One of the tropes rife in the editorial world, regarding non-fiction, is “this should be an article instead of a book.” This is a very disappointing thing for an author to hear. After all, s/he spent years developing an idea into something long enough to be called a book, only to have it suggested s/he should cut it down.
I write fiction, and I love to do so. Once I’m in the world I’ve imagined, it is difficult for me to break away. In my day-job, however, I have written, and continue to write, creative non-fiction. I recently managed to get one of these pieces up to 60,000 words so that I could call it a book. A friend suggested maybe it should be an article instead.
This is the dilemma of the writer seeking publication. You have to meet the expectations of a publisher. Nobody knows the piece as well as the author, and it hurts to cut organs away—body parts that your mind organically grafted into the body of your work.
Creative non-fiction, it seems to me, is easier to sell than fiction. The common misperception is that anyone can dash off fiction. “Just make something up.” Good fiction, however, is just as hard as non-fiction. Probably harder. It’s definitely harder to publish.
This week I sent out a creative non-fiction piece to a journal. It will be weeks, perhaps months, before I hear back. I’ve done this before, and often with success. I’m still nervous, though. If it’s not enough for a book, maybe it won’t be enough for an article?
Writers, I’m told, must have thick skin. Many of us who write, however, do so because we feel deeply. Feeling deeply and thick skin aren’t natural corollaries. I’ve already accepted that I don’t know whether it’s a book or an article that I’m writing. Do I have to accept than it’s not publishable too?
Comments
Post a Comment