REASON, THERE IS A SUPERFLUITY OF THESE TWO PARTS OF SPEECH IN ROMANCE NOVELS. AND 5) THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE OF ALL, ALWAYS WRITE WITH THE READER IN MIND. SINCE WE PUBLISH MOSTLY NOVELS, I IMAGINE THAT MY READER IS GENERALLY A COLLEGE-EDUCATED WOMAN, OCCASIONALLY A MAN, WHO ENJOYS A GOOD MAIN-STREAM READ, ENTERTAINING BUT POSSESSING, HOPEFULLY, SOME NEW IDEAS TO BE THOUGHT ABOUT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH ALL THESE VITAL CONVERSIONS, THE EDITORIAL/WRITER RELATIONSHIP IS NOT FOR SISSIES. BUT I STILL BELIEVE, IN SPITE OF CERTAIN EVIDENCE OF HYSTERICS AND FOUL LANGUAGE THAT HAS COME MY WAY, THAT THE MAJORITY OF EDITED WRITERS, NO MATTER HOW RELUCTANT, EVENTUALLY EXPERIENCE AT LEAST A SMALL FRISSON OF SATISFACTION. THERE WILL BE NO COMPLIMENTS AT THE END, BUT I BELIEVE HE RECOGNIZES THAT HIS WRITING HAS BECOME SMOOTHER, CLEARER, MORE FELICITOUS, MORE STYLISH. AND THAT ANTAGONISM OF THREE WEEKS EARLIER WHEN I SUGGESTED THAT IT ISN’T A GOOD IDEA TO GIVE TOO MUCH EMPHASIS TO A CHARACTER WHO IS KILLED OFF IN THE FIRST CHAPTER AND, FURTHERMORE, TELLING THE STORY WITH TOO MANY POV’S IS HARD TO DO SUCCESSFULLY UNLESS YOU ARE WILLIAM FAULKNER, HAS SOMEWHAT WANED. WORN DOWN BY MY PERSISTENCE. NOW THE AUTHOR WANTS NOTHING BUT THE END OF THE PROCESS, FOLLOWED BY A GOOD, STRONG DRINK.
I CAN HEAR YOU THINKING, “SO, WHY DO YOU TORTURE YOURSELF AND THE WRITER LIKE THIS? WHY NOT REJECT HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE AND SAVE BOTH OF YOU A LOT OF TROUBLE?”
THE ANSWER IS TWO-FOLD. FIRST, THERE MUST BE A BIT OF THE MASOCHIST IN MANY EDITORS. WE FIND A BEAUTIFUL PUZZLE THAT HAS POSSIBILITIES LURKING AMID THE INCOHERENT AND THE INCHOATE, IF ONLY WE CAN CONVINCE THE AUTHOR THAT THE CHANGES WILLBE MODEST AND REQUIRE, AT THE MOST, A PAGE OR TWO OF REWRITE. AND MORE OFTEN THAN I LIKE TO ADMIT, I HAVE PLUNGED IN WITHOUT ADEQUATELY TESTING THE WATER FOR SHARKS. INSTEAD, I, WHO LOVES WRITING NOT WISELY BUT TOO WELL, FIND MYSELF ACCEPTING A MS BECAUSE I LIKE ONLY ONE OF THE MANY ELEMENTS OF THE WORK, PERHAPS JUST THE CONCEPT OR ITS EXOTIC SETTING OR THE HORSE THE HERO RODE IN ON.
SO I TAKE MANY MORE CHANCES THAN I SHOULD. I WORKED ONCE WITH A GUY WHO HAD SERVED TIME IN JAIL FOR A YOUTHFUL DRUG OFFENSE. HE WROTE A MARVEL OF A NATURALISTIC NOVEL BASED ON HIS EXPERIENCES. THE STORY CENTERED AROUND A SOCIOPATHIC JAIL BIRD AND THE SORRY AFTERMATH OF HIS FREEDOM. IT WAS A RAW AND TOUGH STORY, AND I WANTED THE WORK EVEN THOUGH I KNEW IT WOULDN’T BE MOST READERS’ MEAT AND POTATOES, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS THE BEST DEPICTION OF PRISON LIFE THAT I WOULD EVER GET TO PUBLISH. TO ME, THAT WORK WILL ALWAYS BE A TOP NOTCH ORIGINAL. BUT WHAT HAPPENED? TODAY THAT GUY IS A PRIZE-WINNING YOUNG ADULT WRITER. I OFTEN ASK MYSELF: WHICH WAS MY BIGGEST MISTAKE--MY HEAVY HANDED EDITING THAT I THOUGHT WAS ONLY APPROPRIATE FOR SUCH A SUBJECT AND THAT HE COULD DEAL WITH OR, JUST AS I FEARED, THE SUBSEQUENT INDIFFERENCE OF THE READING PUBLIC? WHICHEVER OR BOTH, I’LL NEVER KNOW, BUT I HOPE (BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER READ HIS YA WORKS), HE ISN’T TEACHING YOUNG PEOPLE HOW TO GET OUT OF JAIL FREE.
AND EVEN WHEN FINALLY, AFTER PAGES AND PAGES OF DELETIONS AND REWRITING, THE HEROINE HAVING BEEN CHANGED FROM A SEXY BABE TO A TRANSVESTITE AND THE SETTING MOVED FROM DAYTON, OHIO, TO MALIBU, THAT TITLE GOES OUT INTO THE WORLD, BUT THE AGONY IS NOT OVER. REALLY, IT’S JUST STARTING. WILL IT GET ROTTEN REVIEWS? WILL IT GET A REVIEW AT ALL? WILL ANYONE OTHER THAN THE WRITER’S MOTHER READ IT? I REMEMBER A YOUNG WOMAN FROM THE MIDWEST WHO SENT ME WHAT IS KNOWN AS ‘CHICK LIT’, A ROMANCE NOVEL, ONE OF MY FEW NOVELS WITH A HAPPY ENDING. BUT A WORK OF SUCH CHARM, SUCH HUMOR. IT WAS ABOUT A HOMEY BEAUTY PARLOR THAT SERVED AS A SHRINK’S COUCH FOR BOTH CUSTOMERS AND EMPLOYEES. WE SLAVED OVER THAT WORK, STRUGGLING TO SAVE THE GOOD PARTS AND DELETE THE MAJOR IRRELEVANCIES. AND WHEN WE FINISHED AND I HOPED THE AUTHOR WOULD BE PLEASED WITH THE RESULT, SHE THREW A FIT WHEN I TOLD HER NOT TO GET UPSET IF THE NYTIMES DIDN’T REVIEW HER BOOK. SHE CRIED OUT, “CAN’T YOU MAKE THEM?”
TO MY UTTER SURPRISE, WHILE I WAS CORRECT AND THE NYTIMES DID NOT REVIEW THE WORK, WORD OF MOUTH AMONG READERS AND BOOK SELLERS MADE PATTY JANE’S HOUSE OF CURL THE MOST FINANCIALLY SUCCESSFUL TITLE BRIDGE WORKS EVER PUBLISHED. (THE AUTHOR’S SEXY BOOK JACKET PHOTO DIDN’T HURT, EITHER.)
BUT BECAUSE SHE NEEDED SUCH HEAVY EDITING, WE ELECTED NOT TO TAKE HER ON FOR A SECOND WORK, WHICH WAS NOT AS COMPELLING AS THE FIRST, FEELING THAT THE EDITING WOULD BE TOO MUCH OF A LOAD. THAT WAS A FIRST CLASS MISTAKE. SHE WENT ELSEWHERE AND HAS BECOME A STAPLE IN THE CHICK LIT FIELD. ON THE OTHER HAND, SINCE SHE WOULD ALWAYS RESENT ME FOR NEVER GETTING HER REVIEWED BY THE NEW YORK TIMES, MAYBE I WAS SMART ENOUGH TO QUIT WHILE I WAS AHEAD.
SOMETIMES, IT ONLY TAKES THAT ONE SUCCESSFUL TITLE FOR WRITERS TO ANNOUNCE THAT WITH SPELLCHECK AND THEIR OWN SELF-CONFIDENCE, FROM HERE ON THEY WILL EDIT THEMSELVES. ONE OF OUR AUTHORS, PRONOUNCED A NATURAL” BY NO LESS THAN MICHIKO KAKUTANI, DID JUST THAT. HE WAS AN ENGLISH PROFESSOR, AN OLDER WRITER TO BE STARTING OUT. BUT HIS FIRST NOVEL WAS AN ABSOLUTELY PITCH-PERFECT MELD OF TRAGIC-COMEDY. HIS STORY WAS ABOUT A GROUP OF ELDERLY DENIZENS OF A RETIREMENT HOME PUTTING ON THE PLAY, HAMLET. I WAS SO IMPRESSED AT HOW WELL THE AUTHOR PORTRAYED THESE OLD FOLKS, KNEW THE CHARACTERS, THEIR FOIBLES, THEIR WEAKNESSES, THEIR HUMOR. ALL HE NEEDED TO CHANGE WAS THE COLD AND UNCOMPROMISING PERSONA OF HIS ELDERLY PROTAGONIST. WE GAVE THIS MAN, A HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR, SOME EMOTIONS AND SOME WEAKNESSES. THE PRINCE OF WEST END AVENUE TOOK OFF IN SALES AND AWARDS. AFTER A SECOND TITLE FOR US, THE AUTHOR LEFT TO GO ON TO A FANCY AGENT AND A BIGGER PUBLISHING HOUSE, WHEREUPON HIS EGO, BOLSTERED BY FAME AND FORTUNE, CAUSED HIM TO PRONOUNCE IN PUBLIC THAT HE PERSONALLY FELT EDITORS WERE UNNECESSARY. I WON’T BE SO IMMODEST AS TO SUGGEST THAT THE MORAL IS OBVIOUS, BUT THIS PARTICULAR WRITER SUBSEQUENTLY DROPPED OUT OF SIGHT. TO US LITERARY MEDDLERS, A WRITER, NO MATTER HOW SKILLED, WILL ALWAYS NEED SOMEONE OBJECTIVE TO HELP POLISH HIS MATERIAL, SOMEONE TO BE A SURROGATE FOR THE READER. WHAT GOES ON TO ACCOMPLISH THIS IS AS UNCLEAR TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD AS A SUCCESSFUL MARRIAGE, BUT MAYBE I HAVE GIVEN YOU SOME HINTS.
I AM IMMENSELY PROUD OF THE ALMOST TWO HUNDRED WRITERS WHO HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BY BRIDGE WORKS IN 20 YEARS AND I FEEL VINDICATED, IN MANY CASES, BY THOSE WHO HAVE WON PRIZES, SECURED MOVIE PRODUCTION CONTRACTS OR GONE ON TO LARGER AND MORE DEEP-POCKETED PUBLISHING HOUSES. IT’S GOOD FOR THEM AND GOOD P.R. FOR US, THE FARM TEAM. TOM PERROTTA, FOR INSTANCE, A FIRST-TIME AUTHOR WHO, AFTER GETTING LOTS OF PUBLICITY WITH OUR “BAD HAIR DAY”, A SENSITIVE STUDY OF A BOY’S ADOLESCENCE, LEFT ME IN A HUFF (IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EDITING) FOR A BIG AGENT AND A LARGE PUBLISHING HOUSE. SINCE THEN HE HAS WRITTEN A SERIES OF FORGETTABLE NOVELS THAT, FORTUNATELY FOR HIM, MAKE GOOD MOVIES. (ELECTION, LITTLE CHILDREN.) I’VE ALWAYS FANTASIZED THAT IF HE HAD STAYED WITH ME, HIS SUBSEQUENT BOOKS COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER WRITTEN AND HOLLYWOOD WOULD HAVE COME CALLING, TOO. BUT, LET’S FACE IT. AS I SAID, EDITING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE. WHAT YOU THINK WILL BE FANTASTIC IS IGNORED COMPLETELY, WHILE YOU PERSONALLY DISLIKE YOURSELF IS EATEN UP BY THE READING PUBLIC. YOU WIN SOME, YOU LOSE SOME.
AND THE TRUTH IS, NEITHER OF US, AUTHOR AND EDITOR, WILL EVER BE FULLY SATISFIED AT THE END OF THE PROCESS. NOR CAN IT BE SAID THAT THE PROCESS HAS BROUGHT US CLOSER TO A PEACE TREATY. THE WRITER WILL TELL HIS FRIENDS THAT REALLY VERY FEW CHANGES WERE MADE, BARBARA HARDLY TOUCHED A THING. I AM SURE THAT WHAT I TOUCHED WAS THE MAJOR REASON FOR LIFTING THIS GUY OUT OF ANONYMITY. THERE WAS A MAJOR SCANDAL IN THE WRITING WORLD A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN THE WIDOW OF RAYMOND CARVER, THE CELEBRATED SHORT STORY WRITER, DECIDED THAT SHE (AND BY EXTENSION, HER LATE HUSBAND) WAS DISSATISFIED WITH THE RESULT OF HIS COLLABORATION WITH GORDON LISH, A CELEBRATED EDITOR. SHE WISHED TO REPUBLISH CARVER’S WORKS IN THEIR ORIGINAL, UNEDITED STATE. NOW, SOME SAY THAT IT WAS GORDON LISH’S CAREFUL CUTTING OF CARVER’S OFTEN ROUTINE WRITING THAT MADE THE WRITER FAMOUS AS THE EPITOME OF MINIMALISM. NATURALLY, THE PUBLISHERS REFUSED TO CHANGE A WORD OF THE WORKS THEY HAD SPONSORED. SO, EVEN WHEN AUTHORS ARE UNHAPPY, SOMETIMES EDITORS JUST HAVE TO SAY, “TAKE TWO ASPIRIN AND CALL ME IN THE MORNING”.
