I just finished a conservative political non fiction book and after a great deal of effort put together a pretty good query letter if I do say myself. Of course, the real problem was the fact that it was a "conservative" book in the world of a very liberal publishing world. Do you honestly think that a first time conservative writer will get a fair shot in the very liberal world of publishing unless of course, he's got a major talk show?
With a straight face - tell me how the publishing world can ignore the fact that the mega hits of non fiction have come from conservatives - without a NY Times book review. Don't tell me that you have to be a major talk show host or big time blogger to write and sell a conservative political book because I think that's just a convenient excuse.
Regnery is no longer the only game in town anymore for conservative publishing - so I know liberals enjoy making money too. Here's a fact that the liberal publishing world cannot seem to deal with: Conservative books, like talk radio, resonate with the rest of America that doesn't live in the bubble of New York or a few other cities - and hold your breath - there are more of us than you!
I couldn't find "Regnery" in the dictionary, but apparently it's a conservative press. Why I didn't think of that first, I don't know.
I won't address the poster directly here, as I don't want to start I fight. I will say that a simple look on Amazon will assure him that there is a huge audience for books by conservatives and the publishing industry knows it and regularly publishes and promotes these books. Glenn Beck's book on common sense (insert your own 'does he have any?' joke here) is currently number 1 on Amazon, which means it sells about 300 copies an hour, and it's been there for 45 days. Mark Levin's Tyranny or Liberty: A Conservative Manifesto is number 9, and number 2 on the New York Times bestseller list for non-fiction (Bill O'Reilly is number 13). This is not unusual; the bestseller list on Amazon is generally made up of fiction that's doing insanely well, books by angry conservatives, and a slot for "flavor of the week" (the Jackson unauthorized biography thing). And this is Amazon, which ranks solely by copies it sells, as opposed to the New York Times, which is ranked in some mystery way no one knows, but does somehow reflect national interest in books. There's very few political books that are bestsellers that I would consider "liberal," though occasionally a book by a Bush staffer makes it up there. My boss handles a lot of "liberal" books that are quite good, and I say that not because of my political affiliations but because I've read them, and they're not rants but summaries and interpretations of things that have happened or are happening in the world, and only one them cracked the NYT and only for a week.
I will add an interesting side note here, which is that a lot of these conservative-rant books (as opposed to books written from a conservative viewpoint discussing history or a particular issue by examining it and drawing conclusions over the course of the book) get some nasty tags on Amazon. Ann Coulter is pretty much the queen of getting bad tags, as every one of every edition of her books was tagged by a ton of people as "stupid" and "evil" and "waste of a good tree." If you are an Amazon junkie, I encourage you to explore the tag system, an entirely impartial (as much as it can be) and spontaneous way that viewers can express praise or criticism of book.
For "waste of a good tree" here are the top 10: (meaning, they got the most of those tags)
Anne Coulter, Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America
Katharine DeBrecht, Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed!
Bill O'Reilly, A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity
Paris Hilton, Confessions of an Heiress
L Ron Hubbard, Dianetics
Alan Sears, The Homosexual Agenda
Ann Coulter, Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism
Ann Coulter, If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans (paperback)
Bill O'Reilly, Who's Looking Out for You?
Ann Coulter, If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans (hardcover)
So, conservative books and Scientology. That's what internet shoppers don't like. For fun you can also try the tags "evil" and "Keeping America stupid" and get mostly the same results.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Monday, July 06, 2009
More Formatting Questions
I apologize if it's been awhile. I haven't been well/upright much the last two weeks, for reasons unexplained and I wouldn't explain a publishing blog anyway.
Hi.
* When starting new chapters, do we just make a few returns (so there's obvious white space) or start each new chapter on an entirely new page?
A new chapter should have a new page.
* Also, when changing POV in a scene, I always used to see * * * * * to indicate the switch. Now I sometimes just see white space. Does it matter how you indicate the POV/scene change?
As long as they're space it doesn't really matter, but you can add something like ****s or ##s if you want, as long as it's unobtrusive and doesn't confuse us into thinking we're reading a new chapter.
* I've looked at several agents' blogs, and different agents suggest different footers/headers. Is there a standard? i.e., should it be book title/name or name/book title at the top left? Also, should the page number appear top right or at the bottom?
Standard is:
AUTHOR'S LAST NAME - PAGE NUMBER - TITLE
In the upper right hand corner of the page on every page. Minor alterations to this, such as the author's full name, or reversing the positioning of the title and the last name, or putting it on the bottom of the page, are not a huge problem unless the agent specifically told you what to do on their website and you didn't do it. Then you look lazy/obnoxious.
Hi.
* When starting new chapters, do we just make a few returns (so there's obvious white space) or start each new chapter on an entirely new page?
A new chapter should have a new page.
* Also, when changing POV in a scene, I always used to see * * * * * to indicate the switch. Now I sometimes just see white space. Does it matter how you indicate the POV/scene change?
As long as they're space it doesn't really matter, but you can add something like ****s or ##s if you want, as long as it's unobtrusive and doesn't confuse us into thinking we're reading a new chapter.
* I've looked at several agents' blogs, and different agents suggest different footers/headers. Is there a standard? i.e., should it be book title/name or name/book title at the top left? Also, should the page number appear top right or at the bottom?
Standard is:
AUTHOR'S LAST NAME - PAGE NUMBER - TITLE
In the upper right hand corner of the page on every page. Minor alterations to this, such as the author's full name, or reversing the positioning of the title and the last name, or putting it on the bottom of the page, are not a huge problem unless the agent specifically told you what to do on their website and you didn't do it. Then you look lazy/obnoxious.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
The Infamous Synopsis
A lot of recent questions seem to be synopsis-related, so I figure I'll go over this once and for all so that it can settle the issue until a few months bury it in the archives and someone new comes along and answers the questions because they don't know how to use the "search" function on the blog.
Writers are irrationally scared of the synopsis. How long is it? Does it have to be really good, or is it just a summary? Should it have the character's name in bold? How is it different from an outline? I remember being terrified of the idea. I'd already gone through the manuscript, the editorial phase, then perfected my query letter - and now I had to write more? Holy shit! This just goes on and on and I could screw up at any time! And I went to write a synopsis for a novel that was rejected, though I assume it was because the novel didn't make much sense and not because of the synopsis. This happened again with a different novel a few years later, and when I did eventually get accepted and get an agent, I was thrilled to be done with the synopsis - or so I thought.
After my first book did well, my editor requested a synopsis of the next two books before she bought them. In a panic I asked my agent what to do, to which she said, "Summarize the books. It's not a big deal."
Which it isn't. Really, the synopsis is straightforward. The agent is asking you for a summary of the events that occur in your book, over about 1-2 pages. I say "1-2" because less than one is probably not descriptive enough in my experience and three is generally too long. Some agents do specifically ask for more, and you should give them a more detailed synopsis. If they ask for it chapter-by-chapter, write a paragraph for each chapter.
While the synopsis can be very important when we're trying to determine if the book is going in a solid direction and has a good arc without reading it all, it lacks a certain formality that squashes the query letter. We're also not as serious about formatting like we are in the manuscript itself, where we really, really want you to use the manuscript format described on every single writing website ever. Why? Because manuscript format is specifically designed to be easy on the eyes - spaces between the lines, large font, page numbering - and we need things to be easy on the eyes because we're going to be spending hours reading your manuscript. The synopsis? Not so much. Twenty or thirty seconds, maybe more. Presentation is not so important. Double-spacing, 1.5, single, whatever. Font? It should be readable. Should the characters have their names in bold? Uhm, if you want, sure.
The only important things are to (a) cover the important events in your manuscript, including the ending, and (b) not go on for too long. Seriously, no 80-page synopses. If we can't tell the difference between a chapter-by-chapter synopsis and actual chapters, your attempts have gone horribly awry. (And yes, this happened) So, 1-2 pages, maybe three if it's a long book with a lot of intricacies and you just can't fit it onto two pages. Only do more if it's requested.
As to an outline, it seems to mean a lot of different things to different people, but to me it means "a synopsis with a lot of structure to it." Really I'm not the person to ask about outlines as I never bother to distinguish them from a synopsis. Follow the agent's instructions and you should be OK.
Publishing will provide you with plenty of chances to stress out over real and imagined crises. The synopsis doesn't have to be one of them.
Writers are irrationally scared of the synopsis. How long is it? Does it have to be really good, or is it just a summary? Should it have the character's name in bold? How is it different from an outline? I remember being terrified of the idea. I'd already gone through the manuscript, the editorial phase, then perfected my query letter - and now I had to write more? Holy shit! This just goes on and on and I could screw up at any time! And I went to write a synopsis for a novel that was rejected, though I assume it was because the novel didn't make much sense and not because of the synopsis. This happened again with a different novel a few years later, and when I did eventually get accepted and get an agent, I was thrilled to be done with the synopsis - or so I thought.
After my first book did well, my editor requested a synopsis of the next two books before she bought them. In a panic I asked my agent what to do, to which she said, "Summarize the books. It's not a big deal."
Which it isn't. Really, the synopsis is straightforward. The agent is asking you for a summary of the events that occur in your book, over about 1-2 pages. I say "1-2" because less than one is probably not descriptive enough in my experience and three is generally too long. Some agents do specifically ask for more, and you should give them a more detailed synopsis. If they ask for it chapter-by-chapter, write a paragraph for each chapter.
While the synopsis can be very important when we're trying to determine if the book is going in a solid direction and has a good arc without reading it all, it lacks a certain formality that squashes the query letter. We're also not as serious about formatting like we are in the manuscript itself, where we really, really want you to use the manuscript format described on every single writing website ever. Why? Because manuscript format is specifically designed to be easy on the eyes - spaces between the lines, large font, page numbering - and we need things to be easy on the eyes because we're going to be spending hours reading your manuscript. The synopsis? Not so much. Twenty or thirty seconds, maybe more. Presentation is not so important. Double-spacing, 1.5, single, whatever. Font? It should be readable. Should the characters have their names in bold? Uhm, if you want, sure.
The only important things are to (a) cover the important events in your manuscript, including the ending, and (b) not go on for too long. Seriously, no 80-page synopses. If we can't tell the difference between a chapter-by-chapter synopsis and actual chapters, your attempts have gone horribly awry. (And yes, this happened) So, 1-2 pages, maybe three if it's a long book with a lot of intricacies and you just can't fit it onto two pages. Only do more if it's requested.
As to an outline, it seems to mean a lot of different things to different people, but to me it means "a synopsis with a lot of structure to it." Really I'm not the person to ask about outlines as I never bother to distinguish them from a synopsis. Follow the agent's instructions and you should be OK.
Publishing will provide you with plenty of chances to stress out over real and imagined crises. The synopsis doesn't have to be one of them.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Don't Go All St. Elsewhere On Us
I've heard conflicting things about submitting a synopsis. Some say tell ALL (the plot twists, surprises, even the ending) and others say allude to those events but don't necessarily tell exactly how everything is ironed out. Which is it?
Basic answer here - give away the ending, be it in synopsis or outline form. We want to know that the spy thriller doesn't end all crazy with everyone riding off on a magic unicorn.
Basic answer here - give away the ending, be it in synopsis or outline form. We want to know that the spy thriller doesn't end all crazy with everyone riding off on a magic unicorn.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Small Press vs. No Publication
I have a novel submitted all over the place and have a few requests for fulls. I also have a bite from a very very small press that usually only sells between 100 to 500 copies of a book and usually poetry.
My question is: if the big/medium presses don’t come back with a contract, should I pursue the small press. Knowing I’d have to do all the publicity etc. I think I could sell 500 books easily.
Im working on my next novel which I think will be much better than my first.
Should I shelve my first novel or go with the small press? If I go with the small press and only sell 500 copies, will this hurt me if a I look for an agent for my second (and better) book?
If you get no hits from the big presses, go with the small press. You don't have to take my advice here. It's not a hard-and-fast rule I'm laying down. But I am saying that it is awesome to be published, especially for the first time. You don't know when the next time is going to come, so shoot for the stars. If the small press is your only offer, you should go with it.
The other legitimate option is to shelve it and focus on your new work. I've certainly shelved a lot of work - in fact, most of my work - either to revise it later or never to look at it again, but usually I shelved it after it was turned down everywhere, a surefire sign that something was wrong with it. Some people are not proud of their early stuff. Some people believe that a small press is harmful to your resume. This is not true, necessarily, it just isn't as helpful as you would think in comparison to having a shorter piece published in a major magazine.
A lot of people talk about waiting to have written the "right" book which will land them a good advance at one of the big 5/6 publishing companies. These people generally do not get published.
My question is: if the big/medium presses don’t come back with a contract, should I pursue the small press. Knowing I’d have to do all the publicity etc. I think I could sell 500 books easily.
Im working on my next novel which I think will be much better than my first.
Should I shelve my first novel or go with the small press? If I go with the small press and only sell 500 copies, will this hurt me if a I look for an agent for my second (and better) book?
If you get no hits from the big presses, go with the small press. You don't have to take my advice here. It's not a hard-and-fast rule I'm laying down. But I am saying that it is awesome to be published, especially for the first time. You don't know when the next time is going to come, so shoot for the stars. If the small press is your only offer, you should go with it.
The other legitimate option is to shelve it and focus on your new work. I've certainly shelved a lot of work - in fact, most of my work - either to revise it later or never to look at it again, but usually I shelved it after it was turned down everywhere, a surefire sign that something was wrong with it. Some people are not proud of their early stuff. Some people believe that a small press is harmful to your resume. This is not true, necessarily, it just isn't as helpful as you would think in comparison to having a shorter piece published in a major magazine.
A lot of people talk about waiting to have written the "right" book which will land them a good advance at one of the big 5/6 publishing companies. These people generally do not get published.
Saturday, June 06, 2009
BEA Roundup
Officially, I did not go to the BEA. I went into the building on Sunday, the only day I was available because of Shavuos, but I didn't have a badge and I went to meet with my editor, who was in town for the convention and pre-scheduled it. At that point I could have gotten a free badge from her, but the convention was over in about an hour and I have no more room in my apartment for free books. From my editor and my boss (who attended on Friday), I learned the following things:
(1) There were less people this year. Some booksellers didn't show up at all, or sent very few people. It was not a wasteland, but it was no 2007.
(2) There were a lot of panels on e-books, as nobody knows how to price them and is mad at Amazon for arbitrarily deciding how books should be priced for the Kindle. Whatever the price is, in the publisher's opinion, it's always too low. About a year ago I went to a talk where I publisher said he thought e-books should be priced the same as regular books because they were the same, which had to have been the stupidest thing that came out of anyone's mouth that evening. Obviously they're not the same, and the lower price is a discount because of the production saved in creating a physical book and the money spent on the reader.
