Perigee Bookmarks

Free-Falling to End Bullying in 2012--Courtesy of Atypical Author Jesse Saperstein

We're so proud of Perigee author Jesse Saperstein, author of Atypical -- and now creator of this new anti-bullying video. Whether he's writing, speaking, or skydiving, he is always fearless, generous, and inspiring. Go, Jesse!

 

Chris St. Hilaire – Don’t be afraid of the silence | Smart Business

Chris St. Hilaire – Don’t be afraid of the silence | Smart Business.

This article was originally published on http://www.sbnonline.com.

by Chris St. Hilaire

Imagine you had a secret power that could calm frazzled colleagues, foster teamwork and help you manage conflict. Not only would this power be versatile, it would also be invisible. To ignite this power, you would merely need to do … nothing.

That’s the power of silence.

The best politicians know all about silence; just watch them being interviewed. Notice how they pause after a difficult question, appear to think about it, and then finally give an answer. That pause makes the audience believe that the politician listens to others and thinks very carefully before responding. As a longtime political consultant, I can assure you that seasoned politicians have been briefed on every possible question and have prepared their answers well in advance. They’re using silence to create a specific effect.

Communication pros, such as salespeople, reporters and trial attorneys, all consider silence to be one of their most effective tools, as I explain in my book, “27 Powers of Persuasion.” Here are six ways silence can help you communicate, negotiate, mediate or persuade. And the power of silence works not only with colleagues but also with your friends and family.

Use silence to build consensus for your idea

If you’re presenting a plan to a group, chances are you already know what some of their objections might be. Rather than blurt out an instant response, take a page from the politician’s book. Listen. Pause for a moment. Then say, “That’s a good point. What if we handle it this way …” When others feel heard, they are much more likely to listen to you in return.

Use silence to get a better answer

Reporters never settle for the first answer they get from an interviewee. If you’re interviewing a potential hire, inquiring about a plan of action or otherwise trying to ascertain reliable information, let the person respond to your question, then wait. Don’t say anything. They will fill in the silence with a more complete answer. If you then murmur something vaguely encouraging — for instance, nod and say, “Hmmm” — they will dig even deeper. Many reporters believe that the third answer is the most revealing and valuable.

Use silence to gain advantage in an argument

When you’re having a disagreement, the natural tendency is to respond to an attack. Instead, nod and say nothing. Ninety percent of the time, the other person will moderate his or her own position.

Use silence to negotiate

Car salesmen do it all the time. You make an offer on a car. He frowns and says nothing. The silence builds. Finally, you can’t stand it any longer and say, “Maybe I could go a little higher.” You’ve just increased your own bid. In any negotiation, the first one to speak after an offer loses.

Use silence to regain control of a conversation

If someone else is dominating a discussion, wait until he or she is done, then pause for a few seconds before you say your piece. Silence always feels longer to the person who has just been speaking, so if you wait, a subtle advantage swings your way.

Use silence to buy time while appearing thoughtful

In the midst of a conversation, you may need a few seconds to think. When that happens, gaze down and take the time you need. Our research has shown that when people look downward, they are perceived to be thoughtful and intelligent. When they gaze upward, they look like they’re searching in the air for answers.

The other side of silence is knowing how to interpret it. In general, don’t assume that the silence is a bad sign and don’t take it personally. There could be many reasons why a room is quiet after your presentation. The audience could be confused or bored, but they could also be completely satisfied. When it happens to me, I like to say, “Judging from the silence, I must have covered this topic brilliantly.” The line always gets a laugh, and sometimes it’s even true.

Chris St. Hilaire is the author (with Lynette Padwa) of “27 Powers of Persuasion: Simple Strategies to Seduce Audiences and Win Allies” (Prentice Hall Press). He is an award-winning message strategist who has developed communications programs for some of the nation’s most powerful corporations, legal teams and politicians.

Don't Miss the Chance to Get Your Money Questions Answered by Finance Expert Dan Solin

Get your finance questions answered by expert Dan Solin, author of THE SMARTEST MONEY BOOK YOU’LL EVER READ. He’ll be hosting a live video chat on January 11 at 3 pm EST. All you have to do is like the Mint.com Facebook page to participate!

