It Takes So Long!
First published in 1997.
Copyright © 2007, Kathy Lynch Carmichael. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced in print or on the Internet without the prior written approval of Kathy Carmichael.
Lately, I've heard many writers complain about response time from publishers. Some have commented that publishers need to hire more editorial staff—or readers—or whatever it takes to get the job done in a more timely fashion.
A publishing house's priority isn't making authors happy but instead, it's increasing their profits (which means keeping costs as low as possible). Most large houses are publicly traded companies and their responsibility is to stockholders. Unless they perceive that profits will drop because quality is waning, there's no incentive for them to change their policy, in my opinion.
Probably, if they began losing higher numbers of their best editors because they're overworked, that will be when they'll take some of the load off the editors. We're seeing editors leaving because of husbands being transferred or to stay home with kids, but not because of overwork. That's because for the industry, editors are ALL overworked. At many houses, editors are discouraged from reading at their desks during office hours. They have so many other responsibilities, that reading rather than editting, is a no-no.
An alternative is when a house takes too long to make decisions, authors might go elsewhere with their work (for a faster answer). Since the competition is limited, particularly in category, that doesn't happen with much frequency—plus most houses have the same problem and it's tough all over. We're seeing more authors writing for multiple lines within the same house. Ultimately, this is bogging down the system further because authors are forced to send in greater and greater numbers of submissions in hopes something will sell (this excludes big name authors whose every book a publisher will want).
It's why the submissions numbers game is successful right now. I know of one author who practises this—almost like a credo. She's submits not only to the house she sold to, but also to two other publishers. If the house who'd bought from her had read her submissions in a more timely manner, she wouldn't have turned to the numbers of submissions she's made nor would she have submitted (and sold) to other houses. Since other authors have little choice but do the same thing—and this is published as well as unpublished as well as published but unpublished by the particular house, the channel is getting bogged down (however, the unpublished are turning in completes which takes even more time to make it through the mountains of submissions). Straight rejections come pretty quickly—but the ones that might work or actually do work are slowed down considerably by the process of having to go to two, three or more editors, and wading thru each editor's swollen submission pile.
Ironically, I suspect editors and houses think of this as a buyers market. In reality, if all of the partials sent in by published authors were bought at once, then we'd see a real problem—because it would be physically impossible for a writer to finish all those books at once.
Some houses have dealt with it by buying further up the line, for instance buying thru '99 instead of '98. I suspect the houses that are requiring submissions only from agented authors reacted to this sort of situation. There are only X number of slots, the market is tightening, and all authors are trying to find a way to increase their odds of selling.
Because of this perception of a buyers market, editors are being more particular. Books that would have sold two or three years ago are now being rejected—and often due to personal taste rather than flaws in the book itself.
The solution? For the time being, you need to jump into the numbers game and submit as many ideas as you can. In the meantime, consider your rejected books and ideas as inventory. Hopefully, another year or two should see us out of this submissions bog.