Do books ever get rejected for being too smart?

I doubt a book is rejected as "too smart." Note this isn't coming from a crotch-scratching, overall-wearing hillbilly, I am a crotch-scratching denim-wearing PhD biologist. That said, "too smart" is bullshit. Stephen Hawkins wrote a fucking best-seller.

There ARE books written too dense, with too many asides and info-dumps, etc. to match their target audience, and there are plenty of them. But saying they were "too smart" is inaccurate, just as saying a $200K rocket-car was rejected for being "too efficient." If you fail to match your market (or the publisher's idea of it) you can be rejected, but that isn't a matter of "too smart" so much as not meeting certain genre standards, etc......you write Harlequin Romance or pulp horror with an advanced English college-level reading level, you'll alienate a shit-ton of your audience. Because they don't have that reading level. But I would say if anything that isn't you writing too smart, it is an author writing too dumb--write what you feel compelled to write, but if you simply won't match your market, that isn't too smart at all.

You can write beyond your market, but that seems to be an issue on the author, failing to meet their market, so I have difficulty calling that "too smart".....it would be your fuckup for making something your target audience does not want, and the bottom line is this: written work, if you intend to chase commercial success, IS a commodity--you either provide what the customer wants, or you do not, but to lament the customer not buying what you have if it isn't what they're looking for is silly at best, no matter if you're selling shoes or lobster or thrillers.

I'm sure they do. By writing a book that requires a high reading comprehension level, you're cutting a whole lot of people out of your audience. And this isn't just people who can't understand the "smart" book. There are many highly intelligent people who choose to read books that aren't quite as "smart" because they're challenged intellectually in other ways.

Agents and publishers have to make decisions based on what they think will sell. If they think your book lends itself to a small audience, they might seek out something that's more accessible for the average reader.

When I interned at a publishing house, there was a particular book which one of the editors was very passionate about. He'd talk about how smart it was, how deep and insightful etc. He asked the other editors in the house to read it too, to get support before taking it to acquisitions, but ultimately, not enough people fell in love with it and marketing said no. Their complaint was that the subject matter was too narrow for it to be profitable for them to publish. They also said that the book was written in such a way that it would just go over most people's heads.

I don't think the book was "too smart" to be published. I don't think "too smart" would be the appropriate way to describe it. "Too smart" implies that your audience is too stupid to get it, that the book is somehow too good for the general public. It's an umbrella term that doesn't do justice to the context. In that particular instance, the book was "smart", but it was also written in a not-very-accessible way and focused on too narrow a subject matter to appeal to a large enough audience. Unfortunately for the author, that means it's hard for the publisher to justify sinking money into something they're not confident would earn them a profit.

So I don't think being profound is a problem. Being profound in a way which alienates your reader...THAT's a problem.

I'm sure some books -- perhaps lots of books -- get rejected for incoherence.

Too smart? As in thought provoking? Probably not, though some genres are supposed to be lighter and less serious than others.

There are plenty of very deep, thought provoking novels out there, and some become bestsellers. But if a highbrow novel is written in such a way that it doesn't come across as an interesting story about interesting people doing interesting things, then it might have trouble finding a market.

And non fiction has to be accessible too. If you've written a book about, say, evolution, and the only people who can understand it are people with doctorates in biology (weirdos like me and Quicklime who can say words like "organism" without embarrassment), you won't have a very large audience. But if the book discusses complex biological concepts in a way that can reach people without such a specialized background (like Stephen Jay Gould used to do or Neil Shubin did more recently), then it might sell very well.

Smart writing with thought provoking themes does not mean writing unnecessarily long, convoluted sentences or using large words just for the sake of using large words.

Literary fiction tends to not sell very well compared to genre fiction, but it wins more lucrative awards and can have more dependable backlist sales, at least for the more lauded books.

So literary fiction could fit your definition for books that are "too smart" for the majority of book buyers. However, it still gets published and those books make money.

It's absolutely possible that a book could be so cerebral that its market would be too tiny for a publisher to make a profit in, and they would choose not to publish that book. However, that's the same reason why they don't publish utterly stupid books -- there's not a big enough market for utterly stupid books.

I think this is probably an issue mainly if the book doesn't seem like it's written in such a way that it would be comprehensible or enjoyable for the intended audience. Books can be profound or intelligent in multiple ways. Ideas can be expressed in multiple ways. Making a book accessible for the target audience doesn't have to mean dumbing it down, I don't think.

For example, I have not actually read it, personally, but my understanding is that The Giver deals with some pretty major themes of freedom of though and good vs. evil. And it's a book intended for MG/YA audiences.