 

The Smartest Money Book You'll Ever Read is available now. 

 

One of the Evils of the Modern World

Posted by John Duff

I hadn’t meant for this first blog of 2012 to be about New Year resolutions but Art Markman’s interview with USA Today (for publication of his book, Smart Thinking), nudged me in that direction since it focused on one of my own issues, multitasking, that he calls “one of the evils of the modern world.”

It seems to me that many people in the publishing industry multitask by default. We aren’t unique, but we do juggle many different aspects of our jobs and have to respond to a stream of demands from different quarters simultaneously. The process of bringing an author’s work to fruition is not assembly line work in spite of the fact that we have, here at Penguin, what is called a “critical path” – a month-by-month timeline that details every aspect from acquisition and editing to production and distribution of a book.  But like all assembly-line processes, it doesn’t take much to turn it into an episode from “I Love Lucy.”

What Art so cogently and clearly presents in his book is an alternative. “Rather than multitask,” he continues, “I think we need to prioritize.” But the challenge for most of us is finding the discipline to set those priorities while maintaining the flexibility to respond to the unexpected. 

As Art sees it, multitasking prevents us from acquiring and using high quality knowledge to get things done. For instance, he says, “We go to meetings and we’re supposed to learn something from them…” but far too often we are either sneaking peeks at our e-mail during the meeting or whip out the smart phone when we are barely out of our seats. In the former case, we are simply not absorbing what we need to from what’s taking place in front of us and, in the latter, we are leaving what we remember about the meeting completely up to chance since our minds have become immediately focused on something else.

But rather than eschew multitasking completely – or even resolving to do so – I’ll take one piece of advice from Art and take just 90 seconds after a meeting to review (or note) the key points that I want and need to remember. I’ll try that for a week and see how it works. It may just become one of those beneficial habits that makes getting things done so much easier.

And next week I’ll turn off my Email Alert so I’m not distracted every time a new message arrives!

 

Art Markman's Smart Thinking is available now.

 

Bad Animals at Home for the Holidays

Posted by Linda Lombardi, author of Animals Behaving Badly

Reporting on the truth about our fellow creatures is a lonely job. Despite my best efforts to expose their bad habits and character flaws, they still seem to get nothing but good press. One day, yet another book about a puppy hits the best-seller list. The next, another cute animal photo goes viral. And last week, we had a story by the Associated Press about gift-buying plans for the holiday season.

The article contained the results of a poll revealing that pet owners have budgeted an average of $46 for gifts for their pets—more than the average $41 they reported spending last year. Yes, unemployment is at nine percent and governments everywhere are cutting basic services, but if you’re a dog or a cat, don’t worry. The odds are good that you’ll find even more in your Christmas stocking this year than last.

I admit that I’m as guilty of this sort of thing as anyone. My cats get hairball-medicine treats that cost as much per pound as Kobe beef. My pugs dine on kibble made of locally sourced free-range chicken and wild-caught fish, and go on vacation with me to nice hotels. They certainly do get Christmas presents, and homemade birthday cakes, too.

What have our pets done to deserve this kind of treatment? Sure, they’re cute and cuddly. But did you know that over 86,000 Americans end up in the emergency room each year because a pet caused them to fall? Or that pets start about a thousand house fires a year?

And you may believe that you’re doing all these nice things for your sweet furbabies of your own free will when, in fact, these creatures are manipulating us at a completely unconscious level. Those puppy-dog eyes trigger the same neurotransmitter involved in pair-bonding with your mate and maternal behavior toward your offspring. And cats use a special combination meow-purr to demand service that’s acoustically similar to the cry of a human infant, a sound that we’ve evolved over millennia to respond to without fail.

So let’s get a grip on ourselves, people. Times are tough. Spending going UP on presents for our pets makes no sense, because even leaving aside whether they deserve it, they’d be just as happy with stuff that costs nothing. Let your pet’s worst qualities work in your favor for a change. Cats, for instance, may be beautiful, but they’re no geniuses: Their tiny brains can get hours of entertainment out of an empty box or paper bag. Just give them what the human presents came in and their holiday fun is all set, at no extra cost.

