Why I Don't Illustrate Other People's Self-Published Books, or Work on Spec

About once a month I get a request by an individual to illustrate their self-published or print-on-demand book. They're very passionate about their project, but they don't tend to  know very much about publishing or the publishing industry, and don't have much knowledge about what goes into publishing and promoting a book. But this isn't the only reason.

Even if they're willing to pay, I typically won't take the job. Not from a family member, family friend or good acquaintance.

The reason is that most people don't know the process. They don't know how picture books are structured. They don't know how to work with an illustrator in a professional way. For the illustrator, this only results in grief, and the grief often outweighs the reward.

Typically, professional book publishers who match writers and artists for picture books do not encourage the collaborators to discuss the book with one another beforehand. Often notes from the author that suggest illustrations are eliminated from the manuscript. Editors work with writers,then work with art directors who work with illustrators. This hierarchy is in place for a reason. It works.

Illustration has its own vocabulary, and good art directors know how to speak an illustrator's language. They understand design, they understand how illustration serves a story. They know how illustration relates to story structure. Good art directors know their stuff.

People who don't have this experience, even some of the best authors of children's books, (with rare exceptions) don't tend to share this knowledge. It's a discipline of it's own. Many authors tend to have very specific images in their heads--and I sympathize, as an author, this is difficult to avoid--and the illustrator's vision is inevitably different.This is the nature of picture books. It's a true collaboration between author and illustrator. The illustrator does not simply execute the author's vision, but adds their own personality in equal measure to the book. The pictures tell half of the story.

 Working with a non-professional is an unpredictable proposition. You don't know how involved the writer wants to be in the process of creating the images, how little or how much they know about the process. You don't know what the ultimate design of the book is going to look like, whether it's going to be properly typeset, whether the printer they've chosen is going to do a professional job. And since the writer is new at this, the quality of the prose is often not as good as they think it is.

I take pride in the work I do, and I don't want to make a bad book. I don't want to endlessly negotiate with the writer about how they want the images to look when they don't know the mechanics of what makes an illustration work.

What if I've got this great project to pitch to a publisher. I can't pay, or pay much, but I'll give you half of the profits.

This is called "working on spec." "Spec" stands for speculation, the idea that maybe the project will be taken up and in that event the artist gets paid. This seldom works out.

First off: artists don't typically submit finished illustrated books to publishers.They submit what's called a "dummy" a mock-up of the book that generally includes two finished Illustrations and a cover, the rest roughed out, giving room for art direction and editing. But this is only if a writer/illustrator is submitting. For the reasons stated above, writer/illustrator teams are rarely considered.

Secondly: illustration takes a long time to do. It's work. Though there is some satisfaction and pleasure in the work, we don't do it because it's "fun." Many people enjoy their work, but that doesn't mean they want to do it for free.You don't ask your plumber to work on spec. You don't ask a retailer to give you their wares to see if their product is going to work out for you. Why would you ask an illustrator to do the same?

If you would like to learn more about how professional books are produced, I recommend joining The Society of Children's Book Writers and Illustrators and attending one of their seminars. The SCBWI is how I got my start. It's how I met my agent. You don't need to attend one of the big expensive national conferences. A local one will do just fine.

But I'd like to return to the subject of self-publishing, because I don't think it's a completely untenable option. Not everyone is interested in huge book sales. Some of us just want to make books for family and friends. I've had the same notion, and am considering doing a small number of self-published books myself. Not all books are commercial. Most of us aren't going to get rich.

If having a professional publication published is your goal, its the wrong goal. You should concentrate first on being a good writer. Unfortunately commercial success tends to be the focus of the SCBWI, but I don't think that was the intention or original design. It does the best it can to serve its members, and its members want to be commercially published. I just think that's not the best goal for most of them.

Which Doesn't Mean You Shouldn't Self Publish

I think self-publishing, especially now that it's so easy and at such a low cost, is a fantastic option for writers, and a great way to share your book. But first, make a good book, the best book you can, a book that you're proud of. If you want to commission professional illustration for your book and you're not an artist yourself, the key word is "professional." Being an illustrator is a profession, and professionals get paid for their work. If you're not going to seriously pursue a professional writing career and do the proper research, even if you intend to self-publish,  then realize that it's hard for a professional artist to consider you seriously as a professional writer.

