How to use this Page

Really? I'm having a difficult time believing this. I don't own a kindle. Can I still read on my iphone? Just curious.

heather-

Yeah, there are several non-Kindle-related e-reading applications for the iPhone, including one just released by Barnes & Noble.

Me, too! Me, too!

I haven't the dedicated e-readers, but I love reading books on my iPod Touch. Using the various reader apps out there, I can buy my books in whichever format suits me.

I prefer using the eReader app because it has a little status bar at the bottom of the screen that shows me how far into the book I am. I got so upset reading my first ebook in the Kindle app (Pride by Rachel Vincent) because I didn't realize I was on the last page!

I always knew that when there was an iPod for e-books, e-books would take off. Turns out there already was an iPod for e-books.

It's small--so what? So are paperbacks and that's what I like about them. I could read my iPhone while in line at the grocery store. I can't imagine hauling out a big old Kindle while waiting in line somewhere.

jennifer-

Yeah, that is one drawback of the Kindle iPhone app -- you have to click away to see where you are in a book. You also have to actually go to the web in order to buy new books rather than buying them directly through the app.

I agree. I read exclusively on my Palm Tungsten E for about six years; it was a great experience. You could add your own fonts and change the font sizes. The autoscroll function meant I could take it to the gym, set it down on the elliptical to read and never touch it to change the page.

When my Palmie died I was heartbroken.

I purchased and use a Sony now and - while I do like the Sontas a reader - the smaller screen Palm was a better reading experience.

I've considered getting an iPod touch just for reading...

Enjoy your iPhone, sir!

The Road would read great on any medium.

PS -

eReader Pro from eReader.com was the first iPhone reading app and still one of the best. That was what I used on my Palm as well. You might want to try it out!

C-

Oh geez. I always thought "The Hills" was something you had made up. It's a real show?

This is very disillusioning.

I love reading books on my Sony - I'm, in fact, reading a PDF version of a fellow beta reader's novel right now... and it's so cool seeing her words in book form!

For financial reasons, I have yet to buy an iPhone. But I'm pretty happy right now with my e-reader and separate cell phone. As if I don't have enough distractions without getting calls on the very device I'm trying to read!

Geez, Nathan, how do you do it? It's a wonder to me, I tell you. :-)

I just got an iPhone a few weekends ago. Two days before that, Barnes and Noble came out with their free iPhone app. I must first say that I am against e-readers. I don't own one. I love the feel of a book and the "high" I get browsing the store and carrying my purchases to the counter. Okay, now that I've got that out of the way, I LOVE reading on my iPhone! The B&N app comes with a few classics, and I've found myself reading them. On Friday I purchases a collection of Poe, because I figured it's an easy pick up and put down book. Just like Nathan, I get pulled into the pages and am not even aware that the "book" is actually my iPhone.

So if this multi-device is the way forward and not dedicated e-readers, then in the future, instead of calling them 'e-books', we will call them 'phone books'....? Er, no. I suppose that would be confusing.

I never wanted to say this, but The Hills just brought you down. This break up, it's really for the best.

But guess what? A friend of friend told me that Battlestar Galactica thinks you're cute.

Wait, you have an iPhone?

I'm so jealous.

But I do agree with you. I borrowed my brother-in-law's and read Twilight off it during my husband's graduation ceremony this past spring (shhh! Don't tell him) The size of the font wasn't bad at all, especially in landscape mode. Watching movies wasn't bad either (hey, it was a l-o-n-g ceremony).

That's funny, Steph. I read all four Twilight books on my e-reader! Just couldn't bring myself to display the print versions on my bookcase, I guess.

I've been reading eBooks on my iPod touch for the last year and a half and I agree with all of your reasons. The Bonus for me was when I scored a Kindle for Mother's Day, I just pointed all my downloaded iPod swag to my Kindle2 and BAM (said the lady--sorry Nathan), I'm in business. And the ambient light thing is such a WIN that Kindle3 needs to get on that pronto.

I usually have my iPod with me (in my purse, my bag or strapped to my arm if I'm running) so I'm always armed with some reading material.

Nathan, to my IMMENSE surprise (and everyone's disbelief) I feel the same way about reading books (via Kindle app or Stanza) on my iPod Touch! My only issue is battery life... I don't usually like reading white text on black (or other similar variations) but I'm thinking about trying that to help me get through more "pages"!

Jeez Dan. I really can't believe I had to hear the news this way. I mean, Battlestar and I just went out last week!

I guess it's sloppy seconds from The Hills for me...

I have a new Blackberry bold. It has a screen, though small, to rival the resolution of the Iphone. So far online reading goes fine. Wonder how reading a book would be on that thing? Ok. Gonna have to try it and report back.

Hi Nathan, thanks for this post! I too have recently discovered the joys of reading on the iPhone - it's addictive!

I have been using the Stanza app. I didn't realize there was a Kindle app out now.

Yaay!

I'll admit it - I laughed when I read this. People think I'm crazy all the time for reading on my Palm TX. "Isn't that screen too small?" Nope. Not at all.

I love it though, and I can get a few pages in wherever without having to carry around a larger or dedicated reading device. I have the background colored a light tan that's easy on the eyes, and just dim the back light when I need to.

The Hills was never my type from "Hello," but I do love my Kindle. Love it so much that I e-pubbed one of my novels on it. While I do love books...the feel of them, the sound of the binding cracking open, even the smell of the ink...you can't beat taking six or seven books (and a bunch of blogs) on the train with you...and getting updates on the fly. And I'm glad to hear that the iPhone Kindle app isn't totally unpleasant. More users, more readers!

Nathan, Fascinating, as usual. I told my husband I want some type of mechanical reading device for my b-day in December. Picking which one, however, is the trick...

I'll let Lauren know you won't be by Nathan. :)

I'm all about multifunctional tools. I don't like to carry too many items with me. But, I can see myself with an iphone. Hmm...I think I'm up for a new phone too. Thanks Nathan! (picks up car keys and runs out the door)

Dammit. I've been trying sooooooooo hard to suppress the devil on my shoulder who keeps insisting I need an iPhone. Must. resist.

Don't need a new phone (but the iPhone would be so much more than a phone!).

My functional old Nokia works just fine (but it deserves to retire after its years of honorable
service.

arghhhh.

I mean, um, thanks for the enthusiastic review. Sigh.

i resisted the Kindle for a LONG time for the same reasons most book lovers do: i love books. i love the feel and the smell of books. I like to pet them. i like to shop for them. it's possibly an unhealthy relationship :)

short story shorter: i finally gave in. i LOVE my Kindle. i love that i can just change books when i'm in the mood, no matter where i am.

not sure that i'm ready to read on my iPhone yet--doesn't it get in the way when people text you all day long?

I've been waiting to buy an iPhone for my Treo 680 to finish its long, slow death...(and for Apple to release my favorite Chinese dictionary application from its beta prison) - this is an additional incentive for sure!

Question for those of you using the iPod Touch - what's the deal with that, anyway? I have a video iPod with a click wheel. Am I better off with one of those Touch thingies and a separate cellphone? Or an iPhone and my current click wheel iPod?

I still love my paperbacks. I read while on my exercise bike every morning. I'm wondering if the bouncing screen would be a problem, although the backlighting would make it easier to read. Just one more year 'til I have my own iPhone... Have to wait for my Sprint contract to be up.

I've read one book on my iPod Touch using Stanza. And even though the book was awesome, the eye strain got so bad about halfway through that I wanted to gouge out my peepers with my thumbs.

lisa-

iPod touches are basically iPhones without the phone part. You can connect to the internet wirelessly, use apps, and do a lot that click wheel iPods can't.

Now that iPhones come with 32 gig memory, though, if you're going to upgrade it probably makes sense to just go with an iPhone over buying a new phone and a separate iPod touch. You can still use your click wheel iPod to store music that you don't have room for on your iPhone.

I have the ipod touch and I use it as much as my kindle! You're right I have it with me everywhere so it's always on hand.

Too true. I read the classics on my BlackBerry with Barnes & Noble's app. My phone is always there and I am always in need of some classic brush-up-ness. I love the Kindle, but the phone is the new thing. It is there with you while you commute, when you're stuck at a boring event, or hanging out with friends who start to watch TV shows you don't care for (yes, The Hills included).

I'm not sure I'd have as much fun reading on my iPhone if I couldn't break to play games and make random crank calls. (Yeah, that was me, sorry.)

Totally. I don't read books on my iPhone, but I sure do everything else, including reading your blog! I'm curious to hear the Apple eReader's (whatever it's going to be called) reviews. I think the winner shall be my dad's Christmas gift. He refuses to get a cell phone, though...so iPhone is out. Does the iTouch have this app? I'm sure it does...hmmmmm.....

Well, that's a short story waiting to be written. Couples counseling between a T.V. show and a human. Funny......

This was helpful to me personally, thank you. I just got my student loan money. Did you know they give you EXTRA? EXTRA money. It's amazing how much junk is suddenly absolutely essential to my upcoming education.

Like an I-phone. You can call on it. You can read on it. Could there be anything more desirable in human existence? I think not. Not when I have money in my pocket to burn, baby.

But is the I-phone the best option? Well, you convinced me with the ambient light thing. That is SO important. So, thank you. Very helpful.

I suspect that e-reading devices will continue to evolve. I'm anxious to see what Apple's tablet gizmo will do/look like. I think we're eventually going to walk around with something that looks like what Jon-Luc Picard had on STNG.

I have to admit I sometimes wander to Amazon and look longingly at the Kindle. But I just can't part with that kind of cash, espeically when my children keep requiring stupid stuff like clothing.

Anyway, feel free to OCCASIONALLLY update us on your e-reading exploits, Nathan. I'll just have to live vicariously through you for the time being.

I adore my Kindle - I don't have an iPhone - I have a Samsung Omnia - it lets me comment mod my site, my Verizon Treo did not. But I digress, as usual.

First thing I asked my agent when we got an offer, "Please make sure it's on Kindle." I'm frustrated now when my favorite releases aren't there. What's the rhyme or reason, or is there any, as to what books get onto Kindle. Some I can pre-order even - others? Just. Not. There. Waaah!

Does this mean you'll be looking to move your Kindle for some low, low price, Nathan? ;)

Thanks, Nathan! Plus my click-wheel iPod is in great shape, so it seems kind of silly to not make use of it. I kind of like using devices until they die.

The only reason I haven't bought an ereader is because I have an iphone. Not super to read for hours in bed-but on the go, in the car, all the infernal waiting one must do...it's right there in my hand and already paid for. I love it.

My iPhone is so cool I wish I could do my writing on it, let alone reading. But it's not ready for that yet. I can type faster than I can think (convenient in many ways until they invented a "send" button), but I can only type with my thumbs on the iPhone. So writing on it will unfortunately require a direct bluetooth link with brainwaves, and that may not come standard until version 3.0, plus we will need USB jacks implanted in our jawbones.

Meantime, my little darling can read to me, play with me, soothe me when I'm down, sing to me. My TV shows are so jealous!

No, "THAT NEVER WORKS". I mean, these people somehow delude themselves into thinking it might, but... but it might work for us.

This is really helpful, Nathan. A review by someone who understands.

I've been wondering (suspiciously) about the e-book phenomena and you've helped put it in perspective.

David Pogue, of the NY Times (technology desk) doesn't like them precisely because they lack the traditional attributes of a book ... being able to hold it like a book, being able to pass it on, etc.

I recently discovered all the reader apps for the Iphone too. I've got Stanza (my favorite), eReader, Barnes and Noble eReader, and Kindle for Iphone. (You don't need an actual Kindle reader to use the apps on your Iphone or Itouch.)

It's surprisingly easy on the eyes. You can increase the font, change the color of the text and background, change the actual font, etc. Reading in bed is much easier. No lights to disturb the significant other. You don't have to prop yourself up because you can hold the phone with one hand and turn pages with a touch of a finger or thumb.

I was skeptical at first which is why it's brilliant that publishers are offering free books on their websites. The apps are free, some of the books are free, you've got nothing to lose.

If I had to pay, I'm not sure I'd have tried it. Now that I know I enjoy reading books this way, I've purchased several already.

I just bought the new Google Phone. It has a book app called Aldiko (which is amazing).

Welcome to the future.

Interesting post. I read somewhere that in Japan there's a huge number of books downloaded to phones. I read this piece fast; I could be wrong.

Nathan,

My sentiments exactly. I read on my iPhone all the time, everyday almost. But you left out the best part: The Kindle and iPhone wirelessly sync with each other.

I'm a busy mommy of four and I run all day. I do take my Kindle with me, if I know I'll be having a little down time. But sometimes, I don't have it with me and soccer practice runs late, or the hockey game ended and the kids are taking forever to get to the car - well, you get it.

The phone's the thing.

There are a few of us willing to read NB's blog from our uninteresting-uneasy-on-the-eyes blackberries despite the fact we don't have an e-reader or even watch The Hills. This is because of the phenawsomeness of this blog.

Jenn via her 1st generation Blackberry Curve.

I love to read on my iPhone. There are many ebook reader apps. I actually read the twilight series on my iPhone using the iceberg reader, which I kinda like more than the iPhone kindle app. With the iceberg reader you can increase the font.

What I am totally digging are audiobooks. I love them. That to me is the next bug thing. I got my brother who dosen't like to read listening to an audiobook which he really likes.

I can work out, clean up, drive, etc while listening to the books. I even fall asleep sometimes while listening to audiobooks.

I listen to audiobooks on my iPhone.

Melanie K had a good question. Can you turn off the phone function when reading? I can only imagine how many times I would get ticked off because someone called right when Rochester's attic wife is revealed or when Frodo gets to Mt. Doom.

Thanks for more incentive for me to buy an iPhone. Off to convince the hubby...

I dunno... I love the idea of readers for things like journals, blogs, magazines, cookbooks, etc. It would save a lot of paper. But as far as novels go, I still want to own my books. REALLY own them. I collect antique and used books, and I'd hate the thought of some day newer novels not being available in book form. I love to get a used book and see people's notes and scribbles on interesting passages, or where they spilt their coffee, and to underline my own favorite passages, knowing that it'll stay like that for a long time.

Not to mention questions about sales and piracy.

You see, I might seem like a hypocrite because I support "illegal" music downloading. Ultimately, it helps independent bands and evens out the odds a bit in what was becoming a monopolized top-40 industry. The only people complaining are the Sonys and Universals.

But the reason piracy has had a positive influence on the music industry is that music is something we don't consume just once. Once we like the album, we want to buy it, go see shows, buy the shirts, etc.

Books, on the other hand, we read only once (for the most part). Once someone has downloaded a book illegally and read it, what will their incentive be to ever purchase it, like they would a music album? None. They'll just move along to the next one.

I know how hard it can when you and a show split. Heroes and I have been having some problems and I think we may end up splitting if it doesn't turn its behavior around. I miss the days when we first started and the show was fresh and new... aw well...

Anyway, E-readers (iPods and iPhones included) are nice if you have money, but I, a lowly student can't afford them and when I played with one (in Boarders and the iCult store respectively) I wasn't really impressed.

More power to you if you like them though. I"m preparing for a world where I have to print the book myself and probably draw a cover if they don't give your graphics to go with your download.

I moderated a panel on this very topic at Worldcon. I had two panelists on opposite sides of the dedicated eReader vs. multi-use device, altho the multi-use guy was actually thinking more in terms of economics than anything else. The dedicated eReader guy came down on the side of a better reading experience. I have a Kindle myself, and carry it almost everywhere (my new purse requirement is that my Kindle has to fit). I have looked at a friend's iPhone Kindle app and another friend's iTouch, and that screen is too small for me to feel comfortable reading more than 20 minutes or so.

But I'm happy to see I'm not alone in thinking there's an eReader out there for everyone. Us boomers may need e-ink and a larger screen, but younger folks may need multi-use convenience. To each his own. Eventually, people may well use both-- a Kindle-like eReader at home, and a PDA/phone app on the road (I loved the commenter's "phone book" joke). Amazon makes that easy, even today.

It's only going to get better. Now if they would fix the errors in ebooks I coudl be happy.

great post nathan. there needs to be a bookcase app to house all of your ebooks! when apple hits the right price point, world domination will follow.

