Pretty Pathetic, Publishers

Filed under: Writing Thoughts, Books — joy at 10:09 am on Thursday, July 19, 2007

Ever wonder what would happen if great works of literature were disguised and submitted to publishers today? In today’s market-driven advertising-controlled literary world, would the great writers of yesteryear be rejected along with the rest of us?

Turns out, the answer is yes. Writer David Lassman sent typed chapters of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice to 18 literary agents and publishers, changing only the titles and character names.

He got 12 rejection. No one offered him a book contract. Only one of them recognized Austen’s work.

Penguin, which republished Pride and Prejudice last year, described the work as a “really original and interesting read” but not right for them.

The literary agent Christopher Little, who represents JK Rowling, said it was “not confident placing this material with a publisher”.

These people are not doing their jobs. They don’t recognize Jane Austen? Even more troubling, they can’t recognize brilliant writing when they see it? Makes you wonder what else are they missing.

Thanks to Marcia for the link.

7 Comments »

11713

Comment by Kate

July 19, 2007 @ 5:16 pm

Maybe this is ageist…but I do think the publishing industry is run by young people– so many of the agents, editors, etc. (especially at the assistant level, the ones who work as gate-keepers) are under 40. And the focus on finding the “new YOUNG hip author” is sickening. I don’t know if this relates to the Jane Austin debacle, but maybe…

11714

Comment by Kate

July 19, 2007 @ 5:17 pm

oops, I mean AustEn!

11801

Comment by Susan

July 20, 2007 @ 12:14 pm

The thing about this is that agents and publishers are defending it, saying Austen’s not marketable today. This means that they’re opening ADMITTING that they are just after the same old same old fashionable CRAP to keep the population stupid. They even say that old books, even classics, are “not relevant” to now. If so, then what makes them classic? I doubt they could answer that!

12169

Comment by Grogged

July 23, 2007 @ 12:09 am

I’m going to play devil’s advocate on this one, even though I tend to consider the position of “agent,” literary or otherwise, as occupied by persons more viscous and putrid than decomposing flesh.

However, there has to be some perspective. I’m all but certain there was a gripe session by William Wordsworth about how the damned royal press had seemed to have all but forgotten about the brilliant works of former Poet Laureate Ben Johnson, who himself cried foul when that guy who ran the newfangled moveable printing press said that reprinting the works of Chaucer would not be profitable enough.

Business has always had a sinister symbiotic relationship with art, and this will not change. Jane Austen doesn’t sit on top of the New York Times best seller’s list. Harry Potter does. Agents and publishers are out there to make a living, just like writers. Their jobs aren’t just to assess talent, but also to judge what will command midnight book release parties, movie franchises, and Happy Meal toys. The English language is maleable, and so too is the interpretation of its mass appeal. Pride & Prejudice was published in 1816 not only because of it is a fine example of literature, but also because somebody figured they could make a few bucks.

One other thought. Were these manuscripts submitted to appropriate agents and publishers (aside from Penguin - that one is inexcusable)? Janet Evanovich’s publisher would probably no sooner consider a sample chapter from Pride & Prejudice than Pixar would consider the script for Citizen Kane.

12214

Comment by Joy

July 23, 2007 @ 7:41 am

Robin, yes, as Susan said, this is the argument that the publishers are making now. You have a lot of good points, but still, I can’t help but thinking that:

A. This is Pride and Prejudice, an extremely well-known novel. The fact that these agents and publishers can’t recognize something *that* well-known suggests that they may not have the background and skills to know a good book when they see it.

B. They are notoriously bad at being able to pick what will become bestsellers. I think Harry Potter, which is doing so well today, was rejected some 15 or 20 times before it found a–smaller–publisher. Now I’m wondering if some of the same people let that slip through their fingers too. (England is a small place after all.)

C. Jane Austen’s fanbase is easily as large as Harry Potter’s fanbase. They are still making movies of her books and writing sequels to her books and writing books about groups of people who read her books and MOVIES about groups of people who read her books. Believe me, if they found a new book of hers, the sales would be humongous. So to argue that she wouldn’t do well in today’s marketplace is–forgive me–kind of weak.

D. None of this changes the fact that when presented with top-notch writing, they apparently don’t recognize it as good enough to publish. As a writer, that’s something that offends me.

12215

Comment by Jen

July 23, 2007 @ 8:01 am

Yeah, what Joy said. It would be hard to miss Pride and Prejudice, wouldn’t it? I haven’t read that book in years, but I still remember that first line… “It is a truth universally acknowledged….”

13071

Comment by Krista

July 27, 2007 @ 9:49 am

Lets expose these fools! Let’s send this to Yahoo News and Access Hollywood. This is big news considering there is a movie coming out about her. Which I am very excited to see BTW.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>