Rating: 
Summary: Solid and entertaining
Review: Perhaps the best endorsement I could give this book is to say I finished it cover to cover for the second time in a two month period and I still have several unread writing books sitting on the shelf. The tone is more familiar and casual than some of the other more "scholarly" sounding books I've read, which isn't to say it is not serious just more reader friendly.
I recently wrote a review for Stephen King's "On Writing" which is also a great book on the craft and includes some personal history. That book made me feel as if I was hearing from an old friend. I noted in that review that "First Five..." made me feel as if I was hearing from a friend.
The difference I think was the personal touch in the former, lacking in "The First Five Pages" but not altogether absent. I'd like to see a revision with more personal anecdotes or at least more stories similar to the ones Lukeman uses to open some of his chapters. It is interesting to hear an insiders view of back room deals or books that were once rejected but later won acclaim. It makes the learning part easier because it adds an element of enjoyment.
There is plenty of information here to help the aspiring writer the format is simple: the first thing that gets a work rejected is "A", the second thing is "B", etc. To get published a writer must eliminate "A", then eliminate "B", etc. While it is true that the actual order of items is subjective, I am sure it is close enough and besides if something is wrong it needs to be fixed regardless of it's relative importance.
There are lots of examples of bad text. I quickly skimmed these in my second reading as they are so blatantly bad. One improvement I'd suggest in a revision would be to use more real and true to life examples. It is bordering condescension to be told that writing something like this has problems with it:"Let me get your eggs" said Mary.
"Ok" said John.
"Do you like salt with them?" asked Mary.
"Not today" replied John, "Maybe tomorrow".
Eggs are so good. You could eat them everyday. I bet you eat eggs.
White.
Yellow.
Dipping toast.
Yummy.
That was the day Mary beat John to death with a dictionary. I can see this myself easy enough. What I'd really prefer is to see actual examples of that was either published or at least sent to an agent or publisher in an otherwise decent book. One other slight (at least for me) problem was the end of chapter exercises. While I realize these weren't on the order of: "Take a blind man, his dog and a long board and incorporate them into a story involving a blizzard." I still found them to just get in the way of my reading. Perhaps this quote from Swain has tainted my thinking: "The man who cottons to exercises generally isn't cut out to be a fiction writer." -Techniques of The Selling Writer.
On the whole I strongly recommend this book, it should be on the desk of every unpublished yet serious fiction writer. I will most definitely be referring to it again.
Rating:
Summary: A great reference tool for writers at all tiers.
Review: I bought this book to help me figure out how I can stop getting rejected so often. I wish I would have read it before I started writing. As clear and concise as Strunk & White, this little book is an important addition to any writer's toolbox. It covers all the bases on how to make bad writing good, and good writing great. If I had a complaint, it would be that the examples of what not to do are so horribly written. Then again, they get the point across without a lot of time-consuming study!
Rating: 
Summary: The title's misleading.
Review: This book doesn't offer specifics on the finer distinctions that agents make when considering the rejection pile. It uses examples of horrible writing. As an aspiring writer, I would have rather seen work that was pretty good, but didn't make it because . . . And then the author (agent) could have provided specific constructive suggestions and techniques for writers to use to improve their craft. I didn't get much out of this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Makes a Strong Impression
Review: This book doesn't try to be all things to all people. It's not a book about how to write a query letter, or a proposal. It's about how to make sure that the first five pages, mostly your first page, keep you from getting rejected. There are writing exercises at the end of each chapter that will help you make that first five pages snazzy. And it's a powerfully effective little tool. But you'll need this /and/ some other resources to help you sell your novel.
Rating: 
Summary: What? Someone wrote ANOTHER book on how to WRITE?
Review: Any time you can get information from an editor of a book, by all means, go for it. This book is written by an editor so one would hope you would get some insight to getting published. And you do. That is, you do if you haven't already read a number of other books on writting. Funny thing is, most books on writing tell you the same stuff, and this one is no different than, Writing the Blockbuster Novel, How to Write a Damn Good Novel, Self Editing for Fiction Writers and the such. I would recommend to you, the aspiring novelist to READ THIS BOOK, but also to read two others: Elements of Style (type that into the search window on Amazon, its by Strunk and White) and On Writing, a Memoir of the Craft by Stephen King. Great book on what to do and what not to do.