(3) Whatever company that decided to send drummers and dancers to promote their new e-Book deserves to die a fiery death of flames, or at the very least get some acid in the face. In other worsd, the people who had to be at the BEA for 3 days (or even 3 hours, really) did not appreciate their ear-pounding presence.
If you have interesting tales from the BEA, feel free to share them with the other readers here.
(1) There were less people this year. Some booksellers didn't show up at all, or sent very few people. It was not a wasteland, but it was no 2007.
(2) There were a lot of panels on e-books, as nobody knows how to price them and is mad at Amazon for arbitrarily deciding how books should be priced for the Kindle. Whatever the price is, in the publisher's opinion, it's always too low. About a year ago I went to a talk where I publisher said he thought e-books should be priced the same as regular books because they were the same, which had to have been the stupidest thing that came out of anyone's mouth that evening. Obviously they're not the same, and the lower price is a discount because of the production saved in creating a physical book and the money spent on the reader.
(3) Whatever company that decided to send drummers and dancers to promote their new e-Book deserves to die a fiery death of flames, or at the very least get some acid in the face. In other worsd, the people who had to be at the BEA for 3 days (or even 3 hours, really) did not appreciate their ear-pounding presence.
If you have interesting tales from the BEA, feel free to share them with the other readers here.
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Travel Writing
I'm back. You probably figured that out from, you know, a new post being up, but I feel like it's the thing to say. For years I haven't traveled abroad because of illness, except to go to Israel, but this year I said, "Screw it, I'm doing okay" and went to Asia, and surprised everyone by not getting sick. Of course I mainly ate trail mix, so that probably contributed to it.
If you're a writer, you should really travel. If you've been saving up for years and you're not dipping into that savings to pay rent, do it now. My plane ticket was cheap, my tour was like half their regular cost, and there were all kinds of free upgrades at hotels because they were deserted. Of course now I have to be really careful with my spending, but I'll manage. As they say, "You can't take it with you." But really, it's important to get out and see something completely foreign, which opens your eyes to so many different things that contribute to the creative process. Man, I hope this is the last time I ever use the words "creative process."
Every once in awhile we get a travel memoir at work - today was one of those days - where the traveler is obviously racist. You can tell because they talk at great length about how open-minded they are and how they're really throwing themselves out there, and then go on to say how like every Middle Eastern guy tried to rape them. You would think that extensive international travel would broaden horizons, not limit them. Of course stereotypes are based on fact, and there is horrible shit out there that will harden your stance on things, but usually if you come out of a place with no respect for its culture and a bad opinion of its people, it's justified because something bad happened to you.
For example: I have friends I met through the SCA who were shot at by a Palestinian sniper on a regular basis, and knew people who had died because the windows of the car weren't bulletproof. They could point to the sniper site, actually, from their backyard. The problem was, they lived on the border with Gaza (a lesser border, with just some chicken wire up), and a blue-topped UN car would drive up and down the road every once in a while to make sure that the Jewish townspeople weren't violating Palestinian territory by, say, arresting or killing the one sniper. Or just destroying his nest. Nope, the UN is there to safeguard the Palestinians. Thank goodness.
Now obviously that's an isolated situation, and the politics are vast and complex and the Palestinians are really suffering, not entirely but mostly because of Israel, but I would see a lot of situations like that, and they would harden me, whether I wanted them to or not. Like seeing a blown-up bus or having a friend who was on a bus that blew up, but she got off just in time because she was in the back. These things are events that shape your perception because they're just so terrible, and if you happen to write about them, you should probably do so with every attempt at perspective (that sniper felt the Israeli community had stolen his home even if it wasn't true, he was given a gun by the government but not food, he sincerely felt that the situation was desperate enough to call for violence, and if he had his own home and good plumbing and and a job, maybe he wouldn't pick off kids walking from the school building to their houses with a rifle, i.e. some of this is our doing for not helping him). People have called me a racist for telling the sniper story, though people have also called me a racist for saying that Scientology is a dangerous cult, so I feel that word is just thrown around a lot. Also, Scientology is a dangerous cult.
It bothered me that this writer, who was talking about the 1970's when she traveled around Asia Minor and the Middle East, discussed her various fears based on ignorance (she wouldn't be allowed in mosques, she would be raped, she would get involved in some Arab honor killing somehow) and then described a trip where none of those fears manifested into reality, and she had no attempt to justify her early assumptions or say something like, "How foolish I was to think that all Turkish men are gay." It just astounds me that a person could be that way, and then have the gall to write about it as if she did a great thing by traveling to these horrible countries where the food was all bad because she didn't know what it was and so she ate bread and onions the whole time.
So, travel. Then consider what you actually want to say before you write about it. We will judge you.
Note to commentors: I am not interested in turning this into an Israeli-Palestinian political discussion; I was just using that as an example. I will reject comments that are about that and not writing or travel writing and instead are attempting to inform me of how racist I am.
If you're a writer, you should really travel. If you've been saving up for years and you're not dipping into that savings to pay rent, do it now. My plane ticket was cheap, my tour was like half their regular cost, and there were all kinds of free upgrades at hotels because they were deserted. Of course now I have to be really careful with my spending, but I'll manage. As they say, "You can't take it with you." But really, it's important to get out and see something completely foreign, which opens your eyes to so many different things that contribute to the creative process. Man, I hope this is the last time I ever use the words "creative process."
Every once in awhile we get a travel memoir at work - today was one of those days - where the traveler is obviously racist. You can tell because they talk at great length about how open-minded they are and how they're really throwing themselves out there, and then go on to say how like every Middle Eastern guy tried to rape them. You would think that extensive international travel would broaden horizons, not limit them. Of course stereotypes are based on fact, and there is horrible shit out there that will harden your stance on things, but usually if you come out of a place with no respect for its culture and a bad opinion of its people, it's justified because something bad happened to you.
For example: I have friends I met through the SCA who were shot at by a Palestinian sniper on a regular basis, and knew people who had died because the windows of the car weren't bulletproof. They could point to the sniper site, actually, from their backyard. The problem was, they lived on the border with Gaza (a lesser border, with just some chicken wire up), and a blue-topped UN car would drive up and down the road every once in a while to make sure that the Jewish townspeople weren't violating Palestinian territory by, say, arresting or killing the one sniper. Or just destroying his nest. Nope, the UN is there to safeguard the Palestinians. Thank goodness.
Now obviously that's an isolated situation, and the politics are vast and complex and the Palestinians are really suffering, not entirely but mostly because of Israel, but I would see a lot of situations like that, and they would harden me, whether I wanted them to or not. Like seeing a blown-up bus or having a friend who was on a bus that blew up, but she got off just in time because she was in the back. These things are events that shape your perception because they're just so terrible, and if you happen to write about them, you should probably do so with every attempt at perspective (that sniper felt the Israeli community had stolen his home even if it wasn't true, he was given a gun by the government but not food, he sincerely felt that the situation was desperate enough to call for violence, and if he had his own home and good plumbing and and a job, maybe he wouldn't pick off kids walking from the school building to their houses with a rifle, i.e. some of this is our doing for not helping him). People have called me a racist for telling the sniper story, though people have also called me a racist for saying that Scientology is a dangerous cult, so I feel that word is just thrown around a lot. Also, Scientology is a dangerous cult.
It bothered me that this writer, who was talking about the 1970's when she traveled around Asia Minor and the Middle East, discussed her various fears based on ignorance (she wouldn't be allowed in mosques, she would be raped, she would get involved in some Arab honor killing somehow) and then described a trip where none of those fears manifested into reality, and she had no attempt to justify her early assumptions or say something like, "How foolish I was to think that all Turkish men are gay." It just astounds me that a person could be that way, and then have the gall to write about it as if she did a great thing by traveling to these horrible countries where the food was all bad because she didn't know what it was and so she ate bread and onions the whole time.
So, travel. Then consider what you actually want to say before you write about it. We will judge you.
Note to commentors: I am not interested in turning this into an Israeli-Palestinian political discussion; I was just using that as an example. I will reject comments that are about that and not writing or travel writing and instead are attempting to inform me of how racist I am.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
It's About Time Is All I Can Say
Despite the current economic crisis and the size of my royalty check, I am going on vacation. I know it seems like I take a lot of breaks because of writing or the constant barrage of Jewish holidays, but now I am seriously taking advance of the excellent airfare available and going away. I will be not near my computer or updating this site for about three weeks.
While I'm gone, I'm disabling comments so I don't have to approve anything in the few stops I will be making to internet cafes. Take some time to enjoy the many other publishing blogs out there and then when I return you can complain about how we give contradictory advice and have typos in our blogs.
Be well!
While I'm gone, I'm disabling comments so I don't have to approve anything in the few stops I will be making to internet cafes. Take some time to enjoy the many other publishing blogs out there and then when I return you can complain about how we give contradictory advice and have typos in our blogs.
Be well!
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
The Earth Takes One for the Team, Again
Hi Rejecter,
Why do agents still go from a five-page sample with a query, to a partial, to a full? I understand the wisdom of taking samples and partials when submissions arrive primarily in dead tree form, but in this day of electronic submissions and vast inboxes, storage doesn't seem like it would be a problem. What other function does the system serve for agents?
I'm to combine the answer with an answer to this comment by someone else:
Yes, Priority + DC is what I use. I was callling that "Express," without realizing that express actually means overnight.
So, when facing a dinosaur (i.e. they insit upon snail mail), then I respond with Priority mail + DC. There is never a reason for overnight. If they want it that fast, I'd say they need to accept emailed attachments.
Furthermore, it's becoming an environmental taboo to use paper and fuel-hogging snail mail--I don't want to be repped by an environmentally insensitive company, so if they don't take e-mail, they're probably not going to work out for me, anyway.
Mionions, I have spoken.
So this may be shocking to some people, but some people have problems reading manuscripts on a computer screen. The computer screen was not designed to be easy on the eyes and e-Readers are still ludicrously expensive. So is printer ink and paper and we don't like spending money on a client until they are actually a client, because then it's just lost money. So, when we ask for something in hard copy, it's so we can read it without our eyes starting to burn. Granted I'm on the internet a lot, I do read things online, but if I had to do it all day every day for novels, I would be wearing glasses a lot sooner. Yes, it's not environmentally friendly. You know what's not environmentally friendly? Basically everything we as human beings do on this planet. So until they invent an e-Reader that's like $20 and everyone in the publishing industry buys one to save paper, deal with it.
Moving on and assuming the agent asked for hard copy, most agents don't ask for 5 page partials. they ask for at least 30 or 50 pages, or three chapters. I knew an agent who asked for 5 pages, but she made a lot more partial requests than the average agent, knowing the writing would just knock off most of the submissions and she could tell that in 5 pages. It wasn't very paper-efficient and I don't know if she still does that.
If you feel really bad about the environment, watch the show Life After People, which relieves some of the collective guilt by showing just how quickly nature will reclaim the earth after we're gone.
Why do agents still go from a five-page sample with a query, to a partial, to a full? I understand the wisdom of taking samples and partials when submissions arrive primarily in dead tree form, but in this day of electronic submissions and vast inboxes, storage doesn't seem like it would be a problem. What other function does the system serve for agents?
I'm to combine the answer with an answer to this comment by someone else:
Yes, Priority + DC is what I use. I was callling that "Express," without realizing that express actually means overnight.
So, when facing a dinosaur (i.e. they insit upon snail mail), then I respond with Priority mail + DC. There is never a reason for overnight. If they want it that fast, I'd say they need to accept emailed attachments.
Furthermore, it's becoming an environmental taboo to use paper and fuel-hogging snail mail--I don't want to be repped by an environmentally insensitive company, so if they don't take e-mail, they're probably not going to work out for me, anyway.
Mionions, I have spoken.
So this may be shocking to some people, but some people have problems reading manuscripts on a computer screen. The computer screen was not designed to be easy on the eyes and e-Readers are still ludicrously expensive. So is printer ink and paper and we don't like spending money on a client until they are actually a client, because then it's just lost money. So, when we ask for something in hard copy, it's so we can read it without our eyes starting to burn. Granted I'm on the internet a lot, I do read things online, but if I had to do it all day every day for novels, I would be wearing glasses a lot sooner. Yes, it's not environmentally friendly. You know what's not environmentally friendly? Basically everything we as human beings do on this planet. So until they invent an e-Reader that's like $20 and everyone in the publishing industry buys one to save paper, deal with it.
Moving on and assuming the agent asked for hard copy, most agents don't ask for 5 page partials. they ask for at least 30 or 50 pages, or three chapters. I knew an agent who asked for 5 pages, but she made a lot more partial requests than the average agent, knowing the writing would just knock off most of the submissions and she could tell that in 5 pages. It wasn't very paper-efficient and I don't know if she still does that.
If you feel really bad about the environment, watch the show Life After People, which relieves some of the collective guilt by showing just how quickly nature will reclaim the earth after we're gone.
Friday, May 01, 2009
Dropping Off Requested Material
If you live in New York, any harm in dropping it off quickly and politely, leaving it with the receptionist?
Ask. Agents feel differently about this, usually depending on how often they actually come into the office (as opposed to working from home) and whether they actually have a receptionist. I used to work for an agency that did not have one, and anyone could walk in, and we all want to avoid the awkward conversation with the author we are probably going to reject, statistically. My current boss works in a building with a lot of different small offices and does have a receptionist for the building, so she allows drop-offs, but only when she knows to expect them and ask if there's anything behind the desk for her.
Ask. Agents feel differently about this, usually depending on how often they actually come into the office (as opposed to working from home) and whether they actually have a receptionist. I used to work for an agency that did not have one, and anyone could walk in, and we all want to avoid the awkward conversation with the author we are probably going to reject, statistically. My current boss works in a building with a lot of different small offices and does have a receptionist for the building, so she allows drop-offs, but only when she knows to expect them and ask if there's anything behind the desk for her.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Saving $$$
Today I opened an express mail envelope that contained a requested partial.
Really, you don't have to do this. Express mail is very expensive. If we request a partial, we expect to wait 2-5 days for it, at least. If we for some reason need it faster than that (if you have a book deal with the publisher and are just agent-shopping before you sign on the dotted line), we'll say so, and then you can ask if you can email it.
If you're querying via mail, you're going to be spending money. You can spend it unnecessarily if you want, but don't think dropping a twenty on express mail will impress us. Your manuscript is the thing that needs to impress us. Save some money and send it media mail or at worst, priority. If you live in a state close the agent, totally send it media mail.
