Jackson Howard and Jonathan Escoffery are part of Harper’s Bazaar’s 2023 Voices of Now, highlighting 36 forces shaping the cultural conversation.

Literature is having a moment. Despite the novel being declared dead every few years, books—fiction in particular—are at the forefront of our political and cultural zeitgeist. BookTok—the community of readers who passionately dissect both high culture mainstays and pop culture passings—drives an enormous amount of discourse and cash toward the book industry. Book publishing has been on the front lines of discussion about what true equity and inclusion might look like. Despite the increased visibility of marginalized authors and books by Black authors and other authors of color topping the bestseller list, publishing as an industry remains homogenous—the vast majority of authors published in the United States remain white, straight, and male. And nothing speaks more to the deep power of literature than the increasing attempts by governments to control it—book bans are on the rise in the United States, even as the vast majority of Americans believe deeply in the freedom to read what they choose. Given all of this, the role of the book editor is more important than ever.

Jackson Howard, editor at Farrar, Straus and Giroux, has distinguished himself as an editor up for the challenge. He has worked on books that range from Let the Record Show, a wide-ranging, deeply researched history of ACT UP and other AIDS activism by Sarah Schulman; to the novels of deeply subversive artists like Brontez Purnell; to the fiction of writer’s writers like Laura van den Berg and intellectual giants like Judith Butler. Howard’s most recent triumph, If I Survive You by Jonathan Escoffery, was short-listed for the Booker Prize, among other awards. The collection of linked short stories explores the life of a Black immigrant family in Miami and is deeply funny, moving, and beautiful. Here, in a conversation with Harper’s Bazaar, Howard and Escoffery discuss the value of gatekeepers, building trust in the creative process, and the special relationship between writers and their editors.

What makes the bond between an editor and a writer so unique?

Jonathan Escoffery: I never really gave too much thought about it. Prior to having a book, the main concern seemed to be: Will these gatekeepers let me in? That obviously changed once Jackson and I started working together. We both have this book baby together. [And he is invested in] getting it to the broadest possible readership, but also making sure that the artistic integrity is maintained.

I wanted to work with Jackson because I really like the way we communicate. It’s important that I can disagree with my editor, but do so in an open and honest way.

Jackson Howard: I approach each book differently. With Jonathan, these stories had been published in really great outlets, and they were already really polished. We did do some work on the page, but really my job was the publishing aspect.

There are a few parts of what I do … acquiring, editing, and publishing are probably the three main things. The publishing part has to do with everything from the cover to the copy, to the blurbs to being really involved in the publicity and marketing meetings. That’s something editors have always done.

I feel like these days, with our current attention economy with the internet, it’s kind of unavoidable for editors to be as involved as publicists and as involved as agents, and we don’t just edit the book at this point. I’m dealing with expectations a lot, and that’s a hard thing to manage. I want all of my books to win every award and sell a million copies. But that’s not how our world works. It’s about really approaching other writers I work with as a peer. But also knowing that my job is to work for them.

Jonathan touched on this earlier, but there’s a real belief in the editor as gatekeeper—a term that’s become very loaded, almost a dirty word today.

Howard: In some ways, gatekeeping is almost an idealistic term. It assumes that I’m just sitting there and I have complete control of, like, This one and not this one and not him. I think that term is really important, because when I think about my job through that lens, it makes me recognize the power I do have.

I always stop and think, Am I more comfortable with this writing because they went to Iowa and it’s somebody who lives in Brooklyn? Or: How do I think about this (piece of writing) if it’s an experience that I don’t share, that I’ve never come across before? That’s the type of thought that should go into that (role of gatekeeper).

I really just look for what’s good. And I can’t do that without the context of how simply unfair this industry has been and all cultural industries have been to certain voices. I take that seriously, while also recognizing that it’s a lot more than just me waving my magic wand. Even if I am putting a book forward, there are a lot more gates that we have to open beyond signing the book deal.

I mean, I actually am minding who gets it in and who gets out. But I can’t look at that as a completely a moral crusade, because I think that cheapens my authors’ work.

What do you think about it, Jonathan?

Escoffery: For me, I didn’t necessarily understand it at the beginning, but it’s one of the best things to happen to my writing—being rejected over and over again. It’s just blatantly obvious to me that one who practices more and more, and reads more and more, and tries to understand the publishing and literary landscape, and tries to understand who their work is in conversation with, is going to improve. And I think the gatekeepers are part of the process.

There are the people who are really waiting to be told what’s acceptable because someone somewhere at some other house, some other editor took a chance on some other writer and it paid off and now they’re willing to publish you. And then there are the gatekeepers who recognize, Okay, this is something that maybe I don’t fully have a grasp of, because it’s not coming out of my experience or I haven’t quite seen this done on the page, but I actually recognize that this is something that’s gonna actually push us forward. Those are my favorite gatekeepers, and those are the people I want to be working with.

Trust is such an important part of the editor-writer relationship. What moment made you realize you could trust each other to work together on this book?

Howard: We’d just had our first meeting, and I spoke really directly to Jonathan. I really wanted to publish this book, very badly. I went out on a limb and said that what I loved about the book was its humor, first and foremost. I really was looking at it as a book about family and manhood and not as a Black trauma piece of fiction, and I feel like that was maybe a bold thing for me to say at the time. But it resonated with Jonathan, and I felt like we understood each other.

But I knew after I acquired the book … I was in L.A. and Jonathan and I had lunch. I remember he ordered some sangria, and I was like, Hell, yeah, this is like my type of guy. He had some time to kill and I was like, “I’m not doing anything.” So he came over to my mom’s house. I had to do some work, and he had to do some work, and we just kind of hung out on my mom’s roof for three hours. After that I was like, Okay, this is somebody I can have a drink with and hang on my mom’s house with. And at the very least, even if we don’t become friends through this, I know what type of person he is and that means I know what I can ask of him.

Escoffery: From the writer’s side, you’re putting a lot of trust in the hands of your editor. I mean, frankly, they can tell you anything. And you don’t know until they follow through. You have to build the trust through actually working together after that. Seeing that he held true … that meant a lot to me.