Friday, July 5, 2013

The Linguistic-Numerical Divide and the Quest for Literary Validation


Having traveled the dark and dismal road of agent-submissions, increasingly burdened by a plenitude of form-rejections that steadily compile, accumulate and weigh heavy (my Golem counts them with ill-concealed glee), I have stumbled upon an unexpected truth. A truth that, like a child seeing the vast expanse of sea for the first time, widens horizons in a sudden realization of infinite possibility. It is indubitably a  subjective truth, but it is in the hope that it might prove pertinent to others that I expound upon it here...

Discerning literary agents, publishing representatives of the stiff and uncompromising ilk (as such they seem to us poor writers) are, in reality, quite a distinct species. A necessary one. They fulfill a critical function, as do we. Storytellers elaborate upon a theme, weave a fanciful discourse, cast a literary spell - words are our stock in trade, our currency, our estimation of self-worth: casting a critical eye over our previous sentence we ask ourselves how well that sounds on the tongue, how effectively we have communicated that particular emotional nuance. We do not need our Golem to whisper snide disapprovals in our ear - we are, indeed, our own harshest critics. It is words that validate us or cut us down to size - that scene you wrote at two in the morning in a frenzied burst of inspiration that is retained through draft after draft because there is something improbably perfect in it! And of course the profusion of passages that are worked and reworked until mind and pen are utterly weary of them.  But it all comes down to words. Just as cytosine and guanine make up essential nucleotides in the construction of the double-helixed DNA, so do conjoined words comprise the essential life-giving element of a writer.

Agents and Publishing houses, however, operate from a distinct premise - as with writers they are instinctively geared towards the survival of self. The evaluation of fitness, however, is an economical one. They must sell to survive; while we work in the aggregation of letters, in the sequence of words - so must they examine with all due intensity the numbers. For publishing houses, and subsequently agents who must woo them, are rightly concerned with the dimensions of things: the number of words and pages, the cost of printing, the depth, width and weight of shipping containers to transport said works, the trends of sale - all of which comes down to an association of numbers rather than letters.  That is not to say they do not appreciate the fine hue of this letter or that, or the artistry inherent in this particular collection of words, but they are prohibited from prioritizing such a subjective leaning, lest the Board, peering disapprovingly over graphs of revenue projections, should darkly mutter: "Yes, that is all very well, but the sales trends for this such a novel do not bear out your optimism!" or: "too long....too literary...the demographic too marginalized!" The numbers simply must concur for the Board to acquiesce. For they too must survive. And for an author untried, unproven, and uncertain - it is the numbers that provide the necessary bolstering, that tempt the Publishing House to take the requisite gamble - number of blog hits or twitter followers (assuming the length is suitably confined and the genre a well-selling one). For they do not like to hold their breath and hope as writers tend to do, this particular species prefers a degree of certainty, the solidity of evidential precedence, before they take the plunge.

Numbers that reassure them do but bewilder me. It is not that I do not understand their imperative, I simply to do not elevate it to the same degree. For intrinsically we are not mathematicians - we are writers and words are both the air we breath and the sustenance that nourishes our literary mind. And whilst one does not begrudge publishing agencies their economic imperative (for they must also veer clear of monetary deficiencies and economic red-ink) is there any wonder that there is such a frisson of unrest between the two? A disconnect felt more acutely, perhaps, on the writing side of it - seeking as we are entrance to the hallowed halls of traditional publishing. Or are we?  And this is where the unexpected Truth emerges from the dusty hinterlands like the fiercely guarded  treasure of a grouchy leprechaun. We covet traditional publishing approval because it serves as a widely recognized and esteemed form of literary-validation. We made it - in a stringently competitive arena - one of the select chosen few - and I do not, indeed, belittle such an achievement! I have naught but happy pride for those of my literary colleagues who have pursued such a course and been successful. I cannot claim such happiness for myself - but have found a different kind of joy - one which is perhaps more long-lasting and less dependent upon the vagaries of Publishing Trends or Editorial Idiosyncrasies because it is rooted in the essence of the writing self. It is, in short, the realization that a specific agent-publisher-acceptance is not the validation I seek.