Really, you don't have to do this. Express mail is very expensive. If we request a partial, we expect to wait 2-5 days for it, at least. If we for some reason need it faster than that (if you have a book deal with the publisher and are just agent-shopping before you sign on the dotted line), we'll say so, and then you can ask if you can email it.
If you're querying via mail, you're going to be spending money. You can spend it unnecessarily if you want, but don't think dropping a twenty on express mail will impress us. Your manuscript is the thing that needs to impress us. Save some money and send it media mail or at worst, priority. If you live in a state close the agent, totally send it media mail.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
The Agent For You
Dear Rejector,
My memoir involves my experiences in music. The agent who wants to represent my work is passionate about my book, understands the concept and what I am trying to do, and all of his books are extremely successful. My only concern is that most of the books he represents are mainstream Christian. Although my book doesn’t fit anywhere in that category, this agent seems perfect for me in so many ways. His Christian books are all best sellers, so clearly this agent knows what he is doing in that area. Will he have the same pull with publishers in a book that is off his topic area?
If he's a good agent, he wouldn't offer to take you on without some idea of whom he was going to sell your material to. Ask him where he would try to sell it and what editors he knows. If he has a comprehensive response, he'll be a good agent for you. If he doesn't have a real plan and you have other options, go elsewhere.
My memoir involves my experiences in music. The agent who wants to represent my work is passionate about my book, understands the concept and what I am trying to do, and all of his books are extremely successful. My only concern is that most of the books he represents are mainstream Christian. Although my book doesn’t fit anywhere in that category, this agent seems perfect for me in so many ways. His Christian books are all best sellers, so clearly this agent knows what he is doing in that area. Will he have the same pull with publishers in a book that is off his topic area?
If he's a good agent, he wouldn't offer to take you on without some idea of whom he was going to sell your material to. Ask him where he would try to sell it and what editors he knows. If he has a comprehensive response, he'll be a good agent for you. If he doesn't have a real plan and you have other options, go elsewhere.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Death of a Contract II: The Hypothetical's Revenge
Dear Rejecter:
How about this scenario: Agent sells author's first novel to a well-known house and a well-regarded editor. Agent then leaves agency for another line of work, and is succeeded by another agent from same agency, who is not nearly as committed and energetic. Editor who bought book jumps to another house without taking the book with her. New editor clearly doesn't understand the manuscript, dislikes it and sends a lengthy letter essentially demanding a stem-to-stern rewrite with major changes to key characters that will destroy intent of said novel. Agent is useless and apparently has not even read the manuscript. After some more dicking around, editor cancels contract.
Heard that one often?
Usually when I'm answering questions, they're not so much theoretical as situations the author is in or heard about. Here we have a situation that's pretty far gone in the theoretical area, but I'll look at it anyway. The situation is: author gets book contract via agent, and then both agent and editor abandon her.
(1) The agent. You can fire your agent if you don't like them. Most agents work only off a verbal agreement with their clients anyway (though a contract is not unusual) so all you have to do is say, "I don't want you to be my agent anymore." The tricky thing here is that the agency's name is undoubtedly on the contract. The agent represents the author, so though the author's name appears on the contract and it requires the author's signature, somewhere in the first few paragraphs of a typical contract is a notation making it clear the author is represented by the agency, and all monies will go to the agency address and not the author's address. If you have a legitimate reason to fire your agent, but their name is on a contract, they may fight to keep it there and collect their 15% on future royalties. I'm not actually sure how you would go about solving this situation if you felt the 15% wasn't deserved, as I've never had this come up before. In this case, though, the 15% is deserved, as the agency did make the deal, even if it wasn't that particular agent at the agency who made the deal.
There's some issues between agents that go on for years, usually not involving the author. For example, my boss used to be a subagent at another agency when she was starting out. Her boss got a cut off her earnings. When the contracts were signed, they had the agency name on them. Now it's been a few years, but there are still some royalties being earned by authors who have followed my boss when she formed her own agency, but as her old boss had a part in the original contract, the money still goes through her old boss and has to be passed on to her. We get a lot of mail with that agency's letterhead on it. You would think agents wouldn't fight over pennies (in this case it's not a fight; it's a completely mutual agreement that does not subtract from the author's cut in any way) but sometimes they're not pennies. You never really know if a book is going to succeed wildly or get a second wind (especially if it's a political book) and royalties are going to be rolling in; the agent and their old boss have it worked out as to who gets what and where before the check is cut to the author, still at the rate of 15% for the agent(s).
(2) The editor. This may be a problem and it may not be. If the book was fairly far along in the process, it might not be a big deal. Editors work on things they don't care for all the time, either because they got handed someone else's workload or because they're an assistant to a bigger editor or a long list of other reasons. Editors are editors; their responsibility is to edit, which can be as minimal as "let's see if there's any huge inconsistencies before it goes to the copyeditor." If the deal is done, and the advance has been paid, and the publisher has already invested money in publicity for the book and hours of editorial, then the publisher has a good reason to go forward with the book and the editor has a good reason to just do their job and push the book to the copyeditor's and be done with it. If the editor decided to kill the book, there would need to be a really legitimate reason to justify all the time/money already spent on it. If the editor doesn't care for working on the book, they'll probably rush it to the copyeditor, who usually has no emotional investment in the book and is simply doing their job, which is to copyedit the hell out of the manuscript before it goes to layout. Once it's in the copyeditor's hands, it's pretty much going to be published unless something unusual happens, like the company goes bankrupt.
EDIT: So I'm now told this was not a theoretical; it happened long ago. Says the person who emailed me:
It wasn't a theoretical situation -- all of it happened several years ago. The book had already been scheduled (as a paperback original) and the cover design was being discussed. The author in question did drop the agency. A portion of the advance had been paid, and the author was never dunned for it. I've had writers and agents tell me this is the worst publishing story they've ever heard.
I'm not going to change whole post around, but yeah, that is a pretty bad situation. It also is very rare, I'm assuming.
How about this scenario: Agent sells author's first novel to a well-known house and a well-regarded editor. Agent then leaves agency for another line of work, and is succeeded by another agent from same agency, who is not nearly as committed and energetic. Editor who bought book jumps to another house without taking the book with her. New editor clearly doesn't understand the manuscript, dislikes it and sends a lengthy letter essentially demanding a stem-to-stern rewrite with major changes to key characters that will destroy intent of said novel. Agent is useless and apparently has not even read the manuscript. After some more dicking around, editor cancels contract.
Heard that one often?
Usually when I'm answering questions, they're not so much theoretical as situations the author is in or heard about. Here we have a situation that's pretty far gone in the theoretical area, but I'll look at it anyway. The situation is: author gets book contract via agent, and then both agent and editor abandon her.
(1) The agent. You can fire your agent if you don't like them. Most agents work only off a verbal agreement with their clients anyway (though a contract is not unusual) so all you have to do is say, "I don't want you to be my agent anymore." The tricky thing here is that the agency's name is undoubtedly on the contract. The agent represents the author, so though the author's name appears on the contract and it requires the author's signature, somewhere in the first few paragraphs of a typical contract is a notation making it clear the author is represented by the agency, and all monies will go to the agency address and not the author's address. If you have a legitimate reason to fire your agent, but their name is on a contract, they may fight to keep it there and collect their 15% on future royalties. I'm not actually sure how you would go about solving this situation if you felt the 15% wasn't deserved, as I've never had this come up before. In this case, though, the 15% is deserved, as the agency did make the deal, even if it wasn't that particular agent at the agency who made the deal.
There's some issues between agents that go on for years, usually not involving the author. For example, my boss used to be a subagent at another agency when she was starting out. Her boss got a cut off her earnings. When the contracts were signed, they had the agency name on them. Now it's been a few years, but there are still some royalties being earned by authors who have followed my boss when she formed her own agency, but as her old boss had a part in the original contract, the money still goes through her old boss and has to be passed on to her. We get a lot of mail with that agency's letterhead on it. You would think agents wouldn't fight over pennies (in this case it's not a fight; it's a completely mutual agreement that does not subtract from the author's cut in any way) but sometimes they're not pennies. You never really know if a book is going to succeed wildly or get a second wind (especially if it's a political book) and royalties are going to be rolling in; the agent and their old boss have it worked out as to who gets what and where before the check is cut to the author, still at the rate of 15% for the agent(s).
(2) The editor. This may be a problem and it may not be. If the book was fairly far along in the process, it might not be a big deal. Editors work on things they don't care for all the time, either because they got handed someone else's workload or because they're an assistant to a bigger editor or a long list of other reasons. Editors are editors; their responsibility is to edit, which can be as minimal as "let's see if there's any huge inconsistencies before it goes to the copyeditor." If the deal is done, and the advance has been paid, and the publisher has already invested money in publicity for the book and hours of editorial, then the publisher has a good reason to go forward with the book and the editor has a good reason to just do their job and push the book to the copyeditor's and be done with it. If the editor decided to kill the book, there would need to be a really legitimate reason to justify all the time/money already spent on it. If the editor doesn't care for working on the book, they'll probably rush it to the copyeditor, who usually has no emotional investment in the book and is simply doing their job, which is to copyedit the hell out of the manuscript before it goes to layout. Once it's in the copyeditor's hands, it's pretty much going to be published unless something unusual happens, like the company goes bankrupt.
EDIT: So I'm now told this was not a theoretical; it happened long ago. Says the person who emailed me:
It wasn't a theoretical situation -- all of it happened several years ago. The book had already been scheduled (as a paperback original) and the cover design was being discussed. The author in question did drop the agency. A portion of the advance had been paid, and the author was never dunned for it. I've had writers and agents tell me this is the worst publishing story they've ever heard.
I'm not going to change whole post around, but yeah, that is a pretty bad situation. It also is very rare, I'm assuming.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The Death of a Contract
I was expecting to make this post under more depressing circumstances, but I reached an agreement with my editor. I decide to make the post anyway, because it's informative.
Let's say you've got a book deal with a publisher, agent or no agent. You get the long contract in the mail - easily 10-17 pages - and it feels like you're signing away your work. While you are signing a binding legal agreement, you're not actually selling your soul, nor is your publication really guaranteed, though it's mostly guaranteed. Once the contract is signed by both parties, there are three essential ways a contract can be severed:
(1) The author fails to live up to the obligations stated in the contract. The author doesn't deliver the manuscript by the agreed-upon date, the author refuses to revise, the author dies (the company is not obligated to publish the book if the author dies before delivering the contract, though the estate of the author can push for publication if the manuscript has been delivered), etc.
(2) The publisher fails to live up to the obligations stated in the contract. The publisher does not pay the advance money by the agreed-upon dates or in the agreed-upon amount(s). The publisher does not publish the book within the agreed-upon time (usually a year after signing, sometimes two years). The publisher goes under and stops publishing books. Etc.
(3) The author and the publisher do not reach an agreement on the final version of the manuscript. Either party can sever the contract over this, though it tends to be mutual because there's been a ton of fighting leading up to it. Generally editors buy manuscripts that they like, then ask for some revisions to clean up the manuscript. Sometimes the author will deliver a manuscript radically different from the one that was bought (the version that is "delivered" is a version delivered AFTER signing the contract, not necessarily the version the editor read when deciding whether to buy the book). Sometimes the author will refuse to do revisions because they're too radical (in the author's opinion). Sometimes the real life situation the book is based on, especially if it's a political book, will change dramatically and the author will feel that the book is no longer relevant or needs so much altering that it's not worth publishing.
Either way it's a painful process, feeling a tiny bit like a divorce. If the book is not published, any advance money paid must be returned, though if the author decides to just keep it, the publisher has to then sue to the author to try and get it, and if the advance is small enough the legal fees won't be worth it. The author, if they have other books at the same company, may say, "Take it out of my future royalties for book X" so that the author doesn't have to write a check and the publisher doesn't have to process it. Any money not involving the advance spent by the publisher - in editorial hours, promotion, sales, design, etc - is considered lost and the author is not responsible for publisher's expenses.
Publishers try not to let this happen, but it does. Authors die, or disappear, or don't deliver manuscripts. Publishers are bought by other companies and forced to reduce their line. Publishers go under. The editor who bought the book moves to another company and takes the author with them, involving a whole new contract. It happens. It's one of the reasons the contract is so long, covering a ton of possibilities that are not likely to ever happen but occasionally do. The contract is meant to state what everyone's responsibility is in the production of the book and what happens when situation X or Y occurs, and who is responsible for resolving it. Authors and publishers only go to court when (a) huge sums of money are involved and (b) someone is wildly violating the terms of the contract.
There was a case a year or so ago where someone sued their publisher for "failing to promote the book successfully." Essentially she blamed the publisher for the failure of the book and its low sales. I don't remember who it was or how this case turned out, but it would be a difficult case for a judge in my opinion, as nowhere in the contract does it stipulate what the publisher has to do to promote the book, just that it has to do something. The money allotted to publicity and promotion is not a number the author sees at any point, and would look like monopoly money anyway, because it's impossible to tell what those numbers represent unless you work for that particular company's imprint and know precisely what they typically spend on a book in that genre in the area of publicity and what the budget was when they were deciding and how feasible it was to promote this book anyway. In other words, you would have to be the publisher.
Anyone know how that case turned out?
Let's say you've got a book deal with a publisher, agent or no agent. You get the long contract in the mail - easily 10-17 pages - and it feels like you're signing away your work. While you are signing a binding legal agreement, you're not actually selling your soul, nor is your publication really guaranteed, though it's mostly guaranteed. Once the contract is signed by both parties, there are three essential ways a contract can be severed:
(1) The author fails to live up to the obligations stated in the contract. The author doesn't deliver the manuscript by the agreed-upon date, the author refuses to revise, the author dies (the company is not obligated to publish the book if the author dies before delivering the contract, though the estate of the author can push for publication if the manuscript has been delivered), etc.
(2) The publisher fails to live up to the obligations stated in the contract. The publisher does not pay the advance money by the agreed-upon dates or in the agreed-upon amount(s). The publisher does not publish the book within the agreed-upon time (usually a year after signing, sometimes two years). The publisher goes under and stops publishing books. Etc.
(3) The author and the publisher do not reach an agreement on the final version of the manuscript. Either party can sever the contract over this, though it tends to be mutual because there's been a ton of fighting leading up to it. Generally editors buy manuscripts that they like, then ask for some revisions to clean up the manuscript. Sometimes the author will deliver a manuscript radically different from the one that was bought (the version that is "delivered" is a version delivered AFTER signing the contract, not necessarily the version the editor read when deciding whether to buy the book). Sometimes the author will refuse to do revisions because they're too radical (in the author's opinion). Sometimes the real life situation the book is based on, especially if it's a political book, will change dramatically and the author will feel that the book is no longer relevant or needs so much altering that it's not worth publishing.
