PUBLISHERS AND AUTHORS

[_10 Mar. '10_]

Authentic documents are always precious to the student, and here is one

which strikes me as precious beyond the ordinary. It is a letter received

from a well-known publisher by a correspondent of mine who is a

journalist:

"I am awfully sorry that we cannot take your novel, which is immensely

clever, and which interested my partner more than anything he has read in

a good while. He agrees with me, however, that it has not got the

qualities that make for a sale, and you know that this is the great

desideratum with the publisher. Now don't get peevish, and send us nothing

else. I know you have a lot of talent, and your difficulty is in applying

this talent to really practical problems rather than to the more

attractive products of the imagination. Get down to facts, my son, and

study your market. Find out what the people like to read and then write a

story along those lines. This will bring you success, for you have a

talent for success. Above all things, don't follow the lead of our

headstrong friend who insists upon doing exactly what you have done in

this novel, namely, neglecting the practical market and working out the

fanciful dictates of imagination. Remember that novel-writing is as much

of a business as making calico. If you write the novels that people want,

you are going to sell them in bales. When you have made your name and your

market, _then_ you can afford to let your imagination run riot, and _then_

people will look at you admiringly, and say, 'I don't understand this

genius at all, but isn't he great?' Do you see the point? You must do this

AFTER you have won your market, not before, and you can only win your

market in the first place by writing what folks want to buy.--Sincerely

yours--"

* * * * *

The writer is American. But the attitude of the average pushing English

publisher could not have been more accurately expressed than in this

letter sent by one New Yorker to another. The only thing that puzzles me

is why the man originally chose books instead of calico. He would have

sold more bales and made more money in calico. He would have understood

calico better. In my opinion many publishers would have understood calico

better than books. There are two things which a publisher ought to know

about novel-producers--things which do not, curiously enough, apply to

calico-producers, and which few publishers have ever grasped. I have known

publishers go into the bankruptcy court and come out again safely and yet

never grasp the significance of those two things. The first is that it is

intensely stupid to ask a novelist to study the market with a view to

obtaining large circulations. If he does not write to please himself--if

his own taste does not naturally coincide with the taste of the

million--he will never reach the million by taking thought. The Hall

Caines, the Miss Corellis, and the Mrs. Humphry Wards are born, not made.

It may seem odd, even to a publisher, that they write as they do write--by

sheer glad instinct. But it is so. The second thing is that when a

novelist has made "his name and his market" by doing one kind of thing he

can't successfully go off at a tangent and do another kind of thing. To

make the largest possible amount of money out of an artist the only way is

to leave him alone. When will publishers grasp this? To make the largest

possible amount of money out of an imitative hack, the only way is to

leave him alone. When will publishers grasp that an imitative hack knows

by the grace of God forty times more about the public taste than a

publisher knows?

Books and Persons; Being Comments on a Past Epoch, 1908-1911 · 第 50 / 76 题