Shooting oneself in the foot?

[megwrites]

Delacourte editor Wendy Loggia talking about why manuscripts get rejected has me greatly worried.

Well, most of them I nodded my head to. But then I got to this and I felt like a record has screeched to a stop the way it does in movies:

4. The writer seems like a difficult person to work with. Wendy always Googles an author’s name before offering a contract. She says she may be prompted to change her mind about signing up an author if they share too much information in their blog, if they tend to blog a lot about how hard writing is, if they blog about being rejected many times, if they publicly bash a book she’s worked on, or if they bash a colleague in the business who is her friend.

I can't begin to say how much this bothers me. Because I realize that I am quite vocal about many things on this blog from racism to reviews to how I feel about certain parts of the industry. I try to be fair minded where I can, and I do try to keep a level of professionalism going.

I also try not to whine too much about how hard writing is because every job is hard in it's own way. But writing is the job I love. I love it even when it hurts. And I want to to do this job well. I want to do it professionally. I want to work well with other professionals.

But it worries me that doing that may include turning off parts of myself in ways that I'm not comfortable with.

Is blogging about the Query Score Card, or talking about rejections or ranking CoC/GLBT/Gender scores on books causing me to shoot myself in the foot? Am I hurting my chances of landing a deal somewhere just by mentioning these things?

I'm also a little worried that my chances may be hurt if I'm perceived to be "bashing" someone's book. Should I just not review books (or not review the ones I find I don't like very much) for fear that the editor or agent who worked on that book may find my review to be a reason to reject me?

I'm worried that someone will find me too difficult to work with because I blogged about getting a rude rejection - but at the same time? Is it necessarily fair or professional for an editor at a major house to say that they will pass on a manuscript based on their non-literary feelings about an author?

Like I said, the article does bother me greatly. Because it carries uncomfortable implications for what I should be doing from here on out and for what the publishing landscape is like.

Comments

[madwriter.livejournal.com]

I can only speak for me, but this just hardens my notion that I shouldn't second guess myself. This one editor may Google people and decide they're hard to work with. Other editors may appreciate an outspoken writer. If I spend too much time fretting over how I'm perceived online for speaking my mind should I choose to, I'd never get any writing done.

I will never be intentionally rude to an editor or other writers or readers. I will never argue with a rejection. But otherwise I prefer to spend my online time on my own terms and hope that my writing will speak for itself.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

But otherwise I prefer to spend my online time on my own terms and hope that my writing will speak for itself.

That sounds like a wise policy in the end. I mean, after all, if your book is good enough and shows enough potential to make big sales, you'll find an editor willing to take you on, right?

[madwriter.livejournal.com]

Right. And not only that, but a lot of publishers LIKE having outspoken authors in their corral, because that essentially translates to the author doing their own publicity.