Either way it's a painful process, feeling a tiny bit like a divorce. If the book is not published, any advance money paid must be returned, though if the author decides to just keep it, the publisher has to then sue to the author to try and get it, and if the advance is small enough the legal fees won't be worth it. The author, if they have other books at the same company, may say, "Take it out of my future royalties for book X" so that the author doesn't have to write a check and the publisher doesn't have to process it. Any money not involving the advance spent by the publisher - in editorial hours, promotion, sales, design, etc - is considered lost and the author is not responsible for publisher's expenses.
Publishers try not to let this happen, but it does. Authors die, or disappear, or don't deliver manuscripts. Publishers are bought by other companies and forced to reduce their line. Publishers go under. The editor who bought the book moves to another company and takes the author with them, involving a whole new contract. It happens. It's one of the reasons the contract is so long, covering a ton of possibilities that are not likely to ever happen but occasionally do. The contract is meant to state what everyone's responsibility is in the production of the book and what happens when situation X or Y occurs, and who is responsible for resolving it. Authors and publishers only go to court when (a) huge sums of money are involved and (b) someone is wildly violating the terms of the contract.
There was a case a year or so ago where someone sued their publisher for "failing to promote the book successfully." Essentially she blamed the publisher for the failure of the book and its low sales. I don't remember who it was or how this case turned out, but it would be a difficult case for a judge in my opinion, as nowhere in the contract does it stipulate what the publisher has to do to promote the book, just that it has to do something. The money allotted to publicity and promotion is not a number the author sees at any point, and would look like monopoly money anyway, because it's impossible to tell what those numbers represent unless you work for that particular company's imprint and know precisely what they typically spend on a book in that genre in the area of publicity and what the budget was when they were deciding and how feasible it was to promote this book anyway. In other words, you would have to be the publisher.
Anyone know how that case turned out?
Monday, April 20, 2009
Blogging
Dear Rejector,
my first question is : do you think that blogging can pay as well as writing novels can?
Yes, if you're the chick who thought up "i can haz cheezburger." Otherwise, probably not. The money to be made in blogs is pretty illusory. I think the ads in my blog have made me about $70 total.
My second question is: how did you become a writer?
I started writing when I was in 3rd grade. As to how or why, I don't really know. As to how I got published: practice, practice, practice, followed by rejection, rejection, rejection followed by a little bit of luck and a decent manuscript after 10 bad ones.
my first question is : do you think that blogging can pay as well as writing novels can?
Yes, if you're the chick who thought up "i can haz cheezburger." Otherwise, probably not. The money to be made in blogs is pretty illusory. I think the ads in my blog have made me about $70 total.
My second question is: how did you become a writer?
I started writing when I was in 3rd grade. As to how or why, I don't really know. As to how I got published: practice, practice, practice, followed by rejection, rejection, rejection followed by a little bit of luck and a decent manuscript after 10 bad ones.
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Offline
Things have been a little slow here at the Rejecter because of Passover/editing book issues, and they're about to get even slower as I log off for Pesach. I'll be back up Saturday night, then down for two days next week, so if you post a comment, it may not get approved for a few days. Feel free to post it anyway, just expect a delay. And if you send a question, it will go in my "to answer" box all the same, so go ahead.
Chag Sameach and Happy Easter to all who celebrate.
Chag Sameach and Happy Easter to all who celebrate.
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
The Boundaries of Young Adult
Hello Rejecter,
I am new to writing and have paged down many months on your blog. I'm not sure if you answer this type of question, but I will ask.
I am at the final chapters of a YA. My question to you is my ms to much for a YA? In brief it takes place in a high school and includes relationships, drugs, sex, kidnapping/torture and murder. It has description to feel the emotions, but not to much depth in the sex and drug portions.
Really, anything goes in YA these days. Basically, don't write smut that has no plot, or PWP as we say in fanfic. (Porn Without Plot or Porn Without Point) And don't be excruciatingly descriptive unless you're being raped and it's an autobiography. Then sit back and wait for the awards to roll in.
Also, do you ever give pro's/con's on query letters?
If by this you mean review them, no.
I am new to writing and have paged down many months on your blog. I'm not sure if you answer this type of question, but I will ask.
I am at the final chapters of a YA. My question to you is my ms to much for a YA? In brief it takes place in a high school and includes relationships, drugs, sex, kidnapping/torture and murder. It has description to feel the emotions, but not to much depth in the sex and drug portions.
Really, anything goes in YA these days. Basically, don't write smut that has no plot, or PWP as we say in fanfic. (Porn Without Plot or Porn Without Point) And don't be excruciatingly descriptive unless you're being raped and it's an autobiography. Then sit back and wait for the awards to roll in.
Also, do you ever give pro's/con's on query letters?
If by this you mean review them, no.
Monday, March 30, 2009
The Rejecter's Rejections
So the editorial situation for my third book is still a mess, and has gotten more complicated, to the point where it's really not appropriate for me to continue posting about it on an anonymous public blog, as a lot of specifics are involved. And curse words.
Today I was back in my hometown to give a speech to students in my high school about my book and the publishing process. This was requested by an English teacher I didn't know, which shocked the hell out of me. I babbled for about 45 minutes and I'm pretty sure I might have said something in there about something related to writing. When I do public speaking it's kind of blur. It's good to go into my 10th reunion this fall with a major accomplishment. I looked in my yearbook when I got there to jog my memory of the names of my teachers, as I am especially terrible at remembering names, and discovered that in my senior profile, I asked people to buy my book (the one I was trying to publish at the time) or "a book by me by another title." Actually the English teacher, the alumni director, and the librarian all got copies from me for free, but the principle is there, which is that I had a dream in high school and I've fulfilled it. I need to come up with some crazier dreams.
Also very satisfying: My mother asked me to clean out my desk while I was home, which was filled with old paper and bank statements that needed to be shredded alongside the very important documents to save, like GRE scores and proof of jury duty service. Included in this desk was a huge stack of rejection letters from various graduate programs in creative writing. I was rejected almost everywhere I applied, and I applied repeatedly: my senior year of college, the year I was in Israel, and the year I was home sick after Israel. I applied to Columbia's MFA program three times (and was waitlisted once, but never got off it). My fiction was apparently "too commercial" as grad professors have admitted off the record. Obvious I did get in somewhere, really a middle tier school looking to expand its program with more students, and even there I was ostracized for writing "popular fiction" and one professor threatened to flunk me if I didn't write about myself. Also I probably burned the bridge of being hired as a professor there by calling the head of the department a sadist to his face.
Number of books under contract 1 year after graduating with my MFA: 5
Anyway, I shredded all of my rejections (and the acceptances to the crappy programs). Let me tell you, it was very satisfying. Especially for Columbia. Three times I paid that application fee, which went up from $85 to $120 the final year. Also Iowa, just because everyone applies to Iowa and no one gets in. Man, they rejected the hell out of me.
So, for those you receiving rejection letters: keep at it. Persistence pays off. And shredding is very theraputic.
Today I was back in my hometown to give a speech to students in my high school about my book and the publishing process. This was requested by an English teacher I didn't know, which shocked the hell out of me. I babbled for about 45 minutes and I'm pretty sure I might have said something in there about something related to writing. When I do public speaking it's kind of blur. It's good to go into my 10th reunion this fall with a major accomplishment. I looked in my yearbook when I got there to jog my memory of the names of my teachers, as I am especially terrible at remembering names, and discovered that in my senior profile, I asked people to buy my book (the one I was trying to publish at the time) or "a book by me by another title." Actually the English teacher, the alumni director, and the librarian all got copies from me for free, but the principle is there, which is that I had a dream in high school and I've fulfilled it. I need to come up with some crazier dreams.
Also very satisfying: My mother asked me to clean out my desk while I was home, which was filled with old paper and bank statements that needed to be shredded alongside the very important documents to save, like GRE scores and proof of jury duty service. Included in this desk was a huge stack of rejection letters from various graduate programs in creative writing. I was rejected almost everywhere I applied, and I applied repeatedly: my senior year of college, the year I was in Israel, and the year I was home sick after Israel. I applied to Columbia's MFA program three times (and was waitlisted once, but never got off it). My fiction was apparently "too commercial" as grad professors have admitted off the record. Obvious I did get in somewhere, really a middle tier school looking to expand its program with more students, and even there I was ostracized for writing "popular fiction" and one professor threatened to flunk me if I didn't write about myself. Also I probably burned the bridge of being hired as a professor there by calling the head of the department a sadist to his face.
Number of books under contract 1 year after graduating with my MFA: 5
Anyway, I shredded all of my rejections (and the acceptances to the crappy programs). Let me tell you, it was very satisfying. Especially for Columbia. Three times I paid that application fee, which went up from $85 to $120 the final year. Also Iowa, just because everyone applies to Iowa and no one gets in. Man, they rejected the hell out of me.
So, for those you receiving rejection letters: keep at it. Persistence pays off. And shredding is very theraputic.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Editorial Demands
General notes: We've been receiving a lot of manuscripts from people about how the car industry failed (in their opinion) or from people who worked as investment bankers and want to talk about all of the wasteful spending they encountered. Not a huge surprise. The mortgage crisis we haven't seen so many books on, but I suppose that's not as interesting to write about, or is simply too complicated to write about except by an expert. And if the last few months have taught us anything, it's that nobody's an expert.
On the home front: I've still been focusing every spare second on revisions for my third book. I had an interesting conversation with my agent (the agent who represents my work, not my boss the agent) about editorial demands on behalf of the publisher and what is realistic, and it turns out that what I was asked to do is way out of the ballpark, but as the book was paid for and is slated for the fall release, I can't do anything but tear up my contract (which I can do, if we fail to reach an agreement on the content of the manuscript) and not get the third book published, so the editor has the advantage. Now I've known editors and spoken to editors and done some editing myself, but I've only been an author working with an editor no two previous books, and it difficult to be on the receiving end of comments that you just plain don't agree with and think would detract from the book.
What you should expect: Generally editors are supposed to tighten the manuscript (or ask you to add more material to clarify the plot), find inconsistencies, and discuss problematic scenes. Some editors do little or no revision because they're overworked and leave it to the copyeditor to find inconsistencies, and I have to say my copyeditor did a fabulous job on the previous book, and found a ton of stuff that was easy to correct (a line or two here and there).
What is not the norm: The editor is not supposed to ask you to dramatically rewrite the book. In theory, the editor buys the book because they like it, and the changes they suggest are to make the book better, but the essential nature of the book was already there when they bought it. Or if they bought multiple books at once (which would be my case), they either read them all when they bought them, or they at least read the chapter-by-chapter summation you provided them with before the contract was signed so they knew what they were getting, at least in theory. If an editor just buys a bunch of books because the first one was successful and doesn't look at the summaries and doesn't even bother to look at the book until two months after you delivered the manuscript but a week before it has to go to the copyeditor's, and discovers they hate the plot, both of you are in trouble. Even though it wasn't your fault as a writer, you're going to be the one to fix it or walk away from your contract and return your advance money. This happens on occasion in publishing, though it is rare. It is, however, a situation you never ever want to get into. If you are selling a multi-book series, my advice is to be absolutely sure the editor has signed off on careful summaries of all the books that haven't been written yet. There is an advange to editors buying books blindly - it means you're more likely to to get your first big break. But it has a disadvantage, too, which I've discovered over the past few weeks, as it's come down to my integrity as a writer versus my career as a writer. Trust me, it is not a good place to be.
On the home front: I've still been focusing every spare second on revisions for my third book. I had an interesting conversation with my agent (the agent who represents my work, not my boss the agent) about editorial demands on behalf of the publisher and what is realistic, and it turns out that what I was asked to do is way out of the ballpark, but as the book was paid for and is slated for the fall release, I can't do anything but tear up my contract (which I can do, if we fail to reach an agreement on the content of the manuscript) and not get the third book published, so the editor has the advantage. Now I've known editors and spoken to editors and done some editing myself, but I've only been an author working with an editor no two previous books, and it difficult to be on the receiving end of comments that you just plain don't agree with and think would detract from the book.
What you should expect: Generally editors are supposed to tighten the manuscript (or ask you to add more material to clarify the plot), find inconsistencies, and discuss problematic scenes. Some editors do little or no revision because they're overworked and leave it to the copyeditor to find inconsistencies, and I have to say my copyeditor did a fabulous job on the previous book, and found a ton of stuff that was easy to correct (a line or two here and there).
What is not the norm: The editor is not supposed to ask you to dramatically rewrite the book. In theory, the editor buys the book because they like it, and the changes they suggest are to make the book better, but the essential nature of the book was already there when they bought it. Or if they bought multiple books at once (which would be my case), they either read them all when they bought them, or they at least read the chapter-by-chapter summation you provided them with before the contract was signed so they knew what they were getting, at least in theory. If an editor just buys a bunch of books because the first one was successful and doesn't look at the summaries and doesn't even bother to look at the book until two months after you delivered the manuscript but a week before it has to go to the copyeditor's, and discovers they hate the plot, both of you are in trouble. Even though it wasn't your fault as a writer, you're going to be the one to fix it or walk away from your contract and return your advance money. This happens on occasion in publishing, though it is rare. It is, however, a situation you never ever want to get into. If you are selling a multi-book series, my advice is to be absolutely sure the editor has signed off on careful summaries of all the books that haven't been written yet. There is an advange to editors buying books blindly - it means you're more likely to to get your first big break. But it has a disadvantage, too, which I've discovered over the past few weeks, as it's come down to my integrity as a writer versus my career as a writer. Trust me, it is not a good place to be.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Frustrations
So if you think once you get an agent and a contract it's all fun and games, you are wrong. So wrong.
(1) Today I got yet another review pointing out the various historical mistakes that (a) were supposed to be cleared up by copy-editing, but the corrections we agreed on were never implemented into the final manuscript file by the editor, and/or (b) were historical inaccuracies that were not part of the book and were slapped onto the back cover and all the promotional material by an overworked assistant who hadn't read the book. Every single review has hit on at least one of these mistakes, neither of which were my fault. Of course I don't respond to reviews, because as an author you don't do that, but I have addressed the issue on my website and in interviews, which of course means nothing to the person who is a discerning historian and just picked the book up in a store. Eighth month after publication and I still want to hit myself in the face whenever I see a review mentioning them and therefore downgrading my book.
