August 11, 2025 • 41 mins
Landing a publishing deal often feels like an impossible dream for aspiring authors. What makes one manuscript stand out among thousands? How can you ensure your pitch letter doesn't end up in the rejection pile? In this revealing conversation, former book editor Jason Kuznicki pulls back the curtain on what really happens when editors evaluate submissions.
Drawing from his experience reviewing hundreds of pitch letters at the Cato Institute, Jason dispels common myths about the publishing process. Contrary to what many writers believe, editors aren't looking for authors who can dazzle them with vocabulary or obscure references. Instead, they seek writers who can communicate clearly and connect with readers. "Can you talk about your book like a real person?" Jason asks, identifying this simple quality as the most crucial element of a successful pitch.
The conversation explores the surprising reality that pitch letters serve multiple purposes beyond securing a publishing contract. They help authors clarify their thinking, provide a compass for the writing process, and ultimately become valuable marketing copy. This makes crafting a pitch letter valuable even for those planning to self-publish. Jason shares practical advice on structuring these letters, emphasizing brevity (just a couple of pages), clarity about your book's core argument or story, and the importance of identifying comparable titles.
Perhaps most refreshingly, Jason reframes the author-editor relationship. Rather than viewing editors as gatekeepers or adversaries, he suggests seeing them as potential teammates who want your book to succeed. The best pitch letters demonstrate you understand not just your subject matter, but how to talk about it engagingly with different audiences—a skill that proves invaluable throughout the publishing journey.
Want to transform your publishing prospects? Join our workshop on August 21st to learn how to craft pitch letters that open doors and set your work up for success. Whether you're writing fiction or non-fiction, this episode provides the insider knowledge you need to approach publishers with confidence.
We're excited to announce the launch of our new website: 12weekyearforwriters.com
To celebrate, you can join the 12 Week Year Writers membership for 50% off the first three months.
ABOUT TREVOR THRALL & THE 12 WEEK YEAR FOR WRITERS
- Subscribe to get our free Quick Start Guide at 12weekyearforwriters.com
- Join our community at 12weekyearforwriters.com/membership
- Register for a live workshop at 12weekyearforwriters.com/events
- Connect with Trevor on Linked In
My team and I help writers get their writing done. If you're stuck, it's not a knowledge problem. It's not a skill issue. And it's not a motivation or willpower thing. You know what you need to do and how to do it. The problem is consistent execution: getting the writing done week in and week out.
With the 12 Week Year for Writers system, you'll create a routine that helps you write more, and more happily, than ever before.
Thanks for listening!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Trevor Thrall (00:01):
Welcome to the 12-Week Year for Writers podcast
.
I'm Trevor Thrall.
Today I am joined by former andpresent colleague, jason
Kuznicki, an editor and awriting coach with a lot of
experience reading hundreds andhundreds of pitch letters.
If you've ever wondered what ittakes to land a publishing deal
(00:22):
, this is the episode for you.
Hey, jason, welcome to thepodcast.
(00:44):
It's great to have you on forthe first time.
Thanks, it's good to be here.
Yeah, fantastic, jason Pusnickiis with me.
He's one of the writing coachesat the 12-Week Year for Writers
and today we are talking abouthow to write a pitch letter.
But before we do any of that,jason, since it's your first
time on the pod, why don't youtell people who you are, what
(01:05):
kind of writing you've done andwhy it is that you know so much
about pitch letters?
Jason Kuznicki (01:10):
So Trevor and I are former colleagues at the
Cato Institute where I was forquite a few years the book
editor and in that capacity Igot lots of pitch letters.
But I've also been an author.
I've successfully written andpublished a book with an
(01:33):
academic press books and authorsin my career and have gotten a
lot of pitch letters, mostly innonfiction public policy work.
But a lot of the lessons fromthere I think are also
(01:54):
applicable in fiction and carryover Fantastic.
Trevor Thrall (01:59):
Well, we should probably start, you know, for
those who are the aspiringauthors set in our listing
audience.
Let's just start by explainingthe most basic thing, which is
what is a pitch letter?
Jason Kuznicki (02:14):
A pitch letter is a letter that you write to an
editor who's in charge ofacquisitions at a publisher.
Who's in charge of acquisitionsat a publisher?
Now, that might be the editorthat you work with for copy
editing or line edits in time,or it may not be that Many
larger publishing houses willhave specialized editors just
(02:37):
for acquisitions.
Either way, the pitch lettergoes to an editor and it either
accompanies your finishedmanuscript, if you have it, or
it says what you're working onand what you intend to deliver.
It can be either one of those,but I think really, the uh,
important points are just thesame in either case.
(02:58):
Whether you finish the book ornot, and and so everything I'm
going to talk about here, it'sgoing to stand either way,
absolutely, absolutely.
Trevor Thrall (03:07):
And I have.
I've had clients who, beforeeven pitching to a publisher,
use their pitch letter to landan agent in the first place who
would then take the pitch letterto publishers.
Jason Kuznicki (03:19):
So yes, yes, and , and that's also, that's also a
valid step of the process.
It often happens that way.
Yes, absolutely.
Trevor Thrall (03:28):
So that makes it pretty clear what its general
role is.
But as someone who's been onthe inside as the editor, making
the decisions about which ofthese things to publish and move
forward with and which not, whyis a pitch letter important?
Jason Kuznicki (03:47):
It's important because when I'm reading it as
an editor, I'm trying to figureout several things, and the very
first one is is this book agood fit for our mission as a
publisher?
Does it fit in well with thetypes of things that we publish?
(04:08):
And I want you to be able totell me that you have a good
idea of what your book is about.
And I will be looking at thatidea of what your book is about
and trying to fit it into thepublishing world that I inhabit,
and I'll be trying to determine, from from what you tell me,
(04:29):
whether this is going to be agood opportunity for us both.
Trevor Thrall (04:34):
Yeah, yep.
So you know, I think a lot ofauthors, myself included, really
kind of wonder the extent towhich let's put it this way it's
easy to wonder if the pitchletter matters at all from the
outside, because so many peoplejust get rejection after
(04:58):
rejection, after rejection, evenif they have a great book.
And then you find out thepeople that do get published
already know the editor or havea publishing.
Jason Kuznicki (05:10):
you know they know someone who knows,
sometimes yeah, sometimes itworks that way.
Trevor Thrall (05:15):
So we know, we know that can be how people get
published, of course, but but?
But what you're saying is thatit's the quality of the letter
does matter.
It's because they don't know,they haven't seen your book yet,
so you're relying on thatletter to decide if you're even
going to look at the book at all?
Jason Kuznicki (05:34):
Yes, yes, it absolutely matters, and the very
first thing that an authorshould do before writing a pitch
letter is to research theintended recipient.
I don't mean the editor inparticular, I mean the
publishing house.
Is this the type of thing thatthis publishing house would do?
(05:54):
So when I was in charge of CatoBooks, if someone were to send
me a cookbook or a book ofpoetry or you know, a book of
fiction, a novel, you knowthat's not what they do there at
all, and so if they write aclear, coherent pitch letter for
(06:17):
it, that makes it real easy forme.
That's five minutes of work forme.
I say no, this is obviously notthe type of thing that we do.
Maybe it's really good cookbook, but it's not what we publish.
And I can write right now writeback a standard form letter
response and tell them to moveon.
But if they had done a bit moreresearch, they might have found
(06:40):
a publisher where this wouldhave been of much, much more
interest.
So one way to avoid rejectionletters is to know where you
ought to be heading in the firstplace.
Trevor Thrall (06:49):
I know, yeah, we'll talk about what goes into
a good one in a minute, but howmany letters would you get at
Cato back in the day.
Jason Kuznicki (06:59):
Oh wow, Dozens and dozens and dozens.
Trevor Thrall (07:08):
So many of them.
And yeah, what was thepercentage of books that you
published to letters you got?
Jason Kuznicki (07:15):
Less than 1%, I would say.
Trevor Thrall (07:18):
It's just for a little reality.
Check out there.
Right, it's a bit of a roulettewheel getting published and you
have it's.
To some degree it can be anumbers game, even if you're
doing your research and sendingonly to appropriate places.
