By Jenny Bent
An Agent’s View of How the Publishing Industry Is Changing
A couple of years ago, I had lunch with an old friend, someone I think of as both intelligent and savvy. He’s the publisher of a largish imprint at a major house, and I run my own literary agency. We’re used to disagreeing, and that day we disagreed about what will happen as e-books become more popular.
He thought readers would always need the big publishing houses, because readers need to have their content filtered—that we agents, editors, and publishers have a certain kind of literary taste or standard that should be passed along to the reader.
"Drinks" © Rick Audet
Well—as I told him then—blech.
I’ve always found this kind of thinking elitist and unnecessary. And as the publishing climate continues to change, I like to think he’s been proven wrong.
Some authors need publishing houses, of course. Publishers are often better at marketing, publicity, and distribution than any individual author can be. Increasingly, this is not the case, although even Amanda Hocking, who famously made close to $2 million with her self-published e-books in 2010, decided to go the traditional route in 2011 by signing a contract with St. Martin’s Press.
Right now, however, I’m somewhat gleefully celebrating the fact that electronic publishing is blowing apart the idea that we in publishing have better taste than the average reader.
Why would this be so? Because some of us have Ivy League educations? Because we live in New York City and are therefore more sophisticated and urbane than most readers? Because we read the Paris Review and the New Yorker? Because we have chic haircuts and ironic sideburns and wear trendy little eyeglasses? (Full disclosure: I do not have ironic sideburns.)
What I love most about successful independently published e-books is that many of them didn’t pass the gatekeeper test. The individual authors tried and failed to get an agent or publisher, then decided to do it themselves. With e-publishing, it’s easier than ever to get books out there, and the list of successfully self-published e-book authors grows every day. Like Hocking, lots of these authors are now getting lucrative book deals as publishers struggle to catch up. And many of them are turning down agents and publishers because they want to keep doing it on their own terms.
This has always happened to a certain extent. My client Laurie Notaro self-published years ago, because she couldn’t find a publisher after seven years of trying. When she did get a publishing deal at long last—with Random House for The Idiot Girls’ Action-Adventure Club, Notaro’s 2002 collection of humor columns from the Arizona Republic—her book debuted at #12 on the New York Times Bestseller list.
The Shack was self-published. This Christian novel by the unknown William P. Young shot to #1 on the Times paperback fiction list in 2008 and likely sold more than a million copies. (Hachette later picked it up for commercial publication.) In the early ’90s, Richard Paul Evans’s first book—The Christmas Box—was self-published. (Evans is now a bestselling Simon & Schuster author.)
"Diner 2" © Seemann
Maybe I’m just bitter. An agent friend and I recently emailed each other about “reader taste” versus “publisher taste.” Many of the books I’ve really loved, I’ve had a tough time selling to publishers or sold for very little money. Yet, most of them have done very well indeed. I knew readers would love them, but publishers often waffled, apparently because they didn’t believe readers would want books that were “quiet” or not “high concept” or just plain quirky and tough to categorize.
I don’t want to be too hard on editors and publishers. We agents, too, are part of the same cycle, as we pitch books that we believe the big houses want.
We’re all doing our best, and publishing will always be a gamble. But except for Harlequin, most of us can’t really afford to do market research; we rely on guesswork to make pretty major decisions about what to pitch, publish, or promote.
When publishers “run numbers” to decide how much money they can spend on a book, a big part of the process comes down to comparing the book to another that’s similar and then factoring in the sales figures of said book. Sound unscientific? You betcha. But in many cases, they don’t have much more to go on—and with so little to go on, publishers really do have to rely on marketing hooks in their decision-making.
Still, what I dislike about publishing is not so much the way publishers, editors, and agents make decisions but the attitude that sometimes affects those decisions. It’s that patronizing, East Coast, urban attitude of knowing better than the rest of book-reading America. It’s the assumption that a book must appeal to a certain kind of sophisticated East Coast reader to be successful.
Readers respond to sincerity, to emotional truth, not to hooks. And when a “quiet” book takes off because readers love it, it’s fun to gloat—as well as to note that some mainstream publishers do remember that people outside New York actually read books.
Take Amy Einhorn of Amy Einhorn Books. You may have heard of a little novel called The Help? It’s not a high-concept book at all. But Amy fell in love with it, published it, and the rest is history. It was the first book she bought at her new imprint at Penguin USA. We had lunch before it published, and I remember Amy telling me how excited she was about it.