(2) The cover for another book of mine went unapproved to Amazon for the pre-order. Now technically I have no control over the cover, but it is a confusing cover that makes no sense and is downright misleading, and I will have to stamp my feet and be really annoying to the already overworked production department to get them to change it, and even once they do Amazon will not bring the changes up until months after it's published. If I can get it changed at all.
(3) Amazon.co.uk has a funny additude of putting a book into pre-order again instead of admitting that they are out of stock, claiming the book hasn't been published yet and will not be published until whatever the next shipment date is, even if they've been selling it for six months. This wouldn't be so annoying if it didn't automatically delete pre-existing reviews (most of my reviews are positive so I don't want them deleted, or the negative ones either so people know what they're getting), because the website thinks this is a whole new book. I wrote Amazon.uk about this, to which their response is, "Send us proof of the original publication date," as if they can't check their records to show they've been shipping the same book for 6 months, they're just out of copies. So I send them a screenshot of the Amazon.com page with the ISBN and publication date, and they don't do anything about it anyway.
(4) Amazon does not believe I'm the author when I say, "Hi, I'm the author and you're incorrect about the description of the book; you should fix this." Even if my publishing company insists that I am, in fact, the author.
This isn't really anybody's fault in terms of being mean or evil, but more a combination of people who are overworked, people asked to do a job they aren't given proper information about, or companies with better things to do with their time. The manuscript passes through a bunch of hands before it makes it to yours, and any one of those could make a change and either not tell me or tell me well after it's possible to fix it. So next time you're reviewing a book, consider that a seemingly minor mistake it might not be the author's fault.
If Philip Dick was alive I would feel really bad for him, as the current edition of his books has summaries on the back that either give away the ending or are just plain wrong about anything that occurs in the book. And Philip Dick books often have twists at the end, so this is a really big problem for the reader.
(1) Today I got yet another review pointing out the various historical mistakes that (a) were supposed to be cleared up by copy-editing, but the corrections we agreed on were never implemented into the final manuscript file by the editor, and/or (b) were historical inaccuracies that were not part of the book and were slapped onto the back cover and all the promotional material by an overworked assistant who hadn't read the book. Every single review has hit on at least one of these mistakes, neither of which were my fault. Of course I don't respond to reviews, because as an author you don't do that, but I have addressed the issue on my website and in interviews, which of course means nothing to the person who is a discerning historian and just picked the book up in a store. Eighth month after publication and I still want to hit myself in the face whenever I see a review mentioning them and therefore downgrading my book.
(2) The cover for another book of mine went unapproved to Amazon for the pre-order. Now technically I have no control over the cover, but it is a confusing cover that makes no sense and is downright misleading, and I will have to stamp my feet and be really annoying to the already overworked production department to get them to change it, and even once they do Amazon will not bring the changes up until months after it's published. If I can get it changed at all.
(3) Amazon.co.uk has a funny additude of putting a book into pre-order again instead of admitting that they are out of stock, claiming the book hasn't been published yet and will not be published until whatever the next shipment date is, even if they've been selling it for six months. This wouldn't be so annoying if it didn't automatically delete pre-existing reviews (most of my reviews are positive so I don't want them deleted, or the negative ones either so people know what they're getting), because the website thinks this is a whole new book. I wrote Amazon.uk about this, to which their response is, "Send us proof of the original publication date," as if they can't check their records to show they've been shipping the same book for 6 months, they're just out of copies. So I send them a screenshot of the Amazon.com page with the ISBN and publication date, and they don't do anything about it anyway.
(4) Amazon does not believe I'm the author when I say, "Hi, I'm the author and you're incorrect about the description of the book; you should fix this." Even if my publishing company insists that I am, in fact, the author.
This isn't really anybody's fault in terms of being mean or evil, but more a combination of people who are overworked, people asked to do a job they aren't given proper information about, or companies with better things to do with their time. The manuscript passes through a bunch of hands before it makes it to yours, and any one of those could make a change and either not tell me or tell me well after it's possible to fix it. So next time you're reviewing a book, consider that a seemingly minor mistake it might not be the author's fault.
If Philip Dick was alive I would feel really bad for him, as the current edition of his books has summaries on the back that either give away the ending or are just plain wrong about anything that occurs in the book. And Philip Dick books often have twists at the end, so this is a really big problem for the reader.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Amazon breaks its own bank
I've been very busy with last-minute edits for my third book, so I haven't had a lot of time to post. But here's this, which I found amusing.
Maybe their discounts are getting a little too deep.
Maybe their discounts are getting a little too deep.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
College Credit
Dear Rejecter,
I have a yes-but question about writing credits. As I understand it, getting published in your college's newspaper never counts as a writing credit. The but is this: But what if your column gets syndicated? A few of the pieces I wrote were syndicated on the website uwire.com. (This is their about page.) Their kind of like the AP wire for college newspapers.
I write fantasy novels so it's not as if a bunch of Anthropology columns are terribly relevant anyway, but I was curious.
College newspapers totally count if you don't say they're college newspapers. The thing that makes it not meaningful is if you've talking about journalism and you've written a novel. It does prove you know how to write, but it doesn't prove you know how to write fiction. You wouldn't believe the people we get who have 20 years' experience working for the AP and can't put together a plot to save their lives.
If you've been published in a college literary journal with a pretentious name, just list the name, not the part about it being a college literary journal. Literary journals prove you can write fiction.
I have a yes-but question about writing credits. As I understand it, getting published in your college's newspaper never counts as a writing credit. The but is this: But what if your column gets syndicated? A few of the pieces I wrote were syndicated on the website uwire.com. (This is their about page.) Their kind of like the AP wire for college newspapers.
I write fantasy novels so it's not as if a bunch of Anthropology columns are terribly relevant anyway, but I was curious.
College newspapers totally count if you don't say they're college newspapers. The thing that makes it not meaningful is if you've talking about journalism and you've written a novel. It does prove you know how to write, but it doesn't prove you know how to write fiction. You wouldn't believe the people we get who have 20 years' experience working for the AP and can't put together a plot to save their lives.
If you've been published in a college literary journal with a pretentious name, just list the name, not the part about it being a college literary journal. Literary journals prove you can write fiction.
Monday, March 02, 2009
Kindle 2: Escape to Royalty Mountain
I can't afford the new Kindle, and therefore haven't seen it and can't comment on it, but I can post a funny cartoon someone else made about it.
Note: 300th post!
Note: 300th post!
Essay Collections
Hello Rejecter,
I often hear that nonfiction is more marketable than fiction. Is that true for all forms nonfiction? My question relates specifically to essays. The Caged Virgin, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, was and is highly acclaimed. It's no secret that she's an excellent writer with a compelling story. That leads me to wonder if the success of The Caged Virgin was an exception rather than the rule. Are publishers generally receptive to essay collections?
It's hard to say which is more marketable because fiction and non-fiction have different markets. Though many agents deal with both, editors tend to focus on one or the other. If you're asking yourself, "Should I write a fiction or non-fiction book?" the answer is, "Write the book you want to write, then submit it for publication. When it's rejected, write another book and try again."
As for essay collections, this can be a tricky situation. Generally agents are not incredibly receptive to essay collections written by people who have not had any of their essays published, much like short story collections. And then it depends where they were published, and what kind of essays they are, but generally boils down to, "Do we think anyone would buy and read this?" Because I can't remember the last essay collection I bought and read, and I read a wide variety of things. My dad bought me a copy of "Best Science Writing of 2001" or something like that, and I think I read two of the essays, and that was a "best of" collection. So, don't bank on it.
If people have successful essay collection publishing stories they are welcome to share them in the comments section.
I often hear that nonfiction is more marketable than fiction. Is that true for all forms nonfiction? My question relates specifically to essays. The Caged Virgin, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, was and is highly acclaimed. It's no secret that she's an excellent writer with a compelling story. That leads me to wonder if the success of The Caged Virgin was an exception rather than the rule. Are publishers generally receptive to essay collections?
It's hard to say which is more marketable because fiction and non-fiction have different markets. Though many agents deal with both, editors tend to focus on one or the other. If you're asking yourself, "Should I write a fiction or non-fiction book?" the answer is, "Write the book you want to write, then submit it for publication. When it's rejected, write another book and try again."
As for essay collections, this can be a tricky situation. Generally agents are not incredibly receptive to essay collections written by people who have not had any of their essays published, much like short story collections. And then it depends where they were published, and what kind of essays they are, but generally boils down to, "Do we think anyone would buy and read this?" Because I can't remember the last essay collection I bought and read, and I read a wide variety of things. My dad bought me a copy of "Best Science Writing of 2001" or something like that, and I think I read two of the essays, and that was a "best of" collection. So, don't bank on it.
If people have successful essay collection publishing stories they are welcome to share them in the comments section.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Thanking Agents
Dear Rejecter,
Several agents have requested my full ms, and one of them recently sent me a very kind no. She clearly gave the book a thoughtful, thorough read and her letter to me included encouraging and constructive feedback. I'd like to send her a thank-you note, acknowledging her time and encouragement. Is this appropriate? Or would an agent just think it was weird to receive a thank-you for what was, after all, a no?
If the agent went through all that trouble, you can do it, but it is a pointless exercise for the most part. We do occasionally get thank you's, oddly enough for queries, and they're pointless and we just throw them out. But for what she did, it wouldn't hurt, certainly, if you send something else to that agent sometime in the near future.
In all other situations I would not recommend the waste of paper and postage.
Several agents have requested my full ms, and one of them recently sent me a very kind no. She clearly gave the book a thoughtful, thorough read and her letter to me included encouraging and constructive feedback. I'd like to send her a thank-you note, acknowledging her time and encouragement. Is this appropriate? Or would an agent just think it was weird to receive a thank-you for what was, after all, a no?
If the agent went through all that trouble, you can do it, but it is a pointless exercise for the most part. We do occasionally get thank you's, oddly enough for queries, and they're pointless and we just throw them out. But for what she did, it wouldn't hurt, certainly, if you send something else to that agent sometime in the near future.
In all other situations I would not recommend the waste of paper and postage.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
In These Harsh Economic Times...
Dear Rejector:
The following is gleaned from the latest issue of Publisher's Weekly:
“With bookstore sales falling the last four months of 2008, total sales for the year fell 0.5%, to $16.93 billion.”
“Bookstore sales were off 4.7% in December, an improvement over the 13.0% and 5.6% declines posted in November and October.”
“Sales for the 81 publishers that report their revenue to the Association of American Publishers fell 2.4%, to $10.6 billion, in 2008. . . The 13% decline in the adult hardcover segment was the result of a 5.3% drop in gross sales plus a steep 10.8% increase in returns.”
As you know, Houghton Mifflin has stopped accepting new submissions and Borders is on the ropes.
How is the downturn in book sales affecting literary agencies? Are agents taking on fewer new clients? Are agencies relying more on their existing best selling authors? Are colleagues of yours in fear of losing their jobs? How should unpublished authors trying to break in view all of this? Should we follow in Hemingway's and Poe's footsteps and just do ourselves in? Worse -- get a real job?
Yes, chicken little was right. The sky is falling. Soon people will be burning books for fuel and attaching spikes to their cars. Me, I plan to camp out at Walmart. I think I could last pretty long in a Walmart in some kind of massive global socio-economic destruction. They have food and clothing and camping equipment and generators. I would be fine.
Despite the corporate doom-and-gloom, publishing is actually a fairly stable industry in that people always want/need books. It's either for school or escapism, and it's rather cheap escapism, as most mass market paperbacks are now cheaper than a movie ticket and the book will last you longer. And not all publishing companies are doing badly. Yes, I don't know an editor who isn't under a little extra stress (or a lot of extra stress because half her department was cut and merged with another imprint), but most companies are in the black or near the black, and the ones doing well are being tight-lipped about it, hoping no one will figure out their secret. (Hint! It's probably cheating the authors with low advances and bottom-level royalties!)
The one company that is actually gaining in this crisis is Amazon, despite the rising cost of postage and increasingly slow speed of mail, along with the bankruptcy of DHL (bad for Barnes and Noble). Their used book seller program is probably generating them insane profits, allowing them to slash prices on new books, which then increases buying and gets them more profits. My book was recently reduced by about $1.50 on Amazon and is now selling about twice as many copies. I don't care about the sticker price, as my contract stipulates that I get my royalties based on the established retail price (the price set by the book company), so whatever the stores sell it at, I still get the same $1.12 or whatever it is per copy. Also, another way Amazon is able to offer great deals is that while bookstores have earn 50% of the retail price (the rest going to the publishing company), Amazon earns 55%, meaning it makes more on each book and can afford to keep the prices down to attract customers. Also Amazon sells a lot of other stuff, which just generally keeps the company afloat. I recently bought $35 headphones through a used seller for $4.00 AFTER shipping. And they were new in box.
Will the publishing companies go bankrupt? I doubt it. They may decrease in size, merge imprints, merge companies, or just shift around their lists, but they will survive and then thrive when the economy picks up again. People need books and POD technology is not yet economically viable to produce those public domain classics; you need a real company to do that. When the cost of POD goes down significantly, we will probably see a real restructuring of the industry, but not before.
What does this mean to literary agents? Well, advances are lower and it's certainly a bad time to become a literary agent, but my boss doesn't seem worried at all. If anything, she's rejecting more because we're seeing more queries as people who've been laid off submit books now that they have the time to write them. A ton of queries in her inbox can put her in a rejecting mood if she's just gotten some contracts out for rights in Indonesia and the Korean translation of the newest bestseller on her list just came in. This doesn't affect my work. Actually, it puts you guys at an advantage, as I'm not prone to be busy with another area of the business and reject queries because I'm busy, as my primary (but not only) job is to read queries. So, I'll put the normal amount of maybe's in the pile until she says there's too many, and then I might get a bit more discriminating, but usually not by much.
What does this mean to you? It could be good news, despite what I just said about my boss. (She really is a nice person, and takes on new authors all the time, but a large query pile can be staggering) Even if money is coming in from old backlisted items and current bestsellers, a good agent is always on the look out for new things, and probably on the lookout for more things with the knowledge that the advance is going to be lower for each book. In other words, agents have an incentive to actively look for new clients.
Either way, if you've written a good book, submit it. Just don't expect a big check to come if sells.
The following is gleaned from the latest issue of Publisher's Weekly:
“With bookstore sales falling the last four months of 2008, total sales for the year fell 0.5%, to $16.93 billion.”
“Bookstore sales were off 4.7% in December, an improvement over the 13.0% and 5.6% declines posted in November and October.”
“Sales for the 81 publishers that report their revenue to the Association of American Publishers fell 2.4%, to $10.6 billion, in 2008. . . The 13% decline in the adult hardcover segment was the result of a 5.3% drop in gross sales plus a steep 10.8% increase in returns.”
