Non-Fictional!

Someone yesterday wrote in saying that he had written a "non-fictional novel."

Normally I'm pretty laid back about the whole "fiction novel" business, but this was hilarious.

Interviews and Unloved Manuscripts

Clearly there's a bit of a lag between when I get emails and when I answer them, mainly because this blog only takes priority after I've finished my real work and then my writing work.

Dennis Cass asked me to do a guest Q & A, and I did. The results are here.

Dear Rejecter,

I was wondering whether you know how I can get my hands on unloved (rejected) manuscripts? The ones without a loving home etc.

On principle we toss them. Sometimes we recycle and sometimes we don't (if the recycle bin is unavailable or I'm making the decision, because I don't recycle). While the paper belongs to us, we don't have legal ownership of the words ON the paper. The author holds the copyright - the right to copy and/or reproduce them. That puts "sending other people's rejected manuscripts around" into somewhat dubious legal/moral territory.

Mystery Genres

Dearest Rejecter,

I am writing a series of what might be called "ultra cozy" mysteries. My stories don't involve murder. I think there is plenty of evil that men can do in addition to homicide, and I think a lot of that evil doing can drive stories that can be compelling and satisfying.

But I don't quite know how to pitch them. I'm afraid that if I say they are in the mystery genre, most agents and editors will have the standard preconception that there "must" be a murder or the story isn't worthy. Is there a genre title for what I am writing?

Yes. Thriller. Sorry, but now you are obligated to thrill. Or suspense. No, wait, I think suspense is the one where the protagonist is in danger, while thriller implies that other people are in danger, but not necessarily the protagonist. I always get these mixed up.

The long answer is that it kinda depends what the crime is. If your protagonist investigates international intrigue, you're writing a political thriller. If your protagonist is investigating a religious conspiracy, you're just writing a thriller that has an angle. If your protagonist is investigating the proper use of pre-existing water maintenance regulation, you'd better throw some lesbian rape in there, because otherwise it's probably going to be pretty boring. And you'd better be a woman too, because then it makes it a feminist piece.

"Mysteries" are generally to classify books about murder, or at least the implication of murder. Why that is, I'm not sure entirely; it's just now the industry developed. Either way, feel free to query agents who deal in crime, thrillers, suspense, and mysteries. Depending on what the crime actually is will narrow it down a bit for them in the query.

For more on your question, there's a discussion here.

Stupid Things This One Guy Did

Today we got a query on colored paper from someone who had some program to reverse his text. In other words, to read the query, I had to go to the mirror above the sink in the bathroom and hold it up.

Not only that, at no point did he really mention what his book was about. He mainly focused on the fact that his writing credentials were having lost a contest to host SNL in some "anyone can host" contest NBC ran in 1977. Yes, that's right, he lost the contest. Oh, and he has a novel, or something, but he didn't mention what is was about and I was already pretty annoyed, so I don't think it mattered.

Look, don't send us text that is unreadable unless we figure out how to do something to it. I didn't think I would have to say that, but apparently I do.

Age and Gender

Blog Readers: More on my blog in general in the comments section.

Ms. Rejector,

I am a sixteen year old female author. I have one full length novel (unpublished), under my belt, as well as one half of another one. My question is, respectfully, do age and gender play a major part when a manuscript is being taken into consideration by a publisher? I know it ultimately boils down to the quality of the work as to whether or not it is picked up, but in those first stages of consideration, is my age working against me?

Gender does not work against you unless you are a male writing a story about lesbians. That is the once case where it works against you.

Age does. Don't mention your age if you are below 21 years old. It's not lying; it's just not something you should mention before they see your novel and love it.

And the hits keep coming. Hits of awesomeness.

This is a continuation of the material I quoted in this post. He/she also references some replies, so read the comments. Not that it helps.

P.S. No offense meant to Peter. Sorry, but I'm just quoting the material.

That's right, Deb. You can make 4000 queries over the course of a couple years and that's what I did.
No hyperbole. Prob'ly more. It's easy to do with the internet, one single query at a time, wait awhile, requery some.

