Thanks so much for the kind words and for including me in this great conversation! This onerous process for a book proposal is a stark contrast to how one commissions a magazine piece—or at least how I do. You go on the basis of what a writer has done before. If they’re a good writer, and it’s a strong subject, you trust them to know how to do it. Of course the stakes are much lower, but I really wonder how much more an editor gets out of a laboriously prepared sample than just reading someone’s past work. If they propose to be striking into new terrain, maybe just a few pages in which they articulate how they mean to handle this differently than work they’ve done in the past. It’s the whole kismet of the job, seeing the potential in writers.
Agents come in for books where they (often) do not for magazine pieces. It adds another layer, and all the Big 5 and many larger indie presses only accept agented submissions.
I recall the proposal process for Belt being nice because it was actually a helpful step along the way to writing the book itself, a way for me to gather enough thoughts to prove (to myself above all) that I had a book in me, but not so onerous as to sap the energy required for the book. I ended up taking the same approach with the proposal for my next book, not doing a sample chapter, basically just doing a bunch of capsule paragraphs about the ideas the book would grapple with, and it ended up being a document convincing enough for my agent to sell.
I did have an advantage in that I had various pieces I'd published about the topic so publishers could see a sample of what I was going to do in the book, but I think you're on to something important about what kind of bar a proposal should have to clear before getting greenlighted. When it's too high, not enough people will even make the attempt.
Another unconstructive thing about it is I imagine what a writer does first in working on a book is not the most representative necessarily. You’re being asked to drum up something that characterizes the work you are going to do, whereas the actual book may have a different structure, in which disclosure happens more slowly. Plus obviously when you are writing the proposal you haven’t actually done the work yet; presumably at least some writers are keeping an open mind about what it the research will reveal.
Thanks so much for the kind words and for including me in this great conversation! This onerous process for a book proposal is a stark contrast to how one commissions a magazine piece—or at least how I do. You go on the basis of what a writer has done before. If they’re a good writer, and it’s a strong subject, you trust them to know how to do it. Of course the stakes are much lower, but I really wonder how much more an editor gets out of a laboriously prepared sample than just reading someone’s past work. If they propose to be striking into new terrain, maybe just a few pages in which they articulate how they mean to handle this differently than work they’ve done in the past. It’s the whole kismet of the job, seeing the potential in writers.
That's how I do it for some writers for sure.
Agents come in for books where they (often) do not for magazine pieces. It adds another layer, and all the Big 5 and many larger indie presses only accept agented submissions.
I recall the proposal process for Belt being nice because it was actually a helpful step along the way to writing the book itself, a way for me to gather enough thoughts to prove (to myself above all) that I had a book in me, but not so onerous as to sap the energy required for the book. I ended up taking the same approach with the proposal for my next book, not doing a sample chapter, basically just doing a bunch of capsule paragraphs about the ideas the book would grapple with, and it ended up being a document convincing enough for my agent to sell.
I did have an advantage in that I had various pieces I'd published about the topic so publishers could see a sample of what I was going to do in the book, but I think you're on to something important about what kind of bar a proposal should have to clear before getting greenlighted. When it's too high, not enough people will even make the attempt.
Another unconstructive thing about it is I imagine what a writer does first in working on a book is not the most representative necessarily. You’re being asked to drum up something that characterizes the work you are going to do, whereas the actual book may have a different structure, in which disclosure happens more slowly. Plus obviously when you are writing the proposal you haven’t actually done the work yet; presumably at least some writers are keeping an open mind about what it the research will reveal.
so glad to hear this, John--and very happy to hear about your process with your new book (excited to read!)