Ok snagged it for BB Bold. Pretty cool, actually, though a bit slow to turn pages. Gives me an excuse to read Draculaa again, though.

I don't have an iPhone yet but I plan on getting one just because the phone I do have is spoiling me with being able to download movies and browse the internet. The only thing my current phone cannot do is download documents from my email which is why I want to upgrade one day. And now with the bonus of reading books ... god, life is going to be great!

The lit screen, small size, and adjustable text size make it easier to read on the treadmill too than the paperbacks I used to read. Haven't tried actually running outdoors with it, but can't see why that wouldn't work too.

I just finished reading State of Fear on my iPhone. It's nice because I can read in bed and don't need the light on while my wife is trying to sleep. I don't have a Kindle to compare it to, though.

I wanted a Kindle or Sony reader but my husband got me an Ipod touch for our anniversary (more practical and versitile he said).
I read a ton on my I pod. I downloaded a ton of free classic novels on it--including Moby Dick and War and Peace. I'm only 6.04% the way through--hoping I can finish, one day.
But, as you pointed out, the portability is great. I bring it with me to appointments and while traveling. Oh, I've also developed the habit of reading on the Ipod right before bedtime. Love the light feature.

Love my iphone to death! I even read my church's manuals on it because there are apps available, for free too. So if I forget to bring a book along, I always have my B&N free books on my iphone. Miraculous little thing!

Oh, and Regan Leigh, there is an "airplane mode" which would switch the phone part of the iPhone off, to answer your question.

I LOVE reading on my iPhone. I don't even want a kindle. The great thing is, with Stanza-you can also view .doc files with TOTAL ease.

What I really like about it is, if I just happen to be standing in line or bored at my daughter's gymnastics stuff--bam--I download a book.

I have very little experience with the Kindle (mostly just fiddling with my dad's) but I didn't care for it - there was the page-turn blink, and I didn't think there was enough contrast between the print and the background. But I liked the idea of an e-reader, so when Barnes and Noble introduced their e-book platform, I gave it a try on my iTouch. I'm kind of in love. I don't see myself giving up paper books altogether, but I can definitely see myself making frequent use of it in the future.

"...the iPhone really disappears in your hands like a book."

Precisely. I'm hooked.

I HATE phones. They are far too much a part of my life however much I try to avoid them. I like my PC and, as a small magazine editor, read short stories on my monitor regularly.

Books, I like to read on the couch or in bed. My attention span is short, I need to be comfortable to read anything long.

Also, I have thrown a book or two at a loved one's head; try doing that with one of your high tech devices. You will most likely decide that your passion is not worth the cost of your Kindle or Iphone. Whereas a hardback is worth its weight in potential impact.

Well, there you go. Leigh mentioned she'd have to "draw" her own book cover; I guess you don't have to worry about getting just the right one for the e-book thing. Talk about putting a whole lot of artists out of work!! How else would an author get to experience a full-blown "agent freakout?" I don't think I care to miss that opportunity.
.......dhole

God damnit man! How am I supposed to resist buying an iPhone when you write posts like this about it?

And I've got a novel soon to be published as an e-book and I might be the only person left in the world who doesn't have a reader to read it on!

The world is conspiring to make me buy this thing!

E-books... Yuk.

Thanks for bringing this up, Nathan. I'd read something similar elsewhere and downloaded eReader and Stanza and gave them a try. Based on your suggestion, I just downloaded the Kindle app. Funny thing is I find it easier reading books on the iPhone than long formatted emails.

For the folks who don't want to read from an iPhone in the gym--audio books!

It's all about choice, really. Having something at hand to read when you're on the go, having a nice hardcover to snuggle up with for the hour before you fall asleep. Never being without a book.

To be comment number 72! I must get out of bed earlier.

I've resisted an iPhone for many years now. (Ok, just two or three) For good reason. I'm Finnish and they don't let you back into the country without a Nokia phone.

But if you can read on it...

Thanks Jason! Good to know!

I've only recently discovered the love for my iPhone as an e-reader. I haven't owned any other e-readers, as I'd been waiting for them to become more affordable.

But I already had an iphone and had bought a couple of books in pdf format a few years ago. So I simply installed Stanza (there might be better ones but this is the only one I've tried) which has worked really well so far.

It's great for, ahem, bathroom breaks, or for when you're stuck waiting somewhere without a physical book, whether it's due to the size or whatever - chances are you'll still have your phone.

I was worried I wouldn't be able to lose myself in the book as I would a print copy, but that hasn't been a problem. I still love print and prefer reading that way when possible, but I also like having books on the phone for the random moments it comes in handy.

100% with you. Cell phones are the reading medium of choice in Japan. And the potential for serialisations and textnovels is incredibly exciting.

While e-books aren't for me--at least not yet--I do see their merits. Not sure I like the idea of reading on a phone, but it's interesting to see how far technology has come.

I suppose I'm one of those old-fashioned kind who only uses her phone for calls and the occassional text message. :P

I am amazed at the new apps for the iPod. I recently read an article about making bank check deposits. I love this new technology.

Hmm, the IPhone is a new one to me and not so sure my old eyes could handle the small screen.
LOVE my Sony reader--mostly for the nightlight feature and because I can increase the size of the print. (Ya know, for my old eyes) :)

Wow, thanks for the post. I am one of those die hard paper book fans (can't get to the point where I feel like I could give up the comfort holding a good ol fashioned book gives me) untill 2 weeks ago. I uploaded a book on my itouch with the Kindel app and I'm hooked! I actually had to make a deal with myself. For every book I read on my iTouch I will read 1 paper book I have in my HUGE to be read pile. Oh and I don't have a Kindle...

So, I guess it's the iPad for you then?

Apple is successfully positioning itself to become the universal computer of tomorrow... if Google doesn't get there first.

I'm not an e-books reader, yet. When the prices come down for those things--and they figure out how to get it backlit for nighttime reading as well as dim durnig the daylight hours--then I'll consider it. for me, now, it's audiobooks.

Shhh, don't tell my husband or daughter, but I spent a nib over $800 for audible.com's downloads. One reason: It saves on prime RE space in an apartment, it's one less thing I've got to move/clean to dust and clean, and I don't have to spend gas on it by going to a used bookstore, Goodwill or the local library. And no way would I ever toss a book in the trash. That's sacreligious.

But audiobooks? Wow, what a world! My writing's different now because of them; I imagine my words are being read aloud by anauthor, so I write as clear as I can with that in mind. And it's a great thing to listen to while walking the dog. Sure bests the wasteland corporate radio's turned into these days.

Downloadable books are here to stay, my friends. I'm a book-in-my-hands lover, too, but only if you're planning to keep them and pass it down to your kids. For books, oh say, like college textbooks, who wants those collecting dust?

Thanks for the super post, Nathan, as usual. Go, technology!

~Missye

Not having a Kindle, Sony eReader, iPhone, or iPod, I find these discussions very interesting and helpful. Oh I'll buy one day, but the market is still shaking out. Like Betamax vs. VHS.

When it settles down, and I suspect there won't be one clear winner other than the consumer who will have a myriad of choices, I'll jump in, an informed consumer.

Don't got no Sony reader. Don't got no Kindle. Don't got no iphone. All I got is this damned ol throw away phone. Guess I'll have to stick to cardboard and wood pulp. Sigh.

This post has made me seriously reconsider my vow to never get an iPhone (because then I would spend so much time playing with it I wouldn't have a life) but if you can read a novel on one . . .wow!

Must start saving money . . .

Alton Brown (awesome cooking tv show host) would agree with you: Monotaskers are terrible.

I also wonder how much the poll results are skewed by people's intentional romanticization of the printed book. Self surveys are great as a crude tool but most people are fundamentally dishonest.

Just returned home from an Alaskan cruise. I brought along two books – one hardcover and a paperback to read on the plane. My husband brought along his Kindle. For travel, there just isn’t anything as wonderful as the Kindle or some other e-reading device. I mentioned to my husband that for the first time ever, I could see myself using an iPhone because I realized how easy it would be to keep up with blogs and everything else on the Internet while standing in lines and during other idle time. Although I have to admit, I usually step away from the Internet on vacation, especially in a place like the wilderness of Alaska.

Congratulations on breaking up with The Hills. I tried watching the show because you so highly recommended it on this blog, but I’m not sure it held my attention for even 15 minutes. Years ago, I watched shows like that, but I’ve also moved on. You’ll survive; be strong. Life will get better. You’ll see.

I see THE ROAD is on your Kindle picture. Fantastic book!

Thanks for this heads-up. I was looking at an iPod touch recently, and this might tip my hand towards that, having not at all considered this perk.

I'm so behind on the times. I didn't even know you could read books on the iPhone. But I guess that's irrelevant, because if I told my husband I wanted to spend such a big chunk of change on an iPhone, he'd probably laugh himself silly for three weeks straight. Too bad, because this sounds fantastic. Someday...

I'm not a phone person, but I love my Sony 505. I'm "the pusher", I try to convince all the readers I know to add e-books to their lives. The convenience, the environment, etc! In fact, I just convinced my 70 year old father today... heh heh.

I have a Sony, but have been considering the Kindle for it's compatibility with Mac. But I'm still worried the Kindle isn't as sturdy as my Sony. Meanwhile, I do have the Kindle App on my iPhone. My eyes are already prone to dryness, though, so after about 10 minutes of reading, I want to tear out my grainy eyes. But it is great for the times you get stuck in line at the bank or drive through and don't have another reading option. (Yes, I read that much)

As the digital revolution prepares to absorb yet another of ye olde analogue world's delights into its transmutatoid internexus, I'm guessing that by 2025 all we'll be left with to remind us of the sensual era of real books will be plucking nostril hair and farting.

Or maybe by then the Kindle will have an enhanced Aromagen(tm) facility for gracing the turn of each epage with a waft of classic book odours ranging from 60s Penguin to Fusty Bookshop Fossil.

All I know is — you can't prop up an uneven table leg with an iPhone.

(This is not an anti-ebook rant, btw — just a sorry indication that it's late here...)

The game changes when you need reading glasses.

You will love your Kindle until Amazon starts throwing advertising at you because they can.

Just sayin'.

Sony, baby, all the way.

Call me last decade, but I want my phone to be my phone, my camera to be my camera, my music . . . You get the idea. If I had everything possible on one device and happened to drop that device and break it- Well, you know where that would leave me.

:)
G.

I agree 100%. I still read traditional books more, but the only reason I even tried an e-book was because of the Kindle app. The iPhone may just well be my most perfect relationship.

I love the enthusiasm you bring to every post! And yes, I also feel ebooks will be read on screens of all sizes. We're just at the beginning of this wave, and you sharing the news that it's all free with the phone, already, is the best!

Fortunately, for your business, the format of the book will have less impact that the need for agents to find good ones to publish.

Nathan,

First, so sorry to hear about the breakup. I know that I'm a day late on the comment thread, but thanks for this e-reader post.

I can't imagine reading on a small screen like an iPhone, but your enthusiasm makes me think that reading that way could someday be possible for me. The developing options in e-reading are quite exciting, and I appreciate your detailed posts about new technology.

I have a Kindle coming for my birthday and am already addicted to it. :)

Thanks!

Nathan,

Thank you for making this post. I immediately downloaded the app (and a book) and both are fantastic! Reading on the small screen is no problem, especially since you can slowly scroll to the next page without interrupting your reading.

Jeez, all the time I've wasted playing silly games on my iPhone when I could have been deep into a novel.

Thanks!

Matt

Oh, great. Now you tell me. My fiance has been pushing the idea of us getting iPhones together, but I just bought a Kindle and a new car and told him no.
If I would've known, I would've not bought the Kindle.
Oh well. I'll still enjoy it just as much.

After some thought I've decided I'm about two years away from buying an e-book reader. Reasons:

1. The Apple Tablet is coming.
2. The Apple Tablet is coming.
3. The Apple Tablet is coming.

(So the experts say, mostly based on the fact that Apple are stringently denying that the Apple Tablet is coming.)

Why two years? It'll take the competition that long to come out with some serious touchscreen-based contenders (once you've done that swipe thing on your iPhone you NEVER want to go back. I find myself trying to swipe all sorts of screens.) And in the meantime Apple will bring out versions 2 and 3. Based on the evolution of the iPod and iPhone, my feeling is that you need to get to at least version 3 before all the issues are worked out and you can really be blissfully happy with your purchase.

Ditto what Jane says above. Nathan, I'm sure Apple has already realized everything you touched on in this post and are currently working to make sure they best Amazon in the fight for the e-reader. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple even absorbed the Kindle part of Amazon, if that were possible (?).

Do most agents use some kind of e-reader? I've noticed that many who blog do, but not sure about other blog-less agents.

Did you know the first book is already available for preorder at Amazon.com? Is it just me, or is that a little bit scary?

I am so annoyed. Grr….

*Of course* she’ll have a ghostwriter.

Personally, I’m frightened. However, think about Christy Carlson Romano’s Grace’s Turn, which was okay, and The Market, by “J.M. Steele” who is apparently two Hollywood types. This will probably be bad, but I’ll wait until I read it to pass judgement.

I don’t think I will order these for my library until I get specific requests for them. I just can’t deal.
On the other hand, if they become audio books, maybe James Franco and Mila Kunis could read them. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, go to funnordie.com and look for the video where these two actors recreate a scene from The Hills. Too funny!

I *knew* Lauren's book deal would be making an appearance in your blog today! It was actually my first thought when I heard the news :).

Your blog rocks! Glad to see it get some Blogger love.

Thank goddess I didn't use the word Shattered in my query, because now maybe someone phenomenal will consider representing me. That Lauren may be smart and pretty but she's a damn fool.

Thank you for the hint. Since I will be sending you a query on my first novel soon, it's nice to know what you like and don't like. Not that I want to kiss up!

Gotta work on that personalizing...

Great inside information. Good to know in case I ever write a book about my shattered life. ha.
I'm one of those people that is told they should write a book about their lives- all the time. Thanks to my very nutty family, lots of drama when I was a teen- and unusual experiences. Always try to explain to folks that I'm happily UN-shatterd, thank you very much, and not interested in being defined by the past by writing a book about it. I'd rather be defined by the awesome present. Besides- everyone has a story. Those "shattered lives" books must be a dime a dozen.
Great blog.

Nathan,

Ahhhh, I DO see. Now. The first time around, that string of cliches made me yech and flee the scene.

On second reading, I appreciate what Ms. Maslin's doing. But I still don't think I'm going to read that book! (I'm just not into coming-of-age and smug attempts to disguise/elevate/reinvent the genre...Oh, excuse me. The Loved One just shattered my ego by whacking me on the head with a printout of my own smug attempt to disguise/elevate/reinvent the genre...)

First time reading your blog, and I am hooked.Congratulations on being noteworthy!



http://noxysnotions.blogspot.com/

You have 61 comments with people finding ways to used "is shattered"? Hmmm. This blog fad just might be overrated. I was hoping to find more literary minds giving their two bits.

Great Blog and I did find it from the blogs of note.

I knew some folks from the UK who said someone was shattered if they were drunk, exhausted, etc. It was a while ago, though.

"You look shattered."

Such a great expression.

Yours is the first "Blog of Note" I have ever looked at and what a pleasant surprise! I'll be coming back.

Hello!

I am a writer (ha, how many times have you heard that?) however that has little to do with why I'm writing in here.

I saw your blogger on blogs of note and read what you had to say. You're amusing and fun- at least in my opinion. I'll more then likely watch your blog from here on because I've enjoyed what I've read thus far!

Btw, my name is Erica (hi again)
Have a good day and congrats on being featured. :)

Thank you for pointing out "shattered" - at least I learn something today.

from: Rushking

wow...nice blog

regard
http://gending-gending.blogspot.com

Hi Nathan... I was just going through my blog and surfing some other blogs where I found an interesting blog of yours. I think people like me need your help to showcase our writing talent. Being an Indian, you shall find plenty of writing talent but the resources to showcase them are really scanty. I wish more people get chance to publish the novels. I am a writer and have written a fiction novel. I would be happy if you can guide me somehow. Thanks again.