In the dark, in the deep quiet pools where ofttimes truth malingers, I have always known it to be true - but only lately has it been recognized by my conscious self: the only validation that matters is that which we provide ourselves. And the growing awareness that there is a fundamental divide between writers and the agencies that seek to represent a select few of them; one who devour words with an insatiable appetite, and the other whose heartblood carries numbers which inevitably and indubitably, it seems, (from agent perspective) trumps words.  Is it any wonder then that entire books are written on the intricate art of  query letter composition alone? That formulations of synopsis are elaborately treated in this Indispensable Self-Help book for authors or that? For are these not the accepted mechanisms for crossing that linguistic-numerical divide?   Writers and Agents are each curiously dependent upon the other - but working within a divergent dynamic, framed by a distinct objective. For some lucky few common ground is found, but for the vast majority of us, we are stranded: with the wordsmiths peering out across the expanse of horizon at the number-sleuths who occupy the island "second star to the right and straight on till morning."

But then being so fortunate as to employ self-publishing options if the need arises (as indeed it does for most of us)  -granted with all additional fiscal and marketing management - we have the ability, utterly on our own, to give our novels flight! To send them out into the literary ether, proudly adorned with ISBN code and self-defined cover art. For where does the pleasure lie for a writer? In the agonized interlude as one awaits the interminably delayed response (if made at all) from an agent? Or, having secured one, the fearful apprehensions regarding sales performance - will they, with a delicate yawn, decide this genre, this style, this author, is not quite their thing when the graph lines dip a little lower than expected? Is THIS where the ecstasy is to be found for the inveterate teller-of-tales? Or perhaps it is the marginalized royalties where the fun abounds? Not that the pragmatic writer expects such economic bounty (we worship at the altar of words rather than numbers after all, do we not?) but there is something to be said, perhaps, after a decade of laboring to enjoy a slightly higher return on however slight an income stream - if only because it enables greater freedom to write rather than give unsquandered time to the cog and wheel, the bureaucracy that plumps the purse but does little to fulfill our passionate yearnings - or to satisfy our essential need for words strung together in an intrinsically unique way. 

Quite simply when one discovers the validation lies here - in the process of writing - in that delicate harmony of mind and pen - in the fluid expression of what lies deep within; in that crafting of the quintessential phrase which survives revision after revision because it retains some semblance of the literary divine about it; a sweet spot which evokes a heart-glow like no other. That is where our validation lies - and if we must needs seek our own methods of sharing those literary gems then so be it. For perhaps we need not be quite so hard on ourselves when we understand that agent-procural oft requires nothing less than a concurrent and unsurpassed fluency in both languages (words and numbers), and one perhaps, given certain popular trends, not even to be devoutly wished for. For if we can write, if we can formulate a phrase that gives us delight - if we can string them together in the weave of narrative - in the creation of a fictional world that pulses with life - is that not ALL? Does that not comprise the pleasure epicenter? So it was my stumbled-upon truth. One that doubtless does not hold for all - but perhaps for some. I have  (like Dr Suess' Sneetches) words inscribed across my belly, but unlike his covetous creations, I have no desire for species conversion - for the acquisition of numbers - because there is no joy for me there. My particular double helix coils and winds, scripting the genetic makeup, with all attendant mutations and base omissions, and surpluses, the complex convoluted curl that is me - all of which finds its base in A through Z.