BUT WHILE I EXPECT THE WRITER TO STRAIGHTEN UP HER BACK AND HER DOUBTS, AND COME BACK THE NEXT DAY FOR MORE OF THE SAME, I STILL HAVE NOTHING BUT RESPECT AND AWE FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING I HAVE ONLY DONE ONCE, GOTTEN A BOOK PUBLISHED. AND DESPITE OCCASIONAL BACK PATS TO MYSELF, I KNOW FULL WELL THAT IT IS THE AUTHOR’S IMAGINATION AND YEARS OF WORK THAT HAVE BROUGHT THIS TITLE TO THE LIGHT OF DAY. I HAVE ONLY BEEN THE MIDWIFE IN A PROCESS THAT SEEMS LIKE A MIRACLE, A WORK OF ART THAT, WITH LUCK, MAY LAST FOREVER.
SO, I THINK I’VE TOLD YOU ENOUGH ABOUT THAT SO-CALLED VITAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EDITOR AND WRITER. AND WHILE IT ISN’T ALWAYS GOOD TO PULL ASIDE THE CURTAIN TO REVEAL THE PROPS LYING AROUND BACKSTAGE, IN THE END BOOKS AND WRITERS STILL ENTHRALL US ALL. WE INTUIT THAT WE ARE IN THE PRESENCE OF GREATNESS. AND MOSTLY WE ARE. I’VE TRIED NOT TO BE JUST ANOTHER PROVIDER OF LONG FORM CONTENT (WHAT A PHRASE!). I’VE TRIED NOT TO PUBLICLY PRAISE LITERARY WORKS, WHILE PUBLISHING MOSTLY MASS MARKET STUFF, BECAUSE IT SELLS LIKE BAGELS AND BRINGS IN THE MONEY. AND WHILE I REALIZE I’M RUNNING A BUSINESS THAT CAN’T SURVIVE UNLESS SALES ARE GOOD, I HAVE DONE MY BEST NOT TO COMPROMISE WITH QUALITY. I’VE NEVER PUBLISHED FORMULAIC BEST SELLERS, WRITTEN BY COMMITTE. IVE ALWAYS STRIVED TO NURTURE THE BEST WRITERS I CAN FIND, PUTTING OUT THE BEST WORK THAT CIRCUMSTANCES PERMIT. MAYBE NO PULITZERS OR FAREWELL KISSES, BUT I’LL KEEP HONORING BRIDGE WORKS’S AUTHORS WHILE LOOKING FORWARD TO FUTURE SPARRING PARTNERS.
AND JUST A POSTSCRIPT. IF YOU, GOOD PEOPLE WHO HAVE SAT SO PATIENTLY WHILE I RANTED ON, CAN DO ONE THING FOR OUR CIVILIZATION, KEEP PROMOTING READING AND WRITING. IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN OR ARE CLOSE TO FRIENDS’ CHILDREN, HEAP THE BOOKS ON THEM. DON’T WORRY TOO MUCH IF YOU HATE HARRY POTTER OR THINK ZOMBIES AND VAMPIRES ARE HORRIBLY INAPPROPRIATE FOR YOUNGSTERS. IF THE KIDS WILL ONLY READ A BOOK ON A KINDLE OR AN IPAD. BUY THEM A KINDLE. BUY THEM AN IPAD. WHATEVER IT TAKES. LONG AGO, WHILE GOING FOR A GRADUATE DEGREE, I NOTICED A LOT OF MY CLASSMATES WERE NODDING OUT IN CLASS, WHEN THEY WEREN’T YELLING “OFF THE PIGS” OUTSIDE SCHOOL. FEELING DEPRESSED ABOUT THE STATE OF THE WORLD AND ITS YOUNG PEOPLE ONE DAY, I NOTICED A SLOGAN PAINTED ON A WALL THAT READ, “HOOKED ON BOOKS”. I’VE DONE MY BEST TO KEEP THAT APHORISM ALIVE. JOIN ME AND ENSURE THAT THE WORLD WON’T FORGET IT, EITHER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS?
REMEMBER TO HAND OUT TWO QUESTIONS FOR STARTERS.
IN MY OWN PRESS, CHOOSING WHO WILL MAKE THE CUT SHOULD BE EASY, BECAUSE I ALONE DECIDE WHAT WE WILL PUBLISH. I AM A COMMITTEE OF ONE, THE MOST EFFICIENT KIND. I CAN TELL FROM THE FIRST PAGE OF A MANUSCRIPT WHETHER IT CAN BE TRANSFORMED INTO A PUBLISHABLE TITLE THAT WILL APPEAL TO READERS. MOST OF WHAT I CHOOSE IS INITIALLY ROUGHER THAN SUBMISSIONS TO THE LARGE PRESSES BECAUSE IT’S A GIVEN THAT IF A SMALL PRESS RECEIVES A SUBMISSION, IT HAS BEEN THE ROUNDS OF THE BIGGIES, UNTIL IT FINALLY LANDS IN MY MAIL BOX, SOMEWHAT TATTERED AROUND THE EDGES. THAT’S WHY MOST OF OUR AUTHORS ARE FIRST-TIME WRITERS. BUT THERE’S GOOD NEWS TO THIS SITUATION. MOST OF THESE FIRST-TIMERS HAVE BEEN REJECTED AND EJECTED FROM THE BIG PUBLISHERS SO OFTEN THEY HAVE LOST ALL HOPE IN THEIR PRECIOUS BABIES. BUT NOW….HEY, IT’S NOT RANDOM HOUSE, BUT I’M GOING TO BE PUBLISHED!!!
AND, SOMETIMES THROUGH THE ODDEST OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE RIGHT PHASE OF THE MOON, I RECEIVE A MANUSCRIPT THAT IS PRACTICALLY PERFECT. I BRIEFLY PONDER WHY FARRAR, STRAUS AND GIROUX TURNED IT DOWN. THEN I DO A LITTLE JIG. I’VE GOT A LIVE ONE, THAT RAREST OF BIRDS, A GOOD WRITER WHO CAN PUT IT ALL TOGETHER IN A CLEVER, UNDERSTATED WAY WITH LITTLE HELP FROM ME. I WORKED WITH ONE GENTLEMAN WHO HAD ALREADY PUBLISHED TWO WORKS, BUT HE HADN’T BEEN EDITED IN EITHER OF THEM. MAYBE HIS FORMER EDITORS WERE SCARED OF HIM. I CERTAINLY WAS. HE WAS A FORMIDABLE MAN, A HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICER, ERECT, TALL, SERIOUS IN DEMEANOR AND WRITING STYLE. BUT BECAUSE HE WAS INTERESTED IN LEARNING THE EDITING PROCESS, HE RARELY COMPLAINED ABOUT ANY CHANGES AND WE HAD A WONDERFUL, NO-STRESS TIME TOGETHER. HIS WORK WAS PERHAPS MY FAVORITE OF ALL--A SAD, BUT HIGHLY AUTHENTIC STORY ABOUT THE TRAGEDY OF PUSHING ONE’S CHILD TOO HARD TO GAIN A SELECTIVE COLLEGE ADMISSION. WE KNOW THIS HAPPENS ALL TOO OFTEN—THE PUSHY PARENTS, THE HAPLESS CHILD VICTIM. MY AUTHOR KNEW THE SITUATION FIRST HAND. AND WE BOTH KNEW BEFORE WE STARTED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO HAPPY ENDING. I DON’T KNOW; MAYBE I GOT HIS MS BECAUSE I’M KNOWN AS THE EDITOR OF UNHAPPY ENDINGS.
LIKE MOST EDITORS, I HAVE MY OWN RULES AND PRACTICES. EDITING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE. ONCE YOU VENTURE BEYOND THE CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE, YOU’RE ON YOUR OWN. HOW I WORK WITH A MANUSCRIPT IS COMPLETELY, UTTERLY MY OWN DESIGN AND EXECUTION. I START WITH THE PRELIMS. AS SOON AS THE CONTRACT IS SIGNED, I TRY TO SPEND SOME QUALITY TIME DETERMINING THROUGH EMAILS AND PHONE CONVERSATIONS THE WRITER’S ABILITY TO MAKE CHANGES TO HER WORK WITHOUT FREAKING OUT. BEFORE PUTTING ONE DELETE ON THE PAGE, I SPEND A LOT OF TIME PRAISING WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT THE WORK AND WHY I LIKE IT. THIS IS MY DISARMING TACTIC, MY REASSURING TACTIC, MY PERHAPS HYPOCRITICAL TACTIC. IT MOSTLY WORKS, BUT NOT FOR LONG ENOUGH. ALL TOO SOON, MY OPTIMISM IS TRIED, I SEE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A SLOG, WHILE THE AUTHOR, ALTERNATELY DESPAIRS AND CONTEMPLATES MY DEMISE. EXASPERATED, HE GOES, “WHY DID YOU TAKE THIS BLEEPING MANUSCRIPT IF YOU BASICALLY DON’T LIKE IT?” THIS REQUIRES MORE REASSURANCE ON MY PART, AS I CONTINUE TO COUNTER THAT THE WORK AS A WHOLE HAS MERIT. BUT PAGES 1-35 MUST GO. YOU SEE THAT DON’T YOU? YOU SEE THAT IT WILL MAKE THE NOVEL TIGHTER, STRONGER? THE AUTHOR DOES NOT SEE THAT AT ALL. THE AUTHOR IS GAZING AT MY THROAT.
THEN, AFTER THE OPENING ACTS, IT’S ONTO THE MAIN EVENT, LINE EDITING, WHERE THE TWO OF US GO OVER LINE BY LINE, PARAGRAPH BY PARAGRAPH, CHAPTER BY CHAPTER, THE ENTIRE WORK. IT’S MY JOB TO ENSURE THAT THE PLOT STRUCTURE IS SOLID, THERE IS LITTLE OR NO REPETITION, THE CHARACTERS ARE WELL-ROUNDED, THE PHYSICAL SETTING IS AUTHENTIC AND HELPFUL TO THE STORY. I TRY TO ENGAGE THE AUTHOR IN JOINING ME IN WHAT I CALL MY LITERARY CONVERSIONS. I HAVE LEARNED THAT I CAN NEVER GET HIM OR HER TO AGREE WITH THEM ALL, BUT I KEEP PROSELYTIZING ANYWAY.
NO. 1) NEVER START A STORY WITH THE WEATHER. I LEARNED THIS FROM ELMORE LEONARD, A MASTER OF THE THRILLER GENRE, WHO WRITES IN A WAY I ADMIRE, MINIMALIST SPARE. I BREAK THIS RULE OFTEN, UNFORTUNATELY. PROBABLY BECAUSE I GREW UP READING BOOKS THAT BEGAN ‘IT WAS A DARK AND STORMY NIGHT”. BUT THAT WAS THEN AND THIS IS NOW. MY NO. 2RULE ) MAKE THE FIRST PARAGRAPH SO GRIPPING, SO EXHILIRATING, THAT THE READER CAN’T RESIST GOING ON. IF YOU ONLY KNEW HOW MANY BOOKS HAVE BEEN THROWN DOWN IN DISGUST AFTER THE FIRST PAGE, YOU’D UNDERSTAND MY ADAMANCE ON THIS POINT. 3) WRITE TIGHT. DON’T RAMBLE. THERE’S A LOT OF COMPETITION OUT THERE. YOU MIGHT BE AWARE OF TWO HIGHLY LAUDED RECENT TITLES: LIFE BY THE ROLLING STONE KEITH RICHARDS AND THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MARK TWAIN, BOTH MORE THAN 500 PAGES. (I THINK THE MARK TWAIN IS ALMOST 800 AND THAT’S JUST VOL 1.) WHAT ARE THE PUBLISHERS THINKING OF EVEN THE LIKES OF US BOOKIES ARE NOT GOING TO BE CAPTIVATED BY SUCH LANGUAGE HYSTERIA. I FEEL THAT IF A NOVEL CAN’T FIND OIL IN 300 PAGES OR LESS, THEY SHOULD STOP BORING. 4) GO EASY ON ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS. FOR SOME REASON, THERE IS A SUPERFLUITY OF THESE TWO PARTS OF SPEECH IN ROMANCE NOVELS. AND 5) THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE OF ALL, ALWAYS WRITE WITH THE READER IN MIND. SINCE WE PUBLISH MOSTLY NOVELS, I IMAGINE THAT MY READER IS GENERALLY A COLLEGE-EDUCATED WOMAN, OCCASIONALLY A MAN, WHO ENJOYS A GOOD MAIN-STREAM READ, ENTERTAINING BUT POSSESSING, HOPEFULLY, SOME NEW IDEAS TO BE THOUGHT ABOUT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH ALL THESE VITAL CONVERSIONS, THE EDITORIAL/WRITER RELATIONSHIP IS NOT FOR SISSIES. BUT I STILL BELIEVE, IN SPITE OF CERTAIN EVIDENCE OF HYSTERICS AND FOUL LANGUAGE THAT HAS COME MY WAY, THAT THE MAJORITY OF EDITED WRITERS, NO MATTER HOW RELUCTANT, EVENTUALLY EXPERIENCE AT LEAST A SMALL FRISSON OF SATISFACTION. THERE WILL BE NO COMPLIMENTS AT THE END, BUT I BELIEVE HE RECOGNIZES THAT HIS WRITING HAS BECOME SMOOTHER, CLEARER, MORE FELICITOUS, MORE STYLISH. AND THAT ANTAGONISM OF THREE WEEKS EARLIER WHEN I SUGGESTED THAT IT ISN’T A GOOD IDEA TO GIVE TOO MUCH EMPHASIS TO A CHARACTER WHO IS KILLED OFF IN THE FIRST CHAPTER AND, FURTHERMORE, TELLING THE STORY WITH TOO MANY POV’S IS HARD TO DO SUCCESSFULLY UNLESS YOU ARE WILLIAM FAULKNER, HAS SOMEWHAT WANED. WORN DOWN BY MY PERSISTENCE. NOW THE AUTHOR WANTS NOTHING BUT THE END OF THE PROCESS, FOLLOWED BY A GOOD, STRONG DRINK.
