shopify analytics ecommerce tracking
Walsh and Bolton Twitter Unconference Advertise Facebook Book Zazzle Search

What an Editor at a Publishing House Looks For: 6 Myths & Truths

By

Credit: William Ivan, Unsplash

Please welcome self-proclaimed book junkie Parul Macdonald to Writer Unboxed! Parul will be joining us 4x/year to add a new and valuable perspective to the site. Parul has been an editor at Random House, Quercus and Cornerstones, and a Literary Scout. For an editor’s view on indie-publishing and a look at publishing uncovered, follow her on Twitter @parulmac or visit her new blog, Publishing Squared.

Welcome, Parul!

What an Editor at a Publishing House Is Looking For: 6 Myths & Truths

Dial back a good few years, and I had just put the phone down with an agent. I had acquired the UK rights for Never Fall Down, by Patricia McCormick, a powerful, hard-hitting book about a boy escaping the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.  I know, cheery stuff. But to me it was an astonishing book, and a book I felt readers in the UK needed to read.

The boss, the Publisher, walked across the room to my desk — ‘Have you already signed the contract for your book?’

I told her I had. Trouble was, they had just read another hard-hitting book, and she thought that one was more commercial. But it was too late, I’d already made my move on the book I loved, so she had to pass on the opportunity for this second book.

Who knows what we told the agent or the writer about why we rejected the second book ,  but the truth was we only had space for one of that type of book that year and my acquisition had taken the slot. There was nothing wrong with that second book. It had nothing to do with the author’s social media followers or her publicity plan. Nothing to do with her cover letter. Just plain bad luck and unfortunate timing.

Sometimes I wonder if authors and aspiring writers really know what’s going on in publishing houses — what motivates editors and why they say yes or no to an unpublished book.

I regularly scroll through advice given online to aspiring writers about how to approach editors and how to stand out. More often than not, I wrack my brains to remember: Did I ever care about that as an Editor at Random House, or did I hear fellow editors worry about this in editorial meetings?

Sometimes yes, the advice is spot on. Sometimes the advice doesn’t match my or my friends’ experiences at all.

The obvious thing I want to point out is that editors have two forces at play when they look at a manuscript.

  1. Their love for a book, or their intuition about that book’s potential to be a bestseller
  2. The company’s position : Are they acquiring? Is there a lockdown on a certain type of book (e.g. paranormal) because the list already has enough of that scheduled in the next year?

So here are some things I often read, and here’s what I think are myths and truths.

Myth #1: An editor is looking for an author who ‘speaks the right language’ of the genre, and has a compelling cover letter.

While it’s nice if an author can make comparisons between his/her book and other bestsellers in the market, I’ve certainly invited authors in who don’t read in their genre but have produced a page-turning book.

YES, authors who can speak the right terminology are great on festival panels, but when I read a manuscript it was because an agent had convinced me with their great description to do so—and because I trusted that agent. I never picked up a manuscript just because it was described well by an author I met at a conference or fair.

Of course, it’s helpful for an agent to see a smart cover letter that sells your book well, but smart ones will get the gist of the story and read a sample to see if they like your style and writing. My advice is not to overly worry about this till you come to submit. In the meantime, just focus on your story. Once you’re coming to submit to an agent, you can take time to hone your pitch.

Myth #2 : An editor is looking for an author with a massive social media following.

I just emailed my friend who is a non-fiction editor at a large UK publishing house to double check this. I asked ‘How many followers would you need a non-fiction writer to have, for you to be interested in them? 10k?’ Her response ‘That’s way too low.’ She said it depended on the project, how topical the subject is was but at least 50k+. It’s a competitive market for non-fiction.

But for Fiction it’s a different story.

Editors are WAY less concerned about how many followers you have. I mean really, I can’t remember caring that much at all.

As an editor, I played up ‘the social media card’ when trying to convince a sales team to let me acquire a book, but it was always the cherry on the cake, not the cake itself. Unless the writer had a ridiculous number of followers, it wasn’t worth mentioning.***

Yes, it’s smart to start engaging with your community early on, but worrying about the number of followers you have is unnecessary at this stage. Focus on writing, and set aside 25–40 min a day on a social network (Not sure what to do on social media? Read this and this), but don’t worry beyond that.

Now you might point to Grace Helbig or Zoella or some YouTuber who won a huge publishing deal because of their social media following. That’s different. In my mind, they get deals because of their followers; they are social media stars first, writers second. Unless you’re interested in making social media your priority, focus on the writing.

I can think of a number of unpublished, about-to-be-published, still-early-in their-career writers I followed when they had small numbers, whose followings grew organically as they published. Nikesh Shukla, Cat Clarke, RJ Palacio, and Patrick Ness have a healthy number of fans today, but five or ten years ago it was very different!