Regards,
Bhavin

I liked the "shattered" blog. I'll probably be subscribing in a minute or two based on that one entry alone. It was funny and informative!

What else have you got?

Tooj,

You have 61 comments with people finding ways to used "is shattered"? Hmmm. This blog fad just might be overrated. I was hoping to find more literary minds giving their two bits.

Peruse the archives. This is a light-hearted blog, but it's pretty amazing how much useful information sifts through. This place, Miss Snark's and Janet Reid's Query Shark archives are a crash course on query writing.

Tips on how to approach agents, edits, genres etc abound. It's the nuts-and-bolts stuff that is just good information without all the fluff.

thanks, and glad to be here! love your blog.

有一伙人在四处打听你的下落，还说逮住你不会轻饶你，他们一个叫财神、一个叫顺利、领头的叫幸福！我问过烦恼了，它根本不爱你还说永远不理你让我转告你不要自做多情了！还有健康让我带封情书给你，它暗恋你好久了并对你一生不变视频聊天,美女视频,聊天室

有一伙人在四处打听你的下落，还说逮住你不会轻饶你，他们一个叫财神、一个叫顺利、领头的叫幸福！我问过烦恼了，它根本不爱你还说永远不理你让我转告你不要自做多情了！还有健康让我带封情书给你，它暗恋你好久了并对你一生不变视频聊天,美女视频,聊天室

ha ha ha I think i lost it at holy tyra!!!

Nathan I did you the favor of translating the above comments...no need to thank me:

Some group people are inquiring your whereabouts in all directions, added that will catch you not to forgive you lightly, their is called the God of Wealth, to call, the lead to call happiness smoothly! I had asked the worry, it has simply not liked you adding forever paid no attention to you to let me pass on you not to from do is full of affection! Also had the health to let me bring to seal the love letter to you, it unrequited loves you for a long time and chats to your life invariable video frequency, beautiful woman video frequency, chatroom

Nice. Congratulations

good!!


post me plis


by: mundo de jinetes

my dear friend ,you blog is very good!!.welcome you to my blog!!
http://blue-office.blogspot.com

hi!

As for Lauren Conrad, if I wasn't aware of the fact that Gyspy Rose Lee "wrote" and sold a novel, I'd be devastated. As it is, I'm nonplussed and experiencing ennui.

But congrats on your blog recognition! Well deserved!

Greetings and Blessings of the Ages: "Moab is disgraced, for she 'is shattered'. Wail and cry out! Announce by the Arnon that Moab is destroyed." Jeremiah 48:19-21 (NIV)

Who can withstand his indignation? Who can endure his fierce anger? His wrath is poured out like fire; the rocks are shattered before him.
Nahum 1:5-7 (NIV)

In revelations, elations, excitations, and edification to One and ALL “Alpha/Omega Lord of Lords, King of Kings and God of Gods” with reproof that he has arisen in the Bread of Life and that none have listened to his words, neither sought his counsel nor have followed his ways. Ezekiel 33-37, Rev. 10 “Thou Art Being Weighted In Thy Balance” ©: Seven words of thunder.

The Heir: Geir-USA-Lem™ HeirUSAlem™©, Rev. 16.19 ∑Θ∑: Everlasting O’EVErlasting™, New Jerusalem. Psalms 29© http://el-shaddai-dad.blogspot.com/ and
http://seaofglass-geirusalem.blogspot.com/ where is thy tithing to bee and what is thy tribute or tribulation??

Lift-up Thy CUP thy VOice and dew visit read and teach all ye nations: Bowl ye heavens and rain down righteousness, I-say-ah 40. If the foot (She-ol) is sick does not the Hand know (noe, no) IT? The Right Hand Michi-gan (right cloven-foot on the sea), with the Sceptre are below four wings of an Eagle (one wing is the Bear turned-UP on one side: The Great Lakes). The Left Hand (left-foot on the earth – with six toes, six fingers is INdian-a) and the Censer under the Stone Throne are all revealed: Between the Ohio and Mississippi (Omega HI Omega - Miss-is-sip-pi) Rivers is the Center Court, Geir-USA-Lem, Rev. 16.19.

The Earth and its fullest is the Lord’s Table: Pull off thy Sandals for this is Holly Ground.

The Marriage is complete, Joseph is in the Well of Creation – “The Dream Weaver – The Shuttle”: The EARth is the Holly Tomb (Womb) and Dad is back in the Garden calling out to his children. If I tell you of earthly things and you do not believe me then how can I tail you of heavenly things?

Blessings of the Ages, all is well in Love and Peace: Noe the hour and day. Eel: ∑Θ∑: Everlasting O’EVErlasting™, Psalms 29©

I AM that I AM, El-Shaddai-dad, The Ancient of Days many names without number, The AMEN.

Ok, so I read through some of the comments on your blog and all I have to say is, "Wow". It is amazing how many people will just simply say, you're great, and have no substance. I don't mean to demean those faithful followers who hang on your every word, but still I see this all the time in online reviews, sometimes the same words are used. "Great book," "Amazing," "A must read for everyone". Maybe I'm a little disenchanted, who knows.
That aside, you could probably do a whole blog just on various words and phrases that should be avoided not only for being hackneyed phrases (hackneyed being on that list but a favorite word of mine to describe the situation, along with chestnut), but also because there are better ways to make your idea do more than just jump off the page.
A good read on certain words and phrases that our English teachers told us not to use but really are ok is Miss Thistlebottom's Hobgoblins. If you have not read it, you should, you will laugh aloud. It is written by Theodore Bernstein.

"All this chitter-chatter, chitter-chatter, chitter-chatter bout
Shmatta, shmatta, shmatta -- I cant give it away on 7th avenue
This towns been wearing tatters (shattered, shattered)
Work and work for love and sex
Aint you hungry for success, success, success, success
Does it matter? (shattered) does it matter?
Im shattered.
Shattered"

- Jagger/Richards

congrats, nathan

Why does this blog keep returning to the fold of cliches when it should avoid them like the plague?

I think you should quit this like a bad habit. But who am I, the Pope in Rome?

[That was as painful to write as it is to read. Sorry. Had to.]

I take on one of my favorite "super-cliches" in my blog, "Rockstar".

Down here (and I believe in the UK as well) 'shattered' can mean extremely exhausted and tired. And that's usually how I use it. I couldn't see myself using iti n a query for more then one reason now I guesss. :)

For over-used and inappropriate words, how about "sexy"?

"Shattered" is a very specific expression, it means "broken beyond repair", like trying to piece together something made of glass, it is not redeemable.

Apropos of nothing in this particular post, I just wanted to say that I'm looking forward to reading "Churchill By Himself."

this is very helpful!!! gr8 blog!!!

Reminds me of the Billy Collins poem, Tension.

I can't understand your blog. Maybe you should use smaller words. hehe.

Bah humbug, let's forget this shatter business and get down to the Milli Vanilli expose - I am SO intrigued!

I think the dating service idea is pretty good, honestly. Think of the reciprocal selling opportunities - and it's a good way to classify people. They'll probably fuck it up unless they pair up with an experienced provider - I'd say go for Nerve.com or something like that.

I don't know about Kafka's taste in adult entertainment, but the collection James Joyce's dirty letters to his wife makes some interesting reading...

To clarify the Canadian newspapers and their book sections: The Star has slashed theirs, but the Grope & Flail's is just on hiatus ... or so says the Grope & Flail, which has been sending out a form letter to all the people who have written to complain.

Also, be advised that we've exported Celine Dion to you folks, so all we really have is maple syrup and an accent that actually isn't funny at all, thank you, and the word "eh" used as an empty marker.

That, and no book section this week ... it's poverty, I tell you. Maybe someone can organize a benefit concert?

Thanks for the links. Adrienne's articles were very helpful and informative.

And wow on Random House. Thank Goodness Lewis Carroll wasn't trying to get Alice published today.

Not sure if this is a reflection of the book market or not, but I discovered this week that the biggest mall in the town where I grew up has closed their book store after four decades and added more games and food places.

By the time I got my sandwich, I'd lost my appetite.

Maybe we should be thinking of game titles that incorporate more literary figures. Kafka as the lead character in Grand Theft Autobiography?

Thank you for mentioning Book Roast and our partnership with Reach Out and Read! We should never rest in ensuring that future generations experience the wonders of reading (and the emotional rush of writing).

Thanks again!!

And here I thought you might miss a post after your herculean answer session yesterday...

But I should've known. Huzzah.

Thanks for yesterday's insights. Cool blog.

You crack me up, Nathan.

Thanks for that.

Yeehaw! Good round-up, Nathan.

As a literati expatriate from Toronto, I'm disappointed that the Star and the Globe are trimming the books pages.

To put it in Canadian: The horrour! The horrour!

Moving to the concept of what is trendy. Mummies. Someone made a movie about them, and the hot seller in YA is mummies. An entire series of books about mummies. This is evidenced by a tag line available on Nameless Photos Inc. "You're my best friend, but if the mummies get close, I'll make you trip." So. Stir-crazy monkeys, mummies and moolah rolls in. Let me know if I've missed something.

That morality clause kind of creeps me out. I work with real actual live children in my day job and I don't have anything like that in my contract. It's so vague-that could mean just about anything.

I like the dating service. Hey, why not? It might actually mean that some literate people will become available for online social contact -- something definitely missing on other singles' websites I've looked at.

Elyssa-
Good point! Lewis Carroll was a wee bit scary, despite his talent.

Lynne,
Mummies in YA? Could you give us some titles? I haven't run across any, so you surprise me. I'd love to hear your recommendations.

linktastic!

you're joining the Penguin Matchmaker club, right Nathan? ;)


I think RH children's authors should just publish under pen names. Then they can be as immoral as they like and nobody will notice.

1. Let me guess, Kafka had a fetish for cheerleaders?

2. That's why Kafka wrote his children's books under the name Dr. Seuss. He didn't want anyone finding about his lusty adventures with cheerleaders. Which he wrote about in many letters to Penthouse.

3. How a time travelling Franz Kafka chasing cheerleaders through history?

4. Canadian book reviews are notorious, at least in Canada, because 90% of the reviewers, are also authors, and they usually know each other. So they try to avoid those awkward silences at Margie Atwood's cocktail parties. I would have preferred a system of anonymous reviews over slashing them.

5. I'm out of dictionary jokes.

6. The economy isn't wonderful, but it isn't in a recession, despite the media coverage. People still gotta read, and with movies getting more expensive and theatre parking getting so damn costly, books are the cheaper choice.

7. Here's a posting from that dating service:

SINGLE WHITE WRITER- Old World intellectual type seeks cheerleader type for literary and erotic metamorphosis.

CONTACT: FRANZ K.

First of all, quite glad to hear the horrendous economy isn't hurting the book industry!

Second, "act or behave in a way which damages your reputation as a person suitable to work with or be associated with children"? Excuse me, but what does THAT mean? Damages your reputation how? Depending on the judge of what "damaging reputations" mean this clause could cover any number of ridiculous things. Albeit, I don't want to support the PeeWee Hermans of the world, but what sort of morality is being prescribed here?

Okay I thought nothing would surprise me but REALLY a book publisher starting an on-line dating biz on the side - what is this world coming to?

Man, between Jewel of Medina and this so-called "morality clause," does anyone else think that Random House seems to have its collective head up its collective ass?

Porn. Morality clauses. Online dating. How can anything else compete with a lineup like that? :o)

Thanks for the Book Roast/Reach Out and Read shout out, Nathan! You're a good egg, despite the rumors/rumours I'm hearing from the Canadians.

I've been waiting for the Hills reference since they premiered the new season...thanks for not letting me down.

Good Heavens, Nathan, you've been busy! About that silly Random House clause, have they read what's been selling at the top of the charts in YA novels? After reading Melissa Marr's Ink Exchange, I was able to breath a lot better. One chapter from that book cleared my nostrils.

I work in a library system that only recently joined CIPA (something that blocks porno sites in the library). They joined because the libraries were short on cash. Up until then, the libraries had an anti-censorship policy. Proof positive that while money talks...well...you know how the rest of it goes.

Sincerely,

Lena

One of the favourite Australian children's books is The Magic Pudding by Norman Lindsay. He's also well-known for his -- ahem -- shall we say 'attraction' to create risque paintings, etchings and statues. Check out his wikipedia illustration:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Lindsay

I doubt very much if RH would sign him today. [shaking head]

What about Roald Dahl? Do you suppose his brilliantly horrifying stories for adults would "violate the morality clause"?

I suspect what RH really means is "if you start costing us money, we will drop you like a giant cockroach."

Thanks as always for the roundup Mr. B.

Book sales may be holding steady, but local governments are slashing public library budgets. Libraries can't afford to purchase new publications, so readers who might have borrowed now have to buy them for themselves.

Public schools are cutting back on book purchases too, thereby narrowing the study options for families that can't afford to buy their kids their own copies. Editors at a recent SCBWI meeting advised attendees not to count on the educational market. You have a better chance of success if your work appeals to the B&N shopper.

The Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star have both reduced their book pages, proving that a quirky accent and Celine Dion are no defense (or should I say "defence") against the decline of newspaper book coverage.

I love this week in publishing. Hey, we Canucks love our quirky accents, and we know you lovely US residents love looking up to us, and hearing us too. I like how you've snuck in the spelling difference too. I did hear about the STAR and the GLOBE reducing their weight. I think I heard it briefly on the local T Dot (Toronto) news. They did make note of the expected rise in e-news in every section of the papers. And we all know bloggers can e-review any book whenever they want to. A very nice author (Alyson Noel, SAVING ZOE)commented my post where I blabbed about how much I loved herf book.

Have a great weekend (if you can manage to be un-like me and not work 8-14 hour days and actually get some sleep!)

Someone should tell Penguin that dating sites don't work if you seem really desperate.

Assuming that what's good for the client is good for the owner, that is.

At least they're dressed for a nice date.

That morality clause is the worst thing I've ever heard.

Well, books are a reasonably priced form of entertainment.

Even if I can't afford to heat my house this winter, I'll be reading...

Simply put, thank you for providing a mechanism through which many can benefit from your experience.

I'm a former attorney, who had an office in San Francisco for years, now located in North Carolina and generating a blog on the innovative thought process and personal responsibility.

I ultimately plan to incorporate some of my articles in an autobiography. Thanks for providing some tips.
http://www.theviewfromoutsidemytinywindow.blogspot.com

An electronics manufacturer opening up their device to competition from other retailers so that users can better use the product??? What a concept!! I salute Sony's non-evilness.

Heh. After the crappy conclusion of the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray format war, Sony can probably afford to be a little generous about other media. :)

Does this mean you'll be picking up a Sony reader to complement the Kindle???

Sir, we really need your commentary on The Amazing Race someday...

When is TAR coming back?

The agent blog situation (or blogging agents situation) is getting out hand. At one time, there was Miss Snark, of beloved memory. And then there were a few more. And then a few more. And then ...

But ya gotta read all of them, because you don't want to miss that one blog that will have that crucial bit of insider info that will make all the difference!

Well, Nathan's blog will always remain on the list because he's so funny as well as informative. Is that a subtle message to other agents who blog?

So sad about Randy and what a legacy he left his children. My niece's husband died of pancreatic cancer and so did my best friend. I couldn't help think of them as I read his book.

Nathan -

I don't know but I am feeling a definite TAR withdrawal. Project Runway can only hold me for so long. ;-P

Colleen

PS: Thanks for the shout-out!

The blogosphere (and Tweet-osphere) response to Dr. Pausch's life is truly incredible. He's a true inspiration and my thoughts are with his family at this unimaginably difficult time.

RIP Randy. Sad times indeed.

Don't lie Nathan. IAdmit that SATC (short form, feel free to use it...I didn't make it up) was the best film you've seen this year. All the fashion and female issues....best $10 dollars ever spent (or however much you folks pay to watch films in cinema). I love how a book came out of it. Reminds me of how in Harry Potter six, there is mention of a wizarding children's book called TALES OF BEEDLE AND THE BARD (something like that), and now JK has written the actual book.

OH NO! Shayne (aha! That's how you spell her name) broke up with Matt Grant? I may as well put in the towel then. I totally thought that true love could be found by going on a TV show and being one of 50 million women to make out with and scantily clad myself, and become a drama queen, in order to get his attention. For shame! Love the series anyways....