I CAN HEAR YOU THINKING, “SO, WHY DO YOU TORTURE YOURSELF AND THE WRITER LIKE THIS? WHY NOT REJECT HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE AND SAVE BOTH OF YOU A LOT OF TROUBLE?”
THE ANSWER IS TWO-FOLD. FIRST, THERE MUST BE A BIT OF THE MASOCHIST IN MANY EDITORS. WE FIND A BEAUTIFUL PUZZLE THAT HAS POSSIBILITIES LURKING AMID THE INCOHERENT AND THE INCHOATE, IF ONLY WE CAN CONVINCE THE AUTHOR THAT THE CHANGES WILLBE MODEST AND REQUIRE, AT THE MOST, A PAGE OR TWO OF REWRITE. AND MORE OFTEN THAN I LIKE TO ADMIT, I HAVE PLUNGED IN WITHOUT ADEQUATELY TESTING THE WATER FOR SHARKS. INSTEAD, I, WHO LOVES WRITING NOT WISELY BUT TOO WELL, FIND MYSELF ACCEPTING A MS BECAUSE I LIKE ONLY ONE OF THE MANY ELEMENTS OF THE WORK, PERHAPS JUST THE CONCEPT OR ITS EXOTIC SETTING OR THE HORSE THE HERO RODE IN ON.
SO I TAKE MANY MORE CHANCES THAN I SHOULD. I WORKED ONCE WITH A GUY WHO HAD SERVED TIME IN JAIL FOR A YOUTHFUL DRUG OFFENSE. HE WROTE A MARVEL OF A NATURALISTIC NOVEL BASED ON HIS EXPERIENCES. THE STORY CENTERED AROUND A SOCIOPATHIC JAIL BIRD AND THE SORRY AFTERMATH OF HIS FREEDOM. IT WAS A RAW AND TOUGH STORY, AND I WANTED THE WORK EVEN THOUGH I KNEW IT WOULDN’T BE MOST READERS’ MEAT AND POTATOES, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS THE BEST DEPICTION OF PRISON LIFE THAT I WOULD EVER GET TO PUBLISH. TO ME, THAT WORK WILL ALWAYS BE A TOP NOTCH ORIGINAL. BUT WHAT HAPPENED? TODAY THAT GUY IS A PRIZE-WINNING YOUNG ADULT WRITER. I OFTEN ASK MYSELF: WHICH WAS MY BIGGEST MISTAKE--MY HEAVY HANDED EDITING THAT I THOUGHT WAS ONLY APPROPRIATE FOR SUCH A SUBJECT AND THAT HE COULD DEAL WITH OR, JUST AS I FEARED, THE SUBSEQUENT INDIFFERENCE OF THE READING PUBLIC? WHICHEVER OR BOTH, I’LL NEVER KNOW, BUT I HOPE (BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER READ HIS YA WORKS), HE ISN’T TEACHING YOUNG PEOPLE HOW TO GET OUT OF JAIL FREE.
AND EVEN WHEN FINALLY, AFTER PAGES AND PAGES OF DELETIONS AND REWRITING, THE HEROINE HAVING BEEN CHANGED FROM A SEXY BABE TO A TRANSVESTITE AND THE SETTING MOVED FROM DAYTON, OHIO, TO MALIBU, THAT TITLE GOES OUT INTO THE WORLD, BUT THE AGONY IS NOT OVER. REALLY, IT’S JUST STARTING. WILL IT GET ROTTEN REVIEWS? WILL IT GET A REVIEW AT ALL? WILL ANYONE OTHER THAN THE WRITER’S MOTHER READ IT? I REMEMBER A YOUNG WOMAN FROM THE MIDWEST WHO SENT ME WHAT IS KNOWN AS ‘CHICK LIT’, A ROMANCE NOVEL, ONE OF MY FEW NOVELS WITH A HAPPY ENDING. BUT A WORK OF SUCH CHARM, SUCH HUMOR. IT WAS ABOUT A HOMEY BEAUTY PARLOR THAT SERVED AS A SHRINK’S COUCH FOR BOTH CUSTOMERS AND EMPLOYEES. WE SLAVED OVER THAT WORK, STRUGGLING TO SAVE THE GOOD PARTS AND DELETE THE MAJOR IRRELEVANCIES. AND WHEN WE FINISHED AND I HOPED THE AUTHOR WOULD BE PLEASED WITH THE RESULT, SHE THREW A FIT WHEN I TOLD HER NOT TO GET UPSET IF THE NYTIMES DIDN’T REVIEW HER BOOK. SHE CRIED OUT, “CAN’T YOU MAKE THEM?”
TO MY UTTER SURPRISE, WHILE I WAS CORRECT AND THE NYTIMES DID NOT REVIEW THE WORK, WORD OF MOUTH AMONG READERS AND BOOK SELLERS MADE PATTY JANE’S HOUSE OF CURL THE MOST FINANCIALLY SUCCESSFUL TITLE BRIDGE WORKS EVER PUBLISHED. (THE AUTHOR’S SEXY BOOK JACKET PHOTO DIDN’T HURT, EITHER.)
BUT BECAUSE SHE NEEDED SUCH HEAVY EDITING, WE ELECTED NOT TO TAKE HER ON FOR A SECOND WORK, WHICH WAS NOT AS COMPELLING AS THE FIRST, FEELING THAT THE EDITING WOULD BE TOO MUCH OF A LOAD. THAT WAS A FIRST CLASS MISTAKE. SHE WENT ELSEWHERE AND HAS BECOME A STAPLE IN THE CHICK LIT FIELD. ON THE OTHER HAND, SINCE SHE WOULD ALWAYS RESENT ME FOR NEVER GETTING HER REVIEWED BY THE NEW YORK TIMES, MAYBE I WAS SMART ENOUGH TO QUIT WHILE I WAS AHEAD.
SOMETIMES, IT ONLY TAKES THAT ONE SUCCESSFUL TITLE FOR WRITERS TO ANNOUNCE THAT WITH SPELLCHECK AND THEIR OWN SELF-CONFIDENCE, FROM HERE ON THEY WILL EDIT THEMSELVES. ONE OF OUR AUTHORS, PRONOUNCED A NATURAL” BY NO LESS THAN MICHIKO KAKUTANI, DID JUST THAT. HE WAS AN ENGLISH PROFESSOR, AN OLDER WRITER TO BE STARTING OUT. BUT HIS FIRST NOVEL WAS AN ABSOLUTELY PITCH-PERFECT MELD OF TRAGIC-COMEDY. HIS STORY WAS ABOUT A GROUP OF ELDERLY DENIZENS OF A RETIREMENT HOME PUTTING ON THE PLAY, HAMLET. I WAS SO IMPRESSED AT HOW WELL THE AUTHOR PORTRAYED THESE OLD FOLKS, KNEW THE CHARACTERS, THEIR FOIBLES, THEIR WEAKNESSES, THEIR HUMOR. ALL HE NEEDED TO CHANGE WAS THE COLD AND UNCOMPROMISING PERSONA OF HIS ELDERLY PROTAGONIST. WE GAVE THIS MAN, A HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR, SOME EMOTIONS AND SOME WEAKNESSES. THE PRINCE OF WEST END AVENUE TOOK OFF IN SALES AND AWARDS. AFTER A SECOND TITLE FOR US, THE AUTHOR LEFT TO GO ON TO A FANCY AGENT AND A BIGGER PUBLISHING HOUSE, WHEREUPON HIS EGO, BOLSTERED BY FAME AND FORTUNE, CAUSED HIM TO PRONOUNCE IN PUBLIC THAT HE PERSONALLY FELT EDITORS WERE UNNECESSARY. I WON’T BE SO IMMODEST AS TO SUGGEST THAT THE MORAL IS OBVIOUS, BUT THIS PARTICULAR WRITER SUBSEQUENTLY DROPPED OUT OF SIGHT. TO US LITERARY MEDDLERS, A WRITER, NO MATTER HOW SKILLED, WILL ALWAYS NEED SOMEONE OBJECTIVE TO HELP POLISH HIS MATERIAL, SOMEONE TO BE A SURROGATE FOR THE READER. WHAT GOES ON TO ACCOMPLISH THIS IS AS UNCLEAR TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD AS A SUCCESSFUL MARRIAGE, BUT MAYBE I HAVE GIVEN YOU SOME HINTS.
I AM IMMENSELY PROUD OF THE ALMOST TWO HUNDRED WRITERS WHO HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BY BRIDGE WORKS IN 20 YEARS AND I FEEL VINDICATED, IN MANY CASES, BY THOSE WHO HAVE WON PRIZES, SECURED MOVIE PRODUCTION CONTRACTS OR GONE ON TO LARGER AND MORE DEEP-POCKETED PUBLISHING HOUSES. IT’S GOOD FOR THEM AND GOOD P.R. FOR US, THE FARM TEAM. TOM PERROTTA, FOR INSTANCE, A FIRST-TIME AUTHOR WHO, AFTER GETTING LOTS OF PUBLICITY WITH OUR “BAD HAIR DAY”, A SENSITIVE STUDY OF A BOY’S ADOLESCENCE, LEFT ME IN A HUFF (IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EDITING) FOR A BIG AGENT AND A LARGE PUBLISHING HOUSE. SINCE THEN HE HAS WRITTEN A SERIES OF FORGETTABLE NOVELS THAT, FORTUNATELY FOR HIM, MAKE GOOD MOVIES. (ELECTION, LITTLE CHILDREN.) I’VE ALWAYS FANTASIZED THAT IF HE HAD STAYED WITH ME, HIS SUBSEQUENT BOOKS COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER WRITTEN AND HOLLYWOOD WOULD HAVE COME CALLING, TOO. BUT, LET’S FACE IT. AS I SAID, EDITING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE. WHAT YOU THINK WILL BE FANTASTIC IS IGNORED COMPLETELY, WHILE YOU PERSONALLY DISLIKE YOURSELF IS EATEN UP BY THE READING PUBLIC. YOU WIN SOME, YOU LOSE SOME.
AND THE TRUTH IS, NEITHER OF US, AUTHOR AND EDITOR, WILL EVER BE FULLY SATISFIED AT THE END OF THE PROCESS. NOR CAN IT BE SAID THAT THE PROCESS HAS BROUGHT US CLOSER TO A PEACE TREATY. THE WRITER WILL TELL HIS FRIENDS THAT REALLY VERY FEW CHANGES WERE MADE, BARBARA HARDLY TOUCHED A THING. I AM SURE THAT WHAT I TOUCHED WAS THE MAJOR REASON FOR LIFTING THIS GUY OUT OF ANONYMITY. THERE WAS A MAJOR SCANDAL IN THE WRITING WORLD A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN THE WIDOW OF RAYMOND CARVER, THE CELEBRATED SHORT STORY WRITER, DECIDED THAT SHE (AND BY EXTENSION, HER LATE HUSBAND) WAS DISSATISFIED WITH THE RESULT OF HIS COLLABORATION WITH GORDON LISH, A CELEBRATED EDITOR. SHE WISHED TO REPUBLISH CARVER’S WORKS IN THEIR ORIGINAL, UNEDITED STATE. NOW, SOME SAY THAT IT WAS GORDON LISH’S CAREFUL CUTTING OF CARVER’S OFTEN ROUTINE WRITING THAT MADE THE WRITER FAMOUS AS THE EPITOME OF MINIMALISM. NATURALLY, THE PUBLISHERS REFUSED TO CHANGE A WORD OF THE WORKS THEY HAD SPONSORED. SO, EVEN WHEN AUTHORS ARE UNHAPPY, SOMETIMES EDITORS JUST HAVE TO SAY, “TAKE TWO ASPIRIN AND CALL ME IN THE MORNING”.
BUT WHILE I EXPECT THE WRITER TO STRAIGHTEN UP HER BACK AND HER DOUBTS, AND COME BACK THE NEXT DAY FOR MORE OF THE SAME, I STILL HAVE NOTHING BUT RESPECT AND AWE FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING I HAVE ONLY DONE ONCE, GOTTEN A BOOK PUBLISHED. AND DESPITE OCCASIONAL BACK PATS TO MYSELF, I KNOW FULL WELL THAT IT IS THE AUTHOR’S IMAGINATION AND YEARS OF WORK THAT HAVE BROUGHT THIS TITLE TO THE LIGHT OF DAY. I HAVE ONLY BEEN THE MIDWIFE IN A PROCESS THAT SEEMS LIKE A MIRACLE, A WORK OF ART THAT, WITH LUCK, MAY LAST FOREVER.