As you know, Houghton Mifflin has stopped accepting new submissions and Borders is on the ropes.
How is the downturn in book sales affecting literary agencies? Are agents taking on fewer new clients? Are agencies relying more on their existing best selling authors? Are colleagues of yours in fear of losing their jobs? How should unpublished authors trying to break in view all of this? Should we follow in Hemingway's and Poe's footsteps and just do ourselves in? Worse -- get a real job?
Yes, chicken little was right. The sky is falling. Soon people will be burning books for fuel and attaching spikes to their cars. Me, I plan to camp out at Walmart. I think I could last pretty long in a Walmart in some kind of massive global socio-economic destruction. They have food and clothing and camping equipment and generators. I would be fine.
Despite the corporate doom-and-gloom, publishing is actually a fairly stable industry in that people always want/need books. It's either for school or escapism, and it's rather cheap escapism, as most mass market paperbacks are now cheaper than a movie ticket and the book will last you longer. And not all publishing companies are doing badly. Yes, I don't know an editor who isn't under a little extra stress (or a lot of extra stress because half her department was cut and merged with another imprint), but most companies are in the black or near the black, and the ones doing well are being tight-lipped about it, hoping no one will figure out their secret. (Hint! It's probably cheating the authors with low advances and bottom-level royalties!)
The one company that is actually gaining in this crisis is Amazon, despite the rising cost of postage and increasingly slow speed of mail, along with the bankruptcy of DHL (bad for Barnes and Noble). Their used book seller program is probably generating them insane profits, allowing them to slash prices on new books, which then increases buying and gets them more profits. My book was recently reduced by about $1.50 on Amazon and is now selling about twice as many copies. I don't care about the sticker price, as my contract stipulates that I get my royalties based on the established retail price (the price set by the book company), so whatever the stores sell it at, I still get the same $1.12 or whatever it is per copy. Also, another way Amazon is able to offer great deals is that while bookstores have earn 50% of the retail price (the rest going to the publishing company), Amazon earns 55%, meaning it makes more on each book and can afford to keep the prices down to attract customers. Also Amazon sells a lot of other stuff, which just generally keeps the company afloat. I recently bought $35 headphones through a used seller for $4.00 AFTER shipping. And they were new in box.
Will the publishing companies go bankrupt? I doubt it. They may decrease in size, merge imprints, merge companies, or just shift around their lists, but they will survive and then thrive when the economy picks up again. People need books and POD technology is not yet economically viable to produce those public domain classics; you need a real company to do that. When the cost of POD goes down significantly, we will probably see a real restructuring of the industry, but not before.
What does this mean to literary agents? Well, advances are lower and it's certainly a bad time to become a literary agent, but my boss doesn't seem worried at all. If anything, she's rejecting more because we're seeing more queries as people who've been laid off submit books now that they have the time to write them. A ton of queries in her inbox can put her in a rejecting mood if she's just gotten some contracts out for rights in Indonesia and the Korean translation of the newest bestseller on her list just came in. This doesn't affect my work. Actually, it puts you guys at an advantage, as I'm not prone to be busy with another area of the business and reject queries because I'm busy, as my primary (but not only) job is to read queries. So, I'll put the normal amount of maybe's in the pile until she says there's too many, and then I might get a bit more discriminating, but usually not by much.
What does this mean to you? It could be good news, despite what I just said about my boss. (She really is a nice person, and takes on new authors all the time, but a large query pile can be staggering) Even if money is coming in from old backlisted items and current bestsellers, a good agent is always on the look out for new things, and probably on the lookout for more things with the knowledge that the advance is going to be lower for each book. In other words, agents have an incentive to actively look for new clients.
Either way, if you've written a good book, submit it. Just don't expect a big check to come if sells.
Poetry Credits
Dear Rejecter,
If I'm querying an agent with a novel, and that agent doesn't represent poetry, but my only previous pub credits are poetry, is it appropriate to mention those credits at all? I'm thinking it could go one of three ways:
1. Say that I have previously published poetry, and it has appeared in journals X, Y, and Z
2. Say that my work has appeared in journals X, Y, and Z, but don't mention that said work is poetry
3. Don't mention the credits at all
What's the prudent course here? Is there another option that hasn't occurred to me?
So there's not one answer to your question, unfortunately. Some agents don't think much about poetry credits, but I'm not sure it would really be a negative unless it's not perfectly clear in your query that you're submitting a novel, not a poetry collection (because sometimes it isn't clear). So, I would go with 1 or 3. Either way it probably won't make a difference, but I'm leaning on 1. The importance is that there's a clear distinction between what you've had published and what you are submitting.
If I'm querying an agent with a novel, and that agent doesn't represent poetry, but my only previous pub credits are poetry, is it appropriate to mention those credits at all? I'm thinking it could go one of three ways:
1. Say that I have previously published poetry, and it has appeared in journals X, Y, and Z
2. Say that my work has appeared in journals X, Y, and Z, but don't mention that said work is poetry
3. Don't mention the credits at all
What's the prudent course here? Is there another option that hasn't occurred to me?
So there's not one answer to your question, unfortunately. Some agents don't think much about poetry credits, but I'm not sure it would really be a negative unless it's not perfectly clear in your query that you're submitting a novel, not a poetry collection (because sometimes it isn't clear). So, I would go with 1 or 3. Either way it probably won't make a difference, but I'm leaning on 1. The importance is that there's a clear distinction between what you've had published and what you are submitting.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Rockstar Agents
Rejecter, my question is this: say there's a real swanky high powered agent who doesn't accept queries (Binky Urban or the like), however you've actually got something that fits with his/her interests. Say also it's backed with the endorsement of someone equally high powered from the artist's end, someone along the lines of a Cormac McCarthy. What would be the protocol of just sending a note about the situation versus a full fledged query? The easy answer, but not always applicable, might be just have the super-author gives the agent a heads up. But in reality, an author like that can't really be expected to run administrative errands for an unknown, especially if they already did you the enormous favor of reading the manuscript in question. So, what do you think: totally out of bounds, a small but potentially fruitful risk, or no big deal-go for it?
If the agent does not accent queries, do not send queries unless you have a recommendation from someone knows the agent personally (a client, a friend, another agent). Or just do it, and probably get rejected, but who knows? But generally, go with first thing I said. Also, there's no reason for extra fuss over a "swanky high powered agent." Yes, a couple agents have made names for themselves with super deals or by continually getting their clients into the New Yorker, but the agent you want is a good agent who cares about your work the most and can do the most for your manuscript. Of course, you may not get a choice on who that is if only one person takes you on, but you are looking for someone who is (a) good at their job and (a) a fan of your work. There are good agents and bad agents (and scam agents). Good agents have the right connections (for you); bad agents have few or no sales, or are out of the loop, or don't know enough editors. The best agent for you may be someone you've never heard of and isn't even listed on the first major agent listing page. So just query widely, to everyone who accepts in your genre and is either an AAR member or from an established agency but just hasn't been in business long enough to qualify for the AAR.
If the agent does not accent queries, do not send queries unless you have a recommendation from someone knows the agent personally (a client, a friend, another agent). Or just do it, and probably get rejected, but who knows? But generally, go with first thing I said. Also, there's no reason for extra fuss over a "swanky high powered agent." Yes, a couple agents have made names for themselves with super deals or by continually getting their clients into the New Yorker, but the agent you want is a good agent who cares about your work the most and can do the most for your manuscript. Of course, you may not get a choice on who that is if only one person takes you on, but you are looking for someone who is (a) good at their job and (a) a fan of your work. There are good agents and bad agents (and scam agents). Good agents have the right connections (for you); bad agents have few or no sales, or are out of the loop, or don't know enough editors. The best agent for you may be someone you've never heard of and isn't even listed on the first major agent listing page. So just query widely, to everyone who accepts in your genre and is either an AAR member or from an established agency but just hasn't been in business long enough to qualify for the AAR.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Literary vs. Commercial Fiction Round 247
So at this point in the life of the blog I am seriously tempted to just write "go away" to people who send in the usual "why is there so much trash in the marketplace while my literary opus isn't published?" email. I decided to make an exception for this one.
Hello Ms. Rejecter,
The dynamic for agents is to find that compelling work that is salable, not an easy task I'm sure. For me some books that are considered page turners are often so empty and the characters so thin I don't care what they do and the plot so mundanely crime-ridden or romance-ridden or horror-ridden that I don't care what happens. I could give many examples of such profitable books with their suspense page turners in different genres that the only reasonable thing is for the characters to self-destruct. Good luck to those writers. I do not envy or begrudge them anything, for life is too short for that. Maybe these books are a kind of therapy in their escapism for readers and agents are part of the therapy business. However, maybe there is kind of writing that tries to sustain us by illuminating the real world.
Now, the dilemma is, do the vagaries of the the marketplace where escapism literature is easily identified and dominate reduce the marketplace need for compelling stories that deal more authentically with the real world?
First, a confession. I had to look "vagaries" up. I don't know everything. It turns out it means "an extravagant or erratic notion or action" or something like that, which I feel really further obscures the meaning of the sentence than if I hadn't looked it up, but fine. Learn something new every day.
Now, there's the standard argument as to why the market is what it is:
(1) People buy books they want to read.
(2) Publishing companies watch sales and take stock of what was bought.
(3) Editors are encouraged to buy new and exciting things in genres that people are actually buying and reading, plus a little "more of the same" to be on the safe side. The company doesn't want to go under or anything.
In other words, if the public for some reason completely stopped buying books about vampires (in a wildly unlikely alternate universe), editors would be less interested in publishing books about vampires, knowing they wouldn't sell. Eventually there would be no new books about vampires aside from a couple companies hoping to buck the trend, because people don't like to publish books that they know won't sell. Publishing is a business, people. A slightly more altruistic business than, say, investment banking, but nonetheless a business.
From browsing the shelves by yourself, using whatever definition of "literary fiction" you want to use, you will probably come to the conclusion that most people don't buy literary fiction, as most things on the shelves aren't literary fiction. And, by the way, it has always been this way. There has been no time in history where people have only read "great literature."
Now, the dilemma is, do the vagaries of the the marketplace where escapism literature is easily identified and dominate reduce the marketplace need for compelling stories that deal more authentically with the real world?
I want to spend a moment for the good of mankind taking apart this sentence.
I'm going to assume that "escapism literature" means "genre fiction" so we don't spend all day discussing. Normally I would just assume that the latter half of the sentence refers to "literary fiction" and just direct you to the explanation above, which is that the buyers dictate the market, not the other way around, but hold on a second. What are "compelling stories that deal more authentically with the real world?" Because generally in publishing, stories that take place in the "real world" are stories that could possibly happen somewhere at sometime, even if they didn't, and if they actually did it's called "non-fiction." So, that eliminates alternate histories, stories that contain ghosts, stories that contain whimsical creatures who are just metaphors for things, and actually most things that are on the shelves, except maybe romance fiction, because people do occasionally have sex with improbably hot guys. Also thrillers happen in real life, but they usually end up with the protagonist dying in a ditch somewhere or never finding out who was chasing him because that's what happens to most spies.
Your given definition of the literature you want to see more of, if interpreted strictly, would knock out most "great literature." You know, like:
All of Greek literature
All of Arthurian literature
Most Shakespeare
1984
Beloved (though I don't know how "great" it is, in my opinion)
The Old Man and the Sea
And a ton of others I'm thinking of right now because I have to get to work
So, you might want to rethink that.
Hello Ms. Rejecter,
The dynamic for agents is to find that compelling work that is salable, not an easy task I'm sure. For me some books that are considered page turners are often so empty and the characters so thin I don't care what they do and the plot so mundanely crime-ridden or romance-ridden or horror-ridden that I don't care what happens. I could give many examples of such profitable books with their suspense page turners in different genres that the only reasonable thing is for the characters to self-destruct. Good luck to those writers. I do not envy or begrudge them anything, for life is too short for that. Maybe these books are a kind of therapy in their escapism for readers and agents are part of the therapy business. However, maybe there is kind of writing that tries to sustain us by illuminating the real world.
Now, the dilemma is, do the vagaries of the the marketplace where escapism literature is easily identified and dominate reduce the marketplace need for compelling stories that deal more authentically with the real world?
First, a confession. I had to look "vagaries" up. I don't know everything. It turns out it means "an extravagant or erratic notion or action" or something like that, which I feel really further obscures the meaning of the sentence than if I hadn't looked it up, but fine. Learn something new every day.
Now, there's the standard argument as to why the market is what it is:
(1) People buy books they want to read.
(2) Publishing companies watch sales and take stock of what was bought.
(3) Editors are encouraged to buy new and exciting things in genres that people are actually buying and reading, plus a little "more of the same" to be on the safe side. The company doesn't want to go under or anything.
In other words, if the public for some reason completely stopped buying books about vampires (in a wildly unlikely alternate universe), editors would be less interested in publishing books about vampires, knowing they wouldn't sell. Eventually there would be no new books about vampires aside from a couple companies hoping to buck the trend, because people don't like to publish books that they know won't sell. Publishing is a business, people. A slightly more altruistic business than, say, investment banking, but nonetheless a business.
From browsing the shelves by yourself, using whatever definition of "literary fiction" you want to use, you will probably come to the conclusion that most people don't buy literary fiction, as most things on the shelves aren't literary fiction. And, by the way, it has always been this way. There has been no time in history where people have only read "great literature."
Now, the dilemma is, do the vagaries of the the marketplace where escapism literature is easily identified and dominate reduce the marketplace need for compelling stories that deal more authentically with the real world?
I want to spend a moment for the good of mankind taking apart this sentence.
I'm going to assume that "escapism literature" means "genre fiction" so we don't spend all day discussing. Normally I would just assume that the latter half of the sentence refers to "literary fiction" and just direct you to the explanation above, which is that the buyers dictate the market, not the other way around, but hold on a second. What are "compelling stories that deal more authentically with the real world?" Because generally in publishing, stories that take place in the "real world" are stories that could possibly happen somewhere at sometime, even if they didn't, and if they actually did it's called "non-fiction." So, that eliminates alternate histories, stories that contain ghosts, stories that contain whimsical creatures who are just metaphors for things, and actually most things that are on the shelves, except maybe romance fiction, because people do occasionally have sex with improbably hot guys. Also thrillers happen in real life, but they usually end up with the protagonist dying in a ditch somewhere or never finding out who was chasing him because that's what happens to most spies.