(spoiler alert). Mad Men is excellent! Peggy and that bastard baby! Heartbreaking. Office Joan is awesome. Hobo Code rules! I love the music in the opening sequence. Love the sets and the clothes. Love Pete and his sad, wicked ways. I can't wait. I can't wait.

LA Times, I spit on you!

You can't write. I hope you find something you can do before you get too old.

anon-

I hear the crazy anonymous commenter gig pays well. I suppose I can always fall back on that.

Just to add, from my view, here in the middle of America,
the news reported that book sales were up -way up- since the recession.
Good news for writers, agents, and publishers!

People want books and movies. Both are up.

An electronics manufacturer opening up their device to competition from other retailers so that users can better use the product??? What a concept!!

I think a computer maker did something like this back in the 1980s. They went through some tough times for a while, but they're OK now.

I was wondering if you watched Mad Men, and when I read your post on characters and the wire I thought Mad Men would be a great fit for it too - because the characters are so ambiguous - I'm not sure how I should feel about Don Draper, which is why I like him.

And keep paying attention to the fake books in those movies you "get dragged to see" - maybe you can give us some ideas to make it big!

This week, in publishing.

Nathan Bransford forgets to blog on Thursday. No mention of why.

His fans spend an anxious 24 hours worrying about him, and not even reality TV can cheer them up.

Seriously, Nathan. Missed you on Thursday. I've come to expect a daily Nathan.

I thought I'd plugged MAD MEN in these spaces before...well, in my own mind I did!

I was very sad to hear of Dr. Pausch's passing - and now determined to watch the lecture.

Who else Twitters? I'm an addict.

Nooo Shayne and Matt have broken up? The couple who, when Matt was asked about why he loved Shayne, he waxed lyrical for about five minutes about the wind in her hair when she got out of the limo and the way she moved her shoulders as she walked? They didn't make it? I'm stunned!

You cannot give up on true love over Shayne and Matt! Now if Jesse and Deanna break up - then you can give up ;)

OMG Nathan! You not only watch The Bachelor, but you have the guts to admit it? Wow! I'm so impressed. I watch it but only admit it a few select few...

But the Sex & City? Oh no, I can't agree with you there. Being a huge fan of S & C, I have to defend the movie, and everything that goes along with it. And I don't have to be objective either.

What I really wanted to say though, was thanks for this amazing blog. I love it. Even if you didn't like S& C, you've more than made up for it here.

Thanks, Nathan.

Michele

Nathan, you watch The Bachelor?

Hmmmm, a man who watches The Bachelor, for fun--not because his wife makes him watch it--and who also happens to live in San Francisco...hmmmm...am I getting the wrong idea here?

anon@8:29-

No, I don't want to be on the next Bachelor, but thanks for asking. Is it set in San Francisco? I hadn't heard.

LOL smooth.

1. Not going to make a joke about that story.

2. Looks like some blog on blog action as they start about their blogs.

3. Sure, why fight the competition when you can screw them by getting around their DRM.

4. That's because the only thing that gets read in LA are summaries of screenplays written by the assistants of producers.

5. His next book will be called: Shameless Book Pimping By Not Pimping the Book, for Dummies.

6. It wasn't longer than Ben Hur, it just felt that way. They were trying to cram a season's worth of stuff into one movie you know.

7. Now I am confirmed in my own sense of superiority because I spurn those shows as I would spurn a rabid dog.

8. And he should be in jail for unlawfully tacky use of television airtime. At least that will be a law when I rule the world with an iron fist.

9. We just started getting Season 1 in Canada, and I must admit that I enjoy it. In fact, I've taken up smoking and heavy drinking, two things I've always found disgusting, just because of that show. *cough* *retch*

Say it backwards and it's golb! Twist the letters up and it's glob! Or bolg!

Jeez, I need to stop eating sugar first thing in the morning....

Thanks for the link to Dennis's blog. I mean, sheesh, I only wasted an hour I could've been writing. Thanks a LOT, Nathan!!

QUIT giving us cool links to hit. We should be WRITING!!!!!

I have a theory about the Bachelor.... It only works when it's the Bachelorette - cuz men like to pursue women. So it doesn't quite work right when the women do the pursuing.

That might sound crazy - but think through it. It's true :-)

I'm hoping Jason is the next Bachelor. He might defy my theory.

The Last Lecture is amazing. It is one of the best hours of film I have watched, and been glued to, and laughed often out loud, in a long time.

I can say I probably laughed in that almost more often than I did in rather dull and predictable, S&TC. Did no one else mention yet, the dialogue was terrible? It had its moments, but OMG some of it was so stilted. Ben Hur is better by far.

Kindle, Sony Reader, my theory (and recent blog article) is that book prices are going to take a hike in price relatively short term, as paper prices on the rise (especially in China production due to factory closures and material shortages). So the ebook will become a cheaper option of the future. Goodbye dog eared pages?

Thanks, Wanda. I'll check it out.

I have a theory about the Bachelor.... It only works when it's the Bachelorette - cuz men like to pursue women.

Very interesting theory . . . the girl chose the firefighter dude and they're the only ones that are still together; in fact, didn't they have a baby? Maybe it has something to do with men in general. Their heads get turned by waxed legs and makeup. Women can see through that sh**. They're just better at choosing, I guess . . .

Ever notice when the men dis the women and send them to the limo? No remorse! They think with their d***s. When it's the women, they agonize for weeks! They cry, they second-guess, they blame the men. It's hard to watch! Great tv, though.

Anyway, I think if the tv matches keep going south, the ratings are going to suffer. Or not. Hope springs eternal.

"Brick walls are there for a reason. They let us prove how badly we want things." Dr Pausch's words not mine, but boy are they relevant to writers these days.

@wanda/michelle -

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=58

nona, you're all wrong. Women are every bit as bad as men when it comes to judging by looks. Often worse.

Last weekend I sat by while several well educated, sophisticated, liberal minded women sat around dissing other women's husbands. "He's an ugly little troll. She could do so much better. He must have lots of money."

Perhaps men think with their dicks but women think with their credit cards? Which is the more morally reprehensible?

My theory on bachelor/bachelorette is less about pursuit and more about trumped-up, false romance. Anyone can "fall in love" during an all-expenses-paid romantic extended vacation at an Italian villa. The men on The Bachelorette are less affected by the atmosphere of romance and the fancy location and the trappings, and they just want to get into The Bachelorette's panties. (You're right, there.) The women on The Bachelor, however, fall for the image presented of the man. They are less interested specifically in getting into bed with him than they are in living the life they feel they're being promised during the whole courtship experience. That's the first part. When they get home, they can't help but be disappointed that he actually has to go off to work every day and they aren't taking hot air balloon rides and cruise ships and having gourmet dinners every night. That's not the man she thought she was getting. Whereas the Bachelorette, well, she still has her looks and her smile and her sense of humor when she gets home.

The second part goes to the definition of marriage that I like best: it's when the woman expects a man to change and he doesn't, and the man expects the woman not to change but she does. The women in The Bachelor spend their whole time thinking that if he selects me, then that means I am his one and only true love, and he'll stop chasing other skirts. But as you point out, the men are who they are. They signed up so they could be wooed by fifty beautiful chicks. When they get home, they're going to want that to stop? Especially when the woman they selected suddenly becomes someone else entirely--perhaps a bad-breath slob, or a raving jealous lunatic, or the call-every-six-minutes freak. In any case, the woman will become something The Bachelor did not expect, and because he just had fifty gorgeous bombshells clamoring for his attention, he assumes he'll get the same treatment from the rest of the world's females. He can have anyone he wants, and suddenly--without the evening gowns and Italian villa and free gourmet meals--he doesn't want her.

So basically, the women are seduced by the fake romance and not the actual man. While the men are seduced by the woman and hope like crazy she sticks with them when they get home and start having to eat Hamburger Helper.

Actually what I meant was that perhaps when a man has to fight for a woman (which would be his natural inclination) than it means more - than when 25 are throwing themselves at him.

Not that women choose any better than men.

Ooops - typo.

"THAT it means more to him"

:-)

So, he's more likely to stick with her... She's more of a treasured "prize" if you will. Otherwise she's just one of many that he could have.

Amen
Namaste

I'm done posting.

promise.

Mad Men is now on our Netflix queue! I've heard from about eighty people that we MUST watch it, so the first DVD should be winging its way to us soon. Have also started DVRing the second season on AMC, so we'll be all prepared for the next crack hit once we finish the first season.

But a replacement for The Wire? REALLY?

So basically, the women are seduced by the fake romance and not the actual man. While the men are seduced by the woman and hope like crazy she sticks with them when they get home and start having to eat Hamburger Helper.

Anonymous:

Thanks for that! It explains alot!

Here's how my husband of 28 years proposed to me: "I know this guy in France who raises horses. Would you like to go there someday?" I thought to myself, "OMG! I have to marry this guy! He knows someone who owns HORSES!"

Did I mention that I was twenty at the time? By the way, what are you doing Saturday night?

wow. nobody knows. not even the top agents and editors out there. when the next BIG THING hits, it hits hard. and i doubt anyone can predict how who or why.

the whole industry is based on huge leaps of faith. and as a writer, you have to believe in yourself and your story. if not this one, the next one or the next one. if you don't have the passion for writing--don't do it.

it's no good if you lose the passion. writing is hard enough when you are fired up and love your story.

good luck to everyone who is trying!

Assessing, in any form, is a difficult job Nathan. I have to assess parenting skills and if I'm wrong, the consequence could be a dead child. Sometimes I get so used to the lying and they all begin to look like con artists. Then they become too easy to categorize and brush away. Sometimes I have to slow down, look at it from another angle, follow my instinct and then decide if there's a chance. If I can still say no, I trust it more. You're where you are and who you are because of how well you've done at it thus far. A few will be appreciative and most will be resentful but at least we'd know the assessment was coming from the best source possible.

I just feel frustrated now.

I guess if you become published, that's one way of finding out if your writing is good enough (or at least marketable enough).

But I honestly feel caught in the middle of something I can't control. No, I'm not published, but I've had some positive feedback from agents - but what does that mean? I'm waiting to hear back on a partial and if it's a no, then I'm considering officially hanging up the ol' pen & paper.

If no one has what it takes to honestly tell us if WE have what it takes, how do we know when it's time to try something else?

Not everyone can write, for the same reasons that everyone can't paint or sing or sew or carve statues.

Computers make writing seem easy. Paint by numbers does the same for painting, but does that mean you can paint?

When my parents opened a flower shop I tried my hand at arranging flowers. My mom took one look and said, "Dad needs help with the bookeeping."

Thanks, Mom for telling me that I was no good with flowers. I found out that I actually really liked bookeeping.

I'd think #2 is the biggest for an agent or publisher to worry about...

I read once that Lucille Ball was told by an acting instructor that she'd never be any good at acting.
And one record company turned down the Beatles because they didn't think they'd sell and because "Guitar groups are on their way out, anyway."
Abe Lincoln lost every single election until he ran for president. And, we've all heard that the first agent that JK Rowling queried rejected her.
And I recall turning to my friend one Saturday afternoon in 1977 as we watched a preview of a movie before the real show, and telling her, "That one looks stupid. No one is going to pay to see that!" The name of that "stupid" movie? It was called Star Wars. I bet you've heard of it. ;)
So, yeah. Sometimes people make the wrong calls on other people's work.
Ball, The Beatles, Lincoln, and Rowling all turned out to be hugely successful. And I ended up loving Star Wars.
You just never know, do you?

There's no easy answer. A terrible writer could spend half his or her life focused on writing and getting published, to no avail. The only solution I can see is to have a life outside of writing, and not to pin every one of your hopes and dreams on being published.

Because being a published author isn't going to solve all of your personal and financial problems and it isn't a non-stop party. It's not the be-all and end-all and you don't wake up every morning with a smile on your face--unless you were a person who woke up that way before you were published.

Is it validation? Yes. When your agent likes your book. When your editor buys your book. But what about after that? When reviews come in? When you're backlisted?

Wherever you go, there you are. If you can't be happy unpublished, you probably won't be much happier published.

It may sound like blasphemy, but I stand by it.

Nathan, I think you're dead on target with your reasons why you don't tell people to, essentially, stop writing. I do freelance critiquing, and, yes, sometimes its temping, but just like you said--I'm not the final judge on any of this. Usually, I get an entire manuscript from an author and, hey, if they've written a whole book--I don't care how far away it is from seeming publishable at this point, they've accomplished something huge. Who is to say that they won't be able to handle the learning curve and turn that story, or the next one, into something that other people will want to pick up off a bookstore shelf.

I don't even want to be a hypothetical seer!

Paperback Writer - that reminds me of a TV show my brother used to watch "Red Dwarf" he was telling me about it, trying to convince my I would like it too. He explained that it was about the last human, a highly evolved (to humanoid) cat, an android and a hologram lost in space 3 million years into the future. I thought YEAH RIGHT - that show must be really bad.

Turns out it is still one of my favourite shows despite no longer being made.

It goes to show you can't judge a book by its cover (sorry for the pun).

I do know what vaqqb is asking though. I have that voice that starts up everytime I am happy with my story "You are being silly, no-one else is ever going to like this. Why are you even bothering." It would be nice to know whether that voice is right or not.

Vaqqb is spot on.

I keep wishing someone would tell me I'm hopeless so I can quit already. It's the encouragement-but-not-success that makes me crazy.

Icqb, it can help to set yourself some kind of reasonable trying-limit. On average, how much work has a successful person put in, before their breakthrough, in the kind of writing you're doing?

Sure there will be insta-hits and people who took 40 years to make it, but I bet there's a more typical range.

It might be three complete novels, two conferences or workshops, and fifteen short stories before an agent took notice. If that's the case, it's unreasonable to expect one novel to be enough. Maybe tell yourself you'll write four novels, revise them and market them seriously, and if no one bites (or comes very close) it's time to admit defeat.

At least, it helps me to think that there's a way to know how much trying is "enough."

Gosh this is a more depressing post than I meant it to be!

(And what is with all the ---qb? Is this an abbreviation I missed?)

That's a really considerate answer.

evagale

"Who knows, anyway?"

Too true.

Most days I don't think I have what it takes to be a published writer. It'd certainly be nice to know what a few professionals truly thought of my potential or lack thereof, but in the end, good or bad input aside, I'd still write and I'd still try to publish.

The conclusion that a writer seems like he or she doesn't have a hope in hell, ever, assumes no possibility of improvement. Why would *anyone* ever assume that?

icqb, you're probably going to hate me for saying this... but do not give up!

It took romance author Anna Campbell 20 years to get published and when her book came out a couple of years ago, it flew off the shelves.

No one was looking for Stephenie Meyer but now I think they'll be a lot of Stephenie Meyer-esque books coming out.

Reading a partial doesn't mean anything and neither does a full really. I've had a partials of my manuscript sent out along with fulls...it's a constant game and each rejection you get, does make you stronger and more used to the word no.

Some people will love your voice but just don't love your story. Others will compliment you left and right but won't sign you.

Sorry to be a little gender-bias here right now but finding an agent is like finding Mr. Right...you have to kiss a lot of frogs until you find that "perfect" one just for you.

Right now, I've queried 85 agents on this one manuscript. It's out in partials with new agents. I've finished the second and starting the third. But the thing is, I won't give up because in my heart I know that I'm meant to write and be published.

So, believe in yourself. Don't let others tell you otherwise. You'll get there.

Paperback,

I thought we were assuming this was a 'seer', not an agent looking at the work. The agent's opinion would be subjective but not the seer's. I think the question was more geared towards, if we knew for a fact that we didn't have the talent, as opposed to whether or not someone saw the talent or not. The answer changes with the scenario.

Nice answer, Nathan. Thanks.

This all comes down to one basic fact about books: there is no Delphi.

William Goldman made the same point in Adventures in the Screen Trade, when he says about movies that nobody has any real idea of which movies will succeed before they're made. The chapter on the subject is worth reading. You could bring that out to another level of abstraction and say the same thing for almost all forms of art, including books. I also use it as a jumping off point for discussing the probability of receiving grants.