Advice: take the time to at least put the agent's name on your form queries. And yes you too can do 4000 if you like. And get just ONE snot-nosed reply, such as from Peter Rubie. Or this asshole "leesmiley."

Yes, you bet, none of the 1999 people rejected have gotten anywhere -- so far. Anyway, it's most probable. It's easy enough to take a representative sample, and easier to check who's made deals with whom, and so on. Then search your own computer records with a search to see if anybody who queried you has made a deal.

That's right, read each individual paragraph for its own. This is internet. You've got to speed up your own comprehensions, people. If you can't, join "leesmiley" and get nowhere, forever.

Oh. Sorry, at least two snot-noses here. Andrew Wheeler, genius.

Out of time. Work to do.

One of My Rare Encouraging Posts

Dear Rejecter,

I am a young writer who actually isn't that naive or arrogant enough to think that my writing deserves publishing (but I can dream right?), however, I at least think everyone is entitled to a response. My young adult novel has gotten to the full stage with five - count them - five different agents. After at least six months for each, the agents have not replied to my check-up e-mails or phone call. One agent said they were still reviewing, but that was two months ago (after the six months). Do I have the right to be frustrated, or should I be happy that someone even might be considering my work? Or maybe the silence of the five is a consensus of suckage toward my writing? What kind of message does it send when you take the time to write a novel, edit it, send it out, get requested, and then hear nothing?

You mean all five agents not only have kept you on hold for 6 months, but also don't answer phone calls or emails? Wow. They're jerks. I would be frustrated. Ignore any exclusives you may have given and start querying other people.

Publishing is frustrating - to writers, to agents, to editors, to the guy who has to design the cover that nobody ends up being happy with - we're all very frustrated. All the time. There's a high burn-out rate in this industry. On the other hand, we occasionally get to make dreams come true, which is pretty cool.

Your manuscript is obviously of some potential for so many agents to have considered it; start querying again and hang in there.

Graphic Novels and Responses

Dear Rejecter:

My question is about the follow-up procedure on the query letters that seem to disappear into the abyss with neither rejection or request for partials/fulls.

I've cast a fairly small net at this point (only eight queries sent) as I researched potential agencies pretty thoroughly in search of agents that might be a fit both for my current fiction novel and also for me in general, since I'm also a graphic novelist (writer/artist) which seems to be a very niche market.

I have had a fairly positive response from those eight queries - two requests for partials; one request for a full; and one flat out rejection. Of the four queries that have had no response, three agencies list on both their website and in my silly little "book about agents" that they respond to queries in a certain amount of time regardless of rejection or acceptance, yet some of these are months beyond those rough dates without a word.

So do I write them off and move on, or requery?

I'll start off by saying that the graphic novel market is a niche market despite its tremendous growth, and I don't know any agents who specialize in it, or even really know if anyone does. I'm fairly sure that if you were a client to an agent and he/she sold work for you, and you approached them about a graphic novel, they would at least make some calls and point you in the direction of getting that published. That's what sub-agents, foreign agents, and whoever else is in the agent's Blackberry are for.

As to the queries that got no response, move on. They got no response. They're rejections. Agent websites are not necessarily accurate to that day, month, or even year. I would exhaust all other avenues before re-querying, and from your high response rate, it seems like you won't need to.

...I'm at a loss.

Anonymous said...

I'm a literary agent who's been on both sides of the desk. After about 4000 rejections for my own MS I got a job with a reputable agency, 30 years in biz.

In 4000 e-mail queries, I found a single snotty agent. He's opened himself to humiliation one day, as this kind of hilarity can make valuable copy.

This is no 9-to-fiver. One is up 'til the wee hours looking for quality work. In 2000 queries I found a single potential -- who didn't even follow submission rules. This first-timer is now getting thumbs-up from several "Big Guys." That's good writin'.

This is what puts food on our tables. Nobody I've rejected has got anywhere so far. We all keep watch to see how right or wrong we are.

Writers who have time for bitterness can't be very certain of themselves.

We get TONS of proposals from self-healed or been healed of something; a client's associate, incidentally, is going on Oprah for that.