 If you're serious about being a commercial self-publisher you you need to act like a real publisher.You need to do what commercial  publishers do. You need to actively promote your book, with purpose, and, preferably, with honesty.

 When someone's promoting their book, the first thing I look for as a consumer and professional is whether they care enough to acquire good design, both for the book and their website. Usually a generic photo cover means a print-on-demand hack job, unless it's really really well presented. And if it's a picture book, the quality of the illustration is a given--if it's amateur, it's obvious. If you've found an illustrator who feels the same way as you do about the book and does professional work--this will go leaps and bounds towards selling the book. But as I mentioned, this isn't any easier than promoting the book in the first place. If someones willing to illustrate your published book, you've got to pay, and pay well for good illustration.

And don't pretend that you're anything else but an individual who is passionate about their personal project. If I see that someone is trying to fool me into thinking that they're published by a commercial publisher, if they've invented an imprint and their not upfront about the fact that they're self-publishing, it's an instant no-confidence. It suggests to me that they feel like they have to hide that they're a self publisher, which to me means that they're ashamed of the fact. Don't try to hide it. Embrace it. This reflects your passion and pride in your product. If you want people to take you seriously as a writer and self-publisher, act like you mean it. If you're describing on your website a book you've published yourself and are doing a follow up, describe it as "My self-published book."

Back cover quotes, especially on a self published book are risky. Some people are just being nice, and in the case that they are, it's a little embarrassing, especially when the quality isn't there to back it up. Maybe if a well known author believes in your project enough to write a real introduction it would make sense, but I'd be careful about soliciting back cover quotes.And NEVER quote without permission from a private e-mail or snail mail. The purpose of a private correspondence is NOT to promote your book, and you could easily get on the bad side of the person you're using to endorse it, which is neither a good personal or professional move.

But more than anything else, DO YOUR HOMEWORK. Professional self-publishing is a business. If you don't consider it one, then it doesn't have to be, but if you're in it to sell as many books as you can, you've got to act like one.

Sometimes, you just want a book you can hold in your hands, something you wrote, and there's nothing wrong with that at all. It's an accomplishment to write a book, and pride in that accomplishment is justified. But try to be conscious of what your real intentions are and act accordingly. If you' don't you're going to be disappointed, or worse, spend money that you can't afford to spend. Be sensible. Be clear about your goals, and if its important to you, strive for excellence.

Why you haven't been seeing much of me

I have a chronic illness that is being effectively treated with drugs. At present I'm making a drug transition. This means withdrawing from one drug and going onto another, assessing whether the new drug is effective, and if the new drug doesn't work out (which seems to be the case) trying another drug combination and starting the business allover again. It's an exhausting and prolonged process, but it's not one I haven't gone through before, and it will ultimately works itself out. In the meantime, the unfortunate result is flu-like symptoms, with limited periods of lucidity.

So the situation has largely put me out of action, and my productivity is at a real low point. This post, for example,  was written in fits and starts over the course of two days.This has not been fun, but there is an end in sight. So no need for condolences, I'm OK, but I just wanted to let everyone know that I haven't been lazy, just ill. I spend most of the day watching bad TV on Netflix, since I don't have the cognitive or physical stamina to do much else. I will say that The Vampire Diaries isn't actually that bad, but then, maybe when this is all over I might think differently. It's hard to say. It's about as much as I can handle at the moment.

Why Do Picture Books Have Fewer Words? Or: The Death of the Storybook

The current word count for picture books these days is anywhere from 500 to 800 words. It was once common for picture books, and their longer companions, storybooks, to be 2000 or even 5000 words. This trend is not because kids are less sophisticated. It's not because kids have shorter attention spans. The problem is that adults have forgotten the purpose of picture books.

We used to have picture books, fully illustrated storybooks, and everything in between. Now by the time kids are in 1st grade they're supposed to abandon picture books altogether. Adults are pushing their kids to read chapter books as soon as they are able. There's no transition point. It's parents at the advice of educators who are doing this, and the picture book market is responding in kind.