As has been said upthread, you have to find the right market. Umberto Eco gets published - but not as a category romance writer. Every genre seems to have its threshold of difficulty, beyond which a majority of its readers just don't want to tread.

It's not a matter of 'too smart' or 'too stupid', either.

I think this comes under things writers probably shouldn't worry about. A kind agent might recommend the author try another agent who specialized in literary fiction.

I'm thinking such a book, assuming it is of high quality only gets turned down if the author isn't "smart" enough to do their research on who buys the kind of book they've written.

Night_Writer said:

Yes, that's what I meant. The kind of book I had in mind (I was thinking primarily of fiction) was the type that makes people think, that makes them use their brain muscles. Does the pub industry feel that enough people are willing to do the thinking work, or do they feel that readers would rather just sit back and be entertained with something light?

Click to expand...

Part of 'being smart' is being able to communicate that insight effectively. Feinman was particularly good at making very complex/interesting things accessible to non-experts.

I would say the problem is not a book is 'too smart', but that it's not smart enough to make that insight interesting/relevant/accessible to people not already hooked…ie a general audience, not a maddeningly academic one.

Night_Writer said:

Yes, that's what I meant. The kind of book I had in mind (I was thinking primarily of fiction) was the type that makes people think, that makes them use their brain muscles. Does the pub industry feel that enough people are willing to do the thinking work, or do they feel that readers would rather just sit back and be entertained with something light?

The light stuff no doubt makes more money, at least in the short run. So I was concerned that the thought-provoking novels could get passed over for light, entertainment fiction. That's my question. And my fear.

Click to expand...

There are two types of readers - those who want light entertainment and those who want thought-provoking depth. Amazingly, they often share the same body...

Night_Writer said:

Somehow I doubt that I'd ever have this problem myself, but I was wondering about it anyway. Do agents and publishers ever turn down books because they are afraid that these books might go over the heads of the audience? Do novels show up that are so packed with profound philosophy and perceptive statements on the human condition that it actually turns off the pros in the publishing world? Would they be afraid of not being able to sell such books? I guess what this boils down to is, Does the publishing industry ever underestimate the audience?


It would be a shame if books were turned down for this reason, because books are supposed to be THE place for smart stuff.

Click to expand...

Novels are supposed to be about good story and good characters. This doesn't mean they can't be "smart". A great many are, but story and character sell books.

My experience is also that a manuscript the writer thinks is packed with profound philosophy and perceptive statements is probably packed with preaching and clichéd statements that make editors roll their eyes and look for a better book. No one wants preached at, and while truly perceptive statements are good, and sought after, they're also incredibly rare.

The publishing industry does not underestimate readers intelligence, but too many writers certainly overestimate their own.

At any rate, agents and editors turn down novels because they have poor story and poor characters. A novel always need great story and great characters. If it has these, it will sell. If it doesn't have these, it shouldn't sell. If all you want is smart, go grab a philosophy book. . .which may also contain zero wisdom, and very few signs of intelligence.

Night_Writer said:

Yes, that's what I meant. The kind of book I had in mind (I was thinking primarily of fiction) was the type that makes people think, that makes them use their brain muscles. Does the pub industry feel that enough people are willing to do the thinking work, or do they feel that readers would rather just sit back and be entertained with something light?

The light stuff no doubt makes more money, at least in the short run. So I was concerned that the thought-provoking novels could get passed over for light, entertainment fiction. That's my question. And my fear.

Click to expand...

There are tons of thought-provoking novels, and some of them even become best-sellers.

I'd tend to be a bit cynical about someone who thinks their novel isn't getting published because it's "too smart."

Jamesaritchie said:

My experience is also that a manuscript the writer thinks is packed with profound philosophy and perceptive statements is probably packed with preaching and clichéd statements that make editors roll their eyes and look for a better book. No one wants preached at, and while truly perceptive statements are good, and sought after, they're also incredibly rare.

The publishing industry does not underestimate readers intelligence, but too many writers certainly overestimate their own.

Click to expand...

Ha! You just described my MFA program. I agree with your assessment!

I think a cultist of Cthulhu once tried to get a book packed with that level of profound truth published. A few interns were lost to insanity, but a team of savvy editors recognized what was going down and was able to stop the madness from spreading further.

Thank gods for gatekeepers.

Night_Writer said:

Yes, that's what I meant. The kind of book I had in mind (I was thinking primarily of fiction) was the type that makes people think, that makes them use their brain muscles. Does the pub industry feel that enough people are willing to do the thinking work, or do they feel that readers would rather just sit back and be entertained with something light?

