Railsback knows it's 'Sydney or the Bush'

By Virginia Culp - WCU Intern

From the first moment writing for the public becomes an issue in their lives, writers are taught the gospel of hard work and perseverance. If you write well, their teachers and mentors say, if you follow the rules of grammar, if you make your characters deep and realistic, if you create a thoughtful, suspenseful plot, if you get a good agent, and if you're good enough at your craft, then - and only then - will you get your work published.

What no one tells you is that while your agent may be spectacular, your writing may be stellar and your book may be inspired, there's one more issue that will, above all else, determine your acceptance into the world of commercial fiction: The bottom line.

Brian Railsback, head of the Western Carolina University English department and author of the non-fiction work "Parallel Expeditions: Charles Darwin and the Art of John Steinbeck," knows only too well that artistic ability can matter little in the final analysis. Last summer he sent out queries in an attempt to find an agent who would market his fiction manuscript, "Shadows of the Valley." His search was successful, and together, Railsback and his agent, Jodie Rhodes, began to move forward.

"I felt really good about her because she was featured in Publisher's Weekly two weeks later," Railsback said.

What followed would be a roller coaster of emotions and an experience that neither will forget. Railsback knew publication would be a long shot. He was an unknown writer in the fiction market, and while his agent was respected in the industry, she made it clear that his lack of "name recognition" would make the chance of success very small.

For her agency, the acceptance rate of unsolicited queries is between 1 and 2 percent, and of that, only about 5 percent of the manuscripts generate substantial interest from publishers. However, Rhodes was confident that "Shadows of the Valley" had a good chance.

"You are both a gifted writer and a marvelous storyteller - a rare combination," Rhodes wrote to Railsback. "We're so swamped [with submissions], we never have time to read real books - just wannabe books. So imagine my pleasure to find 'Shadows' reading just like a real book."

When Rhodes sent out partial manuscripts, the response was overwhelming. Nine out of 13 publishers expressed interest almost immediately, including Random House, Harper Collins and Crown, an almost unprecedented number in an industry where two or three favorable responses are the norm. An editor from Simon & Schuster raved, "I find the writing really stunning."

Encouraged, Rhodes decided to put the novel up for auction, pitting publishers against each other in an attempt to get the best possible deal. The key to this strategy, which she has found extremely successful in the past, would be one editor who could make a firm offer, thereby generating enough competition and excitement to get others to bid. It was risky, but Rhodes believed it could work.

"What we're doing hereŠ It's Sydney or the Bush," Rhodes told Railsback, referring to the all-or-nothing nature of their enterprise.

For one shining moment, it seemed as though publication was just around the corner, and then everything started to collapse.

A major publisher, who had initially expressed great interest, pulled out. The problem? Fear that the hardcover wouldn't sell enough copies to make it worth bidding on.

"Art had nothing to do with it," Railsback says, looking back. "The bottom line was money."

Literally within days, the other publishers' offers folded like a house of cards. One after another, rejection letters started pouring into Rhodes' office, all repeating the same theme: It's a wonderful book, but we can't take the chance. On Sept. 24, his birthday, Railsback sat alone in his office with the bitter realization that it was over.

"It was the biggest professional disappointment of my life," he said.

The sudden downturn caught Rhodes off-guard as well, but she understood the forces behind the rejection letters.

"As you may know," she explained to Railsback, "editors have the power to say 'no,' but they don't have the power to say 'yes.'"

The reason for the publishers' negative decision was no secret. One of the editors regretted that "the pressure is on for a book to be first and foremost commercial"; another cited the "increasingly glutted suspense market."

Underlying all the formalities ran a current of bittersweet praise. They commended Railsback's writing style, plot, characterizations and tone - all the elements that, according to writing teachers, make or break a novel. They talked about their own reactions to the book and lauded the delicate balance of character depth and suspense. One editor even said she would like to see more of Railsback's work.

So why didn't "Shadows of the Valley" make the cut? Railsback thinks the answer is money.

"They're so frightened," he says. "If they acquire something and it doesn't sell, they're in trouble. The money question is polarizing the book industry. The editors can't take a chance on an unknown because all the money is swept up in deals with brand-name authors."

It would be easy to fling the manuscript into a drawer and renounce the publishing industry as fickle and money-grubbing, but Railsback has other plans. First and foremost, he refuses to give up his own work to write a formula thriller. He has retained Rhodes as his agent, and they will be sending "Shadows" out again.

"Learn from the failure," Railsback advises beginning writers. "Don't try to write something formulaic - write what you want to write and let the chips fallŠ Write because you enjoy the writing experience itself."

He also stresses the importance of well-crafted writing. "If the writing isn't good, you get nowhere."

Back to Archive: 06/28/01.