So I can’t help feeling gleeful about the democratization of the process. Hooray for you writers who believe in yourselves enough to get your work out there by whatever means necessary. Hooray for your successes, hooray for your bravery, and hooray for the fact that every book you sell means you may be touching a reader’s life in a powerful way.
Jenny Bent
Jenny Bent has worked in publishing for over fifteen years, both as an editor and an agent, most recently as vice president at Trident Media Group before founding The Bent Agency in 2009. There she has continued her tradition of representing bestsellers, with over fifteen titles on the NYT list since she opened her doors.
The agency recently expanded to include an in-house foreign rights agent and a children’s book agent. See The Bent Agency website for more information.
This piece originally appeared in a different form as “Think of Me as a Conduit, Not a Gatekeeper” on Jenny’s blog Bent on Books, April 6, 2011.
This won’t be news to anyone on the fringes of what New York publishing think is acceptable. Remember Rubyfruit Jungle, which was an underground best seller for Rita Mae Brown and Daughters Inc. before the NYCers realized there was a real market out there for good novels about plucky lesbians who didn’t commit suicide or go straight? It sure wasn’t mainstream trade publishers who realized that feminist nonfiction had not only a large potential readership but a growing distribution network of its own.
I’m a freelance editor by trade and a writer by avocation, but for the last dozen years or so I’ve been out of the reading-for-pleasure habit. Social media and e-publishing, not to mention my e-reader, are getting me back in. I’m experimenting more than I have in years, trying out new authors on the basis of a friend’s say-so or because a respected blogger recommends them. No idea where this revolution is going, but so far I like it a lot.
Jenny,
Thanks for sharing your refreshing viewpoint on this hot topic. Well done!
Oh, yes, Susanna, we’ve gone round this bend before, even if so many pundits would love to believe second- and third-wave feminism never happened. Thanks for bringing up Rubyfruit Jungle—which was such a great raspberry to the publishing industry way back when. And I also agree that new media and e-books allow for more voices to emerge. The gatekeepers of book publishing really are changing.
Jenny, will you be my agent?
Mine just retired, and she tried so hard to get my memoir published, because she loved it. But many publishers couldn’t “categorize” it, they said. It was published by University of Nebraska Press, and after years and a Kindle publishing, it’s going to paperback. But I SWORE I’d never have another agent. New to the pub scene, I didn’t get it. Why couldnt she sell it? Now I do. I write what my heart tells me, and other hearts will answer –or not. The implosion within the pub industry may be the best thing that ever happened to writers!
This was exactly what i needed to read today. I have an upside down problem–my memoir has been optioned by a Hollywood producer, but I can’t find literary representation. Recently, I’ve been wondering if I would be brave enough to self-publish. Writers have been told for so long that self-publishing is the kiss of death, but your article refutes that.
In the end, I tell myself that it doesn’t matter who is the gatekeeper for my work–that I write because I don’t really have an option–and maybe it’s okay that I can see the grapes but, like Tantalus, can’t reach them. But I count myself lucky that there are options, if I’m willing to make the leap.
Thanks, Jenny, for this piece.
[...] appeal to a certain kind of sophisticated East Coast reader to be successful.Link to the rest at Talking WritingMany years ago, Passive Guy worked at a big Chicago advertising agency. A college friend worked at [...]
Terrific post, Jenny. Although many publishing professionals have said similar things to me personally, we see few of them having the guts to do so in public. Bravo, bravo.
I love this post!
I also think there are great books that don’t make it through the gate. Not because publishers are bad or anything, but simply because taste varies. You have to appeal to a chain of gatekeepers to get your book published by a publishing house. I recently did a blog post on this subject that readers felt strongly about: http://bit.ly/rP8XOc
Just my two cents.
Sorry, here’s the direct link: http://emilycaseysmusings.blogspot.com/2011/12/self-publishing-vs-sushi.html
I can’t express how much I love this article, or how much I appreciate Ms. Bent for writing it! Hooray for her!
Great post Jenny! As a self-published novelist I find so many in the traditional world look upon us as the ugly step-sisters. It’s so refreshing to read that not everyone does!
But what about editing . . . I have tried many self-published books, and most of them badly needed editing. I think it’s almost impossible to turn out a perfect, polished books without help. I would totally agree with your post if self-published authors took the time to have their work professionally edited and copyedited.
Editing or the lack thereof is a huge topic, because I’m not sure there’s a consensus out there about how much books need to be edited. Many self-published authors do hire professional editors for everything from structural to copy editing. I’ve done that kind of work as a freelance editor myself. But while everyone hates too many typos on a page, I’d argue that the real problem is books–or magazine articles–in which an author’s argument doesn’t hold up or is based on false claims. That’s where I believe editors play an important gatekeeping function in helping writers to develop their material.
