What I Learned At Rutgers – Not the University, the Council on Children’s Literature

I attended the 42nd annual Rutgers Council on Children’s Literature this past weekend. It is a writers conference of high renowned and in that regard, did not disappoint.

Before we get into the words of wisdom and the what-editors-are-looking-for nuggets, let me say that I was happy to see three other children’s writers from the Capital District (yeah, us!) in attendance. Heather Schwartz (Women of the U.S. Air Force; The Foul, Filthy American Frontier), Victoria DeAngelis and Dan Masucci, all talented in their own right.

Rutgers One on One

My One on One was with Emma Ledbetter, assistant editor at Atheneum. We went over Leaping Lemmings for about 20 minutes or so. She provided several good ideas and seemed adept at working with writers, asking me for my input, etc. It was less a lecture or critique and more of a collaborative effort. We then talked about other projects I’m working on. She seemed most impressed with an middle grade I’m working on which is good, because starting that project was inspired by another editor at Atheneum. I’ll have to get back to that middle-grade manuscript very soon.

Rutgers Five on Five

Emma, of course, was also part of the five professionals in our five-on-five, in this case four editors and one author. Let’s hit the highlights of what they agreed on are industry trends.

• Mash-Ups. Everyone’s in love with mash-ups, you know, those books that take two archetypes and bring them together. Everyone was looking for the next Shark vs. Train (kids love sharks and trains. It’s a natural), or something similar to a new book from Atheneum, Zombies in Love (can be promoted on Halloween and Valentine’s Day).
• Crossovers. Something that can be sold in more than one genre, particularly with undiscovered adult appeal. A lot of YA has this (adults love dystopian almost as much as teen-agers), but so do some picture books, like It’s a Book. Also Zombies in Love. The book is shaped like a coffin for that reason, and filled with dating references and frustrations adults (zombie or otherwise) will get.
• Trends in Children's Literature. All the editors are looking 3-5 years out to figure out what the next big thing is. For instance, if three years ago you guessed food as this year’s hot topic for teens, you’re a big winner. I’m guessing if the economy doesn’t improve, food will continue to be big in three years. And so will starvation.
• Interactive Apps. No one seems to know exactly which way the e-book industry is headed, but it’s certainly going to continue to grow and print books will someday be a novelty item. With that in mind, editors are keeping an eye open for books that come with all sorts of bells and whistles to keep young readers entertained. Probably easiest for the board book, picture book, chapter book, and non-fiction markets, but all books can have pop-ups, links, maps, graphs, etc. Even dark, dystopian YA. After all, readers need to know their way around those mean streets, too.

Finally, I’d be remiss if I didn’t say a word about the day’s keynote speaker, Jon Scieszka. His speech was funny (as expected), but had its underlying serious side, first with Guys Read, an organization he began 10 years ago to encourage boys to find the books they enjoy. As he said, he read Dick and Jane in school, but home had the books he couldn’t put down. As boys fall further and further behind girls in school, particularly in reading, it’s an important message and important work.

But then he talked of rejection, a big topic at every conference, as publishing houses struggle to turn a profit and seem to sign fewer and fewer writers, or keep signings close to the vest. He discusses his own struggles in the late ‘80s, with plenty of rejections for The True Story of the 3 Little Pigs and The Stinky Cheese Man. He kidded the four or five dozen editors in the room with the pain of that time. At least it felt that way, because editors often made absurd suggestions about his submitted manuscripts. Called them “commercially unpublishable” (another buzzword at the conference. It came up at least twice, plus I heard it on Thursday from an agent). He told them they “need to get out more” and said, only half-jokingly, “you are the enemy.”

Can’t say I’d go that far, but I understand the sentiment, even if, for him, it’s coming 20 years later.

To sum up, while Rutgers didn’t turn out to be my best networking conference, it turned out to be the second-most instructive and the most business-oriented. I think I’ll apply next year. Maybe with that middle grade Emma seemed to like…