Mark Tavani

An Interview with Mark Tavani (Jan 2012)

We are lucky this month to have an in-depth interview with Mr. Mark Tavani, Senior Editor at Random House Publishing Group in New York. Mark has risen through the ranks in the publishing industry after his graduation from the University of Pittsbugh to Executive Editor at Ballantine Publishing, an imprint of the Random House Group, to Senior Editor at Random House. The list of authors and books with whom he has worked is an All-Collection. Mark also generously participates at numerous writer conferences and has received outstanding acknowledgements from the writers that he has worked with – placing him the “old fashioned’ category of editors who nurture their writers. Random House is the largest publisher of consumer books in the USA.

Biography

Mark Tavani is originally from Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania, and grew up in the suburban Philadelphia area. Along the way working at a beer distributor in Pittsburgh and as a forestry aid in New Mexico, Mark picked up a degree in Creative Writing from the University of Pittsburgh. He started his editorial career at Ballantine Books, an imprint of Random House Publishing Group, in 2000. He is now an Executive Editor and the Editorial Director of Fiction for Ballantine Books.

The list of authors he has worked with include Steve Berry, R.L. Stine, Justin Cronin, George Dohrmann, Charlie Huston, Bill Simmons, and David Corbett. His acquisitions have included thrillers, literary novels, sports books, and other non-fiction titles. He is also an active participant in many writers conferences, including the International Thriller Writers’ Thrillerfest and the Backspace Writers Conference, where he has discussed both writing technique and the state of the publishing industry.

BWG: You have seen some tremendous and unsettling changes in the publishing industry over the past few years - 1st, the large media corporations acquiring the medium sized and smaller publishing houses, with the industry shaking out to fewer publishers who have a stronger focus on the bottom line than on literary merit, the folding of the independent bookstores due to growth of the big box bookstores, then the folding of the big box stores due to the volcanic eruption of E-books being sold through Nook, Amazon.com, Itunes, etc. Are there any other major changes coming down the road that the general public may not be aware of?

MT: I think you started with the hardest question.

It’s impossible to say if there are changes on the way that will surprise the general public. First, because major changes are occurring these days with startling rapidity; it seems like every month some new thing surfaces, some new technology, new method of distribution, new argument about pricing, etc. Second, because the general public now gets its news so incredibly quickly. It’s an era of rapid-fire communication, and with things like Twitter connecting publishers and authors and agents and reviewers and booksellers and, of course, any interested member of the general public, there aren’t many secrets—and there isn’t much lag between the occurrence of something and the reporting of it.

But it’s safe to say that all of the changes that are afoot will continue to evolve. The release of a new device by one company, for instance, will inspire the next device by another—in the way that Amazon’s Fire is, on some level, a response to Apple’s iPad. And when things evolve, especially amidst heated competition, some obvious things happen…and some very un-obvious things happen; it’s impossible for anyone to predict exactly how the book industry’s players and pieces will be aligned even a year from now.

As a sidenote, I’ll say that to me one of the most interesting aspects of the industry at this moment is exactly how heated its competition is. Book publishing is thought of as an old fashioned business; in many ways it is. But right now, it’s an industry in flux, an industry hosting a mix of old players and new, an industry bristling with innovation.

BWG: I noticed that the Wall Street Journal and some of the other newspapers are now listing Best-Sellers under the categories Hardcover (Fiction & Non-Fiction), E-Books (Fiction & Non-Fiction), and then Combined Fiction & Non-Fiction. Is this having an effect on the health of the publishing industry because of the different cost structures and do you now acquire books with the full understanding that they will be published in both formats?

MT: Yes, recognition of the emerging digital market is affecting the industry’s bottom line. Just a couple years ago there seemed to be a sense that ebooks would happen—just not quite yet. Maybe five years from now — that kind of thing. Well, they happened. And now they are a huge part of our business. Certain kinds of books sell better digitally than others (fiction generally outpaces nonfiction, with genre categories leading the way) but there are no hard and fast rules. Look at a book like Laura Hillenbrand’s UNBROKEN: a serious work of narrative nonfiction, it sold magnificently as a hardcover, but the ebook sales are also off the charts.

When acquiring a book, we do now generally assume it will be published both physically and digitally. And in some cases, books are being published only as ebooks. The digital cost structure is different than the physical, but not at all uniformly inferior; it has its owns upsides.

BWG: Is it possible now for a writer to have a career in E-Books only, without going into the traditional book format?

MT: It is. An ebook-only publication isn’t what all authors want, but for those that are open to it, sure, there’s plenty of opportunity. In some ways, it’s similar to how some authors have long been published in paperback but not in hardcover. Huge numbers of people want their books digitally; if they do their reading on a device, they simply don’t care if the book they want also exists in hardcover.

Ebook-only publishing can also affect authors whose books are published physically. A couple years ago, we published an ebook-only short story called THE BALKAN ESCAPE by international thriller writer Steve Berry. It was a hit with fans, but it also brought new people to his work, as it was an inexpensive way for a reader to give his writing a try. Steve and I are currently working on his third ebook-only short story.

BWG: Do editors in the large houses such as Random House deal only with agents in looking for new acquisitions or is there still a chance for a new writer to connect directly to such an editor? Do slush piles still exist?

MT: Generally speaking, yes. Of course exceptions to the rule exist, but we do tend to work with agents in acquiring projects.

As for slush piles, they do still exist at publishing houses, but they’re a very different thing than they once were. Submissions are almost always made digitally these days, the rules of submission are more widely accessible, writers know better than ever to try an agency before a publisher, etc, etc. The more relevant slush piles—from which writers emerge all the time—are now located at agencies.

And I could elaborate on why that makes sense—why authors benefit from agents acting as intermediaries—but that would be beside the point, I think.