SO, I THINK I’VE TOLD YOU ENOUGH ABOUT THAT SO-CALLED VITAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EDITOR AND WRITER. AND WHILE IT ISN’T ALWAYS GOOD TO PULL ASIDE THE CURTAIN TO REVEAL THE PROPS LYING AROUND BACKSTAGE, IN THE END BOOKS AND WRITERS STILL ENTHRALL US ALL. WE INTUIT THAT WE ARE IN THE PRESENCE OF GREATNESS. AND MOSTLY WE ARE. I’VE TRIED NOT TO BE JUST ANOTHER PROVIDER OF LONG FORM CONTENT (WHAT A PHRASE!). I’VE TRIED NOT TO PUBLICLY PRAISE LITERARY WORKS, WHILE PUBLISHING MOSTLY MASS MARKET STUFF, BECAUSE IT SELLS LIKE BAGELS AND BRINGS IN THE MONEY. AND WHILE I REALIZE I’M RUNNING A BUSINESS THAT CAN’T SURVIVE UNLESS SALES ARE GOOD, I HAVE DONE MY BEST NOT TO COMPROMISE WITH QUALITY. I’VE NEVER PUBLISHED FORMULAIC BEST SELLERS, WRITTEN BY COMMITTE. IVE ALWAYS STRIVED TO NURTURE THE BEST WRITERS I CAN FIND, PUTTING OUT THE BEST WORK THAT CIRCUMSTANCES PERMIT. MAYBE NO PULITZERS OR FAREWELL KISSES, BUT I’LL KEEP HONORING BRIDGE WORKS’S AUTHORS WHILE LOOKING FORWARD TO FUTURE SPARRING PARTNERS.
AND JUST A POSTSCRIPT. IF YOU, GOOD PEOPLE WHO HAVE SAT SO PATIENTLY WHILE I RANTED ON, CAN DO ONE THING FOR OUR CIVILIZATION, KEEP PROMOTING READING AND WRITING. IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN OR ARE CLOSE TO FRIENDS’ CHILDREN, HEAP THE BOOKS ON THEM. DON’T WORRY TOO MUCH IF YOU HATE HARRY POTTER OR THINK ZOMBIES AND VAMPIRES ARE HORRIBLY INAPPROPRIATE FOR YOUNGSTERS. IF THE KIDS WILL ONLY READ A BOOK ON A KINDLE OR AN IPAD. BUY THEM A KINDLE. BUY THEM AN IPAD. WHATEVER IT TAKES. LONG AGO, WHILE GOING FOR A GRADUATE DEGREE, I NOTICED A LOT OF MY CLASSMATES WERE NODDING OUT IN CLASS, WHEN THEY WEREN’T YELLING “OFF THE PIGS” OUTSIDE SCHOOL. FEELING DEPRESSED ABOUT THE STATE OF THE WORLD AND ITS YOUNG PEOPLE ONE DAY, I NOTICED A SLOGAN PAINTED ON A WALL THAT READ, “HOOKED ON BOOKS”. I’VE DONE MY BEST TO KEEP THAT APHORISM ALIVE. JOIN ME AND ENSURE THAT THE WORLD WON’T FORGET IT, EITHER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS?
REMEMBER TO HAND OUT TWO QUESTIONS FOR STARTERS.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
The Vital Relationship Between Editor and Writer
My next two posts contain the text of a talk I gave to the Cosmopolitan Club in New York City in late June 2011. The subject was the vital relationship between editor and writer. First half of text follows:
MY MISSION TODAY IS TO GIVE YOU SOME INSIGHT INTO THE EDITOR/WRITER RELATIONSHIP, WHICH I BELIEVE IS STILL VITAL AND STILL NECESSARY, BUT AS ENDANGERED, I’M AFRAID, AS SILENCE IN THE LIBRARY.
BUT FIRST, IF YOU’LL ALLOW ME TO DIGRESS A LITTLE, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT THIS RELATIONSHIP INTO CONTEXT, WHICH IS THE CURRENT STATE OF THE BOOK BUSINESS IN AMERICA. I’M SURE MR. ROSENTHAL COVERED THE SUBJECT IN HIS TALK LAST WEEK, SO FORGIVE ANY REPETITION. TO PUT IT BRIEFLY, THE BOOK BUSINESS AND ALL ITS PRACTICIONERS ARE IN FERMENT.
ON THE ONE HAND, WE ALL KNOW THAT THE INTERNET HAS CHANGED THE WAY WE READ. IN A WORLD OF BLOGS, WEBSITES AND SOCIAL NETWORKS (ALL SHORT FORM READING), LONG FORM READING—BOOKS, MOSTLY--SEEMS AS DOOMED AS THE VILLAGE BLACKSMITH. I CERTAINLY AGREE THAT WE NOW LIVE IN A FRAGMENTED, SHORT ATTENTION-SPANNED ELECTRONIC WORLD, AND EVEN THOSE OF US WHO GREW UP READING BOOKS FIND LESS AND LESS TIME TO SIT DOWN WITH A GOOD READ. I MYSELF CAN WASTE AN ENTIRE DAY PLAYING AROUND ON THE INTERNET, BUYING STUFF, LOOKING UP STUFF, READING GOSSIP ON GAWKER. LATEST STATS SAY LESS THAN 50% OF THE READING PUBLIC HAVE PICKED UP A BOOK IN A YEAR. SOME SAY OUR LONG FORM READING OF THE FUTURE WILL CONSIST OF COMPUTER-GENERATED ADVERTISING SLOGANS. (HOW GHASTLY TO CONTEMPLATE!)
AT THE SAME TIME, MORE BOOKS ARE BEING PUBLISHED. I FOUND THREE DIFFERENT REFERENCES TO THE NUMBER OF CURRENT BOOKS PUBLISHED IN THE UNITED STATES. THE NUMBERS RANGE FROM 500,000 TO 1,000,000, WHICH INDICATES HOW LITTLE THE BOOK BUSINESS KNOWS ABOUT ITSELF, BUT EVEN IF WE TAKE THE LOWER FIGURE, THE PUBLISHING OUTPUT IS EXTRAORDINARY TO THE POINT OF BEING RIDICULOUS. AND NEW GADGETS LIKE EBOOKS AND TABLETS ARE PROVIDING MORE VENUES FOR READING. HOW TO EXPLAIN THIS PARADOX(LESS LONG FORM READING BY THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, BUT WITH THOUSANDS MORE BOOKS AVAILABLE AND MORE PLATFORMS TO READ THEM ON) HAS YET TO BE EXPLAINED CLEARLY TO ME.
I’VE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SELF-PUBLISHED BOOKS (WHAT USED TO BE KNOWN AS VANITY PUBLISHING) ARE A BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM. CONSIDERED LEGIT TODAY, MANY SELF-PUBLISHING COMPANIES HAVE SPRUNG UP THAT WILL TAKE YOUR WORK, PUT IT INTO BOOK FORM, ADD A JACKET AND HELP YOU DISTRIBUTE IT. HAVE WE COME TO AN ERA WHERE THERE ARE NOW MORE WRITERS THAN READERS? WHERE ONCE UPON A TIME GRANDDAD WROTE A STORY ABOUT HIS LIFE AND WITH THE HELP OF A LOCAL PRINTER DISTRIBUTED A FEW SOFT-COVERED TOMES FOR HIS GRANDCHILDREN’S EYES ONLY, TODAY THERE ARE MEMOIR-WRITING WORKSHOPS ASSURING STUDENTS THAT THE ENTIRE WORLD IS WAITING BREATHLESSLY FOR THE STORY OF THEIR LIVES. IN ADDITION, WHAT I CALL LITERARY JUNK FOOD--HOW TO’S, INSPIRATIONALS, ROMANCES, CHRISTIAN MYSTERIES, CELEBRITY MEMOIRS, GENERAL PULP FICTION—HAVE INCREASED EXPONENTIALLY, UNTIL ONE IS FORCED TO AGREE WITH TRUMAN CAPOTE, WHO FAMOUSLY REMARKED, “THAT’S NOT WRITING; THAT’S TYPING!”
I’M GOING TO TAKE THE HIGHROAD AND BET THAT THIS PERPLEXING SITUATION WILL SORT ITSELF OUT. I’M GOING TO BELIEVE THAT OUR LEADERS OF TOMORROW--THE GEN X’S, THE MILLENNIUMS, ALL THOSE UNDER 40’S-- WILL SOONER OR LATER BECOME BORED WITH THE DAILY AVALANCHE OF ELECTRONIC OUTPOURINGS, MOSTLY DUBIOUS, AND RETURN TO THE IMMENSE PLEASURE OF READING SENSIBLE IDEAS, IN SOLITUDE, IN TRANQUIL SETTINGS. MY ENDANGERED PROFESSION, REQUIRING NURTURING, EDITING, MARKETING AND DISTRIBUTION OF BOOKS, WILL ONCE MORE FLOURISH. AND MY PROFESSION, EDITING QUALITY BOOKS, WILL NOT SEEM SO LONELY, SO CONFINED TO THE BACKWATERS OF THE INFORMATION INDUSTRY.
BECAUSE TODAY, ALONG WITH THE DUMBING DOWN OF LITERATURE, THE DOWNSIZING OF PUBLISHING HOUSES, THE TAKING ON OF FEWER WORKS BY PUBLISHERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE WORKS THAT WILL REQUIRE TIME FOR THE AUTHOR TO CATCH ON, THERE ARE VERY FEW REALLY GOOD EDITORS LEFT. SO I NEED TO KEEP TELLING MYSELF THAT THIS VITAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EDITOR AND WRITER, WHILE IN DEEP TROUBLE, LIKE THE REST OF THE INDUSTRY, IS STILL EDDYING AROUND IN OUR OWN SMALL BACKWATERS.
I GREW UP BELIEVING THAT EDITORS WERE RELATIVES OF GOOD ENGLISH TEACHERS—THOSE FACT CHECKERS FOR MANKIND—AND AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE PUBLISHING PROCESS. AN EDITOR DID NOT NEED TO JUST KNOW WORLD LITERATURE, BUT TO KNOW LIFE AS WELL. EDITORS WERE SCHOLARS, INTIMATE WITH THE CLASSICS, AS WELL AS HAVING A MORE THAN CASUAL INTEREST IN STANDARD ENGLISH USAGE. I WAS TAUGHT HOW TO DIAGRAM SENTENCES, FOR HEAVEN’S SAKE!
LUCKILY, HISTORY HAS PROVIDED US WITH A FEW EDITORS WHOM THOSE OF US STILL CARRYING THE FLAG CAN REVERE AND LEARN FROM. PROBABLY THE MOST FAMOUS, MAX PERKINS OF SCRIBNER, AN EDITOR SO FAMOUS HE HAS HIMSELF BEEN BIOGRAPHED, GATHERED UP THOMAS WOLFE’S TONS OF TYPESCRIPT, CUT 90,000 WORDS, AND PRODUCED A LITERARY MASTERPIECE CALLED LOOK HOMEWARD, ANGEL.
PERKINS ALSO WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN PERSUADING THE SUITS TO KEEP HEMINGWAY’S PROFANITY IN HIS WORKS. THIS WAS A FIRST, AND EVEN THOUGH PERKINS WAS A GENTLEMAN, HE KNEW WHAT STREET TALK SOUNDED LIKE. IT WASN’T STANDARD ENGLISH. BUT IT WAS A NECESSARY ELEMENT OF MODERNISM,SO HE STOOD UP TO THE MORE PRUDISH. AND HE HELPED A REJECT CALLED THE ROMANTIC EGOIST BECOME THIS SIDE OF PARADISE.
IN MORE RECENT TIMES, DIANA ATHILL, THE ENGLISH EDITOR WHO WROTE STET ABOUT HER 50 YEARS EDITING JEAN RHYS AND V. S. NAIPAUL AMONG OTHERS, WAS A BOON TO SOME REALLY DIFFICULT WRITERS. SHE WAS QUOTED AS SAYING SHE LOVED EDITING NAIPAUL BUT WAS GLAD SHE DIDN’T HAVE TO LIVE WITH HIM. AND ROBERT LOOMIS, SOON TO RETIRE FROM RANDOM HOUSE AT 85, HAS LONG BEEN RESPECTED FOR HIS GUIDANCE AND ENCOURAGEMENT OF THE LIKES OF MAYA ANGELOU AND WILLIAM STYRON.
AMONG THE YOUNGER, RESPECTED EDITORS TODAY IS MICHAEL PIETSCH OF LITTLE BROWN, WHO PROVED TO BE NOT ONLY A CONSUMMATE EDITOR OF THE TROUBLED DAVID FOSTER WALLACE, BUT A REAL FRIEND. UNFORTUNATELY, WHILE HE DID SKILLFULLY EDIT WALLACE’S BRILLIANT, DENSE AND DIFFICULT WORK (CONSIDER THE LOBSTER, INFINITE JEST) INTO CULT STATUS, WHILE TRYING TO COPE WITH THE AUTHOR’S INSTABILITY, IN THE END, HE COULDN’T KEEP WALLACE FROM HIS PREMATURE DATE WITH DEATH.