Your given definition of the literature you want to see more of, if interpreted strictly, would knock out most "great literature." You know, like:
All of Greek literature
All of Arthurian literature
Most Shakespeare
1984
Beloved (though I don't know how "great" it is, in my opinion)
The Old Man and the Sea
And a ton of others I'm thinking of right now because I have to get to work
So, you might want to rethink that.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Non-Fiction Proposals and Unfinished Manuscripts
Hi Rejecter,
I've been querying my memoir to agents - and one has asked to see it. Now, everything I've read, and published memoirists, have told me that NF doesn't have to be complete to sell. I have 130 pages written. Based on my query, an agent emailed me yesterday and said, "I'd like to see [name of book]. Please send it to me in XXX format."
So, now what do I do? As I write to you, I am cleaning up the chapters (spelling, grammar, transitions) + planning to email to her with the note that this is my "working manuscript." Or should I just hold off, polish it completely + make sure I have a full book before sending it? Or can I send what I have and say this is a partial? My initial instinct was to email her back yesterday and say, "this is a work in progress, I'll send what I have," but I also don't want to waste her time with explanatory emails.
It's true; sometimes non-fiction is sold to a publisher based only on a thorough proposal and sometimes non-fiction is sold when it's a finish piece. The traditional reason that a proposal is submitted is so that the author has the money to go do the research required to write the book, which may involve things like taking time off work or travel or acquiring rights to photos or just, you know, income to justify their time. That's the only reason an editor would put cash up front to a writer, and they would only do it with a VERY thorough proposal unless you're a celebrity, and even then you should have your ghostwriter already chosen.
In your case, you have a right to say "I have the proposal ready but not the book" but obviously you have to be upfront about that. If the book's not done because you just haven't gotten around to writing it all, you have less of an argument for not having written it all and you should finish before you submit. If you need the advance money first (or just want it first), you have to make it clear to the agent that the book isn't done. This should be in the query letter, and if it's not, immediately after the first positive response.
For anyone considering writing a proposal and then going ahead with only a couple chapters, let me give you some advice: getting published is a hugely stressful ordeal. Some people (most people) find it even more stressful if they've been paid up-front for an unseen product. However detailed the proposal was, the fact of the matter is that the editor still has not seen the entire product. The editor probably won't back out of the deal after paying the advance based on the remaining chapters being not what he/she expected, but if the editor isn't happy with the final product, he/she will either spend a lot of time editing it or the company will kind of shove it aside and not put huge publicity money into it. So, if you can possibly avoid that stress by writing the book ahead, do so.
I've been querying my memoir to agents - and one has asked to see it. Now, everything I've read, and published memoirists, have told me that NF doesn't have to be complete to sell. I have 130 pages written. Based on my query, an agent emailed me yesterday and said, "I'd like to see [name of book]. Please send it to me in XXX format."
So, now what do I do? As I write to you, I am cleaning up the chapters (spelling, grammar, transitions) + planning to email to her with the note that this is my "working manuscript." Or should I just hold off, polish it completely + make sure I have a full book before sending it? Or can I send what I have and say this is a partial? My initial instinct was to email her back yesterday and say, "this is a work in progress, I'll send what I have," but I also don't want to waste her time with explanatory emails.
It's true; sometimes non-fiction is sold to a publisher based only on a thorough proposal and sometimes non-fiction is sold when it's a finish piece. The traditional reason that a proposal is submitted is so that the author has the money to go do the research required to write the book, which may involve things like taking time off work or travel or acquiring rights to photos or just, you know, income to justify their time. That's the only reason an editor would put cash up front to a writer, and they would only do it with a VERY thorough proposal unless you're a celebrity, and even then you should have your ghostwriter already chosen.
In your case, you have a right to say "I have the proposal ready but not the book" but obviously you have to be upfront about that. If the book's not done because you just haven't gotten around to writing it all, you have less of an argument for not having written it all and you should finish before you submit. If you need the advance money first (or just want it first), you have to make it clear to the agent that the book isn't done. This should be in the query letter, and if it's not, immediately after the first positive response.
For anyone considering writing a proposal and then going ahead with only a couple chapters, let me give you some advice: getting published is a hugely stressful ordeal. Some people (most people) find it even more stressful if they've been paid up-front for an unseen product. However detailed the proposal was, the fact of the matter is that the editor still has not seen the entire product. The editor probably won't back out of the deal after paying the advance based on the remaining chapters being not what he/she expected, but if the editor isn't happy with the final product, he/she will either spend a lot of time editing it or the company will kind of shove it aside and not put huge publicity money into it. So, if you can possibly avoid that stress by writing the book ahead, do so.
Monday, February 02, 2009
Multiple Agents and Submissions
Dear Rejecter,
I have a manuscript (full) out with an agent who is due to get back to me soon. Last week my dream agent, to my immense surprise, requested a partial. I’m ecstatic to say the least, but also realistic. Naturally, I sent the partial right away.
According to the letter, it will take a month for my dream agent to get back to me. It wasn’t an exclusive, so I didn’t feel the need to reveal that another agent (a junior agent) has the full. Should I have? Or should I just wait and see what happens with the junior agent, because she might end up passing on it anyway?
While some people do mention in their letters that other people are looking at their work, it's no longer obligatory unless you granted an exclusive, which you didn't. In the old days it was the appropriate thing to do, but today we're just assuming that everyone is mass querying and that we are competing with someone for a manuscript if it's really good. Telling the agent (the second one) that someone else is looking at it is polite, but not necessary. In other words, you don't have to email her and go out of your way to say it (the fewer emails you bother an agent with, the better), but you can mention it in passing in some other correspondence if you have a chance. It may spur them on, or it may do nothing. Either way, not a big deal, no reason to split hairs.
Other agents might not feel this way, but certainly it doesn't really make a difference at my office when we get a letter with something like "other agents have expressed interest."
Don't wait on one agent over another unless you're in the very final stage of deciding between agents and you just need more time to think. Publishing is slow enough as it is. There's no reason here to make it any slower.
I have a manuscript (full) out with an agent who is due to get back to me soon. Last week my dream agent, to my immense surprise, requested a partial. I’m ecstatic to say the least, but also realistic. Naturally, I sent the partial right away.
According to the letter, it will take a month for my dream agent to get back to me. It wasn’t an exclusive, so I didn’t feel the need to reveal that another agent (a junior agent) has the full. Should I have? Or should I just wait and see what happens with the junior agent, because she might end up passing on it anyway?
While some people do mention in their letters that other people are looking at their work, it's no longer obligatory unless you granted an exclusive, which you didn't. In the old days it was the appropriate thing to do, but today we're just assuming that everyone is mass querying and that we are competing with someone for a manuscript if it's really good. Telling the agent (the second one) that someone else is looking at it is polite, but not necessary. In other words, you don't have to email her and go out of your way to say it (the fewer emails you bother an agent with, the better), but you can mention it in passing in some other correspondence if you have a chance. It may spur them on, or it may do nothing. Either way, not a big deal, no reason to split hairs.
Other agents might not feel this way, but certainly it doesn't really make a difference at my office when we get a letter with something like "other agents have expressed interest."
Don't wait on one agent over another unless you're in the very final stage of deciding between agents and you just need more time to think. Publishing is slow enough as it is. There's no reason here to make it any slower.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Maiden Names
I'm back from a brief vacation/visit to relatives. I normally don't post on Friday because of the comment approval delays, but here we go.
Dear Rejector,
I'm getting married in a month, but I plan to keep my maiden name as my pen name. When querying (once married), would you advise querying with my legal -- married -- name or with my maiden name? Or with First Maiden Married?
Am I over-thinking this?
Thank you
Yes, you are over-thinking this. The name you use in your query should be the name you want to appear on the check the agency sends you when the book sells - i.e. your legal name. In a case where you have a DBA or multiple legal names, put whichever one you want. I didn't come up with my pen name until the book was about to go from the editor at the publishing house to the copy-editor.
(A DBA is a "Doing Business As" form that allows people to write checks to you in a name different from your own)
Dear Rejector,
I'm getting married in a month, but I plan to keep my maiden name as my pen name. When querying (once married), would you advise querying with my legal -- married -- name or with my maiden name? Or with First Maiden Married?
Am I over-thinking this?
Thank you
Yes, you are over-thinking this. The name you use in your query should be the name you want to appear on the check the agency sends you when the book sells - i.e. your legal name. In a case where you have a DBA or multiple legal names, put whichever one you want. I didn't come up with my pen name until the book was about to go from the editor at the publishing house to the copy-editor.
(A DBA is a "Doing Business As" form that allows people to write checks to you in a name different from your own)
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Contests and Contracts
Rejecter, enjoying your responses to these questions. Something similar here: I'm waiting a long time for the results of a contest. It says in the rules that should you become the winner, they have the sole exclusive rights to option the winning novel. (But there are several types of winners in this contest, and the rules don't specify which kind of winner.) In the year I've been waiting for the results of this contest, the novel has been requested by a top editor at a top house. Should I become, let's say, one of the winners of this contest, am I somehow able to get out of the exclusive option should the top publisher be interested in acquiring the book? Thanks a lot.
So I'm not completely sure about contest contracts, as I've never seen one in person and they tend to be such limited deals that I have no reason to, but what you should do is call the people running the contest and ask them. Don't pull out of the contest yet, if you're still in the running, as the editor at the publishing house may very well not buy your book and then you'll be high-and-dry. Just inquire as to what you are supposed to do if you get an offer for the novel during what seems like an excessively long (don't use those words) waiting period. Tell them you really care about the contest the most, which is why you're making sure everything is fine on their end and there's no legal misunderstandings.
If you don't have a phone number, email them. If they are a business or a charity, look up their number in a business directory.
So I'm not completely sure about contest contracts, as I've never seen one in person and they tend to be such limited deals that I have no reason to, but what you should do is call the people running the contest and ask them. Don't pull out of the contest yet, if you're still in the running, as the editor at the publishing house may very well not buy your book and then you'll be high-and-dry. Just inquire as to what you are supposed to do if you get an offer for the novel during what seems like an excessively long (don't use those words) waiting period. Tell them you really care about the contest the most, which is why you're making sure everything is fine on their end and there's no legal misunderstandings.
If you don't have a phone number, email them. If they are a business or a charity, look up their number in a business directory.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
The Waiting Game
I apologize if I don't seem to be answering old emails in the order they were received while I was busy editing my third book. If you sent me a question within the last three months, you will probably get an answer. If it's been more than three months, you can just resend it.
Dear Rejector:
Two agents have requested to see my novel manuscript. One of them asked for a partial -- in this case 100 pages (i.e., half the 100,000-word manuscript). A junior agent at a prestigious NYC house, this individual requires with the initial query letter the first five pages only -- no synopsis. He still asks that no synopsis be sent with the partial. It took him one month to answer my inital query. Querytracker contributors who've dealt with this agent state that he usually takes 2-3 months to respond to manuscript requests. This agent, who is very polite, strikes me as inefficient: by the time he gets around to possibly asking for a complete manuscript (3-4 months?), he may have lost potential clients; furthermore, he's wasted his own time by reading copius partials -- what's the point of asking for 100 pages? One might as well then ask for the full manuscript. Finally, how many agents don't bother with a synopsis, especially if s/he's asked to see 100 pages? Anyway, am I dealing with someone competent in your estimation, or a beginner who is just flopping around?
100 pages is half of a 100k word manuscript? Are you single-spacing and double-siding your manuscript? Because you shouldn't be doing that. It should be on one side and double or 1.5-spaced.
Again, I'll take apart your questions.
(1) Agents ask for what they prefer to read. Some agents don't care about a synopsis and don't ask for one. Some prefer 50 pages. Some 100. Some have to deal with so many submissions they just take the first 5 pages and a summary first. It's all in what their reading preference is. It doesn't make one agent less professional than the other.
(2) As to his answering your initial query, that's about right. Its' hard to go a lot faster than that in the mail, especially if there's some pile-up from the holidays or some emergency in the agent's life or whatever.
(3) In terms of him taking 2-3 months to answer a partial: Also not unusual. No, it doesn't take him that long to read it, just to get to it, and he may spend some time debating about it before responding. Like any normal human being, he may procrastinate on making a decision by putting it back in the pile, and quite a little "need to make a decision" pile builds up. You have no idea what's going on in his end. He hasn't been on vacation (or maybe he has) but an agent's life is not spent just lying around, watching TV and not looking at submissions unless the agent landed Stephen King and doesn't NEED new submissions - in which case, said agent doesn't have a website accepting submissions. Agents have a lot of work: editing the manuscripts they're preparing to send to publishers, working with authors about those edits, contract negotiations, chasing down royalty checks for the author, making sure the press coverage that was promised by the publishing company happens, going to meetings with the other agents and publishers (networking is VERY important in this industry), reading industry news that will determine where they send manuscripts, and reviewing submissions. Then there's the low-level stuff, liking going to Staples for more supplies, stuffing SASEs, photocopying, making sure there are enough copies of the contract for everyone involved (which may be several foreign agencies), sending ARC copies around, and assorted trips to the post office. Potential authors haven't earned them any money yet, so they can't spend much time on them when there's work to be done for their actual clients. In fact, the time spent on submissions is massive considering how many new clients they may actually take on that year (it could be as low as 1 new client or no new clients). In other words, be patient.
Also, if the agent is a member of the AAR, they are not a newbie doofus. You have to be in the industry for 5 years as an active agent to even begin to qualify for it, and then you have to pay a steep fee to be in it, so it's sort of the seal of quality. New agents often work in groups with older agents who are AAR people until they earn their wings, so-to-speak. My agent (my agent, not my boss who is an agent) is not a member of the AAR, or she wasn't when she took me on. She is, however, a member of an agency run by a man with 30 years experience in publishing and AAR membership, so I had no real worries about her inexperience, as she could always go to him if she needed to.
Dear Rejector:
Two agents have requested to see my novel manuscript. One of them asked for a partial -- in this case 100 pages (i.e., half the 100,000-word manuscript). A junior agent at a prestigious NYC house, this individual requires with the initial query letter the first five pages only -- no synopsis. He still asks that no synopsis be sent with the partial. It took him one month to answer my inital query. Querytracker contributors who've dealt with this agent state that he usually takes 2-3 months to respond to manuscript requests. This agent, who is very polite, strikes me as inefficient: by the time he gets around to possibly asking for a complete manuscript (3-4 months?), he may have lost potential clients; furthermore, he's wasted his own time by reading copius partials -- what's the point of asking for 100 pages? One might as well then ask for the full manuscript. Finally, how many agents don't bother with a synopsis, especially if s/he's asked to see 100 pages? Anyway, am I dealing with someone competent in your estimation, or a beginner who is just flopping around?