Not everyone is open and hasyou know the bandwidth at any
given time to publish everythingthat's good, and so you know
there's a, there's a choosinessfactor that happens right, and
(07:41):
so presumably people are goingto be looking into your letter,
not just to see that there's ageneral fit, but that you know
the quality is there and the bigidea is there and all that good
stuff.
And if it's fiction, then it'sgoing to be.
Is this a compelling story?
Do they have great characters?
All that sort of stuff.
Jason Kuznicki (08:01):
That's right.
That's right.
There's a lot that I'm lookingfor beyond just fit with the
publishing mission.
I want to know also about theauthor as a person, and that's
something that can come throughin a well-written pitch letter.
I want to know not just can youwrite a great book, but also
can you talk about your book.
(08:22):
I want to know not just do youhave technical mastery of the
subject area, but can you makeit accessible?
Are you someone who could sitdown on a podcast and be
interesting and engaging?
Are you someone who has a goodsocial media presence?
Are you someone who could maybedo an amazing book talk?
(08:44):
And a good pitch letter willgive me a sense of that.
Trevor Thrall (08:49):
Yeah, because and here's another hard truth for
you kids One of the reasonspeople are so excited to get a
traditional publisher is theirfantasy that that publishing
house is going to do a lot ofmarketing for them, which is
false.
It is false, it is absolutelyfalse.
Jason Kuznicki (09:06):
And unfortunately, like a lot of
other creative endeavors,nowadays, the creator needs to
be on social media.
If you're an artist in thevisual arts, if you're an author
, if you're whatever, being onsocial media is a part of your
job, because people want toconnect with a person before
(09:28):
they buy the product.
Trevor Thrall (09:29):
very often, Absolutely yeah, and every pitch
letter book proposal I've everwritten to a publisher has had a
very lengthy section onmarketing where I attempt to
persuade them that I am a veryeffective marketer with a
reasonable size platform who hasa good chance of moving books.
Because, you know, for everyfor publishers, you know you
(09:51):
have to remember that books arebasically lottery tickets.
You know, yes, that we havethings we publish as a general
field or kind of book we wepublish, but most publishers
make it's kind of 80 20 rule.
They make 80 percent of theirmoney from 20% of the books they
publish.
The problem is they don't knowwhich 20% it's going to be.
So every book.
Jason Kuznicki (10:10):
That's absolutely true, and so
Absolutely true In my experience.
Most of the books that Ipublished lost money, and two of
them made it all back.
Trevor Thrall (10:18):
Exactly, exactly, shades of gray, yeah.
So yeah, I mean, it's, it's,it's, and the only thing you can
do as an editor is it's theright fit and the quality bar
has been met.
And then it's a bit of alottery ticket and, and you know
, I think one of the things thatyou're hoping for is that you
can at least hit singles,because if the authors have a
decent platform, then even if itdoesn't go viral, doesn't hit
(10:40):
big.
You can.
You can at least make money onit, and so, anyway, there's a
lot of things that are important.
We're going to get to those ina second a little bit more, but
first, you know, I think we'vekind of already touched a little
bit on some things that peoplemight not know, but people have
all sorts of weird beliefs aboutthis process and about pitching
(11:02):
and so on.
So maybe you could just breakdown a couple of the things that
people think they know but arejust wrong about this process
and about pitching and so on.
Jason Kuznicki (11:06):
So maybe you could just break down a couple
of the things that people thinkthey know but are just wrong
about this process yeah, I'vegotten quite a few letters where
, uh, the letter reflects a highdegree of anxiety, where it's
clear that the attachedmanuscript is is actually
workable, but then the authorlacks some confidence in it.
(11:32):
And often often especially withfirst-time authors there's a
mentality where they think ofthe editor as kind of the final
boss of the dungeon, and they'vegotten through the whole
writing process and now theyhave to defeat this last boss.
And how you defeat that boss?
(11:52):
By well, often it seems likethe idea is you've got to be
extra erudite and really showoff a lot.
And, by the way, I can make aneven more difficult and
complicated case than my book,and I'm even smarter than the
words on the page that I've justsent you.
(12:13):
And that's the exact oppositeof what I need to see.
I want to see an author who, yes, absolutely has that kind of
smarts, but then also knows howto talk to a general audience,
because if they can do both ofthose things, then they're going
to reach a lot of people andthey're going to bring them good
(12:35):
information.
And as a nonfiction editor,that's what I look for.
I want that.
So if you have written adifficult book, you have got to
use the pitch letter as a chanceto turn it into something more
accessible.
It is not the case that theeditor is a you know sort of a
(12:58):
next level author who is judgingyou about your expertise.
There is some amount of that,but really the important part is
, can this person reach anaudience and connect with them?
Do they know what their book isreally about?
Do they have a good sense ofthe topic themselves, and can
(13:21):
they translate it into somethingthat's accessible?
Trevor Thrall (13:24):
That's what I'm looking for yeah, yeah, and I
think you know, sort ofrelatedly I think I think you
know all over the place you runinto that problem of people
trying to write to impress asopposed to be understood.
And I think that's that'salways a bad path to go down.
And but.
But I think you're exactlyright.
(13:45):
I think people mythologizeeditors as these super bosses
who are waiting to find yourgrammar mistake or to chuckle
over your incredibly obscurereference to something you know,
whatever, or something likethat, and instead it's much more
practical and common sense thanthat what the editors are
(14:06):
looking for, right.
Jason Kuznicki (14:24):
Never, never, never.
I'm not even going to reject abook because of a bunch of typos
, but I will reject a book ifthe author seems to have a
complete inability to connectwith an audience, and that's,
that's a problem.
Trevor Thrall (14:33):
Yeah, another question sort of on that score
is I think sometimes authors arenot clear about what, how much
their background and sort ofbona fides mean when they write
(14:54):
a pitch letter.
You know, I think I see twoways people go about it.
One is to completely attempt toobscure their background as a
nobody because they haven'tpublished something yet and so
they're trying desperately notto mention this fact.
And the other side is peoplewho are trying to get you to
publish something because of howimportant they are, even though
they won't let you look at thequality too much.
How do you break that down forpeople?
Jason Kuznicki (15:18):
One very easy way to do it, especially in the
nonfiction world, is just send aCV along.
Don't take up time in yourpitch letter talking about you
and your experiences.
You want to talk about this newgreat idea you've had, that
you've put into a book.
That's what you talk about inyour pitch letter.
(15:38):
If you want to demonstrate thatyou're qualified, a CV will do
it.
That's a thing that we oftenwant to see just for marketing
purposes.
If you're an alumnus of aparticular university, for
example, maybe that's the firstplace you go to do a book talk.
That's something I want to knowabout.
(16:00):
I want to know that you've gotexpertise in the field in one
way or another, whether that'sacademic or practical and yes,
that's important, but that canbe conveyed through a standard
CV.
And then the pitch letter iswhere I want to really hear in
(16:20):
your own words what your book isabout and why it's important
and how it's going to connectwith people.
Trevor Thrall (16:25):
All right.
So let's, that's a good segue.
Let's, let's talk about that.
What, what are the keys towriting a good pitch letter?
What are the elements of a good, a good pitch letter?
Jason Kuznicki (16:37):
I want to see that you can state the argument
of the book clearly andconcisely and in a way that I
can take to other people,because, as your editor, I'll be
working very closely with you,but that work has as its goal to
(16:58):
reach other people, and I'mtrying to be on your team in
that effort.
So help me out.
I want help in selling yourbook.
That's what I'm looking for.
I don't need you to prove to methat it's a good book.
I need you to prove to me thatyou can sell this book, that you
(17:23):
can sell this book.
Now I will judge whether it's agood book or not by reading the
book, and that is definitely apart of a very important part of
the selection process.
But in a pitch letter, it's notthe place to prove your
conclusions again.
Trevor Thrall (17:38):
That's, that's not it.
What's the what's the key, then?
Just just to hop on that for asecond.
What?
What tips you from a send thema form letter to?
I'm going to read themanuscript what's the most
important part of that letterthat makes you do that?
Can?
Jason Kuznicki (17:56):
you talk about your book like a real person.
Can you talk about your booklike a real person?
That's, that's it and, yes,that's.
You know that's art, notscience.
It's not like there's a formulato it, but the person who
writes a pitch letter that canget ordinary people interested
(18:16):
in the book, like if I were toshow the letter to my dad, you
know, or if I were to show it toa friend who's not in the
publishing world and say, hey,what do you think of this?
