Help me out here

[writersblock]

My first novel is ready. I wrote it, rewrote it a few times and revised parts of it. Then I had it professionally edited and incorporated the editor's comments and critiques. Now I am satisfied with the outcome.

Here's the snag: The manuscript was read by two editors, a couple of agents and one traditional publisher. Each of them loved certain parts of the book and disliked others. Thing is, each loved / disliked different parts. For example, person A said chapter so-and-so is fast-paced and the character interesting. Then, person B said the very same chapter is boring and the character just doesn't ring true.(That particular character is based on real person, so it has to be realistic!)

The only common view these well-meaning folks have is that I am a good writer. I guess that's already somethong, huh?

But I am at a loss. Who do I listen to? Person A, B, C, or, to my own gut feeling? Problem is, if I incorporate all of the changes suggested, not only would they be contradictory, but I would also, in the end, lose my own voice.

I can only surmise that reading a book is as subjective as viewing art: some people will have an affinity to it, and others won't. I am satisfied with the book's premise and with the message it conveys, so I've decided to bite the bullet and go the self-publishing route. I intend to work hard to promote the book once it's out.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts and opinions. Do you think I am doing the right thing? Does anyone out there has had the same experience, went on to publish anyway, and succeeded?

[Zolah]

You cannot please all of the people all of the time. Reading is an incredibly subjective experience - every reader brings something of their own personality to their interpretation of a work of fiction, no matter how professional and impartial they may try to be. People will always have different opinions on what you write, and that is shown by the conflicting reports you are now being given.

What you want is for this piece to be the best it can be, not for it to become some other piece altogether. If you try to incorporate all these changes, you'll be in danger of producing a mis-matched patchwork of a book, written by commitee - and in the process perhaps destroying the very things in the work that make it special and uniquely yours. Beta readers can only help you so much. You are the final arbiter of what your work should be.

Now, having said all that...why does this mean you should have to self-publish? Sure, these people are all giving you conflicting advice, but you don't have to listen to all of it, do you? Who are all these editors and agents? Are any of them willing to represent you or publish your work? Is any of them offering you a development fee to work on the ms? If so, listen to the advice of that person! If not, then why are you letting what they say worry you?

Don't give up on conventional publishing so easily. I worked with an editor for six months on changes to my first book, and was then rejected by the acquisitions meeting. The editor was nearly in tears when he phoned me to say that, after all our hard work, they would not be taking the book on. I was devastated - for a while. But I didn't let it stop me writing my second book. When that was finished I submitted it to the same editor, and after doing some changes to it (for a development fee) and meeting with the editor and managing director of the firm, they made an offer to publish it! Perseverence is just as important as talent.

[triceretops]

Writersblock--you are right in that it is very subjective. In this case I would continue to submit--get a larger number of comments from many more sources--a larger control group (if you will). Then, see if a trend develops. Only a handful of editors or publishers is usually not enough for me. When you run up the totals you will begin to see definite patterns. I use higher submission numbers to determine if I need real fixing in a certain area. I use my own 7 out of 10 rule. If seven out of ten editors are telling me that my transitions are to snappy, I'm going to attend to that. Same with any other plot problems or mechanics. The majority of "clued in " edtiors will spot the same problem.

Tri

[maestrowork]

If you know your story inside and out and you know your stuff... I think you should be able to take all the critiques and suggestions and take the ones that are applicable and toss out the "noises."

I'd suggest put the ms. aside for a couple of weeks, at least. Then take it out again, and go through it once again, keeping in mind the critiques you got from these editors and agents. Really go through your ms with a fresh eye and a red pen. This is really difficult to do, but.... try to detach yourself from the work as if someone else wrote it, not you. Then judge the ms as a reader yourself, and as if you're reading that story for the very first time...

Deep down, I think you know what works and what doesn't. You just need to be more objective, which is the hardest thing to do when you're the writer...

Once you really believe in your story, then don't worry about agent A or B said... keep sending it out. Meanwhile, write your second book.

[Liam Jackson]

But I am at a loss. Who do I listen to? Person A, B, C, or, to my own gut feeling? Problem is, if I incorporate all of the changes suggested, not only would they be contradictory, but I would also, in the end, lose my own voice.


You already know the above statement isn't an option. So consider the consequences of choosing one over the others.

Not enough information for me to suggest a solution. Are you trying to secure an agent? Do the editors work for a publishing house, or are they paid out of your pocket to edit the story? Do you already have an agent and are now working to satisfy a potential publisher? Will your decision mean the difference between a publishing contract, and another round of beating the bushes?

If you have an agent, and the editors are working for you, the only parties left that you have to satisfy are the publisher and yourself.

[Jamesaritchie]

My first novel is ready. I wrote it, rewrote it a few times and revised parts of it. Then I had it professionally edited and incorporated the editor's comments and critiques. Now I am satisfied with the outcome.