I personally like using the Pomodoro Technique to be strict about time spent on tasks. The advice I give all authors, and try to follow myself is to show up daily but don’t obsess.

Myth #3 :  An editor is looking for a writer who has a marketing & publicity plan.

I read this advice online and had mixed feelings about it. In today’s publishing houses, it’s a guess as to how much help you’ll ever have from the publishing house. Smart authors, whether self-published or traditionally published, will consider the Long Term Launch. At some point it’s smart to have a publicity plan, and if you’re in a position to choose between multiple publishing houses, then knowing what a publicity plan should look like will help you decide on the best company for you. However as an editor, at the stage of reading a manuscript, that was never on my mind.

By all means start researching marketing & publicity (you can find inspiration by reading Six Lessons Seth Godin Taught a Literary Novelist, and 12 lessons learnt by Tim Ferriss’ marketer) But for now, at the stage of writing and submitting, spend some time reading about how other writers are helping themselves, and focus on the writing.

Truth #1: An editor is looking for an author who is great to work with & personable.

An award-winning author once emailed me in the middle of the night, a long rambling message, with some insults thrown in. I’m pretty sure he was on drugs, complaining about the draft cover we had created. Turns out he had been looking at the wrong image.

He wasn’t easy to deal with; he really wasn’t. By contrast, years later, I still remember kindness and gratitude shown to our team by authors like Daniel Suarez (Daemon) and Michael Williams (Now is the Time for Running).

It’s like any relationship with a client or colleague, everyone would rather work with people they like and can get along with. Try to be that person.

Truth #2: An editor is looking for an author who has potential to grow and develop.

When an editor is persuading the company to acquire a book, the first thing they do is talk about the book itself and how wonderful a story it is, etc…

The second thing they do is talk about the author him/herself. What a publishing house wants to hear is that an author has the potential to GROW, that an author has more ideas and even more fabulous books up his/her sleeves.

It makes sense, right? A publishing house is taking a chance on a debut author, and it takes time for the author to blossom. Household names like Jacqueline Wilson, Lee Child, and Murakami have developed over decades and over multiple books. The best authors become brands in themselves, and the money they make a publisher allows the publisher to invest in lesser-known authors.

Truth #3: An editor is looking for a story that is a potential award winner and/or bestseller, or fits a gap in the publisher’s schedule.

We all want to be successful, to have our work matter. An editor at a publishing house is no different.

Being the editor who acquires EL James, or JK Rowling, or Lee Child can change your career. Discovering small authors who perform well can still save your head when the company is downsizing. I remember having lunch with an editor during a time when his department was downsizing, and he told me he knew he wouldn’t be made redundant because he had ‘discovered’ a book that had gone on to win multiple prizes around the world.

Editors battle across publishing houses, and even internally within publishing houses, to be the first to see potential award winners and bestsellers.

As an editor, when you’re reading a manuscript that you think will be the book of the year/decade, it’s like winning the jackpot — it really is. Of course you might be wrong .  I remember being the first person at Quercus to read Genesis by Bernard Beckett, which was acquired by the boss with big fanfare and—although I still absolutely love the book—it didn’t make or break my career or the company’s. But an editor always hopes…

I don’t think there is a simple solution for having the right manuscript. Editors read your manuscript and compare it to books that the public hasn’t seen yet, to trends that haven’t emerged yet. And they do get it wrong, sometimes, of course. Choosing the next big book is an art, not a science. The best advice I’ve seen for writers is to read broadly so that you have a sense of what else is popular; and of course, the simple advice to ‘just write,’ with focus, without distraction.

Have advice you’d like to share? The floor is yours.

***Note from Parul: After I submitted this to Writer Unboxed, I had a slight panic – was I out of date? After all, it has now been 4 years since I worked at the Big Five. I texted two of my friends, a senior editor & an editorial director both at different publishing houses to check what they had to say. The first answered, ‘It has changed since you left. I do look up an author’s profile online and it is helpful if we know they can engage online.’ The second said, ‘No way, I think you’re right. It’s not important for me, and frankly it would be depressing if we cared about a fiction writer’s Twitter account at the submission stage. It’s great if they can build a following after, of course.’ So there you have it.

Wish you could buy this author a cup of joe?

Now, thanks to tinyCoffee and PayPal, you can!

About Parul Bavishi

Parul Bavishi has been an editor at Random House, Quercus and Cornerstones, and a Literary Scout. For an editor’s view on indie-publishing and a look at publishing uncovered, follow her on Twitter @paruledits or visit her site, Publishing Uncovered.

Comments

  1. “…and of course, the simple advice to ‘just write,’ with focus, without distraction.”

    Thanks, Parul, for this wonderful glimpse behind what can seem a mysterious veil. Knowing that there are factors beyond our writing skill, and beyond whether or not the editor sees potential or even loves it, makes it easier to take your last bit of advice. Much easier, actually.