Rating:
Summary: Not What You Think It Is
Review: The First Five Pages does give some insight into how quickly agents and editors will toss a manuscript. It was much more about clear writing than anything else, though, and if the author is right about how little time editors spend looking at the text, good writing wouldn't help either. She cites an example of a man who submitted a Pulitzer-prize winning book in manuscript form--every publisher rejected it. So, editing according to her guidelines will do little to get you published. Incredibly, the author makes no mention of queries or proposal letters; only complete manuscripts. As I understand it, agents and editors almost never accept manuscripts before proposals, so regardless of how good your manuscript is, it will be tossed before it's even looked at. This is a bizarre oversight from someone who is supposedly an industry insider. The emphasis on tight writing is appropriate, but there are other books that succeed here where The First Five Pages fails: Joseph M. Williams "Style: Toward Clarity and Grace," which is the best book I've ever seen on the subject. In short, "The First Five Pages" doesn't seem like the kind of book that should have made it past the editors.
Rating:
Summary: Elitism gone wrong
Review: If one word describes The First Five pages, it is misleading..., no arrogant..., no, annoying ..., a rewrite of something much shorter and better-The Elements of Style. The title is misleading. If anything, this book should be subtitled "Elements of editing", not "The Writer's Guide on staying out of the Rejection pile". [But who would have bought it with such a title?] Nothing is said on how to satisfy an agent or publisher. The most we learn about agents and publishers is they are overworked, underpaid, and omnipotent. Noah Lukeman then tells us many have little experience, and only really want to reject a manuscript to reduce their workload. Nowhere does he tell us how to work within this framework. The entire premise of The First Five pages is arrogance. The premise is agents and publishers can quickly identify good and bad work without consideration of the story. Lukeman tells us how "common mistakes" in presentation, dialogue, characterization, hooks, and tone will torpedo a submission. Get these right and you will receive immediate interest. The realtor's advise of "paint the front door" is throughout. Strangely, Lukeman ridicules the efforts of writers with academic, journalistic or other backgrounds. Anything other than poverty is suspicious-the struggling writer in a garret is superior to a writer with success elsewhere as if there is something redeeming about failure. The tone is elitist-only those anointed by God really know how to write. Many of the references reinforce this point. They are those wordy "classics" we were forced to read in the ninth grade. Nowhere is there the notion that reading and writing should be fun. The best one word description is annoying--annoyance that I foolishly thought the title had something to do with this book. This work can be read as a condemnation of the publishing industry or as help in editing, but not how to stay out of the slush pile.
Rating:
Summary: Practical, Clear and Very Funny.
Review: This is my favorite book about writing -- and reading. It's hilarious and brilliant: a map of the writer's terrain with instructions to the treasure. I'm a produced screen writer working on my first novel. "The First Five Pages" gave me everything I needed to pull together years of writing and rewriting. I believe the author succeeds because he wants his readers to succeed. Even the most abstract concepts are brought to life in an easy-going, heart-to-heart way. If I taught literature or composition -- at any level -- this book would definitely be "required reading" for the course.
Rating:
Summary: Indispensible Tips on What NOT to Do
Review: Subtitled "A Writer's Guide to Staying Out of the Rejection Pile," Lukeman's book is designed not to tell you how to _write_, but to tell you how _not_ to write. The book is divided into three basic sections: "Preliminary Problems" (dealing with issues such as presentation, excessive use of adjectives and adverbs, sound, etc.), "Dialogue" (avoiding cliches, how not to be melodramatic or hard to follow, etc.), and "The Bigger Picture" (the all-important "Show, not Tell," various viewpoints, hooks, and so on. I think the advice on how to grab the reader with the first few pages of the manuscript -- plunging the characters immediately into conflict, and introducing a dramatic element as quickly as possible -- was most useful to me. Many other the other tips may seem subtle at first, but put together, the combination proved to be extremely helpful to me. For those who immediately react negatively when told what NOT to do, I can only offer you two bits of advice: first, when I went back and compared half a dozen of my favorite best-sellers against the advice in this book, I found that every one of them obeyed the rules to a "T". And secondly, I'm of the school that says, "before you can break the rules, you've got to learn what they are." Once they're mastered, then and only then can you make the decision when and how to break them. Lukeman writes from an editor or literary agent's point of view -- understandable, given that he's a major NY-based agent -- but I think beginning writers would be wise to take heed of his words. in Like the author, I can't guarantee that if you follow the rules of THE FIRST FIVE PAGES your book will sell. But it seems obvious to me that your manuscript won't even get past the first step if you make the basic mistakes described in the book. For that reason alone, I consider this book to be one of the most important books on writing I've read (out of several dozen).
Rating:
Summary: Better than most
Review: The First Five Pages does cover just about all the basics, with a lot of succint advise on how to get past the apparently easily bored and hostile first reader/editor/agent. No wonder so many best selling books have to pass through so many agents before they finally get published. Most of the advice is pretty basic and common sense, although as an editor of several newsletters I have seen submissions written on colored paper, onion skin, etc. There are some good tips even for the more seasoned writer, though, and worth a place in your library.
| 