If that lights people up, thenI know that you're going to be
the kind of author who's good atpromoting their work.
(18:40):
You're the kind of author whoactually understands their work,
and the easiest test of whetheryou understand something is can
you teach it?
So if you're able to hit thehighlights without doing a whole
lot of the sometimes difficulttechnical legwork, then that's a
(19:00):
good pitch letter.
That's what I look for.
Trevor Thrall (19:02):
Yeah, yeah.
It's funny.
I often think about, like, ifyou're telling the story about
what the book is about whetherit's fiction or nonfiction
doesn't matter, but if you're atthe bar, how would you tell it?
Like, how would you tell thatstory?
And if you don't have that kindof ability, it's going to be
hard to tell the average personwhat your book is about, because
that's how average people talkand think there are different
levels of sort of writing aboutthe writing, and the quickest,
(19:28):
most accessible writing aboutthe writing is like the elevator
pitch.
Jason Kuznicki (19:33):
You've got 20 seconds, you're in an elevator,
tell me what your book is about,and that's great.
And a lot of people can do thatkind of intuitively.
The pitch letter is moredetailed than that.
The pitch letter is like acouple of pages.
Don't write a whole lot morethan that, uh, and it lays out
(19:55):
in more detail than the elevatorpitch what the argument is and
why it's important and whypeople will find it interesting.
And if you can do that, that'sthat's what I'm looking for,
because that tells me whetherthe book fits in with our
publishing mission and whetherit is something that's going to
(20:17):
have the capacity to attractattention and whether you're the
right person to be drawing theattention, to be, you know,
bringing people to it.
Yes and yes, it's absolutelyabout you as a person, but it's
not about your technical mastery, it's about your ability as a
(20:37):
communicator.
Trevor Thrall (20:38):
Yeah, yeah.
So in a sense it's a little bitlike any good sort of and for
the fiction writers out there.
Forgive me, but in an academicarticle you would typically
start with something we wouldcall a summary introduction,
where you would introduce people.
Here's the topic we're going tobe talking about, here's why it
(20:59):
arises and why it matters.
Here's what other people havebeen saying about it.
Here's the debate.
Here's what I'm going to sayabout it and here are the
methods I'm going to use to makemy case, and then you might end
with the little road map, andmost book proposals follow this,
whether they're for fiction ornonfiction.
Follow this in spirit, if notin the specifics.
Jason Kuznicki (21:23):
Yes, yes, that's right.
You mentioned a section onmarketing, and that is something
I do want to see, and I also dowant to be able to know at a
glance what you're trying toaccomplish in the book.
A pitch letter often is greatto read first and then dive into
the manuscript and say you know, ask myself, does this
(21:46):
manuscript deliver on thepromise that's in the letter?
Trevor Thrall (21:49):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely Right.
And so now I'm, as I recallfrom writing a few of these I
can't remember the one I wrotefor Cato anymore, but since it
was sort of internal we mighthave skirted around the official
version.
But normally a publisher willhave a template you can actually
(22:13):
download, and that may or maynot be the perfect way to
organize it, but they usuallygive you the big chunks, it
seems like.
Did Kato have one of those?
I presume you had one of those.
Jason Kuznicki (22:24):
We didn't have a template just because, it being
a very wide-ranging sort ofpublishing endeavor, we looked
at anything that would touch onpublic policy and be non-fiction
public policy, although we didpublish one, uh, fictionalized
(22:48):
book on public policy, which, uh, uh, it was a dialogue with
mephistopheles, which, uh, youknow having, you know, satirical
dialogues like that that'sthere's a long tradition of of.
I mean, that goes all the wayback, uh, it goes way back in,
you know, western history.
Voltaire wrote stuff like that.
(23:09):
Uh, you know, and so so youknow that, may you know, with
that one exception, uh, thepoint here is that, uh, I didn't
want to turn anyone away justout of hand and I didn't want to
make it more daunting than itneeded to be.
But if you're working with apublisher who has a template,
(23:31):
the easiest way to start off onthe right foot is to work with
their template and to do as asthey're, as they're asking, and
that that'll tell a publisherwhether you're a team player or
not.
And, uh, you know, when you'rea writer and you're working on a
manuscript, you're workingalone, but when you cross that
(23:53):
bridge to publishing, you're ona team.
You might be the most importantpart of that team, without
which the team wouldn't exist.
But you're still on a team andI'm going to try to be your
teammate and I'm going to try tomake that arrangement work for
both of us.
But I need to see that you'rewilling to do that too.
(24:13):
Yeah, absolutely.
Trevor Thrall (24:15):
Absolutely.
I'm going to put in a quickplug.
While we're there, I'm justgoing to put a quick plug in for
editing.
I think a lot of people arenervous about that process for
all sorts of very understandablereasons, fiction and nonfiction
alike, and you can look upquotes from all sorts of famous
novelists who say horriblethings about editors.
Because that's just whatever.
(24:38):
They didn't like them, theydidn't appreciate the process.
I get it, it's a pain.
It's't like them.
They didn't appreciate theprocess.
I get it, it's a pain.
It's a huge pain.
I don't think and it's funnybecause Cato had the best
editing for all things,especially like the policy
analyses I've never gotten somuch editing on something I've
written in my whole life Four orfive rounds of review and
(24:59):
feedback from different peoplein the building, including
editors, finally includingeditors, and and you know, I was
just like.
I was like pulling teeth,pulling teeth.
But you know what, in the end,in the end, I looked at the
final product and I was so proudof it.
I was like man it's.
It's a little arduous to gothrough that much review and
(25:19):
edit and revise, but the endproduct is so good.
And so you know, I'm a hugeself-publishing fan, but I am
not a fan of self-publishingwithout editing, and so even if
you do choose to self-edit we'lltalk about this a little bit
later and other podcasts willtouch more on this question as
well, more on this question aswell but but even if you choose
(25:42):
to publish on your own which isa great idea these days I really
encourage you to work with aneditor to get the final, most
polished possible version ofyour manuscript.
This is true for fiction.
Non-fiction does not matter.
I regard, I recommend, adevelopmental edit, a review of
structure of all that sort ofstuff as well, of course, as
(26:04):
line editing, copy editing,proofreading, because you just
want it to be beautiful whenpeople see it and that's the way
to do it.
Jason Kuznicki (26:13):
Yeah, yeah, I'm going to talk a little bit about
the fiction side of things,because that's also where a lot
of our audience is, and in myexperience, I think of one
author who is really instructivehere, and not necessarily in a
good way.
That author is Ayn Rand.
(26:34):
Ayn Rand was a mid-20th centurywriter of both fiction and
nonfiction.
Mid-20th century writer of bothfiction and nonfiction.
She wrote Atlas Shrugged.
That's her big bestseller.
But she was infamous, absolutelyinfamous, for being difficult
to work with among her editors.
She did not want to work withmost editors.
(26:54):
She hated what they did to herwork.
She was intensely, fiercelyjealous of her written product
and when I did work at Cato, Iwarned the interns not to be
like her, because a lot of themhad read Ayn Rand and a lot of
them may have read some of herbiographies where they talk
(27:15):
about her struggles with editors.
And the problem with being thatkind of an author is you're
going to lose a lot of goodeditors who want to help you and
you may be successful finallyin finding one editor who will
roll over and do exactly whatyou want in every case, but that
(27:37):
doesn't necessarily help yourfinished product.
Trevor Thrall (27:39):
You have to be someone really remarkable and
have a really great talent forwriting, and even then, even
then, you would probably bebetter off to have several more
people reading and givingfeedback on your work it's so
easy to see with with the mostfamous uh you know fiction
(28:02):
writers out there, because theirearly work is great and then,
as they get more and more famous, their books get longer and
more ponderous.
And if you try to read a johngrism novel right now, good luck
there.
I'm just picking on him for nogood reason, but.
But you know what I'm sayingand I just you know, get up
around the 25th, 26th, 27th in aseries and you're sort of like
(28:22):
woof that should be given to afirst year editor to just
destroy anyway, all right solet's talk.
Jason Kuznicki (28:30):
And the other thing, the other thing that
should be, should be said here,is it's not a test, right like?
If I find something that that Irecommend changing in your
manuscript.