THAT’S NOT TO SAY THAT THERE HAS NEVER BEEN CONSTERNATION IN THESE EDITORIAL RELATIONSHIPS, EVEN AMONG THE GOLDEN OLDIES. THERE’S A VERY OLD JOKE WHEREIN THE WRITER TELLS HIS EDITOR THAT SHE MUST HAVE A PIMP FOR A BROTHER, SO SHE CAN HAVE SOMEONE TO LOOK UP TO. I MYSELF HAVE HAD SIMILAR STAND-OFFS WITH WRITERS, IF NOT AS COLORFUL. ONCE, AS THE AUTHOR AND I WERE APPROACHING THE END OF THE EDITING OF A BIOGRAPHY OF VICTORIA WOODHULL, THE FIRST WOMAN TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT, WE WERE SO CLOSE, WE COULD SEE DAYLIGHT JUST AROUND THE BEND. INSTEAD OF CLOSING THE PROCESS AND SAYING, “GOOD JOB”, I FOUND MYSELF PUSHING FOR JUST ONE MORE CHANGE. AND THE AUTHOR LET ME HAVE IT. “NITPICKER, IF YOU’RE SO GOOD, WHY AREN’T YOU WORKING FOR KNOPF OR PENGUIN?” I TOLD MYSELF THAT MY OWN CHILDREN OFTEN FIRED OFF SUCH ATTACKS ON MY AUTHORITY WHEN THEY WERE FRUSTRATED.
FOR, IN TRUTH, ALL GOOD EDITORS, EVEN IN THOSE GOLDEN YEARS I JUST SPOKE ABOUT, SEEK AN IMPOSSIBLE PERFECTION IN THE POTENTIAL WORKS THEY ARE INVOLVED IN THAT EXISTS ONLY IN THEIR OWN MINDS. MY OWN MODEST OPINION IS THAT EVEN DICKENS AND PHILIP ROTH COULD BE IMPROVED UPON. THAT’S JUST HOW EDITORS THINK. I GREET EVERY INQUIRY WITH ENTHUSIASM, SURE THAT EVEN IF IT HAS FEW DISCERNABLE POSSIBILITIES, WITH A LITTLE WORK ON THE WRITER’S AND MY PART, IT WILL PRODUCE DAZZLING METAPHORS, CAPTIVATING IMAGES, UNIQUE CHARACTERS. AND LET’S THROW IN A PLOT THAT WILL SIZZLE ITS WAY TO THE TOP OF THE HOLLYWOOD PYRAMID. THE AUTHOR, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS SURE THAT ALL THOSE ELEMENTS ARE PRESENT AND ACCOUNTED FOR ALREADY, IS PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH THE WORDS HE HAS BROUGHT FORTH, AND DOES NOT LOOK KINDLY ON MEDDLING. THAT DILEMMA IS PART AND PARCEL OF THE EDITING PROCESS.
SO, PATIENCE, TACT AND COMPROMISE ARE THE WATCH WORDS. AS I WARILY CIRCLE THE WRITER LIKE A FOX CIRCLING THE HENHOUSE, HOPING AGAINST EXPERIENCE THAT HE HAS CHECKED HIS SENSITIVITY AT THE DOOR, AND THAT I WILL DISPLAY A NURTURING INSTINCT THAT MY CHILDREN HAVE ALWAYS THOUGHT I LACKED. IN THIS PURSUIT OF EPHEMERAL PERFECTION, SOMETHING’S GOT TO GIVE—AND HOPEFULLY, NEITHER MY JOB NOR THE AUTHOR’S MIND. IN THIS PROCESS OF IMPROVING THE PLOT STRUCTURE, ROUNDING OUT THE CHARACTERS, GETTING THE AUTHOR TO UNDERSTAND THAT A SINGULAR NOUN DEMANDS A SINGULAR PRONOUN WHEN REFERRING TO ITSELF, THERE IS A LOT OF SPIRITED DIFFERENCE. IF YOU CAN GET TO THE END OF THE PROCESS AVOIDING FISTICUFFS, COUNT IT A VICTORY. A VITAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WRITER AND EDITOR? I OFTEN THINK A MORE PRECISE ADJECTIVE IS CALLED FOR. ADVERSARIAL, MAYBE?
BARBARA PHILLIPS
MY MISSION TODAY IS TO GIVE YOU SOME INSIGHT INTO THE EDITOR/WRITER RELATIONSHIP, WHICH I BELIEVE IS STILL VITAL AND STILL NECESSARY, BUT AS ENDANGERED, I’M AFRAID, AS SILENCE IN THE LIBRARY.
BUT FIRST, IF YOU’LL ALLOW ME TO DIGRESS A LITTLE, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT THIS RELATIONSHIP INTO CONTEXT, WHICH IS THE CURRENT STATE OF THE BOOK BUSINESS IN AMERICA. I’M SURE MR. ROSENTHAL COVERED THE SUBJECT IN HIS TALK LAST WEEK, SO FORGIVE ANY REPETITION. TO PUT IT BRIEFLY, THE BOOK BUSINESS AND ALL ITS PRACTICIONERS ARE IN FERMENT.
ON THE ONE HAND, WE ALL KNOW THAT THE INTERNET HAS CHANGED THE WAY WE READ. IN A WORLD OF BLOGS, WEBSITES AND SOCIAL NETWORKS (ALL SHORT FORM READING), LONG FORM READING—BOOKS, MOSTLY--SEEMS AS DOOMED AS THE VILLAGE BLACKSMITH. I CERTAINLY AGREE THAT WE NOW LIVE IN A FRAGMENTED, SHORT ATTENTION-SPANNED ELECTRONIC WORLD, AND EVEN THOSE OF US WHO GREW UP READING BOOKS FIND LESS AND LESS TIME TO SIT DOWN WITH A GOOD READ. I MYSELF CAN WASTE AN ENTIRE DAY PLAYING AROUND ON THE INTERNET, BUYING STUFF, LOOKING UP STUFF, READING GOSSIP ON GAWKER. LATEST STATS SAY LESS THAN 50% OF THE READING PUBLIC HAVE PICKED UP A BOOK IN A YEAR. SOME SAY OUR LONG FORM READING OF THE FUTURE WILL CONSIST OF COMPUTER-GENERATED ADVERTISING SLOGANS. (HOW GHASTLY TO CONTEMPLATE!)
AT THE SAME TIME, MORE BOOKS ARE BEING PUBLISHED. I FOUND THREE DIFFERENT REFERENCES TO THE NUMBER OF CURRENT BOOKS PUBLISHED IN THE UNITED STATES. THE NUMBERS RANGE FROM 500,000 TO 1,000,000, WHICH INDICATES HOW LITTLE THE BOOK BUSINESS KNOWS ABOUT ITSELF, BUT EVEN IF WE TAKE THE LOWER FIGURE, THE PUBLISHING OUTPUT IS EXTRAORDINARY TO THE POINT OF BEING RIDICULOUS. AND NEW GADGETS LIKE EBOOKS AND TABLETS ARE PROVIDING MORE VENUES FOR READING. HOW TO EXPLAIN THIS PARADOX(LESS LONG FORM READING BY THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, BUT WITH THOUSANDS MORE BOOKS AVAILABLE AND MORE PLATFORMS TO READ THEM ON) HAS YET TO BE EXPLAINED CLEARLY TO ME.
I’VE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SELF-PUBLISHED BOOKS (WHAT USED TO BE KNOWN AS VANITY PUBLISHING) ARE A BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM. CONSIDERED LEGIT TODAY, MANY SELF-PUBLISHING COMPANIES HAVE SPRUNG UP THAT WILL TAKE YOUR WORK, PUT IT INTO BOOK FORM, ADD A JACKET AND HELP YOU DISTRIBUTE IT. HAVE WE COME TO AN ERA WHERE THERE ARE NOW MORE WRITERS THAN READERS? WHERE ONCE UPON A TIME GRANDDAD WROTE A STORY ABOUT HIS LIFE AND WITH THE HELP OF A LOCAL PRINTER DISTRIBUTED A FEW SOFT-COVERED TOMES FOR HIS GRANDCHILDREN’S EYES ONLY, TODAY THERE ARE MEMOIR-WRITING WORKSHOPS ASSURING STUDENTS THAT THE ENTIRE WORLD IS WAITING BREATHLESSLY FOR THE STORY OF THEIR LIVES. IN ADDITION, WHAT I CALL LITERARY JUNK FOOD--HOW TO’S, INSPIRATIONALS, ROMANCES, CHRISTIAN MYSTERIES, CELEBRITY MEMOIRS, GENERAL PULP FICTION—HAVE INCREASED EXPONENTIALLY, UNTIL ONE IS FORCED TO AGREE WITH TRUMAN CAPOTE, WHO FAMOUSLY REMARKED, “THAT’S NOT WRITING; THAT’S TYPING!”
I’M GOING TO TAKE THE HIGHROAD AND BET THAT THIS PERPLEXING SITUATION WILL SORT ITSELF OUT. I’M GOING TO BELIEVE THAT OUR LEADERS OF TOMORROW--THE GEN X’S, THE MILLENNIUMS, ALL THOSE UNDER 40’S-- WILL SOONER OR LATER BECOME BORED WITH THE DAILY AVALANCHE OF ELECTRONIC OUTPOURINGS, MOSTLY DUBIOUS, AND RETURN TO THE IMMENSE PLEASURE OF READING SENSIBLE IDEAS, IN SOLITUDE, IN TRANQUIL SETTINGS. MY ENDANGERED PROFESSION, REQUIRING NURTURING, EDITING, MARKETING AND DISTRIBUTION OF BOOKS, WILL ONCE MORE FLOURISH. AND MY PROFESSION, EDITING QUALITY BOOKS, WILL NOT SEEM SO LONELY, SO CONFINED TO THE BACKWATERS OF THE INFORMATION INDUSTRY.
BECAUSE TODAY, ALONG WITH THE DUMBING DOWN OF LITERATURE, THE DOWNSIZING OF PUBLISHING HOUSES, THE TAKING ON OF FEWER WORKS BY PUBLISHERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE WORKS THAT WILL REQUIRE TIME FOR THE AUTHOR TO CATCH ON, THERE ARE VERY FEW REALLY GOOD EDITORS LEFT. SO I NEED TO KEEP TELLING MYSELF THAT THIS VITAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EDITOR AND WRITER, WHILE IN DEEP TROUBLE, LIKE THE REST OF THE INDUSTRY, IS STILL EDDYING AROUND IN OUR OWN SMALL BACKWATERS.
I GREW UP BELIEVING THAT EDITORS WERE RELATIVES OF GOOD ENGLISH TEACHERS—THOSE FACT CHECKERS FOR MANKIND—AND AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE PUBLISHING PROCESS. AN EDITOR DID NOT NEED TO JUST KNOW WORLD LITERATURE, BUT TO KNOW LIFE AS WELL. EDITORS WERE SCHOLARS, INTIMATE WITH THE CLASSICS, AS WELL AS HAVING A MORE THAN CASUAL INTEREST IN STANDARD ENGLISH USAGE. I WAS TAUGHT HOW TO DIAGRAM SENTENCES, FOR HEAVEN’S SAKE!
LUCKILY, HISTORY HAS PROVIDED US WITH A FEW EDITORS WHOM THOSE OF US STILL CARRYING THE FLAG CAN REVERE AND LEARN FROM. PROBABLY THE MOST FAMOUS, MAX PERKINS OF SCRIBNER, AN EDITOR SO FAMOUS HE HAS HIMSELF BEEN BIOGRAPHED, GATHERED UP THOMAS WOLFE’S TONS OF TYPESCRIPT, CUT 90,000 WORDS, AND PRODUCED A LITERARY MASTERPIECE CALLED LOOK HOMEWARD, ANGEL.
PERKINS ALSO WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN PERSUADING THE SUITS TO KEEP HEMINGWAY’S PROFANITY IN HIS WORKS. THIS WAS A FIRST, AND EVEN THOUGH PERKINS WAS A GENTLEMAN, HE KNEW WHAT STREET TALK SOUNDED LIKE. IT WASN’T STANDARD ENGLISH. BUT IT WAS A NECESSARY ELEMENT OF MODERNISM,SO HE STOOD UP TO THE MORE PRUDISH. AND HE HELPED A REJECT CALLED THE ROMANTIC EGOIST BECOME THIS SIDE OF PARADISE.
IN MORE RECENT TIMES, DIANA ATHILL, THE ENGLISH EDITOR WHO WROTE STET ABOUT HER 50 YEARS EDITING JEAN RHYS AND V. S. NAIPAUL AMONG OTHERS, WAS A BOON TO SOME REALLY DIFFICULT WRITERS. SHE WAS QUOTED AS SAYING SHE LOVED EDITING NAIPAUL BUT WAS GLAD SHE DIDN’T HAVE TO LIVE WITH HIM. AND ROBERT LOOMIS, SOON TO RETIRE FROM RANDOM HOUSE AT 85, HAS LONG BEEN RESPECTED FOR HIS GUIDANCE AND ENCOURAGEMENT OF THE LIKES OF MAYA ANGELOU AND WILLIAM STYRON.
AMONG THE YOUNGER, RESPECTED EDITORS TODAY IS MICHAEL PIETSCH OF LITTLE BROWN, WHO PROVED TO BE NOT ONLY A CONSUMMATE EDITOR OF THE TROUBLED DAVID FOSTER WALLACE, BUT A REAL FRIEND. UNFORTUNATELY, WHILE HE DID SKILLFULLY EDIT WALLACE’S BRILLIANT, DENSE AND DIFFICULT WORK (CONSIDER THE LOBSTER, INFINITE JEST) INTO CULT STATUS, WHILE TRYING TO COPE WITH THE AUTHOR’S INSTABILITY, IN THE END, HE COULDN’T KEEP WALLACE FROM HIS PREMATURE DATE WITH DEATH.