My friends who have overcome worse hardships may never be heard from.

There's no pathology in turning down uninspiring queries. Many sound fraudulent. Let's get "obnoxious:" many were just too dumb to stay out of trouble. People that dumb may think they deserve a book contract and TV accolades, but their peers don't buy books anyhow.

This is a response in my "You Are Not Special" post.

Someone please explain it to me.

P.S. There are not 4000 literary agents in the United States. Maybe in the world. Maybe. And that's including assistants. And the cleaning lady who works in the agency building.

Children's Books and Agents

I’ve done many searches looking for a statistic or at least a better understanding of why some houses do not respond to agented submissions. I read on one editor’s blog that he doesn’t even look at a MS until the agent nudges him. Is this common practice?

I write children’s’ fiction, and out of 7 agented subs this past year, I’ve only received two positive rejections. The rest are all no shows (these are major houses, too). I’m trying to figure out if this ‘if we’re not interested, you won’t hear from us’ is a common thing now, even with an agent, or if my agent is not being aggressive enough with follow up (which I suspect is true). I’d really appreciate it if you could address this on your blog. Thanks so much for your insight.

So I'm not sure the statistics in children's fiction (particularly middle grades and below), but yes, most houses have a blanket policy of no un-agented material. See more about it in this post. There are, however, a lot of smaller publishing houses for children's books that take un-agented submissions.

EDIT: (OK, this is the third time I'm typing this out because blogger keeps losing my work) Sometimes agents take on work that they cant sell, either because they're not good enough or the book isn't as good as they thought it was. Also, markets can dry up and contacts can quit or get fired. Give your agent time to exhaust every possible avenue. When he/she does, it's time to write another book and/or find a new agent.

You Are Not Special or Inspiring

I would say that about 30% of our submissions are medical memoirs. Occasionally they're by doctors who want to bring someone to the public's attention, sometimes someone has a crazy medical theory, but for the most part they're people who have had or have some disease, disorder, or syndrome and have chosen to write about about it. That's all well and good, and inspiring stories about illness are important or whatever, but there are two aspects of it that particularly annoy me.

(1) The ones concerning psychiatric problems, unlike cancer or a disease, tend to fall in line with whatever is a trendy diagnosis in the medical world. Right now we're seeing a lot of bipolar memoirs, far more than we normally see. In fact it's gotten to the point where if I read a CNN health blurb about some disorder, I expect to see more queries about it in the next couple months. The article was written in response to a trend in diagnostics, which means more people were being diagnosed with that particular illness, which means more people who are writing their memoirs are going to say they have that illness.

I've singled out mental illnesses here for a reason: they adhere more to trends because the diagnostic procedures are constantly in flux. Unlike cancer, which is always cancer, mental health issues are simply harder to pin down. Many psychologists and psychiatrists think some of the less obvious categories (obvious categories being narcolepsy and pyromania) are not worth diagnosing. They would rather treat the patient by their symptoms and use therapy to get to the root of the symptoms than label it, but the labels serve a purpose. The patient wants the comfort of knowing their problem has a name, which gives it a legitimacy it might not have had before, and the doctor needs some guidelines on treatment methods, so names are assigned to a collection of symptoms which really appear in a lot of different disorders. Periods of mania followed by periods of depression might label a person manic depressive, but then bipolar disorder came along and some people felt it was separate, and then they classed it into type 1 and type 2, and then added a bunch of supplemental classes, and now after DSM-IV some people argue that manic depression might just be a sub-type of bipolar disorder. (This happens in other areas of medicine. One of my doctors feels strongly that Ulcerative Colitis, long believed to be unrelated to Crohn's Disease, is actually one of 5 subtypes of Crohn's Disease)

The results are good: Doctors learn more about the differences in subtypes and therefore how to treat them. However, it also means I'll see a huge increase of queries of people who for years have struggled with whatever depression and mania is currently being called. In our office we don't have a blanket policy about rejecting disease stories - in fact, many are requested - but we are used to seeing a direct response to medical trends in people's memoirs, which means the memoirs reflect not so much their personal struggle (which could be interesting) as what's popular in medicine (less interesting/relevant).