It's not that I'm grading youlower if, if you're, you're
thinking about school, tear thatup and throw it out.
That is not a helpful thoughtanymore.
(28:50):
You're working as a part of ateam to get, uh, the best
product you can, and right.
If someone points out that thisreference isn't correct, well,
you know that's.
Trevor Thrall (29:03):
That's done in the spirit of trying to make it
a better book, absolutely, andand and I rail against this lone
wolf mentality all the timeit's not good for your writing,
more or less at any stage.
I don't think it's not goodwhen you're ideating.
It's not good when you'rewriting.
It's not good when you'reediting.
It's not good when you'repromotingating.
It's not good when you'rewriting.
It's not good when you'reediting.
Jason Kuznicki (29:21):
It's not good when you're promoting.
It's never good.
Don't do things alone.
Trevor Thrall (29:23):
It sounds cool on paper, but it's a terrible idea
.
Jason Kuznicki (29:25):
To bring this back to the subject at hand,
when you go to write a pitchletter, you should think of it
as you're trying to join a teamand you will be the most
important person on that team.
Like I said, without the author, the team has nothing to do.
But you're trying to join ateam, you're not trying to be
(29:46):
their leader, you're not tryingto uh, you know, accumulate, you
know servants or something.
You're trying to join a teamand so you explain yourself and
what you have to offer and, uh,you know that includes
everything from the argument ofthe book to the marketing of the
book.
And if you can do that in acouple of pages, you've written
(30:08):
a letter that will presumablyget you a book deal.
Trevor Thrall (30:12):
All right, we've convinced them.
They want to write a pitchpitch letter.
Talk a little bit about, beforewe go through, like sort of a
process that you might recommend.
This is useful for people,obviously, when they're trying
to land a book deal, but we'vetalked about this before.
(30:37):
It can be useful for you, evenif you plan on self-publishing
and marketing it yourself.
So maybe just talk a little bitabout the benefits of writing
this letter.
Jason Kuznicki (30:51):
When I wrote my book Technology and the End of
Authority, I went through abunch of different sortas and
writers and talks about theirwork and one of the very first
(31:18):
things that I did in the entireproject was to write essentially
a pitch letter.
And I was working with aneditor who was very interested
in my work to begin with,someone I already knew.
But that still didn't stop mefrom writing a pitch letter.
In a way, it made it veryimportant in a different
(31:41):
direction, because I wanted tomake the argument as clear as
possible in my own mind before Istarted doing the work.
Before I go back to the libraryand read about Rousseau or
Machiavelli, I want to know thatI've got a reason for doing
(32:02):
that.
I want to know what I'm lookingfor in these texts.
I want to know the argument asclearly as possible and one of
(32:32):
the things that I very, very,very useful to me in writing the
book.
Trevor Thrall (32:41):
Yep, so you just said two things and I added a
third that you said before, andit came up with three c's.
It's helps you with clarity,yes, helps, helps you clarify
your thinking.
Once you have written it down,it then provides a compass, it
helps direct your work and, whenyou're done, it's copy, it's
(33:03):
sales copy and marketing copy.
Jason Kuznicki (33:04):
It is the three Cs.
Trevor Thrall (33:06):
Look at that.
We just came up with a coolframework.
That's awesome.
And you know what is funny isthat, uh, you know, in in the
fiction world um, this is nottrue in the non-fiction world,
of course, because we're allplotters in the non-fiction
world.
We all make plans before we trywriting anything.
So writing this kind ofdocument it's like writing a
(33:28):
dissertation proposal, like youdon't get to write the
dissertation until you prove toyour committee that you can
write basically a fancy versionof a pitch letter that we
approve.
That is the compass and showsthat you have clarity about the
project and all that sort ofstuff.
But even fiction writers whocall themselves pantsers, people
who don't like to make the bigplot right, even for those folks
what they will tell you is theycan't write a story if they
(33:51):
don't know the general arc.
They know character A starts inthis situation and ends up here
.
Or if it's two people fallingin love, they end up not knowing
each other and then they end uptogether.
They know they have a versionof that pitch letter.
In a sense it might be verysmall, but it's a kernel.
But I think that vision thatyou have to set out for yourself
(34:13):
, for every project is crucial,regardless if you're going to
let yourself meander sort of alittle bit or whether you're
going to try to really plan itout.
So a pitch letter can be.
It's like a multi-tool, youknow.
It has so many fantasticpurposes and I like your phrase.
It's a tool for thinking.
It really makes you better,right, writing makes you better
at thinking.
It's just no question about it.
(34:34):
I don't think it matters whatyou're writing about, all right.
So I want to write a pitchletter, jason.
What's my best general approachto doing it?
Jason Kuznicki (34:44):
Your best general approach is to imagine
you're writing to a real personbecause actually you are,
because actually you are, and donot get caught up with academic
jargon, don't get caught upwith technicalities.
Don't try to impress them withyour smarts, impress them with
(35:07):
your ability to communicate,introduce yourself, maybe say a
few words about yourqualifications Mention if you're
including a CV, like I'vesuggested and then very clearly,
so no one can miss it, saysomething like the argument of
(35:29):
the book will be as follows, andwrite about a paragraph about
the argument of the book, andmake this a very simple and very
clear statement, much more sothan in your conclusion or even
in your introduction.
You want this to be somethingthat anyone can pick up and read
.
It is not necessarily the casethat your editor is a specialist
(35:54):
in your field.
Your editor will be aspecialist in some field, but
not necessarily yours, and soyou need to introduce your work
here to someone who is, ineffect, a part of an educated
general audience.
That's what you're aiming atfor a nonfiction pitch letter
(36:14):
general audience.
Trevor Thrall (36:15):
That's what you're aiming at for a
nonfiction pitch letter, and infiction it's more or less do
everything you just said.
But it's tell them the story,right?
Yes, tell them the story, thestory and why it fits, the genre
, that you want it, that youtell them the genre and the
sub-genre, because for most ofthe fiction writers, unless
you're writing sort of generaladult fiction, even there there
(36:36):
are so many layers and slicesand niches.
But you know if you're afantasy writer, a science
fiction writer, a romance writer, you know what sub-niche you're
in, because you write it andyou read it, and so does your
agent, so does the publisher, sodoes the editor, and so you
want to be very clear aboutwhere you fit, why your book
fits.
Tell them the story in a quicksynopsis so that they get that
(36:57):
it's the right fit and so on.
Jason Kuznicki (36:59):
Yeah, and one thing that pitch letters will
often do and I do recommend thisis to mention some comparable
titles.
Absolutely, this is often donein the context of marketing, but
also it can help an editor tounderstand in a general sense
(37:21):
what kind of a book it is.
If you're going to write thenext Freakonomics, if you think
you've done that, that'sambitious.
But if you really think you'vedone it, then say so.
But if you really think you'vedone it, then say so.
And if you are not sure whatthe comparable titles are in the
field that are out there, thenperhaps you ought to do some
(37:46):
research and some reading andcome back when you are sure,
because not knowing theliterature in the field is, from
my point of view as an editor,a big red flag.
You should definitely be ableto name right off the bat
several comparable titles.
So I mentioned in my pitchletter that I was imitating a
(38:11):
lot of 20th century intellectualsurvey books, imitating a lot
of 20th century intellectualsurvey books.
So, like I mentioned KarlPopper, the Open Society and Its
Enemies as a book that I wasvery consciously trying to
imitate in my book, now I can'tsay necessarily that I'm as
great a writer as Karl Popper,one of the greatest philosophers
(38:34):
of the last century.
But you know, I know what I'maiming at, I know the kind of
book and the territory that I'min Readers of Karl Popper will
enjoy my book.
Trevor Thrall (38:47):
It's something like that, right?
So it's like King Kong meetsStar Wars.
You know, if you like threeauthors, you're going to love
this, right?
I mean, you see this in booksall over the mall, or Barnes
Noble.
You know, this is how we makesense of what category you're in
, and you want to help peopleget you to the right category
quickly, exactly, yeah, so writefor a specific person.
(39:09):
Is it your mom?
What do you choose, your mom?
Jason Kuznicki (39:13):
your dad.
I tell people the high schoolEnglish teacher.
There you go.
Perfect, you remember your highschool English teacher and you
know that they like writing.