The light stuff no doubt makes more money, at least in the short run. So I was concerned that the thought-provoking novels could get passed over for light, entertainment fiction. That's my question. And my fear.

Click to expand...

With the bolded...the publishing house I interned at published about 10 books a year. 2 out of those 10 would be "big" books, as in the ones they'd give huge advances for and work their asses off to market. Out of those 2, one would be a very commercial, highly entertaining book, and the other would be a thought-provoking one (what the editor described as "the prize-winning one"). So to answer your question, I think publishers definitely feel that thought-provoking books are lucrative, how else would you explain the number of thought-provoking books out there?

Chances are, your book isn't too smart to be published. I have interned for a publisher, I have interned for an agent, and out of the dozens of MSs I have seen go through their offices, not one has been rejected for being "too smart". Some have been rejected for "trying to be too smart", some have been rejected for having a condescending tone, and more have been rejected for having writing so verbose it alienates many readers. So be as profound as you want, but remember too that getting your meaning across is on you. Thoughts like "Oh dear, my book might be too smart for everyone because they'd obviously much rather binge on trash" are not only untrue, they're probably really self-defeating. It's basically just another excuse to keep yourself from working on what actually is keeping your book from being publishable.

Putputt said:

With the bolded...the publishing house I interned at published about 10 books a year. . .

Click to expand...

Just have to jump here real quick to thank you, Putster, for sharing your experiences/what you've learned. You do that all the time. I know you've helped a lot of people, me included. Thank you so, so much for doing that.

<3

And now, back to your originally scheduled programming.

I'm sure some rejections have said a book was "too smart" but I suspect the reason would be more correctly stated as being "too pretentious."

The only person I could imagine attributing a rejection to the writing being "too smart" is a writer with a big ego and hurt feelings. "They just don't appreciate my genius. Obviously the work went right over their heads."

It's sort of like when I was bullied as a child and my mother tried to comfort me by insisting that the bullies were "just jealous" of my brains and/or beauty (yeah right, Mom).

I think a "smart" book is more likely to be rejected if it fails to deal with the "smart" bits in a compelling manner.

jjdebenedictis said:

Literary fiction tends to not sell very well compared to genre fiction, but it wins more lucrative awards and can have more dependable backlist sales, at least for the more lauded books.

So literary fiction could fit your definition for books that are "too smart" for the majority of book buyers. However, it still gets published and those books make money.

It's absolutely possible that a book could be so cerebral that its market would be too tiny for a publisher to make a profit in, and they would choose not to publish that book. However, that's the same reason why they don't publish utterly stupid books -- there's not a big enough market for utterly stupid books.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's fair to say literary fiction doesn't sell as well as genre fiction. That is simply not true. If it were, many books would not continue to have additional print runs and additions. There will always be a marketplace for literary fiction. Also, these books are not necessarily too smart. Even dense books about literary theory continue to sell and be published by mainstream publishers.

Night_Writer said:

Yes, that's what I meant. The kind of book I had in mind (I was thinking primarily of fiction) was the type that makes people think, that makes them use their brain muscles. Does the pub industry feel that enough people are willing to do the thinking work, or do they feel that readers would rather just sit back and be entertained with something light?

The light stuff no doubt makes more money, at least in the short run. So I was concerned that the thought-provoking novels could get passed over for light, entertainment fiction. That's my question. And my fear.

Click to expand...

Are you reading the kind of books you want to write and publish? You should be. It is important to know what is out there that is similar to what you are trying to do.

I think I am still confused about exactly what you are trying to do because there are many, many smart books that sell. I don't see why a "smart" book would be passed over if it is good. But your question does raise questions for me about your reading habits. I'm not saying anything is wrong with reading lighter stories, but you should be reading books like the ones you want to publish. If you can't find such books, you are either not looking in the right places or, perhaps, what you want to do might be harder to sell.

I think you are being smart to look into this. It's not a bad thing at all to try and figure out how marketable your book will be, but don't get discouraged by thinking something you do may be "too smart" (still not quite sure what you mean exactly) because I know my own reading taste probably could fall into this category. People do like smart books.

Amadan said:

There are tons of thought-provoking novels, and some of them even become best-sellers.

I'd tend to be a bit cynical about someone who thinks their novel isn't getting published because it's "too smart."

Click to expand...

Good point. I write literary fiction, but I would never think it is "too smart" to be published. When I think about books that are labeled "too smart" it makes me think of Balzac. And he published and made a great contribution to literature.