We're in a time when preteens and teenagers read more than they used to. The quality of the books vary, but YA fiction is more popular than ever. When we were kids, you didn't see an 8 year old read a giant 1000 page Harry Potter book. No one would have thought to write a book that size for a kid. No one would dare try to market it. Sure, there were kids who read at a higher reading level who were encouraged to read adult fiction, but there was less literature written for them. Now that's changed.

This trend with picture books is a direct result of the popularity of the YA market. Parents want their kids to be "advanced readers." So the picture books are written for a younger audience because kids are encouraged to leave behind picture books at an earlier age. The problem is that this transition point is critical. If kids are forced to jump right into chapter books before they're ready, you risk crushing their enthusiasm for books in general. If reading becomes an intimidating chore, there goes their love of reading.

So what's the difference between a 3000 word chapter book and a 3000 word Storybook? Pictures. Big, full color, sprawling beautiful pictures for the eye to explore. A few black and white illustrations in a chapter book just doesn't do the same job. That doesn't mean that illustrated chapter books are inferior to storybooks, they're just a different form. But it's not a mystery why a young child will be more attracted to a full color, beautifully illustrated book. It's not because of television or video games. It's for the same reason you and I loved them when we were kids. Kids immediately connect with images, and Images are a significant part of how they explore their world. It's part of what makes you a kid.

The bottom line is: let kids choose their own books. If the book is below the reading level you think they're supposed to be, but they love the book, let them make that choice and respect their tastes. The more they're enthusiastic about reading, the more they'll read, and the more they read, the more they'll be naturally drawn to more sophisticated material. There's no need to force this. All you need to do is encourage your child to read, period.

A Great Book Will Always Remain a Great Book: Why Your Kid Will Never Outgrow Picture Books

Your Early Reader Needs Picture Books, Even if You Think They've Outgrown Them


There is an increasing trend to get kids into reading chapter books as early as possible. The publishing industry has responded to this trend by making picture books less sophisticated and with fewer words than they had in the past. I think this is a mistake. Picture books are a pivotal and significant part of a kid's growth and development as a reader. Kids need to be able to read picture books as long as they have a desire to. 


I recently came across a post on a blog called the "Homeschool Classroom" that discussed this issue, expressing that their child, at four, had reached a "reading wall." Here's the original post.


And here's a slightly edited version of my response:

Your boy is four years old. Picture books are OK. I repeat: picture books are OK. There are plenty of challenging picture books for even the most advanced reader. Try William Steig. Try William Joyce. Or Chris Van Allsberg. Yes, there are less words per page. But you'd be surprised--the vocabulary is not necessarily less sophisticated. The stories are often challenging and engaging. Compelling an early reader to read books he's not that interested in is not going to make them a better reader in the future. Let him choose his own books, even if they are what you consider to be below his reading level. Picture books are a very important and critical part of a kids early development as a reader. At four he needs picture books.

There are also some very excellent lavishly illustrated storybooks in the slimmer, picture book format. And no matter what the age level, I don't think it helps to make reading a compulsory act. Give him books that he likes and he will seek them out. Read him books that are maybe a little more sophisticated but that engage him--books that he may not be able to read on his own but that he can enjoy, like Doctor Dolittle or Peter Pan. These are nighttime reading. Bedtime stories. And read him his favorites--even if they're below his reading level--over and over again if that's what he wants. That's how you change a reluctant reader into an enthusiastic one!


I Missed My Picture Books


When I was eight years old, I moved from my home in Pennsylvania to California with my mother and brother. And I left behind my picture books. I had a wonderful collection of some of fantastic picture books, Babar, Maurice Sendak, Steig, classic fairytales illustrated by Dulac and some of the great illustrators of the past. At eight, I saw these as "baby books" and my mother asked if it was OK for my grandmother to sell them. I would get to keep the money. She sold the lot for $50, and my mother started a bank account for me. At the time, I thought this was a great idea. It wasn't long before I figured out what I'd done.