They wouldn't be a high schoolEnglish teacher otherwise and
you want to get them interestedin this new thing that you're
doing.
I've written a romance novelthat I think you'll really enjoy
(39:36):
.
This is what it's about.
Or I've written a mystery, orI've written an examination of
the last 20 years of US tradepolicy, or whatever it might be.
Fantastic, fantastic, fantastic,all right, well, that's, I
(40:00):
think, a great start to thistopic, jason, and for people who
want to learn more, there'sgoing to be a workshop coming up
.
Yes, yes, on the 21st.
Trevor Thrall (40:06):
Absolutely 21st of August.
If you're listening to this inthe year 2026, it's too late.
It already happened last year.
But if you are listening tothis before August 21st 2025,
then you are very welcome tohead over to
12weekyearforwriterscom registerfor this workshop.
Or, if you are a member of thecommunity, the workshop is free.
(40:29):
So make sure to RSVP and wehope to see you guys next week.
All right, jason?
Thanks so much, man.
Good talking to you.
Thank you, good talking withyou.
Welcome to the 12-Week Year for Writers podcast
.
I'm Trevor Thrall.
Today I am joined by former andpresent colleague, jason
Kuznicki, an editor and awriting coach with a lot of
experience reading hundreds andhundreds of pitch letters.
If you've ever wondered what ittakes to land a publishing deal
(00:22):
, this is the episode for you.
Hey, jason, welcome to thepodcast.
(00:44):
It's great to have you on forthe first time.
Thanks, it's good to be here.
Yeah, fantastic, jason Pusnickiis with me.
He's one of the writing coachesat the 12-Week Year for Writers
and today we are talking abouthow to write a pitch letter.
But before we do any of that,jason, since it's your first
time on the pod, why don't youtell people who you are, what
(01:05):
kind of writing you've done andwhy it is that you know so much
about pitch letters?
Jason Kuznicki (01:10):
So Trevor and I are former colleagues at the
Cato Institute where I was forquite a few years the book
editor and in that capacity Igot lots of pitch letters.
But I've also been an author.
I've successfully written andpublished a book with an
(01:33):
academic press books and authorsin my career and have gotten a
lot of pitch letters, mostly innonfiction public policy work.
But a lot of the lessons fromthere I think are also
(01:54):
applicable in fiction and carryover Fantastic.
Trevor Thrall (01:59):
Well, we should probably start, you know, for
those who are the aspiringauthors set in our listing
audience.
Let's just start by explainingthe most basic thing, which is
what is a pitch letter?
Jason Kuznicki (02:14):
A pitch letter is a letter that you write to an
editor who's in charge ofacquisitions at a publisher.
Who's in charge of acquisitionsat a publisher?
Now, that might be the editorthat you work with for copy
editing or line edits in time,or it may not be that Many
larger publishing houses willhave specialized editors just
(02:37):
for acquisitions.
Either way, the pitch lettergoes to an editor and it either
accompanies your finishedmanuscript, if you have it, or
it says what you're working onand what you intend to deliver.
It can be either one of those,but I think really, the uh,
important points are just thesame in either case.
(02:58):
Whether you finish the book ornot, and and so everything I'm
going to talk about here, it'sgoing to stand either way,
absolutely, absolutely.
Trevor Thrall (03:07):
And I have.
I've had clients who, beforeeven pitching to a publisher,
use their pitch letter to landan agent in the first place who
would then take the pitch letterto publishers.
Jason Kuznicki (03:19):
So yes, yes, and , and that's also, that's also a
valid step of the process.
It often happens that way.
Yes, absolutely.
Trevor Thrall (03:28):
So that makes it pretty clear what its general
role is.
But as someone who's been onthe inside as the editor, making
the decisions about which ofthese things to publish and move
forward with and which not, whyis a pitch letter important?
Jason Kuznicki (03:47):
It's important because when I'm reading it as
an editor, I'm trying to figureout several things, and the very
first one is is this book agood fit for our mission as a
publisher?
Does it fit in well with thetypes of things that we publish?
(04:08):
And I want you to be able totell me that you have a good
idea of what your book is about.
And I will be looking at thatidea of what your book is about
and trying to fit it into thepublishing world that I inhabit,
and I'll be trying to determine, from from what you tell me,
(04:29):
whether this is going to be agood opportunity for us both.
Trevor Thrall (04:34):
Yeah, yep.
So you know, I think a lot ofauthors, myself included, really
kind of wonder the extent towhich let's put it this way it's
easy to wonder if the pitchletter matters at all from the
outside, because so many peoplejust get rejection after
(04:58):
rejection, after rejection, evenif they have a great book.
And then you find out thepeople that do get published
already know the editor or havea publishing.
Jason Kuznicki (05:10):
you know they know someone who knows,
sometimes yeah, sometimes itworks that way.
Trevor Thrall (05:15):
So we know, we know that can be how people get
published, of course, but but?
But what you're saying is thatit's the quality of the letter
does matter.
It's because they don't know,they haven't seen your book yet,
so you're relying on thatletter to decide if you're even
going to look at the book at all?
Jason Kuznicki (05:34):
Yes, yes, it absolutely matters, and the very
first thing that an authorshould do before writing a pitch
letter is to research theintended recipient.
I don't mean the editor inparticular, I mean the
publishing house.
Is this the type of thing thatthis publishing house would do?
(05:54):
So when I was in charge of CatoBooks, if someone were to send
me a cookbook or a book ofpoetry or you know, a book of
fiction, a novel, you knowthat's not what they do there at
all, and so if they write aclear, coherent pitch letter for
(06:17):
it, that makes it real easy forme.
That's five minutes of work forme.
I say no, this is obviously notthe type of thing that we do.
Maybe it's really good cookbook, but it's not what we publish.
And I can write right now writeback a standard form letter
response and tell them to moveon.
But if they had done a bit moreresearch, they might have found
(06:40):
a publisher where this wouldhave been of much, much more
interest.
So one way to avoid rejectionletters is to know where you
ought to be heading in the firstplace.
Trevor Thrall (06:49):
I know, yeah, we'll talk about what goes into
a good one in a minute, but howmany letters would you get at
Cato back in the day.
Jason Kuznicki (06:59):
Oh wow, Dozens and dozens and dozens.
Trevor Thrall (07:08):
So many of them.
And yeah, what was thepercentage of books that you
published to letters you got?
Jason Kuznicki (07:15):
Less than 1%, I would say.
Trevor Thrall (07:18):
It's just for a little reality.
Check out there.
Right, it's a bit of a roulettewheel getting published and you
have it's.
To some degree it can be anumbers game, even if you're
doing your research and sendingonly to appropriate places.
Not everyone is open and hasyou know the bandwidth at any
given time to publish everythingthat's good, and so you know
there's a, there's a choosinessfactor that happens right, and
(07:41):
so presumably people are goingto be looking into your letter,
not just to see that there's ageneral fit, but that you know
the quality is there and the bigidea is there and all that good
stuff.
And if it's fiction, then it'sgoing to be.
Is this a compelling story?
Do they have great characters?
All that sort of stuff.
Jason Kuznicki (08:01):
That's right.
That's right.
There's a lot that I'm lookingfor beyond just fit with the
publishing mission.
I want to know also about theauthor as a person, and that's
something that can come throughin a well-written pitch letter.
I want to know not just can youwrite a great book, but also
can you talk about your book.
(08:22):
I want to know not just do youhave technical mastery of the
subject area, but can you makeit accessible?
Are you someone who could sitdown on a podcast and be
interesting and engaging?
Are you someone who has a goodsocial media presence?
Are you someone who could maybedo an amazing book talk?
(08:44):
And a good pitch letter willgive me a sense of that.
Trevor Thrall (08:49):
Yeah, because and here's another hard truth for
you kids One of the reasonspeople are so excited to get a
traditional publisher is theirfantasy that that publishing
house is going to do a lot ofmarketing for them, which is
false.
It is false, it is absolutelyfalse.
Jason Kuznicki (09:06):
And unfortunately, like a lot of
other creative endeavors,nowadays, the creator needs to
be on social media.
If you're an artist in thevisual arts, if you're an author
, if you're whatever, being onsocial media is a part of your
job, because people want toconnect with a person before
(09:28):
they buy the product.