    Welcome to WU! What a great addition you are. I’m looking forward to your future articles.

  2. Parul,

    I second what Vaughn Roycroft said above! Thanks so much for taking the time to give us such insight. I am a new author, adding onto my singer/songwriter world, years in the Film/TV part of the biz. So this info is well appreciated.

    And it’s funny, I see you’re from London. I will be spending a nearly a month in England with my family, looking forward it, with the last week spent in London. (Weekend jaunts to Rome, France in between)

    I will try to escape my three teen daughters, mornings to write. Any London, “muse-like” coffee/shops” suggestions would be appreciated?-:)

    Cheers to you!
    Michael

  3. Welcome to WU, Parul!

    My favorite part of your article: editors are looking to work with an author who is willing to grow.

    My take: Trust your editors!

    I have worked with a few amazing editors, ones who live and breathe for the writer. Just when I think my plot can’t get any thicker, or my character’s arc can’t grow any more, a great editor will make me see things in a completely different way and offer advice that makes my story shine.

    I once worked with an editor (sadly, she changed houses and could not take the book with her) who had me bring a dead character back to life, add more dialogue, and even add a subplot. The book grew from something sweet and simple into something great that I hadn’t yet imagined; something that really does deserve to be read.

    I feel it all begins with keeping an open mind. Without this open mind, a writer runs the risk of losing out on possibilities. Novel writing is all about growth. Editors know and respond to that. They also make great shrinks! ; )

    • Leslie, I agree with you – writing is about growth. There is something unique about the editor-writer relationship. It’s lovely to hear you speak highly of your editors. I’m still friends with authors I worked with when I started out in publishing, and have always been grateful to be able to work with writers and their stories. Even the high maintenance authors! :-) Have a lovely Easter weekend.

  5. Thank you for shining more light on the process of decision making.

    “Sometimes I wonder if authors and aspiring writers really know what’s going on in publishing houses — what motivates editors and why they say yes or no to an unpublished book.”

    I think on the surface I understand, but to read the myths and truths, and gain more understanding definitely helps me stay focused on what I can control: my writing. Looking forward to your future posts!

  6. It’s really interesting to read the perspective of “the other side.” There’s one sentence in this post that bothers me as a writer, though.

    “Who knows what we told the agent or the writer about why we rejected the second book .”

    When we publishing hopefuls get feedback from the professionals, we take it very seriously. Like lovesick teens obsessing over a text from a crush, we pore over every word of a two-sentence rejection letter from an agent/editor, trying to figure out what it really means and what we can change so she’ll like us more.

    “She said the premise is interesting, but the opening pages didn’t ‘hook’ her. What does that mean? Did she think the opening pages were boring? Is my book too slow to start? Are all the publishers rejecting me because they think my ‘hook’ isn’t strong enough?” Etc. etc.

    From the agent’s perspective, this is probably just a polite and generic way of turning someone down, and it doesn’t mean anything. But to a writer, it means everything.

    So if the real reason an agency or publisher won’t take on a book is that they don’t have a free slot for it, or any other mundane business reason, I wish they would just tell the truth. When all we get is vague or dishonest feedback, we flail around trying to figure out what we might be doing wrong. Too few Twitter followers? A boring cover letter? What is it?!

    • Hello there!

      In the example I gave above, I was being a little flippant. We are likely to have told the agent, although it wasn’t me so I don’t know what was said. I have a feeling that book was snapped up by another publishing house so it’s possible the author didn’t hear the details of why one publishing house was interested and another wasn’t. To my knowledge, if you’re represented by an agent, they will be truthful with you, especially if you ask.

      I totally understand your comment about the importance of feedback, I do. However, I don’t think any editor or agent is dishonest or vague intentionally. I think the truth is, giving accurate feedback takes time, and something that can’t simply be given quickly. And sadly, agents simply don’t have time to give detailed feedback to every submission.

      Having said that, the feedback you received may be vague but it doesn’t seem generic. If the agent really wasn’t interested in your manuscript, I think that the feedback would read along the lines of ‘this isn’t what we’re looking for’. The feedback you’ve quoted makes me think that they’ve simply given you their first impressions: the agent feels that the overall idea is good but in the few pages he/she read, they weren’t bowled over – they weren’t pulled into your story.

      I wish I had a magic answer for you, but if you are consistently getting the same feedback, you might want to revisit the pacing and plot in your novel.

      I recently came across Joanna Penn’s on story engineering which may be helpful: http://www.thecreativepenn.com/2011/03/27/story-engineering-larry-brooks

      Good luck with it all!

      • Ah, I should have said that the feedback “quoted” was hypothetical, but it distills many generic letters I’ve received over the years.