I just wanted to stress that although some of these unpublished writers may be throwing some horrible stuff your way right now, perhaps a few years down the road they will hone their craft and a few of them may produce something worthy of publication.

At least that is what I'm hoping for in my in my case:-)

When/if I get to that point, when I feel my material is worth your review, I'll probably be wondering if you're thinking "this girl just needs to give it up" in the back of your mind LOL!

A lovely answer, Mr. B!

You say that the people who have the least chance to be published are people who are most hostile to hearing they don't "have the chops" for mainstream publishing.

I was wondering about the reaction of writers LEAST hostile to hearing this. Do they typically hone their skills? Rework rejected stories? Find a genre or a plot that better suits them? Are the least hostile writers people accustomed to the business of writing, who can recognize not only why something's not working, but why it should change?

**Before I answer that, let me reluctantly admit that at times it is tempting. When you've read twenty queries in a row by people who will almost positively never be published, sometimes this voice in the back of the head wants to tell people to just stop and go and spend some time with their family. And for about 50% of the queries I receive, I think I could probably tell someone with 99% accuracy that they don't have the chops for mainstream publication.
**

I beg to differ. Maybe that project isn't publishable, maybe the next project isn't publishable, but one day, many writers figure things out, and the writing improves.

Most of us who are published have earlier books that never made it, but we learned our craft, we learned our markets, and we worked our butts off and still do.

I teach writing, and I see vast improvements with some writers with the right kinds of direction.

Sure, some writers will never figure it out, or they are so driven by their ego that they will never accept that they are wrong, and the rest of the world is right about their writing, but to say one project defines all writers is nonsense.

All you can tell is whether the writer has the level of craft needed and a book that will fit the available markets.

I would gently disagree with the people who think that everyone can improve their craft to a publishable level simply with practice. To use a sports metaphor, I am never going to make the NBA, no matter how much I practice.

I kind of think this is a myth particular to writing -- because of the subjectivity of books and since writing on some level of quality is something everyone can do, I think people have a notion that anyone can do it on a high level if they practice.

But I'm sorry, that's just not true. Yes, people can improve their craft, but talent also comes into play when you're talking about mainstream publishing-level quality of work, and talent is innate.

To expand you NBA comparison, we know you won't make the Kings roster because you lack physical size, game IQ, experience, an outside jump shot, etc.

So what are some 'tell-tale' signs a writer doesn't have the innate talent and/or chance of getting published?

dan-

Ha. Exactly.

I don't know that there are many tell-tale signs, but if someone really badly struggles with grammar and knowledge of words, that's going to be a seriously tough obstacle to overcome. I'm sure there are people who are able to do that through sheer storytelling talent, but in a previous post I compared that to constantly bouncing the ball of your foot while trying to be an NBA player.

William Blake, in his lifetime, never achieved any measure of critical or commercial success. Many a critic or 'talent evaluator' told him to put away the quill. Yet many scholars (myself among them) feel he's the greatest of all the Romantic Poets.

What's the lesson? Luck has as much, if not more, to do with your success in life than talent or hard work. That's the reality nobody wants to face even AFTER success. But if you're always doing something you love and luck never smiles on you then failure won't also come with the regret that you never tried.

Originally I said I would want to know, and if I don't have the chops, I'd quit to pursue other avenues. I stand by that. Life's too short to be continually bad at anything.

But I can see where people wouldn't want to know. I heard an Olympian speaking today on BBC about the coming games and his excitement over them. Predictably, he was excited - but he added something that reminded me of this hypothetical.

He said that years of practice and hard work are about to be answered as to whether or not he will take home a medal. The hope, he went on, of winning will die right there in Beijing. Either he'll win or he won't. In essence, he has a date with a seer. But the hope of winning had become such a tangible thing, giving him comfort and acting as a crutch when despair set in during training.

So I think maybe it boils down to what that sliver of hope is worth to you. What's it worth? Does the hope of publication and the comfort of that outweigh the time wasted pursuing something in vain?

Maybe for some.

Regarding my earlier comment, I just wanted to stress that I said "some" unpublished writers "may" eventually hone their skills to produce something publishable. I surely didn't mean that anyone, with enough practice, can become a successful published author. I just wanted to clarify:-)

There are those people who will receive a couple of rejections then toss their manuscript in a drawer, the trash can or on a bonfire and call it quits for good. They'll thank the agent for sparing them years of wasted effort and abandon the writing life with ease.

Then there are those who will savor each rejection, their proof that they've at least made contact with the aliens in the publishing land of Oz. Those cold communications will bolster their courage and they will beg, borrow and steal every minute they can to write, learn and devour this thing we call our craft.

And they will change and they will grow and they will become the writers that Oz wants. And when their day arrives, they'll pull out their stash of rejection mementos and they'll laugh...wickedly.

Corked Wine & Cigarettes, your analogy reminds me of the beginning of Bee Movie (yes I have seen it my excuse - I have a 2-year old) "According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way that a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground."

Maybe the same could be applied to some writers, because they don't know they're no good they just keep plugging away & eventually it all works for them.

At least - I am hoping this is the case for me.

Whoa! Nathan said:
But I'm sorry, that's just not true. Yes, people can improve their craft, but talent also comes into play when you're talking about mainstream publishing-level quality of work, and talent is innate.

Define talent. Physical stature is not the same thing. Not even close. I can't make myself grow taller, but I can work my brain.

Humans learn. That and language and use of tools are what sets us apart from other animals. Humans impose meaning. Humans seek meaning. Also sets us apart. Humans adapt, too.

In my mind, there is a range of normal. Most of us are in the middle, which is why we are less likely to be published in the *conventional way*. That doesn't mean we don't have ability to tell stories in good and acceptable ways. It just means we haven't satisfied a set of current agents and current mainstream publishers.

Effort also comes into it. Those with learning difficulties may never get the presentation up to standard. But in general, the majority of humans who work to learn their craft, expand their imaginations, take in as much as possible the experiences of other successful [your OWN definition of success here], and write write write over time, will improve, will get their stories out of their heads for sharing, and will make a difference in the world.

So, no, I can't agree with Nathan on this one. The narrow interpretation in this case is far too narrow. The NBA is not the only game in town.

Thanks for this discussion Nathan. It's given me a little more perspective on my work.

My first novel is finished and has been read by editors at Harper Collins and Penguin, and I'm deciding what to do next. It can sometimes seem the fate of that ms is crucial to my success as a writer, but after reading everyone's comments I see that I should relax more, and write the books I want to write, instead of obsessively returning to that single ms and polishing it to within an inch of its life.

Life is too short, and to much fun to get hung up about whether any single work will see the light of day. Maybe I should spend less time on blogs like this too ;)

I also think it's hard to know if a writer has what it takes. I'm not sure if you could say I have talent. Ten years ago my writing was appalling - egotistical, lacking in the basic craft, and horribly over-written. My writing is now providing me with mentorships and nominations for manuscript awards. Is the arc from horrible to where I am now a result of inherent (but concealed) talent, or because eight years ago I decided that if I wanted to really write a book then I'd better put my ego aside and learn something?

I would say that I was always good with words (in a purplish prose kinda way), but didn't know how to tell a story to save my life. It has been pure slog, and not talent that makes me the writer I am today.

I don't disagree that you can tell if someone will never be published, but at what point in someone's career can you make that call? Maybe if after ten years of busting a gut learning the craft, and you still can't produce a half decent book, then maybe it's time to go take up golf or cross-stitch.

Tys.

Sorry missed the 2nd half of the bee movie quote "The bee, of course, flies anyway. Because bees don't care what humans think is impossible."

Nathan, I never get tired of the hills references. They crack me up every time! Thanks.

I have known people who will never, ever be published by a mainstream, royalty paying publisher. They repeatedly demonstrated with their writing and their reactions to constructive critiques, their incapacity for improvement.

I agree completely with Nathan that not everyone can write commercial fiction. Or literary fiction. Or any sort of nonfiction. Some people can't even write a coherent letter.

And I also agree that it's no one's place to tell these people to stop writing. Only the writer can decide whether to press on or to give up.

I write because I want to. I enjoy creating characters and stories. I like to put my musings into words. I will stop writing when I don't like it any more, and it won't matter if I'm published or not.

shell i,
glad you see my point.
Heather,
I was commenting on Nathan's personal responses in this post, not in the previous one with the seer. sorry if I confused you.

I'm seeing both sides of this. Nathan, since I'm a teacher, I think I can relate to how you must sometimes feel. Sometimes, I get kids where I just think they're NEVER going to be able to write even a formula essay, let alone something with style and a good point.
But, I would certainly never say, "Give it up, kid, and stick with math classes," because, well, to repeat myself, who knows?
I once had a student who arrived from Peru halfway through his 7th grade year. His English was barely passable. At that point, I never would've guessed that within two years, he'd be pulling top grades in the most difficult classes in the school and taking top national honors in academic competitions where he could use only English.
So, it's no wonder, Nathan, that you just stick with a form rejection letter when you're not interested.
(By the way, there are some published writers out there whose books lead me to believe that they'll never be able to write decently either, and yet they made it to the shelves somehow. )

When I was teaching teenagers with dyslexia, I was amazed at how far these students, who hated reading and writing and could barely construct a sentence on the page, were able to progress. They had a number of good ideas, but had no concept of writing as a draft/edit process. They thought stories were flung fully formed onto the page. Once they learned how to take an ordinary (or even pretty darn bad) piece of writing and polish it into something to be proud of, their attitudes toward the process completely changed for the better, and so did their writing.

I don't know how much talent I have as a writer, but maybe perseverance and a talent for editing can make up for any shortcomings.

With regards to Answer #2: Simon probably has a bodyguard. Most agents don't. You choose wisely.

Within reason, of course, the mainstream publishing industry seems to be more about marketing then content anyhow. Nathan picks books he likes because he likes them, and that gives him the confidence required to persuade someone else to like them.

He may like a book we would almost universally think is horrible. Or, conversely, he may hate a book the rest of us would love. That's why there's more than one agent in the world.

Generally, however, agents tastes are going to fall to a common denominator -- if several reject you, many will reject you. Probably all. Does that mean your book is bad? No. It merely means it's unpopular. But is there still an audience?

Likely, there is. Happily, there are alternatives to mainstream publishing. Lulu.com (or others) will print your books cheaply, and you can consign them through a local bookseller. Do readings, have signing just like 'real' authors do.

There's nothing like holding a proper bound copy of your manuscript in your hand, reading to an appreciative bunch of youngsters or signing something you've created that someone else has elected to buy to give you that confidence to go back to an agent, and query them again knowing that, whether they like your book or not, you know that someone else in the world does.

What else matters?

What I find interesting is how many people think the only reason to write is to be published, and that publication legitimizes ones efforts somehow. Is there any other endeavor that carries such a load of assumptions?

Most of the people who run marathons know they aren't going to come anywhere close to winning, but they run anyway. Most people who take up a musical instrument don't expect to play at the local VFW Hall, let alone Carnegie Hall. Many people are very happy to paint watercolors that will hang on no one's walls but their own, make beer that will never be served in a bar, or grow tomatoes that will never be for sale at the local supermarket.

No one thinks it odd that people have these hobbies and in fact, people usually speak respectfully of the gardeners, quilters, and other hobbyists in their midst without ever saying, "Well, Bob is just wasting his time restoring that GTO. He's not a REAL mechanic because no one pays him to work in an auto repair shop."

I wonder why writing is viewed by so many as something that's not worth doing unless it results in a gloss-covered product on the shelf of Barnes & Noble?

Does that mean you think someone couldn't go from point A 'really bad book and query' to point B 'publishable book and fantastic query' with practice?

I know that writing is art and craft, but I tend to think that through discipline and practice we can all improve the craft enough to write a great book. How great, probably comes down to art.

So for that reason, I'd probably never tell anyone they'd never be published. I think that Delphi you're talking about is more "can THIS be published. Can I be published NOW? Or do I have a lot more work to do?"

We spend so much time staring at the words, it's easy to lose perspective, so we're looking for someone to point out the horizon and say "There it is - get straight."

mystery robin-

Yes, absolutely, someone (or rather more than one someone) could go from bad book to really good book with practice. I'm just saying that not everyone can get there with practice.

I also am skeptical that someone could go from a book that is really bad off (and I mean in terms of grammar, idea, execution, etc.) to a publishable writer, but I suppose the world is a big place.

Bunnygirl.

In my opinion there is absolutely nothing wrong with writing for the fun of it. But generally following an agents or editors blog to get information about the business side of writing isn't just writing for fun.

To use one of your examples, if a gardener grows tomatos and knows that he will never sell them to a supermarket, would he bother going online to find out how to sell them? Or a musician who was content to play at home wouldn't try to find out what they needed to do to make a CD or market it. Then again maybe they would, but I wouldn't.

I love writing for the fun of writing but if that was all it was for I would turn off the computer & stop trying to improve my skills because it wouldn't matter if my grammer was perfect, if my plot was non-sense or was unique if it was just for me. If you know what I mean.

shell i: Seeking to improve one's writing doesn't mean one is necessarily seeking publication, any more than taking guitar lessons means one is hoping for a career in music. There's no different set of writing techniques for hobbyists vs those whose end goal is a publishing contract. Everyone wants to challenge themselves and improve.

Writing is one of the few creative endeavors where there is little support for those who want to get better just for getting better's sake and I can think of no comparable mindset with other creative activities.

Knowing the ins and outs of publication is good for setting one's expectations and recognizing a marketable story once you've told it, but I don't know of too many people who turn out their best work by starting with the market in mind.

To get back on topic, though, I think there are some people who don't have what it takes to become sufficiently solid writers to get published in any market. There are also those who can write brilliantly but will never have the correct market timing and will remain unpublished. In each of these scenarios, it really is a shame there's no way to know in advance that all those hours working on queries and synopses would've been better spent doing something else. :-)

I gotta tell you--you guys crack me up with your "learning the craft" and "do I have what it takes?"....

Do any of you ever write anything, or do you just hang out online and talk about it?

Well, I'm here, and I write stuff, so I guess at least some of you do.

But I tell ya, I don't worry about it, I just write, and I send out what I write, and then I write a new one...the time I spend doing this I would only be sleeping more anyway (making myself fully alert for the day job in the process, which would in itself be nearly intolerable), so it's not like I'm making any great sacrifice.

Besides, it's hard to take myself seriously when my latest work is an action thriller about a disgruntled ex-NASA engineer who builds a bank-robbing robot with AI software that allows it to make its own decisions during a series of escalating wild-west style heists...

Maybe for the literary types who are unable to sell their insights into the human condition, the rejection is tougher to take, I dunno.

Do I give a heck if anyone ever buys it? No. Do I think someone will? Hell yes. I'd read it or watch it if it came out, so someone else probably would too. And I have not been published by a major house, but I have been offered a small-house deal...

So I will write on, knowing that I don't need to buy lottery tickets ever again cuz I already got a big one that I play 5 nights a week.

Some people wash their hands obsessively from dawn till dusk. They stand at a sink and rinse, rinse, rinse, like magicians performing a drawn out Disappearing Soap trick.

Then there's us writers.

I suppose it all boils down to how you view the dangling carrot.

"I also am skeptical that someone could go from a book that is really bad off (and I mean in terms of grammar, idea, execution, etc.) to a publishable writer, but I suppose the world is a big place."

I guess I'm finding it hard to believe that even naturally talented writers can whip out a brilliant manuscript from the get go. The published authors I've spoken to all seem to stress that it took them many years and a few failed novels before they became successful (published) writers.

However, I guess I would need to see an example of some of the "bad" manuscripts you've seen LOL.

#2 is the real problem, I think. I've seen a lot of agents and editors mention that they used to give feedback but stopped because they received so many abusive responses from the authors concerned.

(That said, some still give personal feedback even on queries. God bless them.)

mpe

I think a writer who ends up as a professional novelist needs to have a certain amount of inate ability to start with, and then it takes 2-4 books to get good at it for most, not to mention decades of reading. If you have to write 100,000 bad words to get to the publishable stuff, then you must have to read 10,000,000 words.