100 pages is half of a 100k word manuscript? Are you single-spacing and double-siding your manuscript? Because you shouldn't be doing that. It should be on one side and double or 1.5-spaced.
Again, I'll take apart your questions.
(1) Agents ask for what they prefer to read. Some agents don't care about a synopsis and don't ask for one. Some prefer 50 pages. Some 100. Some have to deal with so many submissions they just take the first 5 pages and a summary first. It's all in what their reading preference is. It doesn't make one agent less professional than the other.
(2) As to his answering your initial query, that's about right. Its' hard to go a lot faster than that in the mail, especially if there's some pile-up from the holidays or some emergency in the agent's life or whatever.
(3) In terms of him taking 2-3 months to answer a partial: Also not unusual. No, it doesn't take him that long to read it, just to get to it, and he may spend some time debating about it before responding. Like any normal human being, he may procrastinate on making a decision by putting it back in the pile, and quite a little "need to make a decision" pile builds up. You have no idea what's going on in his end. He hasn't been on vacation (or maybe he has) but an agent's life is not spent just lying around, watching TV and not looking at submissions unless the agent landed Stephen King and doesn't NEED new submissions - in which case, said agent doesn't have a website accepting submissions. Agents have a lot of work: editing the manuscripts they're preparing to send to publishers, working with authors about those edits, contract negotiations, chasing down royalty checks for the author, making sure the press coverage that was promised by the publishing company happens, going to meetings with the other agents and publishers (networking is VERY important in this industry), reading industry news that will determine where they send manuscripts, and reviewing submissions. Then there's the low-level stuff, liking going to Staples for more supplies, stuffing SASEs, photocopying, making sure there are enough copies of the contract for everyone involved (which may be several foreign agencies), sending ARC copies around, and assorted trips to the post office. Potential authors haven't earned them any money yet, so they can't spend much time on them when there's work to be done for their actual clients. In fact, the time spent on submissions is massive considering how many new clients they may actually take on that year (it could be as low as 1 new client or no new clients). In other words, be patient.
Also, if the agent is a member of the AAR, they are not a newbie doofus. You have to be in the industry for 5 years as an active agent to even begin to qualify for it, and then you have to pay a steep fee to be in it, so it's sort of the seal of quality. New agents often work in groups with older agents who are AAR people until they earn their wings, so-to-speak. My agent (my agent, not my boss who is an agent) is not a member of the AAR, or she wasn't when she took me on. She is, however, a member of an agency run by a man with 30 years experience in publishing and AAR membership, so I had no real worries about her inexperience, as she could always go to him if she needed to.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Second Book Clauses
Dear Rejecter,
I'm an unagented novelist. My first novel was published by a small press earlier this year. My second is nearly complete.
According to our contract, my publisher has first right of refusal for all my subsequent works. However, I want out--because they haven't promoted my book at all. I've sent out hundreds of postcards to bookstores, done all the press releases, organized readings, and mailed review copies all over the country and the world. When I asked my publisher to help a little--pointing out that our contract stipulates that they are responsible for promotion too--the head of the company responded that the contract actually says they're responsible for promotion 'as the budget allows' and they've no funds for promotion this year.
(And not incidentally I've got some good reviews and press from my efforts!)
I'd like to try and sell my second book to a larger publisher; so I'd like to get an agent. My question for you is: how much of a problem will this first right of refusal clause be for an agent? I fear that a potential agent might be put off by that sort of baggage. Should I approach my publisher now, and ask to be released from that clause before I query agents? Or is it something that a new agent would be willing to negotiate for me?
So the short answer is yes, you need an agent.
The long answer is yes, you can get out of your first right of refusal clause (aka the "second book" clause), though how the clause works is complicated and will vary from company to company. I don't know what it says in your clause, but this is how it generally works in a standard publication contract:
"First right of refusal" means the publisher gets first crack at whatever you write next for publication. Meaning, you can't shop it at other houses before they look at it. The publisher can then decide to (a) turn it down, refusing to make an offer, and essentially letting you go whether you want to be let go or not, or (b) make you an offer for the second book. Let's say for the sake of argument it's a $5000 advance.
As long as you haven't said "yes" to the offer, the offer is on the table until they decide to withdraw it. If you're not happy with your 5K or just upset with the company in general, you can say to them, "I'm not happy with your offer and want to shop it at other places."
They then have three options:
(1) To raise the offer to something you agree to in order to keep you at the publisher.
(2) To keep the offer the same, but allow you to shop the book elsewhere with the offer still on the table.
(3) To say, "Screw you, we withdraw our offer, have fun trying to get this published elsewhere."
In other words, if you tell them (and you have to tell them) that you want to take it to other places, you risk losing the original publisher altogether and having no publisher for the second book. In your case this doesn't seem like a major problem, but it can be. For example, after the success of my first book, the publisher made an offer that was downright insulting for books 2 and 3. Since in my case the publisher had done a good job with book 1, my agent and I decided not to risk threatening to walk by shopping at other places and stick with the original publisher, even with the very, very low advance for a sequel to a successful book.
So let's say option (2) happens. Then thing can get downright complicated. You shop the book to the other publishing companies, and they make offers. If they make an offer that's equal to or better than the original publisher's offer, you can accept it and walk from the original publisher (5. If they make a LOWER offer (under 5K), the second book clause is still in effect and you cannot walk from the original publisher for a lower offer. In other words, you can't jump ship just because you don't like people; you generally have to do it because there's a monetary justification. Of course the editor at the publishing house could just agree to let you walk for the smaller offer; a lot of this business is done very informally.
This is why you need an agent. The agent can negotiate this for you and gauge what you should probably do.
I'm an unagented novelist. My first novel was published by a small press earlier this year. My second is nearly complete.
According to our contract, my publisher has first right of refusal for all my subsequent works. However, I want out--because they haven't promoted my book at all. I've sent out hundreds of postcards to bookstores, done all the press releases, organized readings, and mailed review copies all over the country and the world. When I asked my publisher to help a little--pointing out that our contract stipulates that they are responsible for promotion too--the head of the company responded that the contract actually says they're responsible for promotion 'as the budget allows' and they've no funds for promotion this year.
(And not incidentally I've got some good reviews and press from my efforts!)
I'd like to try and sell my second book to a larger publisher; so I'd like to get an agent. My question for you is: how much of a problem will this first right of refusal clause be for an agent? I fear that a potential agent might be put off by that sort of baggage. Should I approach my publisher now, and ask to be released from that clause before I query agents? Or is it something that a new agent would be willing to negotiate for me?
So the short answer is yes, you need an agent.
The long answer is yes, you can get out of your first right of refusal clause (aka the "second book" clause), though how the clause works is complicated and will vary from company to company. I don't know what it says in your clause, but this is how it generally works in a standard publication contract:
"First right of refusal" means the publisher gets first crack at whatever you write next for publication. Meaning, you can't shop it at other houses before they look at it. The publisher can then decide to (a) turn it down, refusing to make an offer, and essentially letting you go whether you want to be let go or not, or (b) make you an offer for the second book. Let's say for the sake of argument it's a $5000 advance.
As long as you haven't said "yes" to the offer, the offer is on the table until they decide to withdraw it. If you're not happy with your 5K or just upset with the company in general, you can say to them, "I'm not happy with your offer and want to shop it at other places."
They then have three options:
(1) To raise the offer to something you agree to in order to keep you at the publisher.
(2) To keep the offer the same, but allow you to shop the book elsewhere with the offer still on the table.
(3) To say, "Screw you, we withdraw our offer, have fun trying to get this published elsewhere."
In other words, if you tell them (and you have to tell them) that you want to take it to other places, you risk losing the original publisher altogether and having no publisher for the second book. In your case this doesn't seem like a major problem, but it can be. For example, after the success of my first book, the publisher made an offer that was downright insulting for books 2 and 3. Since in my case the publisher had done a good job with book 1, my agent and I decided not to risk threatening to walk by shopping at other places and stick with the original publisher, even with the very, very low advance for a sequel to a successful book.
So let's say option (2) happens. Then thing can get downright complicated. You shop the book to the other publishing companies, and they make offers. If they make an offer that's equal to or better than the original publisher's offer, you can accept it and walk from the original publisher (5. If they make a LOWER offer (under 5K), the second book clause is still in effect and you cannot walk from the original publisher for a lower offer. In other words, you can't jump ship just because you don't like people; you generally have to do it because there's a monetary justification. Of course the editor at the publishing house could just agree to let you walk for the smaller offer; a lot of this business is done very informally.
This is why you need an agent. The agent can negotiate this for you and gauge what you should probably do.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Excuses, Excuses
I've been real quiet, I know. It's not because I'm lazy (though that should never be entirely discounted) but because the final version of my third book is due to the publisher on the 15th, and the publisher is great at some editorial, but not consistency, and in an ongoing family saga, consistency is really important and you should spend a lot of time checking for it.
And it's historical fiction, meaning I can tear out all the hairs and read all the books I want, but people are still going to find mistakes and write about them in reviews.
And it's historical fiction, meaning I can tear out all the hairs and read all the books I want, but people are still going to find mistakes and write about them in reviews.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Characters, Sex, and the Characters They Have Sex With
I'm in the early stages of my first novel and I think that sex is almost needed. Writing about attraction and sexual impulses is just about the only aspect of writing that makes me uncomfortable to me. I don't want it to sounds awkward, out of place, or at all trashy. This fear is especially amplified by the fact that the first part of my novel takes place in a very conservative setting where sex means breeding, not sex. Do you have any advice concerning how I should approach "romance" portions? When do sex scenes make an auto-reject? Could you give source materials of novels that do sex well?
Oh, and do mainstream publishers care about homosexual relationships and sex scenes? I fear my chances of being published might be hindered because the plot currently involves a gay lead character.
I feel concerned about another aspect of the novel. It basically describes the ride and fall of this religion. Parts of the religion are hidden in books that the main character finds and reads. The character knows it's coming, but is it okay that I put what is contained in the book in a chapter placed before he starts reading it and when he is done? How often do you get this? Should I move these sections to the end of the novel?
So I'm going to try to answer this from the perspective of a potential publisher as opposed to the perspective of a writer. I think that would be more helpful to you.
1. As you no doubt have noticed, many many adult (and young adult, really) fiction that is not romance, erotica, or smut often contains sex. If this is a huge shock to you, go read more fiction. Any thriller with a male protagonist who has a sexy woman helping him should do. Publishers are not afraid of sex. The issue is how descriptive the sex is. Does it describe body parts using their proper medical names and in graphic detail, or is the entirety of the scene "he bent over to kiss her as he turned off the light"? Probably somewhere in between. Like in movies, how much sex is too much is generally something that's a judgment call for the editor, not because the editor thinks kids will be exposed to naughty bits (as concerns the movie councils) but because the editor might feel it distracts from the story.
2. No. The answer to your second question is no, we're not against gay protagonists for mainstream fiction. We just don't see a lot of it, because 90% of the country is straight, and straight people tend to write straight characters or disturbing mpreg slash fan fiction. There are a lot of great gay writers, some of whom don't write about being gay necessarily, or don't make it the central focus of the story but one of the plot points. Somewhere on my bookshelf is a set of lesbian detective stories, legitimate ones written by an actual lesbian who wanted to write queer thrillers. But we don't see a lot of these submissions, partially because there are just less gay writers than straight writers, and because it can be a smaller market depending on how central the homosexuality is to the story. I say, if you want to write it, totally go for it. I've had enough of smart academics solving mysteries, aided by sexy female lab assistants. There's no reason not to have sexy male lab assistants helping smart academics solving mysteries - and then, presumably, falling in love because of the intense experience they shared in that chase scene in the ancient Mayan ruins.
3. I didn't entirely follow your third question, but I think you have two potential situations: a situation where the reader knows the same amount as the character and a situation where the reader knows more than the character. (You can also have the character know more than the reader, a nifty dramatic device that can be annoying when done wrong) Whether you want to go in one direction or not is a question of suspense. If the reader knowing more than the character makes the character fall flat, then the reader will be annoyed and just start flipping through. If the reader's knowledge helps us understand the character's quest as they experience it better, go for it.
Oh, and do mainstream publishers care about homosexual relationships and sex scenes? I fear my chances of being published might be hindered because the plot currently involves a gay lead character.
I feel concerned about another aspect of the novel. It basically describes the ride and fall of this religion. Parts of the religion are hidden in books that the main character finds and reads. The character knows it's coming, but is it okay that I put what is contained in the book in a chapter placed before he starts reading it and when he is done? How often do you get this? Should I move these sections to the end of the novel?
So I'm going to try to answer this from the perspective of a potential publisher as opposed to the perspective of a writer. I think that would be more helpful to you.
1. As you no doubt have noticed, many many adult (and young adult, really) fiction that is not romance, erotica, or smut often contains sex. If this is a huge shock to you, go read more fiction. Any thriller with a male protagonist who has a sexy woman helping him should do. Publishers are not afraid of sex. The issue is how descriptive the sex is. Does it describe body parts using their proper medical names and in graphic detail, or is the entirety of the scene "he bent over to kiss her as he turned off the light"? Probably somewhere in between. Like in movies, how much sex is too much is generally something that's a judgment call for the editor, not because the editor thinks kids will be exposed to naughty bits (as concerns the movie councils) but because the editor might feel it distracts from the story.
2. No. The answer to your second question is no, we're not against gay protagonists for mainstream fiction. We just don't see a lot of it, because 90% of the country is straight, and straight people tend to write straight characters or disturbing mpreg slash fan fiction. There are a lot of great gay writers, some of whom don't write about being gay necessarily, or don't make it the central focus of the story but one of the plot points. Somewhere on my bookshelf is a set of lesbian detective stories, legitimate ones written by an actual lesbian who wanted to write queer thrillers. But we don't see a lot of these submissions, partially because there are just less gay writers than straight writers, and because it can be a smaller market depending on how central the homosexuality is to the story. I say, if you want to write it, totally go for it. I've had enough of smart academics solving mysteries, aided by sexy female lab assistants. There's no reason not to have sexy male lab assistants helping smart academics solving mysteries - and then, presumably, falling in love because of the intense experience they shared in that chase scene in the ancient Mayan ruins.
3. I didn't entirely follow your third question, but I think you have two potential situations: a situation where the reader knows the same amount as the character and a situation where the reader knows more than the character. (You can also have the character know more than the reader, a nifty dramatic device that can be annoying when done wrong) Whether you want to go in one direction or not is a question of suspense. If the reader knowing more than the character makes the character fall flat, then the reader will be annoyed and just start flipping through. If the reader's knowledge helps us understand the character's quest as they experience it better, go for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)