(2) Almost everyone feels compelled to add the line, "I hope to inspire/educate other people with this disease/disorder/syndrome." Altruistic or narcissistic? You decide. It's probably a bit of both. Not to knock on people with serious mental illness (having been misdiagnosed with a number of them myself by well-meaning doctors), but being sick is not the only requirement for writing a memoir about it. You also have to be a good writer and there has to be a reason why your story is something people would want to read. My boss does request a lot of these, which results in a high number of rejected partials, as it becomes plain within a chapter that the author has nothing special to contribute and is merely going through the chronological history of her doctor's visits and making mundane observations about the waiting room in hopes of making it seem real.

I have a personal beef with this, and I admit it outright. When I got sick ten years ago, a ton of people either recommended books to me or gave me books about either my disease or a more general book that was meant to be inspiring. I have a shelf full of them. It's never really stopped. Everyone from the person in the seat in front of me at synagogue to my hairstylist reads some book about illness, thinks of me, and then makes sure I hear about it at length while they're cutting my hair or running into me at the bagel line at kiddish. The more annoying people give me a copy, and then even check back two weeks later to see if I've read it, which means I have to read it or lie about reading it. I did read some of them, and the experience was mainly negative. Either I found them depressing, uninteresting, or irrelevant. In a few cases the author was clearly deranged. Some guy apparently cured his Crohn's by eating dirt, but if you read his story carefully, you'll notice that his doctors were just doing a terrible job and had he been seeing someone decent, he would have gotten treatment that definitely would have prevented him from being 80 pounds underweight (it's called intravenous feeding, dork).

All of these people are well-meaning, and have no idea how little interest I have in whatever book they think will inspire me. When I want to read about Crohn's, I go get a book and read it. Otherwise, I mainly listen to my doctor and have him explain things in detail, and that's enough for me. Beyond that, I have a life to live.

Over the years, many, many people have told me to write a book about my experiences, another line that pops up a lot in these queries. The response I give is always the same: "I don't think anyone would want to read it." Nothing about my personal medical history is particularly instructive or inspiring. I may feel differently in the future, but this is the way I've felt for awhile, and it's unlikely to change very soon. Just because something was traumatic doesn't mean people want to hear about it. There still has to be a basic story, even in a memoir, to entice people. It doesn't have to adhere to the basic conflict/action/resolution structure of a novel, especially with a chronic illness to which there is no resolution, but it has to tell the reader something other than "I was sick and here's what happened."

Also, change the names of your doctors or get their permission to use them. They wouldn't write a book about you and name names; you probably shouldn't do the same.

Stupid Things People Do #I don't know

So you submitted to editors and agencies, and were rejected. They wrote a personalized rejection, though, praising certain elements of your book but deciding at the end it's "just not right for them." Well, good for you. You were close.

That said, do not, under any circumstances, include a rejection letter from another agent or a publishing house in your query letter to an agent. It doesn't help if you underline and/or highlight the line of praise; it's still a rejection and you definitely shouldn't be showing it to us. The time to mention what publishing houses rejected you (so that we don't resubmit) is AFTER we've taken you on as a client, and not before.

I don't know why people do this, but they do.

I'll be offline until Monday night for Passover, so don't expect a lot of comments to be approved between tonight and then unless I get a friend to do it for me. Enjoy, and Chag Sameach!

Pitching at Conferences

Hello! I have an odd question, but in your infinite wisdom and experience I’m sure you’ll have an excellent answer. I was at a regional romance writer’s conference where I was one of the finalists in a big contest. As a conference attendee I got one pitch session, with Deirdre Knight – and that one went really well. As a finalist I got another pitch session – with a different agent. It was a group pitch and I just was not pitching well for some reason. After my pitch, Agent B said, “well, it doesn’t really sound interesting, but send me a partial anyway.”