That said, I am a firm believer that all people--inlcuding those who will never be professional caliber book writers, as well as those who will--can become better writers through training and practice. Writing is a skill that can be learned, it is not some zen gift that you either have or you don't. Unless you're talking about a Stephen KIng or Anne Rice or Michael Crichton; those are cases where inate, raw talent met constant practice...

There might be some confusion in terms here, actually.

Writing is a basic technical skill that can be practiced and learned.

Storytelling is something that takes talent and a certain kind of personality. It can be refined with practice, but some people don't have the ability, and no amount of practice forming sentences is going to suffice.

It's like music: anyone with basic coordination can learn to play the notes correctly. But making a series of notes into a beautiful performance is a whole other thing, and requires talent. (Along with lots of practice.)

It strikes me that people who would not write if they knew they could not sell might be those more likely to sell for one simple reason:

They write to connect with a reader. If they knew they would not have readers, they would not write.

Good writing is writing that connects. People buy books not because they are interested in you expressing yourself, but because they want to read something that expresses THEMselves.

So the person who writes for a reader is far more likely to find a reader. Those who write because they enjoy the feeling of words pouring out of themselves or to admire their own "creativity" often do not.

Nathan, thank you for making people stop and think about their writing. Thank you also, for once again being spot on.

A person with a little talent, persistence and desire will trump a person with immense talent only every time. While at times I think it might be a kindness to tell someone they simply do not have what it takes, how can any of us read their heart?

Of course, I am one of those people who has been told to stop daydreaming about writing and grow up.

Years ago, I followed the career of a filly who sold for a few hundred dollars to an exercise boy. She was ugly and, according to the young owner, "none of her legs matched so no one wanted her." He believed in her and gave her a chance. She went on to become a champion race horse and won enough money for him to buy back the family ranch his mother had to sell to support the family after his father died.

No one can really tell how much desire and heart a person, or horse, has. Sometimes you just have to believe and do your best.

I have to agree with Nathan. It's similar to singing. Watch the tryouts for American Idol one time and you see that some people just have the talent or gift of singing. Others may need a bit of fine tuning here and there or guidance, but the gift is there, whereas others sound as bad as I do while singing in the car. Anyone can open up and sing. Anyone can pick up a pen and write. Does that mean that someone should? No.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't try, but at the same time, I think you have to be realistic. At 34, I still watch the Olympics and want to be the next Kristi Yamaguchi, but it just isn't in the cards for me. I also LOVE to sing, but this is best done in the privacy of my own home. Writing, however, has been something I've been working on since I could hold a pen, and with my experience teaching writing and literature, I think I might have a shot. Several agents and other writers have told me so as well.

Regardless of whether I get published or not though, I'll keep at it because I enjoy it and can't quiet the characters in my head. Anyone can do anything, but attempting to make it one's career is something different. I don't think Nathan is saying that people should stop writing, but getting published is one thing and writing for pleasure is another. I don't think anyone should give that up if they love it, but perhaps they should focus on other career goals. In the meantime, find someone who can be honest about your writing (or whatever it is that you're attempting to do) and let you know if you shouldn't quit your day job.

The blogs of the world are probably the largest single chunk of publicly-available evidence that lots of writing and frequent writing doesn't always translate into compelling writing. There are some people who could write their shopping list on their blogs, and I'd read it. Others write and write and with all the goodwill in the world (which you don't have to have, with blogs, you just choose to read 'em or not) while I may admire their voluminous enthusiasm - their writing isn't compelling. And I wander off that page and probably never return.

But if they're having fun with their blog, well that's grand. But practice alone doesn't create an engaging, sellable book.

"Yes, I could tell the truth to people who I think really don't have a shot, but trust me, they they don't want to hear it from me. And I'm not the person to tell them."

By the time a person starts querying an agent, they should have done all they can do to get their work "publishable." At that point, I think it's perfectly understandable for a person, especially an agent, to have and give an experienced opinion.

Nathan choosing not to do so exhibits a certain amount of class and professionalism.

The people who most need to hear an honest opinion of their work are most often the ones who won't listen. That's why I'm very careful about who I critique now. Some really don't want to improve, they want you to tell them they are wonderful. I simply don't have time to stroke egos.

The thing is, it's hard to know (especially at the beginning) whether you have no talent or you're a diamond in the rough.

Vaqqb is right, authors are looking for a sign, any sign, that they aren't crazy lunatics for spending hours, weeks, months, and years working on their novel.

And I respect your position on not telling someone to please back away from the keyboard. Maybe not everyone is ready for publishing, but there is some joy (I think) in just writing.

Not everyone who can write well gets published, or even tries, for that matter.

But EVERYONE who's been published has been read by someone, somewhere, at some stage of the game who thought, "This is unreadable dreck."

If the recruit then waits at the door for three days without food, water, or encouragement, he is then allowed to come in and begin training.

Huh. I thought Nathan's post was pretty straightforward, hence my earlier plain-old-thanks comment...

A lot (not all) of the comments he's gotten seem to be in the "Them's fightin' words, Mister -- put up your dukes!" vein. And it may be that those of us who've taken offense need to stop and take a breath and remember what's going on here.

Which is, as I see it: Nobody who spends much time reading this blog can seriously doubt that Nathan LOVES reading and LOVES good writing. But one thing makes him different from (most of) the rest of us: he's in the business of SELLING good writing, too.

So when he said, "I think I could probably tell someone with 99% accuracy that they don't have the chops for mainstream publication," I have a hard time believing he meant to discount improvement over time, the virtues of perspiration and good luck, and so on. We need to put ourselves in his shoes -- he simply can't afford to acquire everything, no matter how rough-hewn, in the vague hope that it will really take off 10 (or even two) years down the road. Not to put words into his mouth, but I think he's really saying he can afford to GAMBLE on only that 1%.

Somebody mentioned William Blake, how long it took for him to be appreciated (posthumously at that), and so on. Yeah. And if Blake had queried Nathan, Nathan might have passed on him for any number of reasons. He SAID 99% certainty, not 100% certainty.

And anyhow, betcha anything he gets just as frustrated at writers who won't query him because he's just starting out and, hence, believe they don't have time to wait around for him to build his list. Do those writers have 100% certainty that's not a mistake? Sure they don't. But they've got to play the odds, as they see it.

It's art, yes. It's entertainment, yes. But once we attempt to move a manuscript into the marketplace, we need to appreciate that it's a business transaction -- and a bet -- from both directions.

[Apologies for the long-winded follow-up. I thought this was going to be the short version. :)]

When did "mainstream" become a good word? Mainstream is safe. If agents and publishers are only looking for mainstream fiction, then fiction is dying. Part of the definition of mainstream is that it's not exceptional. Exceptional means brilliant, different, outside the ordinary. Exceptional art, in any medium, is what keeps the art alive. It invigorates it, takes it new places. Mainstream is stagnant. To an agent or publisher, mainstream is reliable. But don't be fooled by that. It's reliable now, but not in the long run.

Any art that closes its doors to the new and different is in the process of dying. Instead of more books with glitzy covers and little substance, fiction needs its Salon des Refuses. It needs more publishers taking chances on books that stand outside the norm, in order to invigorate the art. But publishers are businesspeople, and they look for the reliable sale. It's hard to argue with that; businesses need to make money. In other words, mainstream fiction is good for business-- right now. But it's not good for the art of fiction as a whole. If agents and publishers wanted to invest in the future of this art, they would not be looking for mainstream fiction ONLY. They would leave room for the exceptional. Doing so might not bring in fast cash, but it means investing in the future. Today's exceptional literature is tomorrow's mainstream literature. But we won't have that mainstream literature of tomorrow if we don't have the exceptional of today.

Unfortunately, I think the Salon des Refuses is happening in self-publishing, along with a lot of plain old refuse. If major publishers don't make room for the new and the different, they're not going to survive down the road.

Please, think outside the mainstream, Nathan.

I believe that people who'd give up writing altogether just because they are told they don't have viable commercial success should realize that that, itself, is at least one of the reasons they will not succeed. I realize there's a bit of post hoc ergo propter hoc going on in this statement, but really: if you love writing, you're going to write even if you're the only one who ever reads it. You write for yourself, for fun, for any other reason other than to make money. It's like playing a musical instrument -- you don't practice and play only if you're assured a spot in a concert. If you did, you'd never get offered a place in any concert.

Of course, if Delphi told me I didn't have a snowball's chance in hell getting published, I would cut back the time and energy I spend working on original projects and maybe write fanfic or something. But I don't think I would ever stop altogether. I would hate to lose one of the rare things I actually love doing.

I always wonder why people don’t listen to the criticism they get on reality shows. People usually give a testimonial to the camera and say, “I don’t care what they say. I got talent and I’m gonna do what I’m gonna do. No one can stop me.”
And they are right, no one can stop them. But for me, I’d like a little honest feedback. And I have just recently learned how to listen. It really helps to improve your craft, whatever that may be.

jes-

Thanks, that sums things up very well.

MH-

Publishers and agents follow the marketplace. If you want to see experimental fiction, buy experimental fiction and encourage other people to buy experimental fiction. But it's hard enough to make a living as an agent aiming for "mainstream," let alone shopping around things that aren't going to sell, first to editors, and then, should I find someone to take a chance, to the general public.

I think people may have a bit of an overinflated notion that agents and editors drive the marketplace -- to a certain extent, perhaps. But look at THE SHACK. Zero marketing to #1 bestseller. People will find what they want to read. Agents and editors spend a lot more time reacting to the marketplace than driving it.

I would ask a question of you -- how many experimental novels and other works outside of the mainstream have you read lately? Because they are most definitely being published. Maybe not with an agent and outside "mainstream" publication, but they're definitely out there.

No, I'm not published, but I've had some positive feedback from agents - but what does that mean? I'm waiting to hear back on a partial and if it's a no, then I'm considering officially hanging up the ol' pen & paper.

Ah, icqb, don't hang it up. I've been where you are (and it's frustrating), but obviously your writing is solid or they wouldn't bother. Trust me, editors and agents are far too busy to waste time on poor writing. It could be the time is not right for your story. It could be a personal opinion: they just can't get super-excited about your particular story and feel they wouldn't do it justice in the marketplace. As an editor, I know what it is to work with stories that I can't wait to show the world. Just "settling" for a great story that does not speak to me personally does not begin to compare.

Also, please keep in mind that it takes years to perfect a craft or profession. You wouldn't just decide to be an engineer and then start...er, engineering. No, you have to learn, you have to go to school, do internships (sometimes for free), study your industry, and then find a job (no small trick for most of us.) Writing is the same way. For my husband's first job out of college, he sent out over 250 resumes and ended up in a wonderful job after a lot of heartache and rejection. My point? He kept at it.

Keep at it, any and all of you who are querying. There are a million great writers out there whose stories will languish on their harddrives because they won't put their work out there, or they quit after a couple of rejections. The writers who succeed are the ones who perservere. And I don't mean perservering on their first book or even their fifth, but maybe their tenth. Sometimes it takes years to find your dream job; sometimes it takes years to find your dream agent.

it is so subjective, tho. that's what makes it even more difficult for the author querying to gauge whether their book is good. i've had probably at least 80 agents tell me no (does this mean i have no talent?) via form R or non-repsonse.

i've also had at least three say, great writing, but i could never sell this in the current market.

i had 6 editors pass and 3 say, YES, this is what we want to buy.

all on the same manuscript.

so yes, talent matters, good writing matters. but the subjectivity of it makes things that much more convoluted for the writer.

there's so many of us who write good novels. we just can't tell if it's good ENOUGH to sell until we begin querying for agents and subbing to editors. and good ENOUGH depends quite a lot on personal taste.

again, good luck to everyone who is trying!!

When I look back at some of the things I wrote and editors published over ten years ago, I'm amazed at how much I've improved. I wasn't awful (I guess...hope), but I was only in my twenties and thought I knew it all back then. I had no idea how much there was to learn, and how hard I'd have to work to constantly improve my skills. But I did.

This isn't the case for everyone, and unfortunately the people with no innate talent at all will be the first ones to agrue the point that time and practice makes you a better writer, but I did want to comment so the people who do have the innate talent won't give up.

I've seen writers who I thought were abominable. But they persevered and worked at their craft. I've been amazed at some of the remarkable improvements they made. I would be the last to dismiss a writer's chances of ever being published based on one manuscript. Of course there are those who will never rise above incompetence. But I'm not seer enough to determine the wheat from the chaff. One day a particular writer's work may be chaff. On another he/she has created wheat. And I'm not talking grain here.

I know this amazing kid who made up the greatest stories. She went on to become the most avid book reader I have ever even heard of (repeat reader, intelligent and insightful dissector of each of her beloved books, including ones she can suggest the most awesome improvements on, due to her innate understanding of story.)

And yet, she never was a good student, is a lazy writer (uses 4 for for, etc.), misspells all her words and doesn't use spell-check to correct herself...

BUT: one day she could be such a writer, if she chose to work a little, because she has such an innate sense of story and such an imagination.

--

On the other hand, sometimes one who can't create great becomes a great champion of those who can and do.

You know what I LOVE most about Nathan's blog? His readers' comments. I find myself coming back to peruse everyone's opinions, input, etc., again and again.
You guys ROCK:-) And of course, you too Nathan.

So interesting...
I have four manuscripts in a bottom drawer and 70+ rejection letters.
I'm that 1%.
And my debut novel was published when I turned 54.
If someone had told me this was going to happen I would never have believed them.
The thing is I never stopped wanting to write stories. I can't explain it. I'm that kid who sees the 10 ft high pile of horse manure and says, "There's gotta be a pony in there somewhere..."

Patricia-

I'm guessing that, like just about every other published author, the manuscripts in the drawer may make you shudder and may not have attracted an agent, but they were probably good, but not quite good enough. I probably would have felt that they "just weren't there yet." So by no means would your earlier efforts probably make that 50%.

Just a guess based on the unpublished manuscripts of people who went on to be publication. It's not that there's a massive drastic improvement, just steady improvement from "good but not quite there" to amazing.

Also, there have been a few who have ventured into prognostication about the chances of an author being published, only to be proven hillariously wrong.

No one wants to be famous for telling the next J.K. Rowling to give it up.

I definetly understand what you mean Nathan. In a perfect world anyone can do anything they want and make a bucket load of money doing it. As far as you may like a book, or an actor may be liked at an audition, there are other things at work which also have an influence on selection. This isn't the 'natural selection' that we learned about in high school, this is a buisness. And the truth is a buisness needs to do what it has to do to continue to bring in the money (the green stuff - or red, green, blue etc in Canada) which keeps it afloat. Look at where I work (in retail). The store I work for is owned by a MAJOR Canadian company, and the company sold the franchise I work in. They decided they'd make more money selling it (and the folks who bought it decided they'd make more money rebuilding it into something which will make people want to shop there more then ever before. I think people are feeling paniked and threatened by the reality of the situation. But you're an agent. This blog is about giving us useful information. It can't be all roses and daisies. I like the truth.

That's a good answer. I'm sure many people really don't want to hear the truth. I do. I wish there was a way I could really know whether or not my writing sucked. If I found out that my writing is not good enough, I'd know there were major changes I needed to make in the way I write.

I'm not sure if I made this clear earlier or not, but I think it is really important to write and enjoy it instead of writing for publication. There are artists everywhere who aren't famous or making tons of money, but they love what they do. Many of them do it in there spare time and just enjoy being creative while doing something they love and trying to perfect their craft.

When I began writing my first novel, I was obsessed with trying to be published, and it took away the creative spark and fun of the experience. Stephenie Meyer always says to write for yourself and to create stories you love. When doing that, it's easier to focus on the characters, the process, and the world you have created rather than what an agent is going to say way down the road.

For me, I've decided that I do want to be published, but that isn't the main focus. I hope to be like Orion and get published when the timing is right and when my writing is at its best. There is a time and place for everything, and I'm going to keep working until I get it right. In the meantime, I'm going to listen to the comments from agents and fellow writers and try to learn and keep getting better.

I don't think anybody cheated, they just changed the conditions of the game.

I have two experimental novels in a drawer. I have not tried sending them out at this point.

I have a really fun yarn going in the third novel that I am working on. I can't wait to send it out.