And what will make this the Christmas your dog will always remember? Just think about whatever you’re constantly yelling at him for, and go with it. Let him dive into the kitchen trash, just this once. It’s free, and there’s nothing money can buy that he would enjoy more.

 

An Editor's FML

Posted by Marian Lizzi

I just had the pleasure of editing a very funny new manuscript based on the website FMyLife.com, which collects painfully honest snapshots of life's awkward, embarrassing, or otherwise disappointing little moments, submitted by readers around the world. If you haven't seen the site, I encourage you to check it out (and I hasten to mention that it's often a teensy bit NSFW.) (And if you don't know what NSFW means, then maybe it's best to just skip the whole thing.)

In the spirit of F My Life World Tour (coming from Perigee next June), I humbly present this list of FML entries from the point of view of a hypothetical book editor. That's right, they're composites—inspired by real moments experienced by me and some of my peers, but...edited a little.

With no further ado...

 

Today, a book that I turned down appeared on the bestseller list. For the fifth week in a row. FML

 

Today I read yet another proposal that misspelled the word foreword. It was a proposal for a writing guide. FML

 

Today one of my authors turned in his manuscript. He met the contracted delivery date—but doubled the word count. FML

 

Today I looked at some financial reports, and I was reminded that the profitability of my books often seems to be inversely proportional to the amount of time I spent editing them. FML

 

Today, I mentioned to a friend that I'm thinking of buying some new bookshelves. She replied, "I love bookshelves—but I never know what to put on them." FML

 

Today, I loaded seven proposals onto on my jump drive to read at home in the evening, in advance of our editorial meeting in the morning. Then I left it on my desk. Along with the key to my locked office. FML

 

Today I heard someone in the industry use the phrase “dead-tree editions.” Without being ironic. FML

 

Today we heard that an account was passing on one of our titles. The reason: “It has too many words.” FML

 

Today I turned down three collections of children’s poetry. We don’t publish children’s books. Or poetry. FML

 

Today, a major newspaper gave one of our books a rave review. And misspelled our imprint’s name. FML

 

 

I’d love to hear your publishing-related FMLs (I think…). Comment below, or email me at Marian.Lizzi@us.penguingroup.com. I’ll share the best ones (that aren’t NSFW, of course).

How to Get (Happily) Published

This  excerpt from an interview with Perigee publisher John Duff was originally  posted by Splash of Red in The Industry Interviews, Part III.

 
SoR: What are some common mistakes writers make that can put their manuscript in jeopardy of not getting published?

Duff: I could go on for days (hyperbole) on the topic of the most common, egregious, and silly (excessive use of adjectives) mistakes that writers might allow to creep into their manuscripts or proposals. However, the following appear in proposals and manuscripts often enough to raise red flags. While any one of these might not send the proposal to the recycle bin or cause us to cancel a contracted work, they are worth noting:

A lack of a coherent structure: It is particularly important in prescriptive non-fiction that there is a logical flow of information throughout the book. Many proposals that I have seen appear to have been cobbled together from random thoughts that the author has had about the subject matter.

Failure to understand the potential readership for which the book is intended: When I advise writers that I publish “popular” reference, that doesn’t mean that I am expecting to see copious footnotes and lots of $5 words. (Or, in the present economy, $25 words.)  While many authors may be experts in their particular fields, the largest potential readership is not their peer group. Nor am I in the business of publishing a thesis.  Most of the books that I publish need to have some practical application.  (Assuming that they aren’t intended as pure entertainment.)

The reliance on jargon: Because many of my authors are experts in a subject first and writers second there is a tendency for them to rely on the jargon of their trade, which is incomprehensible to the average reader. Worse, readers might assume that this jargon means one thing when, in fact, it actually means something completely different.

And finally, my pet peeve: Use of the incorrect version of “foreword.” I find it hard to get past “forward” when I see it in a table of contents even at the proposal stage. My instinct is to forward it to the recycle bin.  

(And, also, see the following question concerning grammar and spelling. )

 
SoR: How important is having impeccable grammar and spelling compared to having a really great story for a manuscript?