I was humiliated, of course. Out of seven people she only asked for mine and one other person – other people she either referred to other agents or flat out said “not for me.” This was in late September. I have not sent her the partial, but I’m now thinking I have nothing to lose. Here’s my question: Do I mention in my cover letter that she hated it but wanted to see it anyway? J I could make it funny, but would it be better to lie and hope she doesn’t remember me and only remembers requesting the partial? Such a tricky kind of situation.

You shouldn't feel humiliated. She wouldn't have asked for it if there wasn't legitimate interest; she may just have been tired, or cranky, or in a bad mood, or simply thought your presentation was lacking but she was willing to see if it looked different in paper. Don't mention that she hated it, just that she requested it.

A lot is made in books of the agent pitch at conferences and I'm sure a few sales have come from it, but it's not the main way to approach an agent. Many writers are not good at describing their books (myself included) in person and we're aware of that; the agents who go to these conferences choose to do so because they don't find them as unbearable as I would. If you're not a good speaker, send a query. If you ARE a good speaker and good presenter, go to conferences and pitch away.

This is one of those posts I get in trouble for

Excuse me while I go slightly off the topic of query rejection and into another kind of rejection.

Authors have it bad these days. They're being sued or they're suing someone. I'm surprised Anne Rice, the only author I know to have established and nourished a base of fans who personally hate her, found time to find Christ between lawsuits against fanfic authors, restaurant owners, and dead people's relatives. But really, she's old news.

J.K. Rowling is suing the Harry Potter Lexicon book, which she supported when it was just a website supporting her work, and now is a published book supporting her work and making money off of it. Yes, yes, it's copyright violation, but not only is it far from the only book ever to heavily violate Harry Potter copyright, but she claims it has "decimated my creative work over the last month." To be fair, suing fans for trying to make a buck off you can be demoralizing, but damn, woman, you have a lot of bucks. And what were you doing, writing HP 8?

But I'm actually most sympathetic to Andrew Morton, who in February published a sleazy tell-all book about Tom Cruise in the form of an "unauthorized biography." When it came out in the US, people criticized it for lack of sources (as Tom Cruise and everyone who is friends with Tom Cruise, i.e. is a Scientologist, wouldn't say a word to him), said the writing was choppy, and ultimately decided that the characterization of the star was probably flawed. Tom Cruise threatened to sue him, as is his right to do, for writing something that amounts to several hundred pages of mainly unsubstantiated libel and slander. The lawsuit didn't go through (yet), but Tom Cruise did something more important - he got the publisher to agree not to publish it in Britain (Morton's home country) or Australia. The book did so well, St. Martin's took another pass at it to get an "approved" version to sell in Britain, only to dismiss the idea when they realized the book would be about four pages long because nobody would take their calls.

Brits needing their sleazy Tom Cruise fix will have to shop at eBay and find an international shipper, because Amazon.co.uk won't sell his work (except through used sellers). Good for them, right? Standing up against libel?

So what else does Amazon.co.uk sell? Well, let's see: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, The Synagogue of Satan, Rulers and Ruled in the US Empire: Bankers, Zionists, Militants, The Exposure of Anti Christ's League Of The Untouchables, Inc, and Dajjal: The Anti Christ, but thank goodness theories about Tom Cruise's personal life are safe from British eyes. Unless, of course, they own a computer, a television, or read newspapers.

Actually, Amazon and bookstores in general don't sell a lot of books that are anti-Scientology, which the Andrew Norton book most definitely is. The authors get sued, the books don't come out, and in a few cases, lives are completely ruined. That's not really protection against libel - that's censorship, or in the case of Paulette Cooper, total psychotic behavior on the part of an organization.

There are many, many anti-Semitic and anti-Israel books out there, some by former Presidents. They get a little write-up in the New Jersey Jewish News, some opinion articles are written, and Alan Dershowitz puts out another book disputing claims made in said book. We make a fuss, because a fuss should be made when lies are told to further political interest. Do we censor? Do we do everything possible to ruin the author's lives? No, we don't (for the most part. Nobody's blameless here).