Trevor Thrall (09:29):
very often, Absolutely yeah, and every pitch
letter book proposal I've everwritten to a publisher has had a
very lengthy section onmarketing where I attempt to
persuade them that I am a veryeffective marketer with a
reasonable size platform who hasa good chance of moving books.
Because, you know, for everyfor publishers, you know you
(09:51):
have to remember that books arebasically lottery tickets.
You know, yes, that we havethings we publish as a general
field or kind of book we wepublish, but most publishers
make it's kind of 80 20 rule.
They make 80 percent of theirmoney from 20% of the books they
publish.
The problem is they don't knowwhich 20% it's going to be.
So every book.
Jason Kuznicki (10:10):
That's absolutely true, and so
Absolutely true In my experience.
Most of the books that Ipublished lost money, and two of
them made it all back.
Trevor Thrall (10:18):
Exactly, exactly, shades of gray, yeah.
So yeah, I mean, it's, it's,it's, and the only thing you can
do as an editor is it's theright fit and the quality bar
has been met.
And then it's a bit of alottery ticket and, and you know
, I think one of the things thatyou're hoping for is that you
can at least hit singles,because if the authors have a
decent platform, then even if itdoesn't go viral, doesn't hit
(10:40):
big.
You can.
You can at least make money onit, and so, anyway, there's a
lot of things that are important.
We're going to get to those ina second a little bit more, but
first, you know, I think we'vekind of already touched a little
bit on some things that peoplemight not know, but people have
all sorts of weird beliefs aboutthis process and about pitching
(11:02):
and so on.
So maybe you could just breakdown a couple of the things that
people think they know but arejust wrong about this process
and about pitching and so on.
Jason Kuznicki (11:06):
So maybe you could just break down a couple
of the things that people thinkthey know but are just wrong
about this process yeah, I'vegotten quite a few letters where
, uh, the letter reflects a highdegree of anxiety, where it's
clear that the attachedmanuscript is is actually
workable, but then the authorlacks some confidence in it.
(11:32):
And often often especially withfirst-time authors there's a
mentality where they think ofthe editor as kind of the final
boss of the dungeon, and they'vegotten through the whole
writing process and now theyhave to defeat this last boss.
And how you defeat that boss?
(11:52):
By well, often it seems likethe idea is you've got to be
extra erudite and really showoff a lot.
And, by the way, I can make aneven more difficult and
complicated case than my book,and I'm even smarter than the
words on the page that I've justsent you.
(12:13):
And that's the exact oppositeof what I need to see.
I want to see an author who, yes, absolutely has that kind of
smarts, but then also knows howto talk to a general audience,
because if they can do both ofthose things, then they're going
to reach a lot of people andthey're going to bring them good
(12:35):
information.
And as a nonfiction editor,that's what I look for.
I want that.
So if you have written adifficult book, you have got to
use the pitch letter as a chanceto turn it into something more
accessible.
It is not the case that theeditor is a you know sort of a
(12:58):
next level author who is judgingyou about your expertise.
There is some amount of that,but really the important part is
, can this person reach anaudience and connect with them?
Do they know what their book isreally about?
Do they have a good sense ofthe topic themselves, and can
(13:21):
they translate it into somethingthat's accessible?
Trevor Thrall (13:24):
That's what I'm looking for yeah, yeah, and I
think you know, sort ofrelatedly I think I think you
know all over the place you runinto that problem of people
trying to write to impress asopposed to be understood.
And I think that's that'salways a bad path to go down.
And but.
But I think you're exactlyright.
(13:45):
I think people mythologizeeditors as these super bosses
who are waiting to find yourgrammar mistake or to chuckle
over your incredibly obscurereference to something you know,
whatever, or something likethat, and instead it's much more
practical and common sense thanthat what the editors are
(14:06):
looking for, right.
Jason Kuznicki (14:24):
Never, never, never.
I'm not even going to reject abook because of a bunch of typos
, but I will reject a book ifthe author seems to have a
complete inability to connectwith an audience, and that's,
that's a problem.
Trevor Thrall (14:33):
Yeah, another question sort of on that score
is I think sometimes authors arenot clear about what, how much
their background and sort ofbona fides mean when they write
(14:54):
a pitch letter.
You know, I think I see twoways people go about it.
One is to completely attempt toobscure their background as a
nobody because they haven'tpublished something yet and so
they're trying desperately notto mention this fact.
And the other side is peoplewho are trying to get you to
publish something because of howimportant they are, even though
they won't let you look at thequality too much.
How do you break that down forpeople?
Jason Kuznicki (15:18):
One very easy way to do it, especially in the
nonfiction world, is just send aCV along.
Don't take up time in yourpitch letter talking about you
and your experiences.
You want to talk about this newgreat idea you've had, that
you've put into a book.
That's what you talk about inyour pitch letter.
(15:38):
If you want to demonstrate thatyou're qualified, a CV will do
it.
That's a thing that we oftenwant to see just for marketing
purposes.
If you're an alumnus of aparticular university, for
example, maybe that's the firstplace you go to do a book talk.
That's something I want to knowabout.
(16:00):
I want to know that you've gotexpertise in the field in one
way or another, whether that'sacademic or practical and yes,
that's important, but that canbe conveyed through a standard
CV.
And then the pitch letter iswhere I want to really hear in
(16:20):
your own words what your book isabout and why it's important
and how it's going to connectwith people.
Trevor Thrall (16:25):
All right.
So let's, that's a good segue.
Let's, let's talk about that.
What, what are the keys towriting a good pitch letter?
What are the elements of a good, a good pitch letter?
Jason Kuznicki (16:37):
I want to see that you can state the argument
of the book clearly andconcisely and in a way that I
can take to other people,because, as your editor, I'll be
working very closely with you,but that work has as its goal to
(16:58):
reach other people, and I'mtrying to be on your team in
that effort.
So help me out.
I want help in selling yourbook.
That's what I'm looking for.
I don't need you to prove to methat it's a good book.
I need you to prove to me thatyou can sell this book, that you
(17:23):
can sell this book.
Now I will judge whether it's agood book or not by reading the
book, and that is definitely apart of a very important part of
the selection process.
But in a pitch letter, it's notthe place to prove your
conclusions again.
Trevor Thrall (17:38):
That's, that's not it.
What's the what's the key, then?
Just just to hop on that for asecond.
What?
What tips you from a send thema form letter to?
I'm going to read themanuscript what's the most
important part of that letterthat makes you do that?
Can?
Jason Kuznicki (17:56):
you talk about your book like a real person.
Can you talk about your booklike a real person?
That's, that's it and, yes,that's.
You know that's art, notscience.
It's not like there's a formulato it, but the person who
writes a pitch letter that canget ordinary people interested
(18:16):
in the book, like if I were toshow the letter to my dad, you
know, or if I were to show it toa friend who's not in the
publishing world and say, hey,what do you think of this?
If that lights people up, thenI know that you're going to be
the kind of author who's good atpromoting their work.
(18:40):
You're the kind of author whoactually understands their work,
and the easiest test of whetheryou understand something is can
you teach it?
So if you're able to hit thehighlights without doing a whole
lot of the sometimes difficulttechnical legwork, then that's a
(19:00):
good pitch letter.
That's what I look for.
Trevor Thrall (19:02):
Yeah, yeah.
It's funny.
I often think about, like, ifyou're telling the story about
what the book is about whetherit's fiction or nonfiction
doesn't matter, but if you're atthe bar, how would you tell it?
Like, how would you tell thatstory?
And if you don't have that kindof ability, it's going to be
hard to tell the average personwhat your book is about, because
that's how average people talkand think there are different
levels of sort of writing aboutthe writing, and the quickest,
(19:28):
most accessible writing aboutthe writing is like the elevator
pitch.
Jason Kuznicki (19:33):
You've got 20 seconds, you're in an elevator,
tell me what your book is about,and that's great.
And a lot of people can do thatkind of intuitively.
The pitch letter is moredetailed than that.
The pitch letter is like acouple of pages.
Don't write a whole lot morethan that, uh, and it lays out
(19:55):
in more detail than the elevatorpitch what the argument is and
why it's important and whypeople will find it interesting.