Here's the snag: The manuscript was read by two editors, a couple of agents and one traditional publisher. Each of them loved certain parts of the book and disliked others. Thing is, each loved / disliked different parts. For example, person A said chapter so-and-so is fast-paced and the character interesting. Then, person B said the very same chapter is boring and the character just doesn't ring true.(That particular character is based on real person, so it has to be realistic!)

The only common view these well-meaning folks have is that I am a good writer. I guess that's already somethong, huh?

But I am at a loss. Who do I listen to? Person A, B, C, or, to my own gut feeling? Problem is, if I incorporate all of the changes suggested, not only would they be contradictory, but I would also, in the end, lose my own voice.

I can only surmise that reading a book is as subjective as viewing art: some people will have an affinity to it, and others won't. I am satisfied with the book's premise and with the message it conveys, so I've decided to bite the bullet and go the self-publishing route. I intend to work hard to promote the book once it's out.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts and opinions. Do you think I am doing the right thing? Does anyone out there has had the same experience, went on to publish anyway, and succeeded?

My gut reaction is that you aren't giving your novel much of a chance to succeed. Self-publishing is usually a knee-jerk reaction, and almost never leads to a worthwhile destination. You can promote the book to death, and you will still probably have fewer than 100 sales all told. There are thousands of novels being published each year by commercial publishers, so why buy a self-published novel?

Different editors will have different reactions to a novel. It means nothing. Just who are the editors? Do they work for commercial publishing houses? If not, I'd ignore everything they have to say.

But I will say this, just because a character is based on a real person in no way, shape, or form means that character will ring true on the page. What's on the page is NOT the real character, it's a paper character you wrote, having filtered him through your own mind, your own skill, your own talent. A character based on a real person can be just as unrealistic, just as boring, just as cardboard, as any other character.

Do not ever think that because you base a character on a real person, that character must be realistic.

You can say the same thing about plot. Just because something really happened in no way means it will make a good or realistic plot for a novel.

You're also seeing one of the main reasons I'm against having a novel edited by "professional" editors. Far more often than not, a "professional" editor is just a person who charges you money for doing something you can probably do as well or better yourself. And certainly something that good agents and editors who work for publishing houses can do much better than anyone else.

I'm not saying all the "professional" editors out there are no good, but by and large, I'd trust my local garage mechanic more than I'd trust the vast majority of them.

Reading a novel is certainly subjective, but when you get enough opinions from the right agent and the right editors, it stops being subjective. A consensus forms, and this consensus will tell you where you went wrong.

Part of selling a novel is finding the right agent, the right editor, and the right home. You can't do this if you self-publish. About the only thing self-publishing assures is that your novel will go nowhere, will be read by almost no one, and the vast majority of your time for the next couple of years will be spent trying to market something no one wants to read.

Write the novel the way you want it, then send it to good agents and legitimate editors who work for mainstream publishing houses. And listen to what these agents and editors say, not to anyone else. If they ask for changes, make them. You may have to go through twenty agents and twenty publishers, but this is simply how it works.

Your novel certainly is not perfect. It does have flaws. Different agents and editors will consider different things flaws, and some will think one thing works, and others will think that same thing fails. This is normal. But if the novel really is any good, if it really is publishable, you will find an agent and a publishing house who will take it and help fix the flaws.

And remember that readers do not buy books because of the premise or the message it carries. People buy books because that book tells a good story in an entertaining way, and is filled with good characters.

Throw out the opinions of the "professional" editor(s). They're meaningless.

And don't give up so easily. If it really is written the way YOU want it, if it's the best job you can do, then send it to one good agent after another, and even to the few good publishing houses that will look at it without an agent. Keep sending it out until there's nowhere left to send it.

And in the meantime, get to work on a second novel. First novels almost always are unpublishable. Rather than spending the next year or two self-publishing your first novel, and trying to promote it when very few people in this world want or need self-published novels, your time will be much better spent writing the next novel or two.

Give your novel a chance. I don't think you've done this. When you've gone through twenty or thirty agents and twenty or thirty legitimate publishers, it's had a chance. And if none of them take it on, you can bet there are serious flaws that means you shouldn't want to self-publish it.

While this novel is making the rounds, get to work immediately on a second novel.

[writersblock]

Thank for all your comments. A lot of what you said rings true. Perserverance really is the name of the game, ain't it?

[James D. Macdonald]

Send it out (to paying markets only) until Hell won't have it. Your goal now is to find the editor who loves your book as much as you do.

The next time you revise that book should be after someone with a checkbook says "If you make the following changes I will buy this book."

Meanwhile, write your next book, using all the skill you have, and start sending it around.

[jdkiggins]

writersblock,
I'd suggest reading it over one more time and take only the suggestions you feel would be beneficial to your own writing.

As someone else said, you can't please everyone. If you feel you have done your best and are pleased with it, continue to send it out. Another publisher may decide your work is worth publishing as it stands.

Good luck with this.
Joanne