...it's
a tough industry to work in—and I'm confident
that if writers worked in this industry, then in
no time at all their perspective would change a
hundred and eighty degrees.
RoseDog
interviews New York Agent Noah Lukeman, author of The
First Five Pages—A Writer's Guide to Staying out
of the Rejection Pile
Read RoseDog's review of his book here |
|
—————
"Agents and editors don't read manuscripts to
enjoy them; they read solely with the goal of getting
through the pile, solely with an eye to dismiss a
manuscript—and believe me, they'll look for any reason
they can..." |
 |
 RoseDog: Before
we discuss your book, could you tell us
something about your background in the
publishing industry in New York and the
type of work your own agency now handles? |
| Noah
Lukeman: I have my own
agency and I've had it for about four
years. We represent a very broad range of
commercial and literary fiction and non
fiction and we've done about 100 book
deals in the last four years... Before I
started my own agency four years ago I
worked for another agency and before that
I worked briefly on the editorial side for
a few publishers...so I've worked on both
sides of the table and been in and out of
the business for 7-8 years. |
|
|
 |
| RD: One
thing we especially like in your book is
the way you combine a very
"frank" appraisal of the type of
errors writers make with very practical
but probing exercises at the end of each
chapter. How important was it for you to
offer constructive solutions as well as
identity the problems? |
| NL: I
think it turned out to be more important
than I'd though initially. It's funny you
asked that because when I proposed the
book I proposed a book about what writers
shouldn't do, and by pointing out the
mistakes I sort of inferred how they could
correct them. And the practical
end-of-chapter exercises and solutions
weren't really an integral part of the
original proposal. Those were all
things which evolved out of the writing of
the book. So I spent maybe three
months writing the book and two years
revising it...a lot evolved in the
revision process. When I finished the book
it was almost two and a half years ago, so
it's been a long process until it came
into print. |
|
|
|
| RD: You
devote five chapters in your book to
dialogue and say it reveals the skill of a
writer immediately and can swing the
balance either way if an editor wavers
over the quality of a manuscript. Do
you think that writers underestimate the
importance of dialogue? |
| NL: I
don't know if the problem is that they
underestimate it. I think writers
know that it's important but they just...I
think they're not so used to dealing with
it and working with it. So in the
back of their minds they know it's
important and I think they're making
sincere efforts to make it work, but I
think they get a little careless at times
when it comes to dialogue and they don't
give it the artistic importance they give
to the actual prose...I think they reach
dialogue and they think: here comes a
break from the heavy prose, let me just
take a break and find out whatever I want
to say, and they just let down their
guard. But really good dialogue
shouldn't involve letting down their
guard. They should be working just
as hard as they did in the actual prose.
Another thing is that dialogue really puts
a writer in the spotlight—it's sort of a
peak moment of creativity and ...it's
dramatic. You're really dramatizing
your scene, you're really getting into
characters and in a certain sense you're
in a more creative realm, and sometimes
writers get flustered because of
that...and they just sort of rush through
it and put down on paper what they've
heard before. |
|
|
|
| RD: How
important do you think it is for writers
to use some form of "trusted
reader" who can offer an objective
opinion on their work? |
| NL: I
think it's crucial and I think it's good
not to get just one reader but at least
three, because different readers will
bring different sensibilities to a
work...maybe one male reader and one
female reader...What I think a writer
should do is try to find a support group
or trusted readers that he can round up
where they can all give each other
feedback. He could also take local
classes. He might not always find a
good class or a good workshop, but if you
keep trying and looking you eventually
will...If you can find a good writers
group of maybe 20 people and maybe click
with one person and stay in touch, then
over time you can build up a group of
people you like. And the main thing
is just to keep on working on your
writing, revising and trying new things... |
|
|
|
| RD: In
your book you ask why writers seem to
assume they can just 'write' with no
training whatsoever—are you dismayed by
how many writers do not understand that
writing is a craft to be learned like any
other? |
| NL: Yes
I am. I'm really amazed by it and
it's really the reason I wrote the book. |
|
|
|
| RD: Have
you had any early feedback on your book
from colleagues in the publishing industry
who face the same frustrations? |
| NL: Yes,
absolutely. Colleagues I know that
have read my book so far have all loved it
...it's exactly what they wanted to
say...I wanted to be firm and to tell
writers what to expect and really how it
is today, but also to be uplifting and
encouraging while still being realistic. |
|
|
|
| RD: The
objective of your book is very modest - to
help writers avoid the errors that will
consign them to the rejection pile.