        I also should have mentioned that, thanks to Query Tracker, I know for certain that this type of “feedback” isn’t specific to my work. In the comments on these agents’ profiles, other writers copy/pasted the rejection letters they’d received, and they were the same as mine word for word! Right down to, “While the premise of your book is interesting, I’m afraid your sample didn’t hook me enough to ask for more.” These are clearly, indisputably form rejections that mean nothing, but they’re written to sound personalized.

        I’m not surprised that your first assumption is that the “feedback” is genuine and I must be the one writing slow novels with boring opening pages. That’s my point! The words of agents and editors are more powerful than they might know. Even careless auto-generated ones are taken very seriously by writers and other publishing professionals.

  7. Parul, thanks a lot for providing a knowing perspective on publishing places that can seem mansions of mystery to outsiders. Nice to see you here on WU.

  8. Thank you for writing this post! I have no idea where I want to go in the future with my writing, but it makes me feel better in general knowing that social media and marketing prowess isn’t the deal maker or breaker in traditional publishing that it’s been made out to seem. Over the last couple of years I’ve lost a lot of momentum both with writing and with social media. Lately I’ve been worrying over that, and your post helped me put it into a new perspective. I guess it was the right post at the right time. :) Thank you!

  9. Such a great perspective. The first example you mentioned resonated with me. When I was low-man-on-totem at a PR firm, I went through resumes. Tons every week. Impressive people we never called in because the need wasn’t there. Timing determined everything. When my boss called me for folks to interview, it came down to the best resumes we’d received in the last few weeks.

  10. Parul Macdonald:

    What a refreshing perspective you have brought to Writer Unboxed. I like the way you ended your essay with “So there you have it.” I’ve just finished re-reading Writing Blue Highways, published by @umissouripress. In it, the author, the best selling travel writer William Least Heat-Moon, began writing, when telling about his relationship with a mentor and then, of his progress with his manuscript for Blue Highways and finally the published book, “Well , boys (or folks), there you have it.”

  11. Parul,

    Let’s pretend for a minute that WU is a high class bar in a great district. Good so far? In that context, your post is superior drink. Clear, strong, unforgettable.

    It’s interesting that the myths you lay out (lay out cold) are encouraged by some on the agenting and marketing sides. I appreciate your take. You bring us back to integrity in art, and in truth #1, to decency. Editing and editors thrive in a different atmosphere, where the writing is king. From sipping your piece, I’m a little high. Thanks and welcome to our home.

  12. Thank you for the wise advice, especially regarding the reasons why manuscripts might be rejected. I also found your comments regarding social media presence, cover letters, etc., refreshing. Oftentimes I think we become too caught up in minutia and we forget that the most important aspect is a compelling, well-written story.

  13. Welcome, Parul, and thank you.

    Thirty-seven years as an agent, and my outlook is similar. What I’m looking for is work that is not trend-hitting but trend-setting, writers who are not plugged into the industry but plumbing the depths of their stories.

    In the fiction game, what makes authors successful is not their agent, editor, deal, blurbs, cover, tour, timing or luck. It’s their stories; not just their debut, either, but an accumulation of great novels.

    I have written and repeated that message for years, yet the myths about success persist: You need a following, you need a hook, it’s who you know, and so on. It’s nice not to be the only one telling it like it reassuringly is.

    The part of your post that might strike some as distressing is the seemingly random nature of “does/doesn’t fit our list at this time.” Doesn’t that affirm that, really, you have to have luck?

    On one particular editorial day you may get lucky, but over time other factors prevail over chance. A great storyteller isn’t a great storyteller just on one day. A great manuscript remains a great manuscript in every inbox it hits.

    Sooner or later it will hit a house at the right time, and if not that manuscript then the next one. You’ve seen yourself I’m sure, Parul, what happens when a novel on multiple submission excites everyone who has it: the rush to pre-empt or even an auction.

    There’s nothing lucky about that. Looking forward to your future posts.

    • A rather belated response, Donald, forgive me. Thank you for your note. Yes, I hope you’re right that sooner or later a manuscript will hit a publishing house at the right time!

      I think I have a few sore memories from being an Editor and desperately wanting a manuscript that wasn’t approved by the Editor in Chief, and later finding out it hit a dead end everywhere… still bugs me.

      I firmly agree with your statement ‘and if not that manuscript then the next one’, now that I have seen many times and I hope it is reassuring to writers that persistence and dedication to perfecting their art are the ways to move forward.

    • Thank you Laura! Something that might interest you…I’ve been reading Deep Focus by Cal Newport which reinforces the importance of cultivating focus to create remarkable work. It’s a brilliant book and really brings home how social media is a weapon of mass distraction.
      Warm wishes, Parul

  15. Great post – thank you! What I still find frustrating is the marketing of a book. For someone who loathes commercial, it’s extremely tough…

 

escort bayan

escort escort bayan istanbul escort sikiş anadolu yakası escort