THAT’S NOT TO SAY THAT THERE HAS NEVER BEEN CONSTERNATION IN THESE EDITORIAL RELATIONSHIPS, EVEN AMONG THE GOLDEN OLDIES. THERE’S A VERY OLD JOKE WHEREIN THE WRITER TELLS HIS EDITOR THAT SHE MUST HAVE A PIMP FOR A BROTHER, SO SHE CAN HAVE SOMEONE TO LOOK UP TO. I MYSELF HAVE HAD SIMILAR STAND-OFFS WITH WRITERS, IF NOT AS COLORFUL. ONCE, AS THE AUTHOR AND I WERE APPROACHING THE END OF THE EDITING OF A BIOGRAPHY OF VICTORIA WOODHULL, THE FIRST WOMAN TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT, WE WERE SO CLOSE, WE COULD SEE DAYLIGHT JUST AROUND THE BEND. INSTEAD OF CLOSING THE PROCESS AND SAYING, “GOOD JOB”, I FOUND MYSELF PUSHING FOR JUST ONE MORE CHANGE. AND THE AUTHOR LET ME HAVE IT. “NITPICKER, IF YOU’RE SO GOOD, WHY AREN’T YOU WORKING FOR KNOPF OR PENGUIN?” I TOLD MYSELF THAT MY OWN CHILDREN OFTEN FIRED OFF SUCH ATTACKS ON MY AUTHORITY WHEN THEY WERE FRUSTRATED.
FOR, IN TRUTH, ALL GOOD EDITORS, EVEN IN THOSE GOLDEN YEARS I JUST SPOKE ABOUT, SEEK AN IMPOSSIBLE PERFECTION IN THE POTENTIAL WORKS THEY ARE INVOLVED IN THAT EXISTS ONLY IN THEIR OWN MINDS. MY OWN MODEST OPINION IS THAT EVEN DICKENS AND PHILIP ROTH COULD BE IMPROVED UPON. THAT’S JUST HOW EDITORS THINK. I GREET EVERY INQUIRY WITH ENTHUSIASM, SURE THAT EVEN IF IT HAS FEW DISCERNABLE POSSIBILITIES, WITH A LITTLE WORK ON THE WRITER’S AND MY PART, IT WILL PRODUCE DAZZLING METAPHORS, CAPTIVATING IMAGES, UNIQUE CHARACTERS. AND LET’S THROW IN A PLOT THAT WILL SIZZLE ITS WAY TO THE TOP OF THE HOLLYWOOD PYRAMID. THE AUTHOR, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS SURE THAT ALL THOSE ELEMENTS ARE PRESENT AND ACCOUNTED FOR ALREADY, IS PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH THE WORDS HE HAS BROUGHT FORTH, AND DOES NOT LOOK KINDLY ON MEDDLING. THAT DILEMMA IS PART AND PARCEL OF THE EDITING PROCESS.
SO, PATIENCE, TACT AND COMPROMISE ARE THE WATCH WORDS. AS I WARILY CIRCLE THE WRITER LIKE A FOX CIRCLING THE HENHOUSE, HOPING AGAINST EXPERIENCE THAT HE HAS CHECKED HIS SENSITIVITY AT THE DOOR, AND THAT I WILL DISPLAY A NURTURING INSTINCT THAT MY CHILDREN HAVE ALWAYS THOUGHT I LACKED. IN THIS PURSUIT OF EPHEMERAL PERFECTION, SOMETHING’S GOT TO GIVE—AND HOPEFULLY, NEITHER MY JOB NOR THE AUTHOR’S MIND. IN THIS PROCESS OF IMPROVING THE PLOT STRUCTURE, ROUNDING OUT THE CHARACTERS, GETTING THE AUTHOR TO UNDERSTAND THAT A SINGULAR NOUN DEMANDS A SINGULAR PRONOUN WHEN REFERRING TO ITSELF, THERE IS A LOT OF SPIRITED DIFFERENCE. IF YOU CAN GET TO THE END OF THE PROCESS AVOIDING FISTICUFFS, COUNT IT A VICTORY. A VITAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WRITER AND EDITOR? I OFTEN THINK A MORE PRECISE ADJECTIVE IS CALLED FOR. ADVERSARIAL, MAYBE?
BARBARA PHILLIPS
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Celebrity Memoirs
Although I haven't posted since April, I'm still thinking of memoirs. My husband, an ex-newspaperman and CEO, will be published by McGraw Hill in September. Of course, the usual memoirs published by legacy publishers these days are celebrity memoirs, because America eats up celebrities like chocolate bars. And yet, nine-tenths of these tell-alls are ghost written. "Life", the well-reviewed memoir of Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones, was praised for its writing style, so unusual in a rock musician. The obvious answer is that Keith Richards didn't write his memoir; he either dictated it or talked to his ghost, the excellent writer, James Fox. Fox then set about to write the book using the musician's chatty, intelligent speech. If Keith Richards or other celebrities did write their memoirs, they would be no more intriguing than the one from the little old lady from Dubuque. Incidentally, my husband is (or was) a celebrity of sorts, and so far the trade reviews like his title. He can also write, having been a journalist and tells good stories. So, congrats to him and the rest of you who have no clout can try X-Libris. B. Phillips
It's My Life, Isn't It?
Last year it was book clubs; this year, it is memoirs. Every other Baby Boomer's parent, feeling the cool hand of death approaching, is scribbling down his/her life's experiences, to have a record for the grandchildren is the excuse, but really it's a hope to get published, achieve that longed-for fifteen minutes of fame. As an acquiring editor for Bridge Works, I receive many of these heartfelt but amateurish writings, and feel bad that someone has convinced the authors that the world is waiting for their life records.
But Granny keeps at it, and today there is a reward. It's called self-publishing. Today, that old geezer who was praised in the St. Louis Post Dispatch for his innovative presidency of Rotary does not have to die anonymously. He simply gives LuLu or X-Libris a copy of his ink-stained, tear-stained manuscript and the self-publishing titans will produce as many copies as desired, complete with a dashing book jacket, blurbs by friends, and even photos or drawings never meant to be seen by other than the family. Most self-published writers think the expense is well worth it.
In today's world, no one's life goes unremarked and there are definitely second acts for anyone with know-how.
Barbara Phillips
B. Phillips
But Granny keeps at it, and today there is a reward. It's called self-publishing. Today, that old geezer who was praised in the St. Louis Post Dispatch for his innovative presidency of Rotary does not have to die anonymously. He simply gives LuLu or X-Libris a copy of his ink-stained, tear-stained manuscript and the self-publishing titans will produce as many copies as desired, complete with a dashing book jacket, blurbs by friends, and even photos or drawings never meant to be seen by other than the family. Most self-published writers think the expense is well worth it.
In today's world, no one's life goes unremarked and there are definitely second acts for anyone with know-how.
Barbara Phillips
B. Phillips
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
The End of Reading?
Wow, have things changed since I wrote about the end of plot. There I was, a little down yesterday because I've been festering about the end of Hamlet and his dad, when I met with a really pessimistic friend, Chauncey Mabe, a writer and long-time editor. You can access his blog at http:\\Flcenterlitarts.wordpress.com. He repeated what he wrote in his 3/21/11 post, namely that within two or three generations, we (Americans, the world?) will be functionally illiterate, unable to read sustained works (books and/or newspapers). And to think I was simply concerned about the Prince of Denmark...
Advertising slogans will be just the ticket in this new non-reading world, as they are short and snappy and poetry will gain prominence (every cloud has a silver lining). Even now, Twitter is pushing "twaikus", twitter haikus. The death knell is sounding for "long-form content"--OMG, what a phrase--and those of us "content providers" who are still hooked on books will need to get cracking on a new 140-word writing format or we'll be desperately seeking new jobs!
But in spite of Chauncey and my own doubts, I refuse to believe that longer works will totally disappear. I must say that these 500-600 page bios that are continually rolling off the presses (Mark Twain and Keith Richards)are not exactly reader friendly and even a reader like me who practices total immersion in literature can't stay the course these days. And it is certainly true that there are so many diversions on one's smart phone and IPad that there is little time left over to try out more challenging stuff. But when a millenial's idea of a good read is a friending on Face Book, I'm prepared for "apres moi, le deluge".
Advertising slogans will be just the ticket in this new non-reading world, as they are short and snappy and poetry will gain prominence (every cloud has a silver lining). Even now, Twitter is pushing "twaikus", twitter haikus. The death knell is sounding for "long-form content"--OMG, what a phrase--and those of us "content providers" who are still hooked on books will need to get cracking on a new 140-word writing format or we'll be desperately seeking new jobs!
But in spite of Chauncey and my own doubts, I refuse to believe that longer works will totally disappear. I must say that these 500-600 page bios that are continually rolling off the presses (Mark Twain and Keith Richards)are not exactly reader friendly and even a reader like me who practices total immersion in literature can't stay the course these days. And it is certainly true that there are so many diversions on one's smart phone and IPad that there is little time left over to try out more challenging stuff. But when a millenial's idea of a good read is a friending on Face Book, I'm prepared for "apres moi, le deluge".
Thursday, October 28, 2010
THE END OF PLOT?
The common complaint is that the novel is dead. Don't believe it. Every day new novels dominate review pages, blogs and web sites.
At the same time, there is lots of noise about the death of "plot". Young writers, some critics maintain, don't employ the use of "plot" today. My feeling is that like a lot of dogma, this isn't accurate, either. I think that most readers and writers (especially) are really not sure exactly what "plot" is and how it differs from "story".
It is possible to have a story, that is, a narrative of events that proceeds throughout the book, describing what happens next and then next,without employing a plot. Narrative is the who, what, when, how. Someone once gave the meaning of "story", one that gives you
a sequence of events, as the following: the king died, then the queen died, then the prince died. That can certainly be a good tale, but to make it great, there must be "plot", the "why" behind all these events. Plot is what gives a story meaning and conveys to the reader that deep satisfaction of discovering why she married a dork, why he killed his mother, why friends and lovers betrayed them. And that is why plot will never disappear from fiction (which isn't going to disappear, either.)
We readers will always want to know why. Shakespeare showed us the "why" of Hamlet's family tragedy and created a masterpiece by doing so.
Barbara Phillips
At the same time, there is lots of noise about the death of "plot". Young writers, some critics maintain, don't employ the use of "plot" today. My feeling is that like a lot of dogma, this isn't accurate, either. I think that most readers and writers (especially) are really not sure exactly what "plot" is and how it differs from "story".
It is possible to have a story, that is, a narrative of events that proceeds throughout the book, describing what happens next and then next,without employing a plot. Narrative is the who, what, when, how. Someone once gave the meaning of "story", one that gives you
a sequence of events, as the following: the king died, then the queen died, then the prince died. That can certainly be a good tale, but to make it great, there must be "plot", the "why" behind all these events. Plot is what gives a story meaning and conveys to the reader that deep satisfaction of discovering why she married a dork, why he killed his mother, why friends and lovers betrayed them. And that is why plot will never disappear from fiction (which isn't going to disappear, either.)
We readers will always want to know why. Shakespeare showed us the "why" of Hamlet's family tragedy and created a masterpiece by doing so.
Barbara Phillips
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
This 'n That
Sorry for the long delay in blogging. I was recovering from comments about my blog on "The Help". Such positive ones as "you self-righteous old fart" and "if you're so smart, why aren't you running Random House?". At least, someone is reading me. And while these writers might actually have valid points, I can't reply to them personally because they (3) were all Anonymous. Come on, you guys, what are you hiding behind? Why not put your money where your mouth is and stand up for your positions by giving your names and addresses?
Now for something totally different...Riveted as we have been by the publicity blitz about the new platforms for reading, like IPad, Kindle, Nook and, for all I know, other unknown gadgets, we have lost sight of that poor orphan, the words themselves, the story being read or, in the words of the electronic mavens, THE TEXT. No publisher in his/her right mind could object to having the author's words disseminated far and wide, no matter how. But let's not forget that what's important in the long run isn't necessarily the means to an end, it's the end itself that counts. And too many adults don't read in a sustained way. Something like 27% of surveyed adults haven't read a book in a year. Not even a hardboiled heist or a cozy mystery. Clueless!
And Anonymous, if you're still reading www.barbthebookie.blogspot.com, change your name and reply!!!
Barbara Phillips
Now for something totally different...Riveted as we have been by the publicity blitz about the new platforms for reading, like IPad, Kindle, Nook and, for all I know, other unknown gadgets, we have lost sight of that poor orphan, the words themselves, the story being read or, in the words of the electronic mavens, THE TEXT. No publisher in his/her right mind could object to having the author's words disseminated far and wide, no matter how. But let's not forget that what's important in the long run isn't necessarily the means to an end, it's the end itself that counts. And too many adults don't read in a sustained way. Something like 27% of surveyed adults haven't read a book in a year. Not even a hardboiled heist or a cozy mystery. Clueless!
And Anonymous, if you're still reading www.barbthebookie.blogspot.com, change your name and reply!!!
Barbara Phillips
Friday, April 30, 2010
In one of my last emails, I promised to read David Shields's "Reality Hunger", and report back if I felt he was putting us on. I am more comfortable with his philosophy of writing now in spite of all his appropriations, because his borrowed essays and his own are instructive. They gave me a lot of information about the history of writing and art in general, also the geniuses involved. But I still can't take Shields too seriously. So what, he takes himself seriously enough for both of us. In these days when the book business in general is in trouble, readers need more help than ever, and to flog a major literary theory change right now is like giving the tiger the key to its cage.