Everyone has the right to free speech. If the Chinese can say that the Dalai Lama is a terrorist who is planning suiciding bombings and we can reprint it in the interest of providing news without our heads exploding, then there's some appreciation for the two-way street that free speech and censorship follow. Depending, of course, on how rich and lawsuit-happy your target is.

If google ads pop up for Scientology because of this post, do not click on them. Go to Xenu.net instead. I don't want that dirty money.

I Heart Publisher's Weekly

I was once at a book conference where an agent-turned-author was pitching her book on how to pitch a novel by giving out bad advice. One of the bad things she said was, "Subscribe to Publisher's Weekly." At this point everyone began furiously scribbling on their notepads like she was Moses on Har Sinai, but either that didn't result in one extra subscription or someone in the room had a lot of money to blow.

Publisher's Weekly is a trade publication for the book publishing industry. Being a "trade magazine" means it's mainly - or entirely, really - for people who work in the book publishing industry. With a small readership circle and little or no news stand sales, it makes its money back by advertising and by a $240/year subscription fee. Newsweek, another weekly of about the same length, costs me about $50 a year. On the other hand, Newsweek is not a trade publication, it's timely, and it has high sales from news stands.

I am very fortunate that my boss was having a good enough year last year that she finally broke down and subscribed. Some agents don't. Most editors rely on their office subscription. I once saw it in a magazine shop at Times Square for $14.00, which was $10.00 more than I was willing to pay. I don't get to read it every week, but if I'm in the day it comes in, I do get the privilege.

My G-d! There's an entire magazine out there of industry secrets?!? And it's hidden behind a huge price tag? Those bastards! Trying to keep the small author down.

In actuality, PW is what it is - a trade magazine. That means it discusses industry trends (read: not what kind of book you should be writing), produces more in-depth bestseller lists than the NY Times with some sales numbers, provides some information on comings-and-goings within the industry (so you can see who moved to what house, important if you know that editor), and generally provides a calender of major upcoming releases, book fairs, and other things of note. The opening pages are the articles, which are short but discuss topics relevant to the industry (Amazon's new policy of only dealing with Booksurge and no other POD publisher was this week's topic). Most of the rest of the magazine is just capsule reviews of every book that came out that week, most of which are available for free online and are generally favorable. The last page is something interesting (this week: the day in the life of a publicist) which is meant to get a few chuckles. Again, insider stuff, and we say that because, well, some associate editor taking a new position at Doubleday after leaving Scribner's is not all that important to your writing career. Focus on your writing, polish your query, and you should be fine.

More on Editors vs. Agents

Many editors are not fans of agents.

Most editors will not accept unagented manuscripts.

Please help me understand how this makes sense.

I'll respond to this as a post because I think this is an important request.

With the sheer volume of submissions for publication today, agents have become an additional buffer for the overworked (and trust me, they are overworked) editor. If a novel arrives from an agent, it generally means that at the very least, the novel is going to be the correct genre the editor is interested in, is going to be professional and free of spelling and grammatical errors, and have some literary value. For this reason, editors increasingly rely on agents to provide them with quality material as opposed to looking in the slush pile, and major publishing houses have taken on company wide "no unsolicited submissions" policies (meaning, you need an agent) to prevent the mail room from collapsing under the sheer weight of paper. Editors are subject to the policies of their higher-ups, so that means that not every editor may agree with the policy, but they have to follow it.

When I've spoken to editors outside of my work, they've had mixed feelings about agents. Some like them for the reasons above. Some like them because agents are publishing professionals - they get things done quickly and efficiently, and they understand the ins and outs, and they keep the author from calling every week to see how copy-editing is going. A few don't like them because they know the agent will drive up the price of the book, and the more the advance is, the more copies the book must sell to break even or make a profit (most books barely break even). Some authors, on the other hand, are so eager to be published that they'll sign on the dotted line to any amount, whereas the agent needs the advance as a major source of income and wants it to be as high as possible.