Jenny, that was classy and brave and very, very well done. Thank you.
A wonderfully written and brave post. Thank you, Jenny! I’m with you.
As a recovering ivy-leaguer and HarperCollins marketeer who left publishing years ago to become a writer, I’ve witnessed that sense of entitlement–and, yes, snobbery–that a few folks in the cultural “elite” live and breathe every day. Luckily, as you indicate, most people in publishing are smart and nice like the rest of us, just trying to do a good job in tough times, working for the Corporation or striking out on their own with a boutique agency and impossible workloads.
But … being a person in the system is no excuse for not being able to think outside of it and see what lies beyond. The writing’s on the wall. Let those who can read the message see it for what it is: A shift in power. Democratization. Crowdsourced popularity. People voting with clicks. Writers and agencies choosing to try epubbing for a change.
Yep, the power dynamics are shifting in publishing, at least for a time, and this is why I’m going indie as a publisher and writer in spite of five agent offers and two wonderful agents. It’s nobody’s fault. All good people. It’s just the best move for me at the moment.
Congratulations to Ms. Bent for being one of the few prominent agents to accept and embrace the self-publishing model early on. Long before anyone else, she was commenting positively on the empowerment of writers.
I self-published Deadly Straits several months ago, after several unsuccessful and soul killing months on the agent “query-go-round.” I’ve sold almost 10K copies since October, and am now making really decent $$ on it, with book two in the works. So much for gate keepers tastes.
I’m no longer looking for an agent, but if I were, Ms. Bent would be on the top of the list.
On a sidenote, I always thought your blog should be called “Get Bent”…..
I could not agree more with what you’ve said here. It jibes with my experience as a thrice-represented but yet-unsuccessful author, so much so that I have come to say “agents aren’t real people” in terms of their reading style and sensibility. I have also seen published authors, who are doing well enough at it to make it their sole job, who have to do every ounce of promotion themselves. It’s harrowing out there.
So ‘fess up. Do you have NON-ironic sideburns—?!
I suspect much of the problem with traditional publishing is a reliance on what sold last year to predict what will sell next year. Anything fresh and original is out of the narrow channel of approved types–but those are the very books I want to read. Hmm. The stories are familiar: Harry Potter rejected again and again. The Help ditto, and remember The Lord of the Rings? Will they never learn?
Yes, hooray for you for this clear and thoughtful post. And hooray for you for treating writers with such respect in your Submission Guidelines. Never read anything quite like them. So positive and encouraging.
[...] Jenny Bent tells why traditional publishing should stop with the elitist gatekeeper mentality while she praises the new self-publishing avenues that let authors reach their readers directly. In [...]
I love this post and everything about it. Especially the snark. Thank you from this indie author!
Thank you so much, Jenny, for holding fast to the original purpose of publishing: to bring together readers and the books they can love.
I’m seeing so much emphasis on the bestseller lists and number of copies sold as benchmarks of success. When, in business terms, they aren’t. Let author one sell a million eBooks at .99 and author two sell 100,000 at $4.99 and guess which one has helped the bottom line the most? Number two.
I’ve heard the “so and so publisher did a book like this three years ago and it didn’t do well” line several times. So they want something different, but not too different, so what the heck do they want? They have little clue. Not a fault, not wrong, just a reality of the business.
Perhaps, what publishers want, is bottom line, like any other business? So let’s get away from the shady numbers of the NY Times list and eBook copies sold and go to the cold, hard line of income generated. It’s what most businesses do, but I doubt we’ll see it any time soon in publishing, as advances and royalties are shrouded in mystery.
After all, how many publishers are even using Track Changes to edit a book, instead still relying on the paper manuscript, pencil marks, and stick-ums?
Great post! I’ve posted the link to this to the ebook experiment Facebook group and the ebook experiment ScoopIt page. It’s something many writers need to read.
The funny thing is that elitism doesn’t end with the publishers. There are many writers who think that, because they continue to hold out for a traditional publishing contract, they are somehow better than writers who have chosen to go indie.
For nine years and seven completed novels I tried to get an agent. My books aren’t quiet, not by any means, but they are difficult to categorize. I think that’s why almost all of the rejections I’ve received haven’t been able to pinpoint anything wrong with the manuscripts themselves. If anything, these rejections have been glowing in their praise. Eventually I came to the conclusion that if I truly believed in my books, I should publish them on my own, instead of waiting for someone else to publish them for me.