Duff: I am one of the worst offenders when it comes to correct spelling and grammar, although most of my errors arise from my poor typing skills and failure to proofread. However, the lack of attention to good grammar and proper spelling is an impediment for readers. If authors do not have at least a decent command of both grammar and spelling (and don’t bother to proofread their work) it sends a very strong, negative signal to me. To be fair, many of the authors with whom I work are experts in their fields and do not consider themselves to be “writers.” In most of these cases, the expert will engage a collaborator who will have the skills to convey the expert's ideas clearly – and with good grammar and spelling.

Editors do have their pet peeves. One of mine is using a noun, such as impact, as a verb. I will always change it in the manuscript. I have relaxed my position on many other transgressions – life is too short to worry about split infinitives or ending a sentence with a preposition.

Even in prescriptive non-fiction the “story” is important, but the telling of it can’t be obscured by a lack of clear prose that adheres, at least for the most part, to the rules of grammar and spelling.

That said, I will always give authors leeway for self-expression in order to maintain their particular “voice.” 

SoR: How much do you look at education or publishing credits when considering a manuscript for publication?

Duff: In the area of prescriptive non-fiction, the author’s credentials as an expert in his/her field are very important. While many excellent  works of non-fiction have been written by journalists or others who do not have PhD’s or MD’s or the equivalent, this is generally the exception. Readers (and the media) want to know that the author has the authority to speak on the subject.

Publishing credentials are quite another matter. An author’s track record can be critical. If the author’s  previous book has been successful, it makes it that much easier for the publisher to market the new book. And, of course, the opposite is true. Overcoming a bad track record is one of the most challenging things in my field of publishing.

If the author has not published previously, it is not necessarily a handicap. We will look to other factors to launch a book by a first timer. (I will point out the obvious here: many “authors” who publish in a specific category of non-fiction often only have one book in them. Subsequent books in the same subject area tend to be variations on the theme or become overly specialized.  We will often publish several books by the same author in his/her area of expertise but generally expect lower sales from book to book.) 

 

 SoR: While self-publishing has certainly helped the average writer get their work out there, what are the pros and cons versus seeking a publishing house?

Duff: While I am not convinced that self-publishing  has necessarily helped the average writer to “get their work out there” (it has, perhaps allowed them to print copies of their work or to upload it as an eBook), it is worth noting that a publishing house can provide the following:

• a critical eye and editorial expertise that will help authors not only improve their work editorially (with the input of the editor, copyeditor, etc.), but will help the author place their books in the context of what is already published in the field
• thousands of person hours of expertise in every aspect of the publishing process: editorial, design, packaging, selling, distribution, etc.
• an advance, however modest, provides the author with a level of validation (and sometimes freedom) to do their work and underscores the notion that the author does not have to pay for the services that the publisher provides as a matter of course (see above: “every aspect of the publishing process.”)
• a measure of credibility in the marketplace   

 

SoR: If everyone has a platform, what can authors do to set themselves apart?

Duff: Not everyone has a platform, which can be a problem, especially when trying to launch non-fiction. Many people are capable of writing excellent manuscripts, but publishers expect to get a publishable work as a matter of course. What publishers are often paying for is the “platform” that will allow us to reach the widest possible market for the book in the most expedient way. That platform can be as simple as the author being recognized as a top expert in his/her field. Authors may already have a built-in market from their lectures, workshops, training programs, etc. and can reach thousands of potential buyers with a few key strokes. Almost every author in the non-fiction field should have a website, blog, Twitter, or other social media set up that are maintained and promoted. If an author doesn’t know how to set these things up, they should find out now. (Even the savviest author who may be called upon by the media regularly still needs ongoing social media to support their profile.)

 

SoR: Is there a gender bias that goes with genres such as women writing about relationships and parenting and men writing about history and politics, i.e. do readers expect certain genders to be more knowledgeable about certain topics and if so, how does consumer perception like that affect the what you choose to publish?