BWG: The writing conferences, the writing magazine, etc. all insist that the first page of your novel has to be brilliant, the fist 50 pages are key to acceptance, and the first two weeks of Sale are determinant to the success of the book, all of which is a bit overwhelming to the new writer. If the writer knows that his/her book is not a "Break-Out" novel and knowing the "Mid-List" writer is now nearly defunct, is the new writer better off trying at a small press that specializes in the genre (cosy mysteries, crime, paranormal, horror, etc.)?

MT: That does sound overwhelming. But it’s also true: Editors are looking for a brilliant beginning to a book. Part of this is purely logistical. An editor gets sent so many manuscripts that if the one she’s reading doesn’t grab her in less than fifty pages, she’s going to move on to the next one. She simply can’t read every page of every manuscript and expect ever to get through the stack of submissions. But there’s also a pressure on publishers that comes from readers. Readers demand books that satisfy, books that grip them within a couple pages and don’t let them go until the story’s over. Whenever I look at customer reviews for a novel, I come away nearly shell-shocked by the number of readers out there who demand high action, intrigue, and a sympathetic hero within paragraphs—and how many readers will walk away from a book if they don’t get exactly that.

I think every writer should consider all publishers and should try to find the one that best suits their work. If that’s a small press that specializes in a genre, then I think the author would be smart to go with them. What I think this question centers on is expectations. The big houses do certain things extremely well; small houses do other things extremely well. Some books are a fit for one model, some for the other. In my experience, things go best when an author has a clear sense of where their work truly fits in the market and has fair and realistic expectations of what a publisher offers. If a small or specialized press brings to the table what an author is hoping to get, then it sounds to me like a match. And certainly, an author or his representative can submit to large houses and small simultaneously and see which ones go for it.

BWG: Our December interview was with Jonathan Maberry, a gifted writer who crosses a range of genres (paranormal, horror, mystery, thrillers, sports) very successfully under his own name. Other writers move through different genres under different pen names so as not to upset their fan base, on the assumption that few readers will cross over, i.e., the genre is more important to them than the author. Your opinion on this?

MT: I admire writers who can successfully maintain numerous careers under numerous names. Not everyone has such balanced activity in the various quadrants of their writerly brain. The purist in me always likes to see someone do it Maberry’s way, signing the same name at the end of every story, no matter what kind it is. But when you look at the long history of literature, plenty of the greats—for all kinds of reasons—succeeded with pseudonyms. Bottom line: An author should consider any path that will get them to where they want to be as a writer without compromising their fundamental vision. If that includes the use of a pseudonym, cool.

One thing about the pen name game that has changed, though, is that today it’s infinitely easier to figure out who’s behind a pseudonym. This could affect an author’s approach to the question. Some authors aren’t trying to hide their identity but to keep their different types of books organized—in which case, the discovery of the writer’s true identity isn’t a problem. But for the authors who are hoping to conceal previous work or past sales numbers, it’s an increasingly difficult trick to turn.

In my experience, sometimes a pseudonym is the right thing, and sometimes it isn’t. When I received on submission Justin Cronin’s THE PASSAGE, it arrived under a pseudonym. The first time I read it, I actually thought the author was a woman. The idea was that he was trying something new and he and his agent felt there should be some distance between this novel and his earlier works. But the reviews for his novels were tremendous and he was beloved by booksellers, reviewers, and readers. We didn’t want any of that to be forgotten. So we all agreed to publish under his real name and we’ve been very happy since that we did.

BWG: I assume you are pleased when a new author comes to you with full involvement in social media (website, blog, Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter, etc) but do you now expect a new writer to come on board with all of these? Do you consider any of these social media components more important than others?

MT: Like any editor, I’d prefer that authors focus on writing instead of spending time on social media and self-promotion. But it just isn’t realistic right now for an author to ignore those things if he hopes to sell a lot of books to a lot of readers. Though exceptions exist, it’s generally expected these days that an author will have some sense of how to make social media work for him. As far as I can see, the truth is that today’s readers expect to be in touch with their favorite authors, and an author ignores that expectation at his own peril.

My personal involvement with social media is hit or miss; I make use of some of it and ignore some of it. I get a kick out of Twitter because you get to hear so many voices—and what is an editor’s vocation, if not seeking out and spreading the word about distinctive voices? At the same time, I don’t really know how or why I should be Linkedin, so I don’t bother.

For authors, a few years back the jazzed-up website was the hot new thing, and it’s still important to have a site, but usually these days a simple one suffices. A blog can be very good—if, of course, you have something interesting to say…even after your daily writing session. Facebook is crucial; in a number of ways, a Facebook page serves the purpose a website served a few years ago; these days, if readers can’t find you on Facebook, they probably think you don’t exist. Twitter—well, it’s similar to the blog: Can be a cool way to reach people, to amplify your voice, to advertise your name, but it backfires if you have nothing to say.

And as a general rule with all social media, authors must commit the right amount of time. I imagine that, for smart and talented people who spend the bulk of their day sitting in an empty room and staring at a computer screen, social media can be a fun way to stay busy while avoiding the writing you’re supposed to be doing. But, like any promotional effort that requires a time commitment, there is a point of diminishing returns.

BWG: Is there any particular element in a new fiction writer's background that might cause you take a closer look, i.e., an MFA degree, a resume' of published short stories, literary awards, short story collections, etc. ..or is the novel proposal the be-all and end-all of consideration?

MT: Any of those could pique my interest: a degree from an impressive program, previous publications, awards. An author’s connections with people who have the power to spread the word about books are very enticing. And intriguing life experience—especially if that experience fuels the novel—that’s something I see as a plus. But, yes, ultimately, if the novel doesn’t capture me…well, it’s not the resume that I’ll be publishing, so the novel has to do its thing.