We no longer had any books in my house that I wanted to read. We had my older brother's Beverly Cleary and Judy Bloom books. I tried to read Ramona the Great which was supposed to be written for my age group, but I found it totally unsatisfying. I had always considered myself an enthusiastic reader, prided myself on my interest in reading, but there was nothing I wanted to read. Then I discovered comic books.


Comic books were picture books that I could buy myself. I could seek them out on my own, and buy them with my own money. At the time, the only thing I checked out from the library were hardbound collections of comics, like The Smithsonian Collection of Newspaper Comics and Origins of Marvel Comics and Flash Gordon. My parents thought: at least I was reading, but I think these comics were as sophisticated as any chapter book or young adult book. You see: when I was a kid, I liked fantasy, but there wasn't a Harry Potter. We had Roald Dahl, and later I'd discover Daniel Pinkwater, and John Dennis Fitzgerald's The Great Brain (not fantasy, but no less a great series). I loved a Wrinkle in Time, but didn't read it till much later. But we simply didn't have the wealth of young adult books, of truly engaging young adult books that we have now. Yes, there are too many vampire books, and the fantasy genre dominates, but they are books that kids want to read. And there are so many that are well written, and that have compelling characters, and that go so far beyond the The Hardy Boys and The Babysitter's Club in the sophistication of their content. But there has to be a transition point. Even when a kid's reading level is high enough for them to read a chapter book, or  even a young adult book, picture books can still be important. 


A Great Book Will Always Remain a Great Book


Maybe I was supposed to be too old for picture books, but I never stopped loving them. And I'm positive that even at eight, or nine, or even older, I would have still read them over and over, even if they were "baby books." These were, and remain important books for me. A great book is a great book, and if it's a truly great book, no matter how few words it has, no matter what age it was intended for, it should continue to be a great book, and kids shouldn't be compelled to abandon them. 

More About Being an Illustrator in an Increasingly Digital World

This is an elaboration on some comments I made on  a discussion started by Leif Peng on Google+.


The most successful illustrators of the turn of the century--and I guess I should specify the 20th century at this point--were magazine illustrators. There was a golden age of print media at the turn of the century with the rise of the automated four-color press. There was a high demand for color pictures, and since there was no color photography, illustration was the only way to go.  Periodicals were a cheap, current form of entertainment, and even during the depression, everyone still read newspapers and magazines. This golden age began to decline  some time in the fifties, with the rise of TV and color photography, and now, finally, we're seeing the internet overtake most periodical print media, like magazines and newspapers. 


So what are illustrators supposed to do now?  Now we're told: make digital media. Learn to animate. Learn to storyboard. Learn to provide content for video games and movies. New media will replace old media. But I think this is approaching the problem from the wrong direction.


First, I don't think traditional illustration is going to disappear entirely. Though digital media may largely replace old media, I don't think it's going to entirely replace the inanimate illustrated book or story. You may replace the mode of presentation and distribution--it may be on an Ipad or Kindle, but the form itself will endure. An animated or interactive Cat In the Hat isn't going to be able to replace the simple experience of reading the book. It's still a unique experience that people value. Otherwise it would have happened already--Chuck Jones did a great animated version of The Cat in the Hat in the 70s (available on DVD and Blue Ray!), there's that awful Mike Meyers movie, there are video games, interactive toys, but kids keep wanting to read the dead tree version for some reason.


But still, digital media continues to grow as a popular form. You can't stick your head in the sand. So I do think Illustrators can benefit from being involved in more aspects of media production, but it's not the form of media that you work in that's going to make you a success. Illustrators need to be storytellers first, rather than simply picture makers. That doesn't mean they have to learn to animate, so much as learn to tell stories structurally and visually in a complete way. Rather than ornament someone else's story, they need to learn to tell their own. The more complete their unique vision is, the more invaluable they become. Artists who have spread themselves over the greatest variety of media have done so because their vision and ability to tell stories is what's compelling, not their aptitude for working in different media. Flexibility is important, but have a vision, first.


Illustration by Boris Arzybasheff

Now on Picture-book.com!

I just put my stuff up on the children's illustration directory site, picture-book.com!