But your exercises are not 'quick fixes'
at all and call on writers to apply
'critical thought'. Would you agree
this is at the heart of your book - the
idea that a good writer must bring
"critical thought" to bear on
his or her work? |
| NL: Absolutely.
I mean writing essentially is just thought
applied to paper. I think it's all
about thought and about precision of
thought, being precise about what you are
thinking and being precise in your
observations. Usually the best writers are
the most observant people. Really good
writers can bring details to the page that
you've never even considered. |
|
|
|
| RD: The
encouraging aspect of your book is that
you seem to suggest this does not need to
be an innate skill and that writers can
train themselves in "critical
thinking". |
NL: Absolutely.
I mean even the greatest writers obviously
did not know how to write when they were
babies...It's like great pianists that
play the piano 10 hours a day for 20
years. You have a lot of incredible
pianists out there, but it doesn't
guarantee they'll get a record
contract...technically they get very good
at playing the piano but it still does not
guarantee them anything. So I think
that if writers spent all that time
training, hours a day for years and years,
just technically, learning new words and
playing with words and playing with
structure, they would technically become
extremely accomplished. I think
anyone can do that. You do also need
...guidance here and there, for direction
and support, but ultimately I think it's
90 percent of your own hard work and
training and 10 percent feedback,
direction and support.
The bottom line is that feedback and
people who try to help you and support you
can only help you so much. A
virtuoso pianist who is incredible can go
to a master teacher who, with just a
little bit of guidance, can set him on his
way for the next six months. But if
somebody has never played the piano at all
and doesn't know the basic scales and
chords, then it'll take the instructor
years and years working with that person.
So there's a lot that can be done just on
your own. I think anybody can learn
and anybody can become an accomplished
writer if they work hard enough and long
enough.
|
|
|
|
| RD: That
conflicts of course with the romantic
notion of the spontaneous, naturally
gifted writer... |
NL: Not
necessarily, because I think anyone can
become a very talented stylist and a
technically very accomplished writer and
still be missing that artistic
something—that one percent inspiration.
If technically you're good enough you will
get published. I think there are a
lot of writers that are published today
that are technically very good but I
wouldn't put them on the level of a
Faulkner or a Conrad. So I think you
can become a great writer but not
necessarily an inspired writer. I
think there's that one percent inspiration
and there's no way you can teach
that—it's just what it is.
There's a writer who I sold who I think
was one of the most brilliant writers I
ever represented. Unfortunately he
died a couple of years ago at age 40; he
was HIV positive for many years. His
name was Donald Rawley and in the last few
years of his life I got him several book
deals and he was just incredible. He
brought to his fiction a sort of intensity
that Flannery
O'Connor brought to hers in the last
years of her life. His story
collection Tina
in the Backseat recently came
out—that was his final story
collection...If you look at his writing
it's so incredible and so inspired; it's
beyond anything you could ever
imagine...there's nothing comes close. And
that's something I don't think can ever be
taught to any writer.
|
|
|
|
| RD: How
do you feel now after seven years of being
on the wrong end of a lot of poor writing?
You have your own agency but do you see
yourself in your present career ten years
from now, for instance? Do you still feel
good about what you do? |
NL: Well
it's hard to say. As of right now I have
every intention of continuing what I do.
My agency has expanded, but as I mentioned
in the book it's a very high-burnout
industry and there's a tremendous amount
of pressure working either as an agent or
an editor. You're working extremely long
hours and then there's always home
work...So it's hard to say what I'll be
doing ten years from now, but I certainly
plan on continuing to do it for the near
future. But it is a tough industry
to work in—and I'm confident that if a
lot of writers worked in this industry,
that in no time at all their perspective
would change 180 degrees.
I entered the business as an agent to
help writers, to try to help them out and
get their careers going. That is I
entered with the perspective of a
writer...but after a few years...you get
so much really truly bad material, a lot
of writers are extremely hard to deal with
and you get a lot of aggravated
situations. You get a lot of hate
mail in response to rejections, sometimes
you get death threats. You get a lot of
crazy things, and you have to become
hardened to an extent if you want to
function in the business, you know.
You should keep in mind also that
agents are getting rejected every day by
editors...In any average day I am getting
20 rejections myself from editors and I
end up selling most of the things I go out
with, but in order to sell it usually
you've got to go through a lot of
rejections. So the agent's
experiencing as much if not more rejection
than the writer. But that's just
part of the business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|