And if you can do that, that'sthat's what I'm looking for,
because that tells me whetherthe book fits in with our
publishing mission and whetherit is something that's going to
(20:17):
have the capacity to attractattention and whether you're the
right person to be drawing theattention, to be, you know,
bringing people to it.
Yes and yes, it's absolutelyabout you as a person, but it's
not about your technical mastery, it's about your ability as a
(20:37):
communicator.
Trevor Thrall (20:38):
Yeah, yeah.
So in a sense it's a little bitlike any good sort of and for
the fiction writers out there.
Forgive me, but in an academicarticle you would typically
start with something we wouldcall a summary introduction,
where you would introduce people.
Here's the topic we're going tobe talking about, here's why it
(20:59):
arises and why it matters.
Here's what other people havebeen saying about it.
Here's the debate.
Here's what I'm going to sayabout it and here are the
methods I'm going to use to makemy case, and then you might end
with the little road map, andmost book proposals follow this,
whether they're for fiction ornonfiction.
Follow this in spirit, if notin the specifics.
Jason Kuznicki (21:23):
Yes, yes, that's right.
You mentioned a section onmarketing, and that is something
I do want to see, and I also dowant to be able to know at a
glance what you're trying toaccomplish in the book.
A pitch letter often is greatto read first and then dive into
the manuscript and say you know, ask myself, does this
(21:46):
manuscript deliver on thepromise that's in the letter?
Trevor Thrall (21:49):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely Right.
And so now I'm, as I recallfrom writing a few of these I
can't remember the one I wrotefor Cato anymore, but since it
was sort of internal we mighthave skirted around the official
version.
But normally a publisher willhave a template you can actually
(22:13):
download, and that may or maynot be the perfect way to
organize it, but they usuallygive you the big chunks, it
seems like.
Did Kato have one of those?
I presume you had one of those.
Jason Kuznicki (22:24):
We didn't have a template just because, it being
a very wide-ranging sort ofpublishing endeavor, we looked
at anything that would touch onpublic policy and be non-fiction
public policy, although we didpublish one, uh, fictionalized
(22:48):
book on public policy, which, uh, uh, it was a dialogue with
mephistopheles, which, uh, youknow having, you know, satirical
dialogues like that that'sthere's a long tradition of of.
I mean, that goes all the wayback, uh, it goes way back in,
you know, western history.
Voltaire wrote stuff like that.
(23:09):
Uh, you know, and so so youknow that, may you know, with
that one exception, uh, thepoint here is that, uh, I didn't
want to turn anyone away justout of hand and I didn't want to
make it more daunting than itneeded to be.
But if you're working with apublisher who has a template,
(23:31):
the easiest way to start off onthe right foot is to work with
their template and to do as asthey're, as they're asking, and
that that'll tell a publisherwhether you're a team player or
not.
And, uh, you know, when you'rea writer and you're working on a
manuscript, you're workingalone, but when you cross that
(23:53):
bridge to publishing, you're ona team.
You might be the most importantpart of that team, without
which the team wouldn't exist.
But you're still on a team andI'm going to try to be your
teammate and I'm going to try tomake that arrangement work for
both of us.
But I need to see that you'rewilling to do that too.
(24:13):
Yeah, absolutely.
Trevor Thrall (24:15):
Absolutely.
I'm going to put in a quickplug.
While we're there, I'm justgoing to put a quick plug in for
editing.
I think a lot of people arenervous about that process for
all sorts of very understandablereasons, fiction and nonfiction
alike, and you can look upquotes from all sorts of famous
novelists who say horriblethings about editors.
Because that's just whatever.
(24:38):
They didn't like them, theydidn't appreciate the process.
I get it, it's a pain.
It's't like them.
They didn't appreciate theprocess.
I get it, it's a pain.
It's a huge pain.
I don't think and it's funnybecause Cato had the best
editing for all things,especially like the policy
analyses I've never gotten somuch editing on something I've
written in my whole life Four orfive rounds of review and
(24:59):
feedback from different peoplein the building, including
editors, finally includingeditors, and and you know, I was
just like.
I was like pulling teeth,pulling teeth.
But you know what, in the end,in the end, I looked at the
final product and I was so proudof it.
I was like man it's.
It's a little arduous to gothrough that much review and
(25:19):
edit and revise, but the endproduct is so good.
And so you know, I'm a hugeself-publishing fan, but I am
not a fan of self-publishingwithout editing, and so even if
you do choose to self-edit we'lltalk about this a little bit
later and other podcasts willtouch more on this question as
well, more on this question aswell but but even if you choose
(25:42):
to publish on your own which isa great idea these days I really
encourage you to work with aneditor to get the final, most
polished possible version ofyour manuscript.
This is true for fiction.
Non-fiction does not matter.
I regard, I recommend, adevelopmental edit, a review of
structure of all that sort ofstuff as well, of course, as
(26:04):
line editing, copy editing,proofreading, because you just
want it to be beautiful whenpeople see it and that's the way
to do it.
Jason Kuznicki (26:13):
Yeah, yeah, I'm going to talk a little bit about
the fiction side of things,because that's also where a lot
of our audience is, and in myexperience, I think of one
author who is really instructivehere, and not necessarily in a
good way.
That author is Ayn Rand.
(26:34):
Ayn Rand was a mid-20th centurywriter of both fiction and
nonfiction.
Mid-20th century writer of bothfiction and nonfiction.
She wrote Atlas Shrugged.
That's her big bestseller.
But she was infamous, absolutelyinfamous, for being difficult
to work with among her editors.
She did not want to work withmost editors.
(26:54):
She hated what they did to herwork.
She was intensely, fiercelyjealous of her written product
and when I did work at Cato, Iwarned the interns not to be
like her, because a lot of themhad read Ayn Rand and a lot of
them may have read some of herbiographies where they talk
(27:15):
about her struggles with editors.
And the problem with being thatkind of an author is you're
going to lose a lot of goodeditors who want to help you and
you may be successful finallyin finding one editor who will
roll over and do exactly whatyou want in every case, but that
(27:37):
doesn't necessarily help yourfinished product.
Trevor Thrall (27:39):
You have to be someone really remarkable and
have a really great talent forwriting, and even then, even
then, you would probably bebetter off to have several more
people reading and givingfeedback on your work it's so
easy to see with with the mostfamous uh you know fiction
(28:02):
writers out there, because theirearly work is great and then,
as they get more and more famous, their books get longer and
more ponderous.
And if you try to read a johngrism novel right now, good luck
there.
I'm just picking on him for nogood reason, but.
But you know what I'm sayingand I just you know, get up
around the 25th, 26th, 27th in aseries and you're sort of like
(28:22):
woof that should be given to afirst year editor to just
destroy anyway, all right solet's talk.
Jason Kuznicki (28:30):
And the other thing, the other thing that
should be, should be said here,is it's not a test, right like?
If I find something that that Irecommend changing in your
manuscript.
It's not that I'm grading youlower if, if you're, you're
thinking about school, tear thatup and throw it out.
That is not a helpful thoughtanymore.
(28:50):
You're working as a part of ateam to get, uh, the best
product you can, and right.
If someone points out that thisreference isn't correct, well,
you know that's.
Trevor Thrall (29:03):
That's done in the spirit of trying to make it
a better book, absolutely, andand and I rail against this lone
wolf mentality all the timeit's not good for your writing,
more or less at any stage.
I don't think it's not goodwhen you're ideating.
It's not good when you'rewriting.
It's not good when you'reediting.
It's not good when you'repromotingating.
It's not good when you'rewriting.
It's not good when you'reediting.
Jason Kuznicki (29:21):
It's not good when you're promoting.
It's never good.
Don't do things alone.
Trevor Thrall (29:23):
It sounds cool on paper, but it's a terrible idea
.
Jason Kuznicki (29:25):
To bring this back to the subject at hand,
when you go to write a pitchletter, you should think of it
as you're trying to join a teamand you will be the most
important person on that team.
Like I said, without the author, the team has nothing to do.
But you're trying to join ateam, you're not trying to be
(29:46):
their leader, you're not tryingto uh, you know, accumulate, you
know servants or something.
You're trying to join a teamand so you explain yourself and
what you have to offer and, uh,you know that includes
everything from the argument ofthe book to the marketing of the
book.
And if you can do that in acouple of pages, you've written
(30:08):
a letter that will presumablyget you a book deal.