Duff: For every instance where one could cite “gender bias” there will be another example of how that is negated. Men write prolifically about parenting, relationships, etc. (what one might call the “feminine” subjects, if one wanted to be subject to outrage from certain quarters) and women contribute outstanding works in history and politics (areas of traditional male domination). Even in the category of business (a rather broad term that comprises everything from self-improvement to management to financial subjects) I rather doubt that most editors would factor in the author’s sex when making a decision to publish or not. While I have taken into account an author’s sex when it comes to certain topics it is because I anticipate that readers may wish to hear the points of view of one sex or another on a particular topic.

SoR: When considering a manuscript for publication, how much of your opinion is subjective versus objective and do you consider what will sell over what is underrepresented?

Duff: All opinion is subjective to a degree. The decision to publish is based on (or subject to)  a number of factors: the quality of the work; the credibility (and profile) of the author; the perceived popularity (or otherwise) of the subject matter; the effect of current (and forthcoming) competition (to your point about what is underrepresented); timing; suitability for the respective publisher’s list; etc.  While I hesitate to use the word unique, it does have to apply to each proposal that I see. And so each has to be judged based on the criteria I’ve mentioned above – and many others.

Our goal is to publish books that will sell. Our expectations for sales in the short and long term may vary from book to book, which is often reflected in the advance. But if the books don’t sell, we’ll be out of business – and we will be incapable of contributing to the social capital, which may be considered our higher purpose if one wants to speak in the loftiest terms. I have been disappointed more often than I care to think about concerning the sales of  a book that I was, nevertheless, proud to publish. But when we are looking at the end-of-the-year financials, we expect to be very much on the positive side of the profitability line.
 

SoR: Contracts are commonly made more often than books are published, so how often are contracts broken, for what reasons, and what can an author do about that? 

Duff: To cancel a contract  is rare for me. In fact, to state that “contracts are commonly made more often than books are published” may not be accurate. (There are probably no readily available statistics to support this statement, however.)  The main reason for a contract to be terminated is for non-delivery, that is, the author fails to deliver or to deliver by the deadline.  Most publishers are fairly lenient with authors and will extend the delivery date if the author has shown good faith – and the book is not too time sensitive. If the publisher reorganizes, which is not uncommon these days, and takes a respective publishing program in a new direction, then cancellation may ensue. But this is one of many circumstances beyond the author’s control.

My advice: Deliver a “publishable” manuscript in accordance with the publisher’s  agreement and expectations—on time.

 

SoR: If you could give one essential piece of advice to writers out there, what would it be?

Duff: Don’t quit your day job.

 

About Splash of Red

In  their own words, Splash of Red is  “the literary arts experience. We publish/produce an eclectic variety of the highest quality work & creative projects and our openness has energized a revival in the educational aspect of our field. Our dedication against stagnation fuels our passion to develop the global contemporary literary arts community.”

Another Perk of Publishing Nonfiction: The Inside Track on Wine on a Budget

Posted by Jeanette Shaw

Sometimes I think wine should be the official beverage of the publishing industry. It’s certainly my first choice of drink at any work function or even just a quiet night of working at home. (To all my authors: don’t worry, I do edit your manuscripts with a clear head!) A nice bottle of wine can be an expensive habit, though. So I was definitely excited when we acquired Natalie MacLean’s new book Unquenchable: A Tipsy Quest for the World’s Best Bargain Wines. MacLean, an acclaimed sommelier and journalist, spends the book exploring the far corners of the globe for great, affordable wines and the colorful vintners who make them. Along the way she offers some useful advice for spotting a good bargain:

• Look for labels that have illegible gothic script and impossibly long names that are difficult to pronounce. Few people can read them, so they don’t buy the wines, and demand doesn’t push up prices.
• Check your perceptions about which regions can make wine. South Africa benefits from the confluence of the oceans as well as the cooling breeze of the Antarctic, creating ideal conditions for growing wine. So try a South African brand.
• Go for wines from regions where the currency gives you an advantage. Canadian and American dollars are much stronger than Argentina’s pesos, so that builds in another discount on the import cost.
• No longer does a screw cap necessarily mean that the wine is plonk. Many good producers are using this effective closure to protect their wine.