8 comments:

  1. Dearest PJ,

    You are truly a Renaissance Woman! You wear many hats in the literary and social milieu of writers and publishers in the twenty-first century, and you are recognized as both the artist and the agent in your quest for literary validation. Without your understanding of the two roles, it would be impossible to function in the ever-changing world of the evolving publishing industry. While you prefer the creativity process of the "letters" to the pragmatism of the "numbers," you have a deep appreciation for the symbiotic relationship between the two, and you are even willing to tackle them in tandem independently! Another corona! It never ceases to amaze me how your writing reveals so much of your individualized style, PJ. You are extraordinarily talented, versatile and dynamic, my dear, and you shall have great success and literary validation in whatever manner you choose to publish! And should you ever grow weary of wearing so many hats, just trade them in for one good hard helmet!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dearest Shari,
      Yes indeed - a hard helmet would be a welcome addition to the wardrobe! Thank you, thank you for your kind words of support and encouragement dear Shari - as challenging as this field can be insofar as the publishing route is concerned, I find it populated with others of the most generous spirit, friends who have quickly become close to the heart - and I think 'how lucky am I!' Thank you for being one of those dear ones!

      Delete
  2. Dear PJ, there isn't much left to say after Shari's comprehensive comment, true from beginning to end. I'd like to emphasize her prediction that you shall have great success and literary validation in whatever manner you choose to publish. Moreover, should you decide to self-publish, some well-established publishing house will seek you to republish your book or ensure that you let them have the next.
    Please do not feel lonely amid the rejection letters your Golem smirks over. García Márquez visited endless publishers with his "One Hundred Years of Solitude" under his arm, some of them more than once, for he was stubborn. They said, "Kindly remove that piece of trash from my desk!" Those who wouldn't even browse the manuscript were discouraged by the bulk, while those who looked through it thought it was gibberish. Finally, one saw the gold, both in literary and monetary terms. Also remember that Tolkien's family had got so accustomed to rejection letters that the one that finally conveyed acceptance of his manuscript nearly ended unopened in the fireplace.
    When you are "different", life is harsh. Your writing, judging from these musings, is definitely at odds with the publishing business in its present state. You should rejoice at that, for you are one in a million. Well, the remaining 999,000 will be nine days' wonders... if they're lucky. Not your case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Marta (another dearest one - see commentary above to make sense of this particular allusion) Thank you for your kind words of wisdom - you brought tears to my eyes. I am immensely grateful for your friendship and unwavering support - regardless of the outcome of all and any literary endeavors I cannot imagine a more fortunate circumstance than to be able to engage with such a talented writer as yourself, and an even greater compliment - to be able to count you among the most treasured of friends!

      Delete
  3. Brilliant post, PJ.
    I so recognize that realization that agents and publishers have a different agenda and are not measures of literary quality (or need for that matter) but only of economic criteria. I admire your patience with them and the amassing of rejection letters - I gave up after only a handful and decided that I'd rather not sell than sacrifice my beliefs and visions for something commonplace just because that will be accepted.
    Having said that, in a society that measures people's worth as a person in monetary values, I still struggle with the rejection, not of my work but of my person.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Mirjam,
      Yes, I utterly concur - I did receive one request from an agent who was willing to represent me if I cut my 180,000 word book in half - I took a day to see if it could be done (just to satisfy the process although I knew it would never work) and then promptly wrote back to gracefully decline. Cut in such a fashion - it became a dismembered thing - utterly disjointed and out of all proper proportion. Despite the urgings of some to acquiesce at any cost, to find a way to work it, I could not compromise what was a labor of love in order to meet arbitrary publishing demands (or so it seemed to me at the time - later I became aware that an average of 90,000 word-novel or thereabouts is optimal for packaging boxes....or somesuch criteria - not that the reason mattered overmuch to me - it simply could not be done and maintain a literary integrity to the novel itself.) And for a last thought - those that ascribe to the belief that fiscal wealth equates to individual worth are, quite simply, not worth knowing! There are many of us, Mirjam, that know you to be a talented, generous,and utterly engaging literary spirit - and we are all fortunate indeed to be able to count you as a first among friends.

      Delete
  4. Wonderful post PJ - another brilliant musing, thank you for sharing it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Sarah for taking the time to peruse it, and for leaving a lovely comment behind you!

      Delete