Trevor Thrall (30:12):
All right, we've convinced them.
They want to write a pitchpitch letter.
Talk a little bit about, beforewe go through, like sort of a
process that you might recommend.
This is useful for people,obviously, when they're trying
to land a book deal, but we'vetalked about this before.
(30:37):
It can be useful for you, evenif you plan on self-publishing
and marketing it yourself.
So maybe just talk a little bitabout the benefits of writing
this letter.
Jason Kuznicki (30:51):
When I wrote my book Technology and the End of
Authority, I went through abunch of different sortas and
writers and talks about theirwork and one of the very first
(31:18):
things that I did in the entireproject was to write essentially
a pitch letter.
And I was working with aneditor who was very interested
in my work to begin with,someone I already knew.
But that still didn't stop mefrom writing a pitch letter.
In a way, it made it veryimportant in a different
(31:41):
direction, because I wanted tomake the argument as clear as
possible in my own mind before Istarted doing the work.
Before I go back to the libraryand read about Rousseau or
Machiavelli, I want to know thatI've got a reason for doing
(32:02):
that.
I want to know what I'm lookingfor in these texts.
I want to know the argument asclearly as possible and one of
(32:32):
the things that I very, very,very useful to me in writing the
book.
Trevor Thrall (32:41):
Yep, so you just said two things and I added a
third that you said before, andit came up with three c's.
It's helps you with clarity,yes, helps, helps you clarify
your thinking.
Once you have written it down,it then provides a compass, it
helps direct your work and, whenyou're done, it's copy, it's
(33:03):
sales copy and marketing copy.
Jason Kuznicki (33:04):
It is the three Cs.
Trevor Thrall (33:06):
Look at that.
We just came up with a coolframework.
That's awesome.
And you know what is funny isthat, uh, you know, in in the
fiction world um, this is nottrue in the non-fiction world,
of course, because we're allplotters in the non-fiction
world.
We all make plans before we trywriting anything.
So writing this kind ofdocument it's like writing a
(33:28):
dissertation proposal, like youdon't get to write the
dissertation until you prove toyour committee that you can
write basically a fancy versionof a pitch letter that we
approve.
That is the compass and showsthat you have clarity about the
project and all that sort ofstuff.
But even fiction writers whocall themselves pantsers, people
who don't like to make the bigplot right, even for those folks
what they will tell you is theycan't write a story if they
(33:51):
don't know the general arc.
They know character A starts inthis situation and ends up here
.
Or if it's two people fallingin love, they end up not knowing
each other and then they end uptogether.
They know they have a versionof that pitch letter.
In a sense it might be verysmall, but it's a kernel.
But I think that vision thatyou have to set out for yourself
(34:13):
, for every project is crucial,regardless if you're going to
let yourself meander sort of alittle bit or whether you're
going to try to really plan itout.
So a pitch letter can be.
It's like a multi-tool, youknow.
It has so many fantasticpurposes and I like your phrase.
It's a tool for thinking.
It really makes you better,right, writing makes you better
at thinking.
It's just no question about it.
(34:34):
I don't think it matters whatyou're writing about, all right.
So I want to write a pitchletter, jason.
What's my best general approachto doing it?
Jason Kuznicki (34:44):
Your best general approach is to imagine
you're writing to a real personbecause actually you are,
because actually you are, and donot get caught up with academic
jargon, don't get caught upwith technicalities.
Don't try to impress them withyour smarts, impress them with
(35:07):
your ability to communicate,introduce yourself, maybe say a
few words about yourqualifications Mention if you're
including a CV, like I'vesuggested and then very clearly,
so no one can miss it, saysomething like the argument of
(35:29):
the book will be as follows, andwrite about a paragraph about
the argument of the book, andmake this a very simple and very
clear statement, much more sothan in your conclusion or even
in your introduction.
You want this to be somethingthat anyone can pick up and read
.
It is not necessarily the casethat your editor is a specialist
(35:54):
in your field.
Your editor will be aspecialist in some field, but
not necessarily yours, and soyou need to introduce your work
here to someone who is, ineffect, a part of an educated
general audience.
That's what you're aiming atfor a nonfiction pitch letter
(36:14):
general audience.
Trevor Thrall (36:15):
That's what you're aiming at for a
nonfiction pitch letter, and infiction it's more or less do
everything you just said.
But it's tell them the story,right?
Yes, tell them the story, thestory and why it fits, the genre
, that you want it, that youtell them the genre and the
sub-genre, because for most ofthe fiction writers, unless
you're writing sort of generaladult fiction, even there there
(36:36):
are so many layers and slicesand niches.
But you know if you're afantasy writer, a science
fiction writer, a romance writer, you know what sub-niche you're
in, because you write it andyou read it, and so does your
agent, so does the publisher, sodoes the editor, and so you
want to be very clear aboutwhere you fit, why your book
fits.
Tell them the story in a quicksynopsis so that they get that
(36:57):
it's the right fit and so on.
Jason Kuznicki (36:59):
Yeah, and one thing that pitch letters will
often do and I do recommend thisis to mention some comparable
titles.
Absolutely, this is often donein the context of marketing, but
also it can help an editor tounderstand in a general sense
(37:21):
what kind of a book it is.
If you're going to write thenext Freakonomics, if you think
you've done that, that'sambitious.
But if you really think you'vedone it, then say so.
But if you really think you'vedone it, then say so.
And if you are not sure whatthe comparable titles are in the
field that are out there, thenperhaps you ought to do some
(37:46):
research and some reading andcome back when you are sure,
because not knowing theliterature in the field is, from
my point of view as an editor,a big red flag.
You should definitely be ableto name right off the bat
several comparable titles.
So I mentioned in my pitchletter that I was imitating a
(38:11):
lot of 20th century intellectualsurvey books, imitating a lot
of 20th century intellectualsurvey books.
So, like I mentioned KarlPopper, the Open Society and Its
Enemies as a book that I wasvery consciously trying to
imitate in my book, now I can'tsay necessarily that I'm as
great a writer as Karl Popper,one of the greatest philosophers
(38:34):
of the last century.
But you know, I know what I'maiming at, I know the kind of
book and the territory that I'min Readers of Karl Popper will
enjoy my book.
Trevor Thrall (38:47):
It's something like that, right?
So it's like King Kong meetsStar Wars.
You know, if you like threeauthors, you're going to love
this, right?
I mean, you see this in booksall over the mall, or Barnes
Noble.
You know, this is how we makesense of what category you're in
, and you want to help peopleget you to the right category
quickly, exactly, yeah, so writefor a specific person.
(39:09):
Is it your mom?
What do you choose, your mom?
Jason Kuznicki (39:13):
your dad.
I tell people the high schoolEnglish teacher.
There you go.
Perfect, you remember your highschool English teacher and you
know that they like writing.
They wouldn't be a high schoolEnglish teacher otherwise and
you want to get them interestedin this new thing that you're
doing.
I've written a romance novelthat I think you'll really enjoy
(39:36):
.
This is what it's about.
Or I've written a mystery, orI've written an examination of
the last 20 years of US tradepolicy, or whatever it might be.
Fantastic, fantastic, fantastic,all right, well, that's, I
(40:00):
think, a great start to thistopic, jason, and for people who
want to learn more, there'sgoing to be a workshop coming up
.
Yes, yes, on the 21st.
Trevor Thrall (40:06):
Absolutely 21st of August.
If you're listening to this inthe year 2026, it's too late.
It already happened last year.
But if you are listening tothis before August 21st 2025,
then you are very welcome tohead over to
12weekyearforwriterscom registerfor this workshop.
Or, if you are a member of thecommunity, the workshop is free.
(40:29):
So make sure to RSVP and wehope to see you guys next week.
All right, jason?
Thanks so much, man.
Good talking to you.
Thank you, good talking withyou.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Law & Order: Criminal Justice System - Season 1 & Season 2
Season Two Out Now! Law & Order: Criminal Justice System tells the real stories behind the landmark cases that have shaped how the most dangerous and influential criminals in America are prosecuted. In its second season, the series tackles the threat of terrorism in the United States. From the rise of extremist political groups in the 60s to domestic lone wolves in the modern day, we explore how organizations like the FBI and Joint Terrorism Take Force have evolved to fight back against a multitude of terrorist threats.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com