 

Some of my personal favorite wines at prices that will appeal to everyone:

Charles Smith Wines “Kung Fu Girl” Riesling Columbia Valley

http://www.charlessmithwines.com/wines.php

DMZ (De Morgenzon) Syrah (Shiraz) Stellenbosch South Africa

http://www.demorgenzon.com/wines_dmz03.html

Don Rodolfo Pinot Noir Argentina

http://www.donrodolfo.com/pinot_noir.htm

 

Natalie MacLean’s Unquenchable goes on sale in November.

 

Election Crystal-Ball Gazing

Posted by author Rosemarie Ostler

As the 2012 election cycle heats up, it’s popular to interpret the current election in terms of the past. One of the themes of my book Slinging Mud is that there’s nothing new in politics, so I’m not surprised that the politically astute think they spy familiar territory. But exactly which territory is it? Several contradictory narratives are currently making the rounds.

Many compare the continuing economic slump with the Great Depression of the 1930s. Elections during that time were all about the economy. But will 2012 have more in common with 1932 or 1936? Voters in 1932 blamed incumbent Herbert Hoover for their monetary woes and went heavily for relatively unknown newcomer Franklin Roosevelt. On the other hand, although the Depression still dragged on in 1936, Americans decided to give FDR another four years to sort things out.     

The elections of 1980 and 1996 are also invoked frequently. Again, these two stories had opposite endings. Which ending you predict for 2012 depends on which parallels you think are more significant. Some see a Jimmy Carter-like scenario, with a weak economy leading to a one-term presidency. Others remember that Bill Clinton won a second term easily, although Republicans had decisively captured the House only two years earlier, just as happened in 2010. Will the upcoming election see a backlash against incumbents, or did voters get that out of their system at the midterms, as they apparently did in 1994?   

An election that I haven’t yet heard mentioned, but that may turn out to be relevant, is 1972. That year the Democrats engaged in a brutal, protracted fight for the nomination. They eventually chose a candidate who excited the base, but went on to lose in a landslide to a not especially popular incumbent.

With the election a year away, it may be a while before we know which story we’re in, much less its likely ending. Still, crystal-ball gazing into the electoral past has its uses. Disaffected voters now clamoring for a third party might want to take a look back at the 1912 election. That’s when ex-president Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moosers not only lost by a wide margin, but siphoned off enough votes from their former Republican colleagues to take them down too. In American political history, third-party stories have always had the same ending so far—and it isn’t happy.

The Ones That Got Away: An Editor’s Lament

Posted by Marian Lizzi

Chat up any editor who’s been around longer than the Kindle Fire, and pretty quickly you’ll tap into a deep well of heartache and loss. I’m not talking about the 75-to-1 ratio of straight women to straight men in publishing (that’s for a different post). No, I’m referring to the submissions we loved but lost. They came into our lives, we fell hard for them, and in the time it takes to say “outbid,” “pre-empted,” or “my publisher just didn’t love it as much as I did,” they were gone. And what’s worse, they hooked up with someone else, without a second thought.

In some cases, it was love at first sight. Maybe we even made the first move – reaching out to a favorite blogger, magazine writer, celebrity, or expert. An agent came into the picture, and a proposal was put together. We were included in the submission, perhaps getting an early look or exclusive. It seemed we were headed for Happily Ever After, but then…something went wrong. We couldn’t make the numbers work. The in-house support wasn’t there. The auction (if there was one) got too heated. For one reason or another, we had to part ways.

Or maybe it was a multiple submission – perhaps written by an author we’d never even heard of before. We read. We laughed. Or cried. Or both. We got reads. We got excited. We imagined a bright future together. But then we didn’t prevail.

There are other variations, of course. Maybe we didn’t love the submission at all, and said no thank you right away. Maybe we thought it was a little sloppy. Or overhyped. Or just a teeny bit cookie-cutter. Maybe it just wasn’t our type. We parted ways, and no one got hurt. Until it went on to win a Pulitzer. Or hit the List at #7. Or outsell jeggings at the mall-store chain. Suddenly an old wound is reopened: Why do I let all the good ones go?

In publishing, as in life, you learn to pick yourself up and move on. The acquisitions game is all about finding the right match at the right time, and if we spent too long pondering what might have been, we’d be missing out on the new crop of possibilities – each one another chance to make magic together…or not.