The truth is no one knows how much a book is worth until it goes on bookshelves and starts selling, and that's long after the publishing company has invested at least tens of thousands of dollars in it. Some of those costs are non-negotiable - the book is going to cost money to edit and print and ship. The flexible number is the advance, which can range from $250 to several million. The publishing company, perhaps rightly so, feels that the author wins whether the advance is low or high, because if the book is good, it will sell and the author will make money from royalties. The agent and the author know that the book might not sell, and want all the money they can get up front (which is why it's called "an advance" - it's an advance on future royalties) because the advance isn't returned if the book doesn't sell.

Like any business (and publishing is a business), it all comes down to money. That may sound self-serving, but editors and agents and full-time authors have to pay their rent and their bills and their health insurance just like anyone else. Publishing is already an extremely low-paying industry, so everyone fights for what they can get. Oh, and they also want the book to succeed. You have to be fairly altruistic to be in publishing anyway, because the hours are so long and the pay is so low most of the time.

My first book (here's hoping on the next 3 we're currently pitching to different companies) basically sold at a loss. The advance was so ridiculously low that the hours my agent put into contract negotiations means she lost money with her time, as did I in writing it. Even though it will undoubtedly recoup its advance and I'll see royalties, the royalty rate is an industry bottom (7.5%) so the book would have to be a bestseller for me to see any money and for my agent to see her 15% of that money. We agreed to the contract anyway because it was my first book, and other books will hopefully follow it, and the money will slowly increase until it's substantial. It takes a lot of faith, both in the part of my editor and my agent, to maintain me as a client/author. In other words, I'm lucky for every last penny.

The Agent/Author Relationship

I have a question regarding protocol and approaching a publisher directly. I currently have an agent who represents specific projects -- as opposed to representing ME -- and we were recently within a fraction of an inch of a book deal (my first). The publishing team decided to go in a different direction with the book, and assured us it was not an "author issue." Whatever.

I truly enjoy working with this agent, and feel she has my best interest in mind...most of the time. While I do understand this is a business first and that I'm lucky to have an agent at all, my only complaint is that she is not as proactive as I'd like. She runs a small agency, has mountains of work to do for her published clients, and I, therefore, tend to get less time and, in my mind, opportunities.

Can I help? Can I contact publishers on my own after making sure my proposal matches what they publish? If so, can I tell them to contact my agent if there is any interest? Does having an agent make me a stronger candidate or will I simply look foolish?

I don't wish to burn any bridges -- with my agent or a potential publisher -- and I hope to continue working together, but I do get tired of the waiting game and feel I can at least gain exposure and possibly establish a relationship with an editor.

As any agent will tell you, some of them have a more "hand-holding" approach - meaning they spend more time communicating with the author - and others do not, and spend the vast majority of their time working with the editor and publicist to make sure the book is successful after it sells to a publishing house. It's almost entirely dependent on the agent's personality, which is very hard to get a grasp of at first.

A good rule of thumb is to never go over the head of your agent (who is there to protect YOUR interests) without his/her permission. This is a good question to ask: "Should I call the editor about a concern I have?" Another good rule is that if you do have a strong working relationship with your editor and the agent isn't involved in that part of the manuscript, never mention money. As soon as money, deals, contracts come up, direct the editor to your agent.

I do talk to my editor and I do talk to my agent, and the first question I ask is, "Am I interrupting something? I know you're very busy." To my editor my questions are entirely editorial with a few notable exceptions. It just so happens that my editor is not a fan of agents (as many editors are not, viewing them as people who just drive up the price of the novel) and I only got an agent because I got an offer from her first (she accepts unsolicited submissions). So, I'm fairly sure she likes me better than she likes my agent. On occasion I've said to my agent, "Do you think I should go bug ___ about this?" (it being a contractual question) and she usually says to go ahead. This is a matter of the personalities of the three of us - writer, agent, and editor - and the balance between them. We all want the book to be successful, but we all have slightly different views of how that should come to be.

If you're wondering whether it's appropriate to "bug" your agent or editor about some issue that you have, it's perfectly fair to outright ask them if they mind the interruption. Be as brief as possible, and thank them for their time. Eventually you will get a feel for their personalities and when you can call them and when you should put it off until the next time you speak.

