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

[fashionista-35.livejournal.com]

You know, it's one editor. Most of the other editors I've met/heard speak say they just don't have time to go delving deeply. They might skim past to see if a writer has a blog and they might also be a bit put off if the individual in question is nuttier than a fruitcake, but they have to be Aunt Edna's fruitcake from 1963 that's still getting regifted for the most part. (For a case in point, Google "Cliff Burns." THAT'S the kind of crazy they shy away from.)

But I said it the other day when I posted about self-censorship and writing "safe"-- I'd just as soon not be published again than try to force myself into some box defined by someone else's expectations of what proper behavior is for a writer. I mean, writing? Free expression?

It's creative expression, not the Stepford Wives.

Don't mind me, I'll be over in the Rebellious Corner.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

Most of the other editors I've met/heard speak say they just don't have time to go delving deeply.

I wondered about that! Because from what I remember of my internship in the publishing biz, my editors barely had time for things like lunch or a cup of coffee or all the other ten millions things they had to get done, much less googling an author to see if their blogging was up to spec.

I wish she had defined her parameters for "bashing" or "whining" because I mean, does a negative review count? There are a few books that I've given fairly harsh reviews from, but I tried to criticize the text and the writing not make ad hominem attacks on the author or bash it. I also, at least I believe, am as far as one can be about something as subjective as books.

Don't mind me, I'll be over in the Rebellious Corner.

I think I'll be right there with you. While this sort of thing makes me anxious, it also makes me wonder if it's not a blessing in disguise. I mean, if an editor is going to hold what I blog against me and my manuscript, maybe that's not an editor I should be working with in the first place.

[madwriter.livejournal.com]

>>Most of the other editors I've met/heard speak say they just don't have time to go delving deeply.<<

I second this. Many editors I know have recently commented to this editor's post the same way: "I barely have enough time to read the submissions that come across my desk. Where would I find the time to Google every author I thought showed promise?"

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

Interesting, indeed. Do you have any links to other editors responding to this? Because I'd love to see what other professionals (agents, editors, etc) in the field are saying in reaction to this.

[madwriter.livejournal.com]

That's a good question. Nearly all were on LJ, though, and I think some commented to jaylake's post when he linked to this.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

Ack! I didn't find any comments on it at Jay's LJ or his blog. But thanks. It's nice to know that other editors were taken aback by Ms. Loggia's comments.