But, interestingly and serendipitously, after reading Shields, I came across "Possessed", a non-novel by Elef Batuman (a woman and a PhD). Shields would give her an A. Batuman has written a series of essays (all her own work, though!)about her obsession with Russian literature and how Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Chekhov et al provided reference points for her life and those of her grad-school friends. She is that rare bird,an academic with a sense of humor, and she can be wry and amusing about the darndest subjects. But I found I needed a lot more craziness as a relief from her interminable book synopses and academic disquisitions. When she concludes that one of Dostoevski's characters suffers from mimetic desire, (a literary theory put forth by a Stanford prof whom Batuman studied with), and then segues to a personal friend she is sure is afflicted with the same problem, I wished there was less scholarship here and more tourist hi-jinks in Samarkand. I'd like to see this talented woman channel less Dostoevski and more Woody Allen! Barbara Phillips
But, interestingly and serendipitously, after reading Shields, I came across "Possessed", a non-novel by Elef Batuman (a woman and a PhD). Shields would give her an A. Batuman has written a series of essays (all her own work, though!)about her obsession with Russian literature and how Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Chekhov et al provided reference points for her life and those of her grad-school friends. She is that rare bird,an academic with a sense of humor, and she can be wry and amusing about the darndest subjects. But I found I needed a lot more craziness as a relief from her interminable book synopses and academic disquisitions. When she concludes that one of Dostoevski's characters suffers from mimetic desire, (a literary theory put forth by a Stanford prof whom Batuman studied with), and then segues to a personal friend she is sure is afflicted with the same problem, I wished there was less scholarship here and more tourist hi-jinks in Samarkand. I'd like to see this talented woman channel less Dostoevski and more Woody Allen! Barbara Phillips
Friday, April 16, 2010
Amazing New Technology
THIS AMUSING ESSAY IS MAKING THE ROUNDS OF THE WEB.
Introducing the new Bio-Optic Organized Knowledge device, trade-named BOOK.
BOOK is a revolutionary breakthrough in technology: no wires, no electric circuits, no batteries, nothing to be connected or switched on. It's so easy to use, even a child can operate it.Compact and portable, it can be used anywhere -- even sitting in an armchair by the fire -- yet it is powerful enough to hold as much information as a CD-ROM disc.
Here's how it works: BOOK is constructed of sequentially numbered sheets of paper (recyclable), each capable of holding thousands of bits of information. The pages are locked together with a custom-fit device called a binder which keeps the sheets in their correct sequence.
Opaque Paper Technology (OPT) allows manufacturers to use both sides of the sheet, doubling the information density and cutting costs. Each sheet is scanned optically, registering information directly into your brain. A flick of the finger takes you to the next sheet.
BOOK never crashes or requires rebooting, though, like other devices, it can become damaged if coffee is spilled on it.
The "browse" feature allows you to move instantly to any sheet, and move forward or backward as you wish. Many come with an "index" feature, which pin-points the exact location of any selected information for instant retrieval.
An optional "BOOKmark" accessory allows you to open BOOK to the exact place you left it in a previous session -- even if the BOOK has been closed. BOOKmarks fit universal design standards; thus, a single BOOKmark can be used in BOOKs by various manufacturers.
Portable, durable, and affordable, BOOK is being hailed as a precursor of a new entertainment wave. BOOK's appeal seems so certain that thousands of content creators have committed to the platform and investors are reportedly flocking to invest. Look for a flood of new titles soon.
Introducing the new Bio-Optic Organized Knowledge device, trade-named BOOK.
BOOK is a revolutionary breakthrough in technology: no wires, no electric circuits, no batteries, nothing to be connected or switched on. It's so easy to use, even a child can operate it.Compact and portable, it can be used anywhere -- even sitting in an armchair by the fire -- yet it is powerful enough to hold as much information as a CD-ROM disc.
Here's how it works: BOOK is constructed of sequentially numbered sheets of paper (recyclable), each capable of holding thousands of bits of information. The pages are locked together with a custom-fit device called a binder which keeps the sheets in their correct sequence.
Opaque Paper Technology (OPT) allows manufacturers to use both sides of the sheet, doubling the information density and cutting costs. Each sheet is scanned optically, registering information directly into your brain. A flick of the finger takes you to the next sheet.
BOOK never crashes or requires rebooting, though, like other devices, it can become damaged if coffee is spilled on it.
The "browse" feature allows you to move instantly to any sheet, and move forward or backward as you wish. Many come with an "index" feature, which pin-points the exact location of any selected information for instant retrieval.
An optional "BOOKmark" accessory allows you to open BOOK to the exact place you left it in a previous session -- even if the BOOK has been closed. BOOKmarks fit universal design standards; thus, a single BOOKmark can be used in BOOKs by various manufacturers.
Portable, durable, and affordable, BOOK is being hailed as a precursor of a new entertainment wave. BOOK's appeal seems so certain that thousands of content creators have committed to the platform and investors are reportedly flocking to invest. Look for a flood of new titles soon.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The Help
At the instigation of my daughter, who loves the work of Junot Diaz, I have just finished reading THE HELP, by Kathryn Stockett, published a year ago, but still hot with book clubs. Said daughter was puzzled about the best-selling story of three women, two black and one white, two maids and one mistress, in Mississippi in the early
1960's, and commented that while THE HELP was engrossing, at the end she felt something smelled. Expert intuition. This is chick lit of the worst kind--story sentimental slush, characters thin as paper dolls, writing style amateurish. The juxtaposition of the unfortunately written work and the simple, honest author afterword of Stockett, wherein she makes clear that yes, there were honest, humane relationships between white and black women even in a segregated south, is especially unhappy. That relationship exists to this day, not only in the south, but wherever women work together.
And who would argue with the book's concept that women can be remarkable agents for change? But this reader would hope that the execution is carried off with some semblance of reality. I was particularly interested in critiques from African-American women (the writer is white). Several grew up in the south (as I did) and their comments are uniformly negative. They comment on disdainful cliches, offensive caricatures and inaccurate use of dialect in The Help. While the jacket copy refers to "pitch-perfect" language, I can only counter that the Uncle-Tom's-Cabin version of simplistic villainy and nobility could only be the result of a mashup of tin ears.
Once upon a time, there were Faulkner, Welty and Flannery O'Connor, all of whom knew how to spin a tale of the south without insulting the reader's intelligence. Except for the author, I doubt if any of the people involved in the publication of The Help have ever been south of the Mason-Dixon Line. Minstrel-show dialect and antics do not a fine novel make. Barbara Phillips
Technorati Tags:
book publishing, writing, books, writers, authors
1960's, and commented that while THE HELP was engrossing, at the end she felt something smelled. Expert intuition. This is chick lit of the worst kind--story sentimental slush, characters thin as paper dolls, writing style amateurish. The juxtaposition of the unfortunately written work and the simple, honest author afterword of Stockett, wherein she makes clear that yes, there were honest, humane relationships between white and black women even in a segregated south, is especially unhappy. That relationship exists to this day, not only in the south, but wherever women work together.
And who would argue with the book's concept that women can be remarkable agents for change? But this reader would hope that the execution is carried off with some semblance of reality. I was particularly interested in critiques from African-American women (the writer is white). Several grew up in the south (as I did) and their comments are uniformly negative. They comment on disdainful cliches, offensive caricatures and inaccurate use of dialect in The Help. While the jacket copy refers to "pitch-perfect" language, I can only counter that the Uncle-Tom's-Cabin version of simplistic villainy and nobility could only be the result of a mashup of tin ears.
Once upon a time, there were Faulkner, Welty and Flannery O'Connor, all of whom knew how to spin a tale of the south without insulting the reader's intelligence. Except for the author, I doubt if any of the people involved in the publication of The Help have ever been south of the Mason-Dixon Line. Minstrel-show dialect and antics do not a fine novel make. Barbara Phillips
Technorati Tags:
book publishing, writing, books, writers, authors
Saturday, February 6, 2010
The Novel is Dead: 2.0
I've been hearing a lot lately about David Shields, a writer whose most recent book, REALITY HUNGER: A MANIFESTO, has mesmerized critics. From a writer who queried me about his own work and had interviewed David Shields for The Huffington Post; from Michiko Kakutani of the NYTimes, who mentioned Shields in her magnificent long article about the Internet on 3/21 and from reviewers who have mostly lauded Shields' as a spokesman for the new age of writing, he is very much in the news. Today, I am ordering REALITY HUNGER to form my own opinion.
Shields is against literary fiction as well as genre and bestseller fiction. Plot is yesterday. Story is for middlebrows. No character development, dialogue, setting anymore. Essay is in (I never knew it was out.) Apparently, REALITY HUNGER is one long essay, in which Shields defends appropriation of other writers' works as well as suggesting we obliterate the boundaries between fiction and nonfiction. Explanation of our consciousness is what books should be about and the form should be a mashup of all that has been written before. REALITY HUNGER consists of quotations new and old, mashed together and only attributed in an appendix that Shields put in because the publisher's lawyers insisted.
None of this is new, but apparently Shields is persuasive. I think of the many school kids in the future who, bidden to write a researched essay, appropriate the whole work from someone else. Where once they would be labeled plagiarists and admonished to be original, they can now receive A's and become famous writers, even if the great American novel will no longer be their goal.
Shields' ideas seem to me to be an extension of the web notion that "information should be free". But what about those writers who are being appropriated? How do they earn enough money to survive? How do publishers sell books that over-intellectualize form? As it is, the book business, although still doggedly sticking to the scorned old model of story and characters to accommodate readers, is in pretty dire straits. Sustained reading is disappearing like land-line phones. Is this the right social temperature for violent overthrow of literary landmarks?
Hoping to shoehorn literature into a new pair of glittery Cinderella pumps has had varied success in the past. And since many of these revolutionary schemes originate in academe, I suggest that the fight for reality-based literature be battled out right there, in the academy, instead of in the real world. That should provide the next generation with ideas to put into practice when they leave their cocoons, while the rest of us, for the time being, read on to find out what happens next. Or maybe I'll change my mind completely after I've read REALITY HUNGER and mount the barricades, too. Barbara Phillips @www.barbthebookie.blogspot.com.
Shields is against literary fiction as well as genre and bestseller fiction. Plot is yesterday. Story is for middlebrows. No character development, dialogue, setting anymore. Essay is in (I never knew it was out.) Apparently, REALITY HUNGER is one long essay, in which Shields defends appropriation of other writers' works as well as suggesting we obliterate the boundaries between fiction and nonfiction. Explanation of our consciousness is what books should be about and the form should be a mashup of all that has been written before. REALITY HUNGER consists of quotations new and old, mashed together and only attributed in an appendix that Shields put in because the publisher's lawyers insisted.
None of this is new, but apparently Shields is persuasive. I think of the many school kids in the future who, bidden to write a researched essay, appropriate the whole work from someone else. Where once they would be labeled plagiarists and admonished to be original, they can now receive A's and become famous writers, even if the great American novel will no longer be their goal.
Shields' ideas seem to me to be an extension of the web notion that "information should be free". But what about those writers who are being appropriated? How do they earn enough money to survive? How do publishers sell books that over-intellectualize form? As it is, the book business, although still doggedly sticking to the scorned old model of story and characters to accommodate readers, is in pretty dire straits. Sustained reading is disappearing like land-line phones. Is this the right social temperature for violent overthrow of literary landmarks?
Hoping to shoehorn literature into a new pair of glittery Cinderella pumps has had varied success in the past. And since many of these revolutionary schemes originate in academe, I suggest that the fight for reality-based literature be battled out right there, in the academy, instead of in the real world. That should provide the next generation with ideas to put into practice when they leave their cocoons, while the rest of us, for the time being, read on to find out what happens next. Or maybe I'll change my mind completely after I've read REALITY HUNGER and mount the barricades, too. Barbara Phillips @www.barbthebookie.blogspot.com.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Mystery Land
In Mystery Land, book sales are hot. Two hard-boiled thriller writers--Robert B. Parker, (who unfortunately died last month) and James Patterson--continue to sock it to a universe of readers, and both have been designated by different marketing experts as the successor to Raymond Chandler. If only it were true. Chandler was a smooth operator, both on and off the typewriter. He even used metaphors and similes in both arenas. Jim Patterson and Co. is the world's biggest thriller writer in terms of sales, and his publisher wishes he could clone him, but his more recent works read as if they were produced by committee, which they are. Dozens of points of view pour out from forgettable characters who speak in italics and exclamation points. It is sometimes said that Patterson's audience moves its lips while reading.
Parker's prose style and structure are more conservative; his chapters are normal length, and his private eye, the one-named Spenser, is a middle-aged ex-boxer, as good with his fists as with his .38 revolver. Spenser has a girl friend, whom he refers to as a "stunning Jewess with a PhD from Harvard", who cooks like Julia Child and looks like Scarlett Johansson. She thinks Spenser is as hot as book sellers do. Trouble is: Parker made Spenser speak almost exclusively in wise-guy one-liners. Twenty-five percent are smart and funny and 75% make your teeth ache.
As Tom Evans, author and lifetime Parker reader, said, "Parker got to be formulaic--Susan with her tiny bites of food, the darky dialogue with Hawk." Neither writer measures up to the great Chandler. Ross Macdonald had the last word. Chandler, he said, "wrote like a slumming angel."
Technorati Tags:
book publishing, writing tips, writing criticism
Parker's prose style and structure are more conservative; his chapters are normal length, and his private eye, the one-named Spenser, is a middle-aged ex-boxer, as good with his fists as with his .38 revolver. Spenser has a girl friend, whom he refers to as a "stunning Jewess with a PhD from Harvard", who cooks like Julia Child and looks like Scarlett Johansson. She thinks Spenser is as hot as book sellers do. Trouble is: Parker made Spenser speak almost exclusively in wise-guy one-liners. Twenty-five percent are smart and funny and 75% make your teeth ache.
