Since April 2017, the podcast Always Take Notes has hosted novelists, historians, biographers, editors, journalists, screenwriters, literary agents and publishing industry professionals. We spoke to the co-hosts of this brilliant podcast, Rachel Lloyd, assistant books editor at the Economist, and Simon Akam, a contributing writer for the Economist’s 1843 magazine and author of “The Changing of the Guard - The British Army since 9/11”.
Where did the idea for Always Take Notes come from? And how did you settle on the title?
SA - Around 2016 I was listening to a number of American writing podcasts and it seemed there was not really an established equivalent in the UK. I discussed an idea for an interview-led podcast with Kassia St. Clair, a journalist and the author of “The Secret Lives of Colour”. We decided to launch a show of our own, featuring a broad church of guests and mixing writers with industry figures such as agents, editors and publishers. As far as I recall Kassia thought up the name.
Kassia and I ran the show together for its first 18 months, then she stepped back when her new book came out. For a year I co-hosted with Eleanor Halls, an arts editor at the Telegraph. Rachel and myself have run Always Take Notes together since the end of 2019. The podcast is fortnightly and we’ve just put out the show’s 112th episode.
How does the co-hosting relationship work?
RL - It’s an even division of labour from beginning to end. Every six weeks or so we have a team meeting with our producer, Artemis Irvine, and assign various administrative tasks. We’ll discuss guests we’d like to invite on the show as a group, and then the hosts divide up the list and approach their agents, publicists etc.
When a guest is confirmed, we’ll both do our research but one of us will write an outline for the interview. During the interview itself, we take it in turns to ask questions—just to make sure neither of us hogs the microphone for the whole thing. Then we also alternate responsibility for putting together the newsletter and information for each episode.
How much preparation is involved ahead of each interview? (Is there a typical process?)
RL - We treat every guest with the same respect and that means doing as much research as possible. Ahead of the interview, we ask them to send over three items of work that they’d like to discuss on the show. It can be anything—an article, a novel, a poem, a play, a television series, a manifesto—so long as it is not just their most recent work and instead demonstrates the progression of their career so far. So we’ll look at those items as a starting point, but we will also look into their other work, listen to or read previous interviews they’ve given, find reviews, that sort of thing. We hope to ask guests questions they’ve not received before, so preparation is crucial.
What are the challenges of creating a podcast?
SA - A podcast is a mixture of the singular—each individual episode—and the plural, the sequence of episodes that makes up the show as a whole. That’s particularly true for Always Take Notes as our interviews are pretty evergreen, and many listeners binge deep into the back catalogue. It’s therefore key to have interesting guests and good production values, but also the right mix. Since 2018 we’ve alternated men and women, but we also try to vary both the type of writers—everyone from romance novelists to military historians—and to mix up writers with editors and agents etc.
As Rachel says, we aim to treat everyone with the same seriousness regardless of how new or established, commercial or literary their work is. Beyond that the key has been to build the production into a well-oiled machine. Given our other commitments it has to work efficiently to be sustainable, and in four years we’ve never missed an episode. We keep a good number of recorded interviews in stock so that we are never scrabbling around for content.
On publishing: A calling card of Always Take Notes’ podcasts is going into the nitty gritty of the publishing process. Why is this so important?
RL - The feedback from our listeners is that the creative industries—be it journalism, publishing or screenwriting—seem impenetrable from the outside. They know they want to write and have ideas, but have no clue what to do next or whether it’s a feasible career. That’s why we try to go back to basics with each of our guests: how did they make their first steps in their chosen field, how did they get their first agent or put together their first book proposal? Listeners find it reassuring, we think, to know that even the biggest names in literature have struggled or made some missteps along the way. They often have useful career tips to share, too.
We think it’s particularly important to be honest about money. It’s an area that is often avoided in conversations about writing, as if it’s a noble pursuit sullied somehow by such practicalities, but it obviously plays a huge role in a writer’s life. Very few novelists can get by on their advances alone. Editorial assistants at agencies and publishing houses often earn low salaries, by London standards. It’s probably the single area of the publishing process we strive to demystify the most.
On publishing: Do you think there are still common misconceptions about the publishing process and do these surprise you?
SA - The element that repeatedly strikes me is the difference between the theory of how it all works and the reality. In theory it is meritocratic—you can submit work to a literary agent or an idea to a magazine or newspaper; if it stands out they will develop it, in the former case present it to publishers or in the latter publish it directly. If publishers like a book idea they will take it on.
However, as we’ve seen repeatedly in interviews, if you do not have connections—or failing that an ability and willingness to hustle determinedly—it’s hard to break in. I also think that for all the laudable rhetoric about increasing diversity in publishing the status quo is actually rather comfortable for publishers—to be besieged by aspiring writers and, apart from in a few cases, to have authors substantially subsidise their own investment of time for the books they write. Until money is discussed openly real diversity in publishing is not attainable. The only route out of this seems to be more robust collective bargaining by authors and by writers’ organisations.
On writing: Do you continue to be surprised and/or inspired by the creative processes of the writers you interview?
SA - It’s a huge privilege to sit at the feet of globally admired writers and to ask them really detailed questions about their process—how they do what they do and how they got to where they are. It’s likewise gratifying to make these conversations public so that others, including those entirely outside the literary world, can draw on them.
A key thread for me is that individuals who have built the most successful careers have often clearly done—to choose a zeitgeisty phrase—“work on themselves”. Creativity and writing often have their roots in difficult personal experiences. It’s telling to see who has subsequently put their life and themselves in the best order they can to manage those experiences and not to be managed by them, and who has not. From running to therapy, the methods vary hugely, but the lesson of many of our interviews is summarised by a line of Anton Chekhov’s: “If you want to work on your art, work on your life.”
On writing: every writer has their own way of working but when it comes to the writing process would you say a few universal truths exist?
RL - We have been struck by how different each writer’s process is. Some, such as Alexander McCall Smith, follow a strict schedule; others, such as Anne Enright, disavow the idea of a routine entirely (she said she doesn’t sit at a desk, even!) Many like to complete their research before they start writing in earnest while others do it as they go along. We often find novelists fall into “plotters”—people who work out the arc of the story before they start typing, sometimes down to the smallest details—and “plungers”, those who like to see where their mind takes them.
That said, all of our guests emphasise the importance of finding a process that works and getting the words down on the page. Even if the sentences are clunky and the structure is a mess, there is at least work to revise that way—there isn’t if you stare at a blank screen or a blank page and wait for inspiration to strike. (It may come as no surprise that many guests have also extolled the virtues of a good, sympathetic editor!)
And finally…do you take notes during every podcast? If so, what do you do with them?
SA - I always have a notepad and pen to hand during interviews, and often jot down points that we might want to return to later in the conversation. But more ambitiously we’re also developing an idea for an Always Take Notes book using material drawn from the interviews, an advice-led title that will relate the story of a single creative project from start to finish but in the voice of numerous distinguished individuals. It will move from the conception of an idea to initial development, pitching, building and maintaining relationships with editors, agents and publishers, the experience of publication, success, failure, and of course the role of money. We’re working up a proposal for this at the moment and if anyone would like to hear more do get in touch. Our view is that although our past guests engage in many distinct types of writing the lessons of their work and wider professional practice are surprisingly universal.
Explore the latest episodes from Always Take Notes.
Comments