Maybe someday the experimental pieces will come out of the drawer. Maybe not. I am still glad I wrote them.

It feels so different, though, writing something that (and I am NOT talking dimmed down, just more mainstream) I feel is more easy to connect to the world with.

I think it's a bit more complicated. Let's imagine that I have a talent comparable to that of Jane Austen or Herman Melville. I write a book. I'd like to have time to write more, so it would be nice to have money from the one I've written. But a while back someone submitted Pride and Prejudice, thinly disguised, to various publishers, and only one rejected it as an obvious plagiarism. After the fact, the consensus in the industry was, Jane Austen's books are popular because they have been established as classics; they could not be sold as new books because they don't fit modern taste. An agent the other day said she would not bother to submit Moby Dick to publishers if sent in, because she thought it was not suitable for modern taste.

So the thing is, I might write my book and show it to friends who like, as it might be, Austen or Melville, and they might think it was brilliant, and it might actually (against all the odds) be in the same class as a book by Austen or Melville. But that still wouldn't tell me whether it was publishable. If agents who knew the industry thought it was not publishable, it might still make sense to go on writing. I might think: we only have a handful of books by Austen, but I LOVE Austen, I'd like to have more, I'll write them myself. I might think: Why aren't there more books like Moby Dick? I LOVE Moby Dick. I go into Barnes and Noble and the only book like Moby Dick is Moby Dick. I have NOTHING TO READ except Moby Dick. I know! I'll write the books myself. Ha HA! But I would presumably spend a lot less time on submissions.

I confess I love art, originality, unique voice.

But I also love being able to pay the bills, own a house, go out to dinner, take a vacation, participate in the world.

Somewhere between high art and low brow lies the mainstream. Probably all of them are needed.

I adore the agents and publishers of high original work. I cherish them. I also appreciate and don't blame the publishers trying to sell a product that's still good, but more marketable.

And the low brow? Well, where would we be, partner, without those cowboy novels?

I write because I love to write, but if I didn't also want to be published, I wouldn't be here, would I.

Fiction is a unique art form in that, unlike music or painting or scuplture, what I write is not the finished product. If scuplture were like writing, you wouldn't actually sculpt, you would just draw what the scuplture will eventually look like. The printed page is the final form of the art.

Neither can fiction writers truly perform their art, or take a copy of their novel and hang it up in a bar for people to read. Well, actually, you can do that, with the internet, but it isn't the same as being published by a publisher.

To my mind, writing is only half the point of this exercise. The other half is to be read. If I'm not being read, my motivation to write isn't as great. I still write because the creative urge never goes away, but I find other ways to express and share it. That's why I write it down - to share it with others.

This reminds me a talk I heard from an author who was shopping around a story with an evil clown in it. The first editor hated it; it was too much like Stephen King's It. The second editor loved it; it was just like Stephen King's It!

Nobody does know and I find that hopeful. Ray Bradbury claims to have received 3,000 rejections. Dune by Frank Herbert was rejected over 20 times before it sold and now it's an SF classic. On and on. I believe as long as I'm open to learning as much about my craft as possible at some point the magic will happen for me. I believe I can always make it better, if not this story then the next one. And the next.

Snork... Spencer Pratt. Oh how I love dumb "reality" TV.

I read everyone's comments, and I have to admit, I'm a little disappointed. I really hope that most people write to write, because they love it. Because if you don't love it, you shouldn't be doing it. You're influencing people's lives. I just left teaching to pursue a career as a writer and I feel that the two paths are very similar. There are a lot of teachers who teach because it's what they've been doing or because they're looking forward to a good retirement package. There are teachers who teach just because they want the same schedule as their kids, or they like the summers off. Most of the people who teach for those reasons are terrible teachers. You have to love teaching to be a good teacher and you have to love writing to be a good writer. If you aren't doing it because you love it, if you wouldn't be doing it even if you never in a million years get published or paid, if you aren't doing it because it makes your heart sing... then you shouldn't be doing it at all. Life is far too short.
I like to think of myself as a "talented" writer. I have some natural talent, and I've worked hard at honing my craft. I'd like to think that I'll be published someday. I'd like to think that I'll be sitting on Oprah's set in a year with her raving about her newest book club selection, my book. But you know what... if that never happened, I'd still write. And I think that's what makes the best writers of all, that passion.

So, I'm a published author (major house) and here's how I see it:

1. Nathan is dead on the money on all his comments.

2. People in this string who are frustrated by that, and who want to be *published* writers, need to get some thick skin, focus on the work, their dreams and just keep going. Or, give up on it and do something else. Or, you can be satisifed by loving what you're doing and don't worry about getting published. Harsh maybe, but if you don't have the chops to *persevere* in this "business" then you're already toast.

3. I read somewhere that only 2% of people who submit *fiction* ms's in any given year ever get published. That didn't discourage me - it just made me dig my heels in and get busy; but then, I'm stubborn.

4. I vehemently disagree with anon 2:51. Any art *is* a gift, a talent - whatever you want to call it. If a person doesn't have a particular gift or talent, they can take lessons and they can learn to be better at that art than they were, but can *never* get to the level of someone who has the talent. The talent isn't just the inate ability - it's the drive, the dreaming, the desire and the vision to see what something can be. That can't be taught.

5. Writing is art. Getting published IS NOT validation that your art is good. THERE IS NO SUCH THING. I love Van Gogh, but you may not. That DOES NOT mean that Van Gogh is no good. It just means I love him and you don't.

6. Robert Crais says that a book is an incomplete work of art until someone reads it. He says reading it completes the work. He doesn't say it's an incomplete work of art until someone *likes* it. I happen to agree with Crais's philosophy. So, if/when you get published and someone reads your stuff (or even if you don't get published and someone reads your stuff), the work is complete - doesn't matter if they liked it or not - doesn't matter if you sold 1 copy or 100,000. Doesn't even matter if it was just your mother who read it. I think it's about sharing dreams and art. No one's work is loved by everyone.

7. Don't look for validation in whether or not someone likes your work. Love the work for what it is.

8. The work should be giving you all the *juice* you need. If you're not getting some major charge out of just crafting stories, then *please* stop.

9. Dare to dream and don't give up, because that's all this is really about. If you're afraid to even dream all the way, then stop writing now, because your heart isn't in it and you're wasting your own time.

10. Finally, I worked on seriously pursuing a writing career 15 years before I finally got an agent, 16 years before I got a publishing deal. I wasn't submitting to agents all that time - I was honing my art and craft. I only submitted work for about 8 years before - and not steadily submitting - going back and writing new stuff and then trying again (and again). Like I said, you gotta have "chops" to stick it out in this "business".

This is about love. It's all about love of the art, love of the craft, love of a life spent writing, and sharing stories. Even if you never get published, you can still have that love and keep writing (and you should).

J.F.

P.S. Paint by numbers isn't painting. That doesn't mean you shouldn't do paint by numbers, it just means it's not painting. :)

Anon who wrote:

"If I found out that my writing is not good enough, I'd know there were major changes I needed to make in the way I write."

I don't think you can do that. I think our writing is an expression of who we are. I have a friend who writes prolifically but his writing is not perfect. I don't think he can change it though and every time I read something he's written, I am hearing who he is. I wouldn't want his writing to change.

Unless you mean about polishing and grammar and things. Those you could change. But if someone really told you that, where would you even begin? And doesn't that suck all the fun out of writing if you have to change the way you write to conform?

Getting to the NBA is a false analogy here.

Getting to a professional level in sports requires certain innate abilities. There is no "talent" for playing basketball, per se, but you can't play at a high level unless you have the right physical attributes. You also have to start young -- your body has a best before date.

The only innate attribute I can think of that affects writing is intelligence. Can anyone name one other innate trait that creates writing talent?

Grammar ain't it. That's a learned skill. Vocabulary, similarly, is learned.

Writing is entirely learned -- unlike jumping or throwing a ball, nothing about it is natural.

Granted, from time to time you will see writing so bad that you just can't believe the author will ever learn to write. But this isn't because they lack "talent"; it's because they've wasted their lives reading crap, because they take writing for granted, because they're not serious enough to know how bad they are.

Okay, maybe this is a lack of "talent." But that's just a polite way of saying that these people are unintelligent, which in turn is a polite way of saying that they're dumb as stumps. These people should give up.

The last thing we need is more Simon Cowells. Cowell is not a seer; he's an egomaniacal dunce. Bob Dylan would never have got past Cowell, for example. Sure, some people feel Dylan can't sing, but you can't argue that he hasn't been successful at what he does.

Nathan, Richard Ford is dyslexic. That's as clear a sign of lack of writing "talent" as any -- he's got an innate disability that affects his ability to form words.

I'll bet you'd like to represent him, though. :)

andrew-

I really disagree, first, on the NBA thing. There are players who have all the physical gifts in the world, but then there are players like LeBron James and Jason Kidd who have an innate feel for the game that goes way beyond just being tall and jumping high. Being a high level basketball player is part physical part mental.

And I also think the analogy fits with writing -- "Storytelling" is a talent. It's innate. Trust me, I've seen natural storytellers who have zero teaching and who are far better than people who have spent years practicing and who have MFAs and who have spent so much time honing their craft. Some people just have a tremendous natural gift that trumps practice.

I also feel that writing something that really flows and captures someone's imagination (like Malcolm Gladwell, for instance, on the nonfiction side) is also a gift. No one can practice their way to becoming Malcolm Gladwell. It's an innate gift that he has honed just as any NBA player who started with the physical gifts and then practiced their entire lives.

Writing well is an incredibly complex trait that involves perception, empathy, knowledge.. it's so hard to put your finger on. But good storytellers just know what makes a good story. It's not something you just learn, even if practice is an important part of it.

Nathan, I'd say those "natural storytellers" are people who have read well, have come from backgrounds where stories are told, and have always played with stories, whether orally or in writing -- in other words, that there are more ways to learn than through formal education.

Writing is a complex skill, and as a result it's hard to identify what makes some people apparent naturals. So we create a black box and call it "talent," which removes the complexity.

Anyway, this is beside the point. We don't really mean the same thing by "talent." I will grant you that some people are unlikely ever to become good writers. Whether we call that a lack of talent or a hopeless and multifaceted skill deficit is moot.

Hi, Just wanted to mention that a friend of mine with SIX unpublished novels of women's fiction just sold her latest at auction to a big-name publisher via a very well-known agent. I think it's the kind of novel that you would have rejected, Nathan. Not that there's anything wrong with that--your taste is your taste--but you would have rejected her other work, too. There has been a vast improvement in her writing over the years. The book comes out next year. Should she have quit? Should she have read the tea-leaves as "give it up, you'll never get published?"

I thought so a few times, but I'm glad she didn't.

So how can you call that? Also, many editors did turn the novel down. It was a small auction (two editors really going at it/and then one who made a single offer).

Go figure.

This all could be taken one step further, by asking if some people have no innate talent and will never get published no matter how hard they work to perfect their skills, then why do we see so many crash and burn novels being published these days? The crash and burn books are the ones where agent, editor and publisher thought they could pull it off, but didn't.

If innate talent were a standard fixture in publishing, we'd all be reading wonderful books, the heavens would open up and glorious angels would start singing.

The Ear Thing

Re: "I'd say those "natural storytellers" are people who have read well, have come from backgrounds where stories are told, and have always played with stories, whether orally or in writing"

Have you ever seen LeBron James play basketball?

There is a character in the movie "Grand Canyon" (great movie by the way), who had played with some big-name basketball player when he was young. The character says: "He and I weren't playing the same game." There was "something there" that the average NBA player doesn't have. It's just not "skill." Or "skill deficit."

I mean, do you define imagination as a "skill?" Do people "learn" to be "imaginative?"

One of the most amazing things to me in getting my MFA in "creative writing," was how UN-creative the average MFA student was (and professor, if I may be so bold).

I taught one day in grad school, as a guest teacher in someone else's classroom. The students were told to come up with questions for me. One question was about meter, learning meter and all those technical aspects of writing poetry, and I answered: "I don't pay any attention to that."

And later the teacher who'd invited me to teach told me she felt like "jumping out of the window" when I said that, because she'd been holding me up to her class as an example of all the fantastic poetry you can write when you LEARN METER. She just assumed if I wrote the way I did, I MUST be studying very carefully my dithyrambs etc!

You don't need to LEARN it, or study it. Just use your "ear." That is, your innate natural talent. How do you develop "your ear?" You read and write.

I think this is true of fiction also. At least, I had a teacher who couldn't understand why I wasted my time writing poetry, when I was so "gifted" writing fiction. It's the "ear thing."

A separate issue from actually getting published, but I have to say something in defense of the "ear thing."

I agree with the 'ear thing.'

I think it's true of grammar, too. Undoubtedly, grammar can improve through study, but I think a writer should absorb a lot of rules through reading a lot.

The 'ear thing' equates to music nicely. There are people who play by ear. Not necessarily even perfect pitch, but an affinity for the sounds that translates into their fingers. Are they musicians? Of course. Are they educated musicians? No. Can they explain to anyone how they do what they do? Probably not in a way that is transferable.

Now lets talk about driving. People can get behind the wheel of a car with little formal instruction and push the pedals and react to the environment. But does that make them the kind of driver you want on the road? No. But even experienced drivers, those with training plus driving experience [practice] drive 'by ear'. They get muscle and perceptive memory. If we had to think about driving at the level of a learner driver, there would be LOTS more accidents. We move to a level of 'expertise' where 'natural', dare I say a perception of 'talent', is exercised.

Writing as expressed by Wanda is somewhat like that. As we gain more and more awareness and practice, that is using those concepts in new ways, we add them to our 'natural' behaviour and even find it hard NOT to do them any more. That is called learning. In writing, it may be called 'voice'. I'm not sure.

Talk to any 'overnight success' and you will find out how long that 'night' really was.

I think talent really is the factor that divides the great from the mediocre. Mozart had prodigious natural talent honed by years of ruthless practice. He could do things normal people, even great musicians with years of training and practice, simply couldn't do.

I actually met a guy like this when I was a teen. He had never had a music lesson in his life, but he could listen to a piece of music one time and then play it back perfectly. He was also able to pick up an unfamiliar instrument and just play it. I actually saw him do this with a violin - an instrument he had never touched before. The parents of another friend of mine were antique collectors and they had picked up a violin somewhere. This guy walks over, picks it up and starts playing. He had a natural talent that was frightful to behold. But it wasn't just parroting what he heard. He could riff and improvise and completely blow you away.

I often wonder what happened to him. He never became a famous guitar player, though at the age of 16, he was clearly on his way to being one of the greats.

I've also known wonderful storytellers who were functionally illiterate. Storytelling is an art. Writing is the craft of bringing stories to the printed page, because a well-told tale often doesn't translate well to the page. Writing can be learned. Storytelling cannot. At best, you can learn to fake it and become a technically proficient but mediocre writer.

To my mind, a story isn't truly finished until it's published.

The driver analogy is a good one, but take it a step further. An experienced driver may seem talented, but put him or her in a race with race car drivers at the NASCAR or Indy or Formula One level and you'll see that there is also a talent for driving. And within the professional level, there are levels of talent. In fact, at the very highest level, it is often talent that is the only difference.

"What I find interesting is how many people think the only reason to write is to be published, and that publication legitimizes ones efforts somehow. Is there any other endeavor that carries such a load of assumptions?"

It's not a matter of validation. I know I can write. It's a matter of the process being so out of my control (you can't have it both ways -- you can't tell us that it's in our control because if we write a good enough book we'll get published, and then in the next breath tell us it's all the marketplace and luck and expect us to believe only the first part, sorry).

If there was another way to quit practicing in front of the mirror, which is what writing for "the joy of it" (aka for myself and a few friends) is to me, I would jump at it with both feet. AAMOF, I would prefer another way if there was one.

No, putting it up on a website or having it printed and bound at Lulu.com is not going to do the job. Neither is just getting it onto Amazon. What's needed is the distribution, not the physical product.

If there was another way to get the distribution, then we'd be getting somewhere.

But that doesn't seem to exist.

I am in the business of medicine. It's a tough field. The vast majority of people who set out to go to med school never get in. Highly competitive.

But there's talent in medicine as well as learning.