As Tom Evans, author and lifetime Parker reader, said, "Parker got to be formulaic--Susan with her tiny bites of food, the darky dialogue with Hawk." Neither writer measures up to the great Chandler. Ross Macdonald had the last word. Chandler, he said, "wrote like a slumming angel."
Technorati Tags:
book publishing, writing tips, writing criticism
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Recently, I came upon a list of the No.1-audience-rated tv shows over 60 years of U. S. viewing Among the shows were Wagon Train, Marcus Welby, M.D., and Laverne and Shirley. Nowhere was there a sign of M.A.S.H, NYPDBlue or Mad Men, all smart, edgy, sophisticated shows highly rated by television critics. This made me realize that there is a parallel in literature. Best sellers, those books that fly out of bookstores and online, like Tuesdays with Morrie, Three Cups of Tea and Eat, Pray, Love,have ranked right up there at the top of the best seller lists, bringing their authors buckets of change and fabulous homes. The writing in each of these blockbusters is often clumsy and awash with dubious premises. However, their messages or moral points are clear to the point of being simplistic: be kind, do good works, get religion. These titles are the No.1 audience-rated books of their times. It makes me think of the oft-stated phrase "Heaven is boring".
Literary buffs prize Don de Lillo, Philip Roth and Lorrie Moore. Any one of those might win a Pulitzer Prize for literature or, sometimes, a McArthur genius grant and if obscure enough, a Nobel prize, but never will their works bring in enough money for the author to buy a house in Palm Beach or Malibu or Bali. And yet, to read any one of them is to be transported to a place where you've never been, never even knew existed, and peopled by characters you've always wanted to know.
And speaking of immortals, the creator of Holden Caulfield might have died last week, but Holden never will.
Literary buffs prize Don de Lillo, Philip Roth and Lorrie Moore. Any one of those might win a Pulitzer Prize for literature or, sometimes, a McArthur genius grant and if obscure enough, a Nobel prize, but never will their works bring in enough money for the author to buy a house in Palm Beach or Malibu or Bali. And yet, to read any one of them is to be transported to a place where you've never been, never even knew existed, and peopled by characters you've always wanted to know.
And speaking of immortals, the creator of Holden Caulfield might have died last week, but Holden never will.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Back in the day, a "platform" meant the tall structure where the high diver stood before racing out on the board. But somewhere in biz school lingo, "platform" came to mean a product springboard, a way to distribute content (what we mossbacks called putting information or thoughts in writing). For 500 years, the platform of the book business was type on paper, bound and covered in cardboard. Now, we book publishers are saluting our new platforms--electronic books like Kindle, Sony Reader, Nook. These ebooks are more than mere gadgets, their inventors tell us. Instead, they are new platforms for the book business, the first in hundreds of years, finally giving the finger to old-style paper pages. Fine, I say: anything, including hand-helds, are grand platforms if they encourage more reading. But a startling statistic has recently come to the fore: there has been an increase of about 350 percent in American data consumption in the last 30 years, according to researchers at the University of California, San Diego. Sounds good, right? Most of this data is channeled into our brains by what is called "TV-related" content, which amounts to almost five hours per day. Then comes radio, then the computer, then Internet games and finally, at 36 minutes per day, reading. (I presume this means book-type material on any platform). Apparently, even the new book platforms, which now include hand-helds and computers, have not increased the low level of interest in longer content. We book lovers think we know the reason--that the young don't like sustained reading of any kind, that two pages is about their limit. But we don't know the answer to the problem. Since writers like Dan Brown and John Grisham corner the market on numbers of books sold, perhaps they could clone themselves! You can comment directly to my blog now, so speak up... Barbara Phillips
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
"HIGHLIGHTING GOOD FICTION IS MORE IMPORTANT NOW THAN IT HAS EVER BEEN"
--Recent quotation from Alice Sebold
Yes, but exactly what IS "good" fiction, anyway?
Fair-minded editors and publishers can disagree on this topic for a year and a day. To this E&P, the definition goes like this:
NOT Experimental Fiction. Apart from academics and other eggheads and writers who are more interested in form than function, the majority of fiction writers throughout history have tried to please an audience. We can all be enlightened (maybe) by Joyce, Proust and Pynchon, but at the end of the day, most of us prefer a long text to have readability, fascinating characters and an intelligent style. After we have finished an experimental work, we breathe a sigh of relief. After finishing a work we admire, we say, "I want to read this again."
MAYBE to massmarket and bestsellers. There is no doubt about saleability here.
Stephen King and John Grisham outsell Philip Roth any day. Some readers have
pronounced THE DA VINCI CODE the best book they've ever read! Fun and easy, these works produce suspense, horror and along the way, some facts. My publishing house has put out several of this type of work. One in particular has kept us afloat over many years.
A BIG YES TO THE REST!!!. Often referred to in put-down fashion as "mid-list" books, lying uncomfortably between mass market and experimental , many publishers refer to this genre as "quality" fiction, "serious" fiction and (quietly, please!)" literature". Often taught in college courses and regarded by a smallish group of discriminating readers as packing in the right amount of quietly questioning stories about our fellow human beings and how they rise in , fall from, and learn about (or not) that situation we're all in together--life. These works become our classics. But sometimes it is so hard to identify the genre we publishers don't even try. We leave that to the critics. This genre receives prizes instead of buckets of cash. The works give publishing houses prestige, writers fame. To me, they deserve the "Good book" label most.
WHAT DO YOU THINK? COMMENT TO barbp39@gmail.com.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Questions and Answers:
1) Is the book business as we know it over? The outlook for conventional paper books is dire, but not yet dead. As more and more people switch to e-readers like Kindle, Sony Reader, Nook, Barnes and Noble's new gadget, fewer are left to read conventional paper. That, however, does not help the book business in general, as those switching are not making up for those not buying books. To solve this issue, publishers must not only have e-reading capacity, they must rethink old paradigms. The disgraceful practice of "returns", where booksellers return to the publisher any unsold books, must go the way of the buggy whip . The author-publisher relationship needs updating, too. Will books cease to exist, though? To me, as long as civilization exists, so too will books, whatever their forms.
2) Will the new "Vooks" take hold and change the way we read books? The "vook", a combination of video and e-book is the latest techno gadget to burst upon the scene. Videos are interspersed throughout electronic text. So far, these vooks seem to be genre types like fitness, diet, beauty, and romance. One reader said he liked the idea of presenting a picture of the protagonist (in novels) as it "makes the story more real". What ever happened to the imagination?
3) What exactly is the meaning of a "good" book? To me, books mean new ideas, new ways to get a handle on humanity. If all the cookbooks, how-to books and pardon me, Michael Chabon, sci-fi works disappeared tomorrow, I wouldn't despair. What I want in a book is a chance to change my often-narrow opinions of certain people, actions and concepts.
4) Will authors go for new-type contracts in this digital age? It's going to be a gamble, but I think a smart one. For instance, even though the number of books sold is down and some large publishers are reading fewer manuscripts, my house, Bridge Works, is receiving more mss than ever. That means more writers who want to be heard. To me, that suggests some compromises on contracts will be open to discussion. I have not heard from any writers (or agents) who feel otherwise. Do you?
5) Is the independent book business threatened? Not as long as enough adults really value reading. As I say, Bridge Works receives more manuscripts than ever. That said, I should also make full disclosure. Small publishers, dedicated to quality books above all, will never have the assets of larger publishers, most of whom are now owned by multinational corporations. Conventional book reviewers, with less space and fewer ads in their review pages, generally won't review the independents. However, online reviewers are swarming out there in cyber space. So, that's a good thing. Moreover, I feel confident that once two-page UTube posters age, they too will appreciate the value of a nice, long story, well-developed and well-told. With characters you can dream about and learn from.
Barbara Phillips
Comment at barbp39@gmail.com
1) Is the book business as we know it over? The outlook for conventional paper books is dire, but not yet dead. As more and more people switch to e-readers like Kindle, Sony Reader, Nook, Barnes and Noble's new gadget, fewer are left to read conventional paper. That, however, does not help the book business in general, as those switching are not making up for those not buying books. To solve this issue, publishers must not only have e-reading capacity, they must rethink old paradigms. The disgraceful practice of "returns", where booksellers return to the publisher any unsold books, must go the way of the buggy whip . The author-publisher relationship needs updating, too. Will books cease to exist, though? To me, as long as civilization exists, so too will books, whatever their forms.
2) Will the new "Vooks" take hold and change the way we read books? The "vook", a combination of video and e-book is the latest techno gadget to burst upon the scene. Videos are interspersed throughout electronic text. So far, these vooks seem to be genre types like fitness, diet, beauty, and romance. One reader said he liked the idea of presenting a picture of the protagonist (in novels) as it "makes the story more real". What ever happened to the imagination?
3) What exactly is the meaning of a "good" book? To me, books mean new ideas, new ways to get a handle on humanity. If all the cookbooks, how-to books and pardon me, Michael Chabon, sci-fi works disappeared tomorrow, I wouldn't despair. What I want in a book is a chance to change my often-narrow opinions of certain people, actions and concepts.
4) Will authors go for new-type contracts in this digital age? It's going to be a gamble, but I think a smart one. For instance, even though the number of books sold is down and some large publishers are reading fewer manuscripts, my house, Bridge Works, is receiving more mss than ever. That means more writers who want to be heard. To me, that suggests some compromises on contracts will be open to discussion. I have not heard from any writers (or agents) who feel otherwise. Do you?
5) Is the independent book business threatened? Not as long as enough adults really value reading. As I say, Bridge Works receives more manuscripts than ever. That said, I should also make full disclosure. Small publishers, dedicated to quality books above all, will never have the assets of larger publishers, most of whom are now owned by multinational corporations. Conventional book reviewers, with less space and fewer ads in their review pages, generally won't review the independents. However, online reviewers are swarming out there in cyber space. So, that's a good thing. Moreover, I feel confident that once two-page UTube posters age, they too will appreciate the value of a nice, long story, well-developed and well-told. With characters you can dream about and learn from.
Barbara Phillips
Comment at barbp39@gmail.com
Sunday, September 27, 2009
FROM MIKE BIEHL, author of "Doctored Evidence" and "Lawyered to Death": My thoughts on the issue of author financial participation with the publisher (of the title): if the author and publisher are consenting adults, why not? Some might suggest it carries the taint of vanity press for the author, but I think that would only be a problem if the publisher didn't have a track record. If an established publisher of good reputation varies the usual contract in this manner for an unagented author, I don't see why that arrangement can't result in a meritorious and successful book. It's harder to see it working with an agented author.
Okay, another voice heard from. I wonder if there are any agents out there who would care to comment. Could this idea work?
In the meantime, this week brought news that Tina Brown, trend editor extraordinaire, has announced that her online journalism website, The Daily Beast, will partner with Perseus Books Group to speed up the conventional book publishing schedule. In that world right now, an author comes up with an idea, spends at least a year researching and writing and when the publisher takes over, another eight months to a year elapses for editing and the production process. Tina plans to turn out a title in less than six months from genesis to revelations. This approach is intended (at the moment) to be used for political subjects that can change completely by the time they are conventionally scheduled for publication or for celebrity memoirs before the fickle public transfers its mourning to a later overdose succumbant. Makes me wonder if those get-'em-while-they're-hot-titles need to be published at all.
Comment at barbp39@gmail.com. Barbara Phillips
Okay, another voice heard from. I wonder if there are any agents out there who would care to comment. Could this idea work?
In the meantime, this week brought news that Tina Brown, trend editor extraordinaire, has announced that her online journalism website, The Daily Beast, will partner with Perseus Books Group to speed up the conventional book publishing schedule. In that world right now, an author comes up with an idea, spends at least a year researching and writing and when the publisher takes over, another eight months to a year elapses for editing and the production process. Tina plans to turn out a title in less than six months from genesis to revelations. This approach is intended (at the moment) to be used for political subjects that can change completely by the time they are conventionally scheduled for publication or for celebrity memoirs before the fickle public transfers its mourning to a later overdose succumbant. Makes me wonder if those get-'em-while-they're-hot-titles need to be published at all.
Comment at barbp39@gmail.com. Barbara Phillips
Monday, August 31, 2009
I SOUND LIKE A STUCK RECORD (Of course, no one under 50 knows what a stuck record is). Okay, I keep ranting about the horrible state of the book business, but I do have some remedies, one or two of which I have stated before. 1) It is vital to immediately change the pernicious practice of Returns. Like making buggy whips, bookseller and wholesaler return of unsold books to publishers for full refunds is an anachronism that should no longer be acceptable. Large and small publishers should rally against the practice and set a date, say January 2012, after which no returns will be countenanced. The novelty and gamble will be more than interesting for all involved in the book food chain. 2) Make life easier for the beleagured publisher. I've observed that there seem to be more writers than readers. If an author truly wants her book published, with professional editing, distribution and publicity and a jacket that doesn't look like it was coughed up by a copying machine, she might consider becoming a partner with the publisher who signs her up. This would involve persuading the author to give up the advance on royalties or foregoing royalties altogether in favor of taking a cut of the publisher's profits. I like this idea particularly for first-time authors. 3) Publishers should continue to expand their sales to new venues and consider publishing simultaneously in offset print and on-demand or electronic downloads. (However, I personally believe that downloading a title onto a cell phone is good for nothing but keeping opthalmologists busy, and I'm not even sure that Kindle and its ilk will last after its initial craze in the marketplace.) A few large publishers are even now trying out No. 3. Stay tuned.
Comment to barbp39@gmail.com.
Comment to barbp39@gmail.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)