To answer your question, which is "Can I help?" the answer is generally that they will tell you if you can. I asked that question once and didn't really get a response, which meant "no." When the time DOES come for your input, show your dedication and respect, and you might be asked for more.

To answer your second, implied question, I can't tell you if your agent is doing a good job or not, but there are long waits in publishing. A "what's going on?" call is acceptable as a client after a few months, and you can ask where she submitted, but this is something that will take its own course. Worse comes to worse, she can't sell the manuscript anywhere, which either means she's not a good agent or she was wrong and the manuscript isn't strong enough to be sold. It's in her interest to sell every manuscript she accepts, and for as much money as possible, so she's not working against you. When she exhausts every possible option (if it comes to that), she'll tell you.

Last point: If you have an agent, do not approach publishers on your own. She will be insulted and it's the wrong thing to do.

My hazy return

I'm back from England, which was fun and informative (I'm a big British history fan), but probably would have been a lot better if I wasn't sick with a bad cold and fever the whole time. Well, some things you can't control. Comments are back on.

A couple observations about the English book market:

(1) I saw my first-ever book vending machine in the airport. Awesome.

(2) With everything outrageously expensive in London against the dollar, I was surprised at how reasonably books seemed to be priced. While other products just seemed to have the same price as in America (1.00 for water) only it was in pounds so it was doubled (really $2.00 for water), books generally had lower retail prices than they do here, to reflect that the pound is worth more than the dollar and always has, even though the rates were much better when I was in Oxford in 1998. One novel that cost about $13.95 here cost 7.95 quid there, which was astoundingly fair.

(3) From the bookstores I was in (and believe me, I made the time for it, especially the used ones), it seems that the British are more into trade paperbacks than we are, an important cost-saving measure that I'm surprised we haven't done here. I saw new books that are only available in hardcover here in the States on sale as gigantic trade paperbacks on the front shelves. The downside, of course, is that you'll kill the spine with a huge book like that, but the book is lighter and costs a bit less.

(4) I saw a lot of books that had a glossy plastic cover over them. When I saw people reading them in the underground I thought it was just a library thing, but in a used bookstore, there was a giant pile of donations and most of them had the same plastic cover. Maybe British readers can tell me if this is something that's done regularly. It seems a nice way to protect the book.

On Hold

I'll be in England for the next week, so I'm disabling the comment feature because I won't be here to approve them.

New readers can take the time to look up older posts, which will probably answer a lot of your questions.

The Job Market and My Boss

Dear Rejecter:
Is your publishing house aware that you are selling your services outside of work?
While I'm sure what you're offering is high-quality, my gentle suggestion is that you check with your senior editor first, before you find a conflict of interest shadowing your career.

Sincerely,
U.S. Writer

Well, yeah, of course she does. She knows about the blog and she knows that I'm looking for other work, even work that would replace the job I have. We've talked about it from time to time.

What I have is a pretty bottom-level job within a two person company, and one of the people is me. It would only get lower if I was an unpaid intern. It's not expected that I'm going to stay working at the literary agency forever. In fact, most people only stay at my position for a year or two, and then the agent (or agents, as many people have multiple jobs and multiple agencies because they need the hours to pay the bills) helps them find a job at a publishing house. It's in the agent's best interest that a former assistant become, hopefully, an editor at a major house, because the agent is thinking that down the line, in 10 years or so, their former assistant may be the person they're pitching a novel to.

I've stayed with the job so long because (1) I was in school full-time until January, (2) I genuinely like my boss and I enjoy my work, (3) until recently I've been too ill for full-time work, (4) I'm a working writer with one book coming out in the fall that's the first in a series and another we're about to try to sell to another company, (5) the job market is completely dead right now.

It may seem a little weird to people who have more traditional jobs that involve getting a job at a company and hoping to get a raise or a promotion that I talk to my employer about job prospects, but people move around a lot in publishing, and it's in everyone's best interest to keep a network of people they know in other agencies/companies. I think when it gets to the corporate level (VP or above) they get extremely secretive about job offers elsewhere, because there actual living wage is involved, but that's at a very high level that most people don't achieve or don't want to achieve.