I had the misfortune to have worked with a doctor who had the highest scores on the medical boards EVAH. In the history of the boards. Perfect scores all three times.

But the guy couldn't diagnose his way out of a paper bag. He couldn't spot impending demise. He diagnosed a three-day-old with "viral syndrome." Well, yeah, herpes encephalitis is a virus. I saw the baby two hours after he did and Flight for Life was on their way.

I passed my boards, did upper echelon kind of scores. But what I have that genius doctor lacked is gut intelligence.

I can't tell you how many times I have looked at a patient across the room, and thought, "Oh, bad language, bad language, they're dying." No idea what was wrong, just bad mojo, impending demise.

Follow the steps, baby with encephalitis, massive heart attack, germs rampaging through the blood stream.

I'm not perfect, medicine is an art not science, but if I had to trade my gut smarts for a perfect score on the boards, I wouldn't do it. Gut smarts can't be taught. (I don't think.) It's innate.

Same with writers. If your grammar sucks, you could take classes. Heck, if I wanted to, I could probably learn grammar, punctuation, etc.

But to be a storyteller, to catch the imagination of people other than yourself, is innate, and in my opinion un-learnable.

Anonymous, you just told a really great story. I'd like to read a medical thriller by you.

These posts have all been fascinating, but the wealth of thought is leaving me a little dizzy. I'm afraid to overthink my career choice, myself. I need all the mental energy I can muster to keep up my writing schedule.

However, I've always used Jane Hamilton as my role model. She started querying agents in the "A" section of Writer's Marketplace for "Map of the World," and didn't find one til she'd reached the alphabetical end. That agent, she has said in one interview, wrote back and said, "Who ARE you?" As we all know now, she was (and is) really someone. I'm so glad she didn't give up.

"This all comes down to one basic fact about books: there is no Delphi.

The secret to the Oracle at Dephi's success was ambiguity, never giving a clear-cut answer to a question. So in that sense this whole discussion is quite Delphic.

I read once that Lucille Ball was told by an acting instructor that she'd never be any good at acting.

Apocryphal. No such thing is mentioned, or even implied, in either the memoirs of her acting teacher, John Murray Anderson ("Out Without My Rubbers"), or Ball's ("Love, Lucy.")

And one record company turned down the Beatles because they didn't think they'd sell and because "Guitar groups are on their way out, anyway."

Have you heard the Decca audition tapes? They performed badly. Note, too, that just one record company turned down the Beatles. One. Not every single company for whom they ever auditioned, or even dozens. Just one.

Ditto for J.K. Rowling.

Abe Lincoln lost every single election until he ran for president.

No he didn't. He was elected captain of his Black Hawk War militia company, he was elected to the Illinois House of Representative in 1834 (and reelected to that seat three times), and elected to the U.S. House in 1846.

I recall turning to my friend one Saturday afternoon in 1977 as we watched a preview of a movie before the real show, and telling her, "That one looks stupid. No one is going to pay to see that!" The name of that "stupid" movie? It was called Star Wars.

Are you a movie producer? Because, if not, that story is really pretty irrelevant, isn't it?

Ball, The Beatles, Lincoln, and Rowling all turned out to be hugely successful.

They did. And they all enjoyed early success, too, hitting the jackpot with their earliest efforts. Which is basically the opposite of your thesis.

At the risk of sending this in past the sell by date, I would like to refrase the question. Suppose there was a seeer who could tell you with absolute certainty wether or not you are going to be diagnosed with terminal cancer between the age of 57 and 60, would you like this seeer to tell you? Would you want to know?
NO. I would not. The joy of life is the blissful lack of knowledge about the outcome of our endeavours, the writer's job as well as the agent's job.
Would I like there to be such a seeer?
NO. I would not and thank god there isn't one.
What should we do if such a seeer appears and starts telling us our future?
Don't ask me, I am afraid my answer will not be kind.

I blogged on this at http://californio.livejournal.com/106805.html, but the guts of my response is the following:

Another answer to why not tell writers “you are no good,” would be because it will deeply hurt them, perhaps even beyond their writing career. An analogy: when a young woman sees a guy coming to the street, and it is clear what this guy is thinking and it’s out of the question, a well-bred young lady does not say “Sorry, you’re too short, not good-looking enough, you have a weird sense of humor, your taste in clothes is hopeless,” or whatever, she just says, “I’m busy,” “I already have a boyfriend,” “We’re moving to a foreign country,” “My father won’t let me date until I’m 30” or anything to avoid passing judgment on this guy as an individual. To do so would be cruel.

Can you imagine this girl telling the young man, “Not only am I not interested in dating you, but I’m confident no other woman would give you a chance either. I really think you should join a monastery.”

The best path in any tense situation is to be gracious, allow people to keep their dignity. Anything else builds bad karma. And, not to be too Californian about this, hurting others, in any way, hurts the world. I think politeness is an asset even in the 21st century.

i can't imagine anyone in the publishing industry would agree with this, but i think good writing makes a reader work. it makes a reader think about the story when the book is closed and the lights are off, want to read passages out loud because they are so well-written, discuss it with their friends.

there are some obvious markers of bad writing (awkward tone or voice and unbelievable characters, etc.) and i don't mean the reader is supposed to "work" through those.

but ease of reading experience or being a "page turner" certainly aren't prerequisites for something to qualify as good writing. the best examples i can think of for contemporary authors are Gao Xingjian and Cormac McCarthy.

Soul Mountain is beautifully written but it certainly doesn't suck you in immediately. Blood Meridian wasn't easy or even pleasurable (that book still haunts me and it's been years) but the writing was... stunningly good.

on the flip-side, i could not put The Davinci Code down but i would hardly call Dan Brown a craftsman.

I think there's obviously bad, clunky writing, writers who are trying too hard, and writers who are lazy. We can all weed those out pretty quickly. But after that, the waters grow murky and opinion and taste play heavily upon our judgement.

I look for a variety of things in books. I judge some as good because I immediately forget I'm reading and if the writer breaks any of the supposed rules of storytelling, I don't notice it. I'm so immersed in the story the writer can do anything he/she wants short of disappointing me.

And when a story really resonates, the first thing I want to do is read it outloud to someone or retell it after I've finished. Sometimes it's the storytelling itself--a solid story with interesting characters. Sometimes it's the language, the turn of phrase done well, the vividness of the colors the writer uses to paint the picture.

While I do care about good writing, it's the story that's more important to me. Good writing can make for a great story, but a great story does not always need good writing.

John Grisham, to use as an example, isn't the best writer. His characters and dialogue can be limited, but he's a first-rate storyteller.

I've seen beautifully written manuscripts that bored me because the story didn't grab me. There's lots of good writers trying to get published with perfectly edited manuscripts, but their stories are weak, so they can't make it beyond the slush pile, while those with not the best writing but with great stories, get published.

Erik makes an interesting point:

All of the various things that people talked about ... are important, but only to the extent that they help get the reader into the work so that it can have the right effect on them.

The only fiction that "works" is that which comes alive in the reader's imagination. Every trick the writer uses has to be aimed at turning on the reader's right-hemisphere brain.

Good writing MUST be subjective. If not, every novel published would be a bestseller and there would be no need for someone like you to evaluate talent.

I also think that you must maintain two separate sets of subjectivity. Based on your personal tastes, you may love a work, but the tastes bred from you professional experience and knowledge understand that even a wonderful story may not fit what editors are looking for.

For me, good writing wipes away the real world and places me body and soul into another place where I can smell the sea on Chesil Beach or taste the ash on McCarthy's road. Poor writing moves me, too, mostly to the top of the page to see how many I have left or to the clock to wonder if I have anything better to do.

I work in management for a national retailer and part of my job is evaluating talent in the form of job applicants. I have passed on several people over the years that have gone on to work out great at other companies, but I know if I don't feel that chemistry right away, it will not benefit me or the applicant if I make an offer. In such a case, my subjectivity is not just a matter of whim, but a key to maintaining a successful business, just as I know yours is while you shovel through the slush.

Of course, all my fiction is good . . . except the stuff that isn't.

Bad--for some values of bad--can be spotted a mile off. It confounds our expectations (of grammar or humanity or what have you) and gives us nothing in return for the extra work it requires. Separating the good from the merely competent is much harder and more subjective.

Spotting the salable is beyond me. I'm the person who stocks up at the supermarket when I find something new I like, because it's pretty well guaranteed to vanish without a trace in a month or two.

If writing, good or bad, was not a subjective craft, there would be only one agent and one publisher.

For most of us, the cash register at the book store is the judge that counts.

Aloha,

Ahhh writing...

If read good to me...than plenty good writing.

If no read good to me...than plenty no good writing.

If no read good to me...but brings millions to agent and publisher and editor...then my thoughts are insignificant...though writing remains no good...for me.

Maybe you should ask James Patterson - he apparently thinks he has it all covered & seems bent on making an impact on the YA market - so that "his" work will make kids say "wow" & read more. If we only knew ahead of time that all we needed was for him to write for kids to start reading more. In my objective / subjective opinion, his writing ain't all that" but he's a commercially powerhouse. It's all about taste - or lack of.

Sadly, I have to agree with crapshooter.

Money talks, and you can never tell what opinion it will voice or what book it will choose.

By the way, that video was harsh. Nathan, please don't ever be that cruel to us again.

I think that Tolkien (Lord of the Rings) is a bad writer. His dialog is stilted, he wanders off on tangents and gives overlong descriptions. He also tells us stuff without showing us.

But the world he created is wonderful. So I struggled through the writing to get to the world.

So who's to say what's good or bad? I agree with those who say if it captivates a reader, then it's good.

YOU'RE ALIVE!!!

Ahem, sorry about the outburst. Nathan, I think we'd all given you up for dead when you didn't post promptly for two days. Don't scare us like that!

As for good writing... I just go by a simple rule. If I don't *notice* the writing (that is, if I don't pick out errors, frown at the metaphors and wonder if a character would really do that) than I consider it good writing. The writing itself should go unnoticed, leaving the reader with only the characters and a good plot.

"I think that Tolkien (Lord of the Rings) is a bad writer. His dialog is stilted, he wanders off on tangents and gives overlong descriptions. He also tells us stuff without showing us."

With all due respect, anon

"I think" and the rest of your statement are completely at odds.

So wonderful worlds would be the only reason his novels captivated and continue to captivate the entire world?

I think Tolkien is a mighty fine writer. Conventional? No. A good writer...? Ignoramus question.

A question or statement flung by a pour soul who grew up suckling from the MTV teat and regurgitating the jealous and critical words of Pullman, a writer who wallows around in Tolkien and Lewis-envy.

Have a little humble pie with thine ego dinner.

Hmmm -- There are objective criteria available for judging the use of the English language, at least for standard NA usage or standard British usage. However, what those really do is reject imperfect usage -- they don't establish good writing.

It is perfectly possible to do technically perfect writing without any redeeming characteristics. It is also possible to do evocative, effective writing that breaks many of the rules. A lot of the New Wave authors in SF back in the '70's "broke the rules", but did so effectively.

I think that perhaps the question that might be better asked is "Can good writing be consistently recognized (discriminated from poor writing) by a number of readers." I believe that the answer is "yes", as long as we take into account the question of cultural biases and balance for taste. For instance, the question of Dickens' abilities, as criticized by his contemporaries was brought up, and I mentioned the New Wave SF authors above. "The Worm Ourobouris" is not to everyone's taste, nor is "Dhalgren", or "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy." (I picked those because by at least some criterion, they are all "well written.")

Whether such examples of good writing will be more or less successful than "Buffy the Teenage Vampire Detective" is an entirely different question.

-- rambling along...

well...it's easier to see bad writing in other writers' work. LOL
If grammar, capitalization and punctuation were that important then ee cummings wouldn't have gotten too far.
Everything is situational.
*puts head down and keeps writing*

So you tell me: how objective or subjective is good writing? How do you know what's good? And who decides what is "good" anyway? Should it be the people who sell the most copies? Experts? Critics? The publishing industry?

Whether or not a piece is well-written can be objectively judged.
As a journalist, I see a lot of really bad writing cross my desk. I even create some of it sometimes. :-0
It's the style of writing, voice of the author and the content of a story that is subjective, and writers need to trust those in the publishing industry -- agents, editors, publishers -- when they say they believe something is or is not salable. They are the ones who best know the trends in the market.
Ultimately, it will be the reader deciding whether or not something published is "good."
As far as critics, I don't know anyone who has picked up a book at the bookstore and said, "I have to read this because (critic at national daily) said this is a great book."
I have more faith in what my friends tell me is a good book.

Anonymous 3:24 pm said "If your judgment on books is typical of most successful agents and editors, how do you account for the fact that publishers lose money on most of the books they acquire?"

Hi Anon--

I felt compelled to answer your comment. If only the world worked that way. You write a good book and it sells like gangbusters. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. A lot of great books with really quality writing just don't find the right audience. And it's not always about the way it's marketed, or the publisher support...sometimes it's just about luck.

Does that mean I think there aren't any bad books published? Certainly not. There's always the stinkers.

But I don't think it's fair to equate not-so-great sales to a bad book. It just doesn't always work that way. Especially in today's consumer market.

It's not difficult to identify them both, I think. One makes you wnat to submerge yourself in it, the other has you running for cover. In the final analysis though, I would imagine that someone like yourself who does this for a living should have no problems blending objectivity with a little subjectivity

"Good" writing is that which engages you even if you don't care about the subject. It's writing that people will still want to be reading in 50 years. Anyone who has lived on a steady diet of good reading over a lifetime--a diet which must include the classics--is qualified to judge whether writing is good or bad.

Good writing rivets you, makes you want to keep reading. Good writing is beautifully written without being "overwritten." It employs metaphor, and other poetic devices. It incorporates style. It imparts wisdom and knowledge even if it is fiction, without hitting you over the head. You know your own writing is good if someone says they felt like they were there, in the moment with the character.

"Marketable" is questionable. So many books are horridly written and agents and publishers think they are marketable. What is marketable? People write books and have so many people tell them they were enthralled and chapters have been nominated for a Pushcart Prize, the subject is unique, and yet agents say it is not marketable.

Marketable is seeming to be what will appeal to the lowest common denominator, to the masses and herein lies the rub. Books that people (the public) would be interested in, books that have authors who already have a fan base from other genres, poetry, for instance, will be ignored, because an agent can't see the book would sell.

Agents and publishers say they want something new, but when it comes their way, they say it's not marketable.

Anon 9:56PM, I agree with Anon 9:26PM who said Tolkien wasn't the greatest writer. I think Tolkien's prose was turgid but his world was amazing.

I also think people who sling insults around rather than presenting any kind of convincing case for their opinions aren't worth listening to. You really expect to change anyone's mind with an argument that can be summarized as: "U R STOOPID AN JELLUS BCUZ U DONT AGREE WITH ME"?

And then you had the gall to say, "Have a little humble pie with thine ego dinner." Funny--I only see one out-of-control ego here, and it belongs to the person who apparently believes his opinions are correct simply because they're his.

The final arbiters of whether a book is good or not are the reading public, and any subset of them may decide that a book is good or not for that particular subset.

with all due respect to Thomas, who wrote:

I've seen beautifully written manuscripts that bored me because the story didn't grab me. There's lots of good writers trying to get published with perfectly edited manuscripts, but their stories are weak, so they can't make it beyond the slush pile, while those with not the best writing but with great stories, get published.

perhaps you're missing the point. any story -- one day in a man's life, someone's funeral, the lives of poor farmers, whatever -- will become a good or even great story if well written.

the reverse is not true.

I'd say pretty much ever aspect of writing is subjective. The only things that aren't are spelling and grammar. Word count? subjective. I know some agents who will feed a query to their dog simply because the novel in question is longer than they'd like, while others will give some that's over 150k a fair shot.

As a student of writing and a writer myself, I'm very tempted to immediately pounce on authors who have crappy character development and pacing problems, but those aren't things I can take into a lab and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt must be done a certain way.

There are several agents out there who have passed up on books that have gone on to become hugely successful. But even those big successes are still loathed by many.

Writing's a strange beast. It's nigh-impossible to find any one piece of writing that everybody can agree on as being good or bad.