I do think agents and editors are important, because they can make a good book great and help get it into more hands. The problem is that sometimes the gatekeepers stand in the way. When they do–when a writer has tried to get an agent or a publisher and has failed time and time again after receiving full-manuscript requests and rejections that give no suggestions as to what can be fixed–it’s time to consider other options.
Is your goal to impress the gatekeepers or delight readers? If it’s the latter, why are you letting anyone stand in your way?
Great comment, Shevi. I couldn’t agree more!
Bravo… Excellent post and too true. As someone helping predominantly self-published authors to edit and market their work, I’m thrilled for their successes in a face of an industry that really has become too much about, “it’s similar to…” Same goes for length of manuscript – can we call it a novel if under 60K? Hell, yes… folks like Justin Torres are proving that sometimes more is just more. Let’s not forget The Great Gatsby was only 47,000 words (and sad to say, might have had a hard time fitting today’s genre molds…)
Great post, Jenny. I had a short pitch session with you years ago at the Maui Writers Conference. No hard feelings that you turned me down. (My books are selling well now.) Boy, has the publishing world changed since then. I’m an indie author, originally from New York. I’ve lived in Colorado for years, and it always floors me when I go back east to visit and I hit that barrier of New York arrogance. Newsflash: intelligent life exists outside of the Five Burroughs.
[...] Agent Jenny Bent talks about Why Reader Taste Differs from Publisher Taste. [...]
A great blog post, by a very savvy agent!
Dissenting opinion: I don’t begrudge any author the chance to publish and make money, but I like knowing that a book was published because someone other than the author’s family and friends thought it was worth publishing.
I know an awful lot of self-publishing writers who aren’t very good, and aren’t bothering to get better because they don’t “have” to. I think it’s sad that so many writers are putting more effort into self-promoting than they ever put into their writing.
But then, I’m old-fashioned that way. I think writers should write, and publishers should publish.
I’ve heard that line so often – well written/very creative/imaginative BUT – “A little too QUIET in a noisy market place.”
And the other old favourite – “I didn’t LOVE it quite enough.”
I’m an editor, Malcolm, so I certainly agree that editing matters. Gatekeeping as quality control will always make sense to me. But I’m also a writer, one who did not get her start on the East Coast and didn’t have those connections when I was starting out. The connections do make a difference, though they aren’t the whole difference.
If writing quality were the only thing driving mainstream publishing decisions, then I’d feel differently about the current self-publishing boom. The funny thing is, self-publishing is also quite old-fashioned. Virginia Woolf was a self-publisher, after all, as was Irma Rombauer (the original Joy of Cooking) and Marcel Proust.
I invite everyone to check out TW’s issue on self-publishing last spring (May 2011), which included a “Self-Publishing Timeline.”
The news about of publishing is demoralizing. I can see the difference in quality when I buy a book hyped by a publisher only to read it and realize it’s mediocre. A gimmicky hook wins over content too often. I’m getting pickier about why I’ll buy. I’ve been burned too many times.
I read this great piece of yours because Bridget McKenna offered a link to it on her Occupy Publishing Web page (http://www.occupy-publishing.com/1/post/2012/01/edit-to-revise-or-correct-as-a-manuscript.html). Thank you! I’m one of those writers out there on the fringe of the universe who very much needed to see the kind of thinking you’re offering.
I’m not giving up. I write every kind of thing from novels to poems to technical articles to patent applications. Sometimes they merge into some quite offbeat creatures of narrative. I will NEVER get a big publisher.
But I’m one of those redesigning ways to write, publish, and read, out of pure frustration at so many missed chances by others, and pure joy at being free to do something about it. Some day you may see what I do. I hope so. You might just laugh, cheer, jeer, or cry – or all four. Isn’t that what we all want our writing to accomplish?
Well…
I am wary of the zero-sum argument that publishing professionals are either unnecessary snobs or the Last Great Hope of the Tasteful.
Taste is just taste. It isn’t good or bad. Mine happens to correlate with publishing Gate Keepers much of the time, so you won’t find me hoping for their demise anytime soon.
As for people with taste different from mine, good for them. You are right and those books that don’t make it past the gate keepers will get out there via new modes.
There is plenty of room for everybody. I’m glad your publisher friend is doing his thing and I’m glad it is so easy for Amanda Hocking to do hers.
Both/And.
[...] don’t intend to imply that self-published novels are trash. Editors and marketing directors don’t always share the general reading population’s tastes. Writers like K.M. Weiland get design. I haven’t had a chance to read her work, but as a [...]