Compare-Contrast: Publishers and Agents

Most everything I've read about getting published says it's best to have an agent. Of course, it is also said that it's better to have no agent than a bad agent. A good agent will often be able to negotiate a better deal with a publisher, and you'll get more publishers to consider your work through an agent rather than without one. My advice would be to try to find an agent before submitting straight to publishers.

Unless you know a lot about contract law, just be sure to get an agent to handle the contract.

The main reason you need an agent is for handling contracts, and for getting through doors that are closed to unagented writers. But I should also note that while many doors are closed to unagented writers, darned few of them are locked.

Too many writers, new and old alike, spend half their time rewriting for agents, choosing which book to write because the agent says this book or that book is the best, or allowing teh agent to make all teh decisions about how, when, and where to market a book. Unless you are forunate beyond belief in your choice of an agent, this is truly dumb.

So go either way, but make your own decisions.

Do not query agents at the same time as publishers. Reason being, the agent can't reshop the book to publishers that have already passes, so your book has more limited places an agent could pitch.

Since you have already queried publishers, wait for an offer. If you get one, tell the publisher you would like time to consider it and to hire an agent or attorney to negotiate the contract for you. Be aware that if it is a smaller publisher, with a small adance, you will have more difficulty getting a agent because the 15% of the advance just isn't attractive enough.

But, if you get an offer, then email/mail queries to prospective agents with the subject line of PENDING OFFER FROM XYZ PUBLISHER so that you get their attention fast.

good luck.

~suki

Jamesaritchie said:

Too many writers, new and old alike, spend half their time rewriting for agents, choosing which book to write because the agent says this book or that book is the best, or allowing teh agent to make all teh decisions about how, when, and where to market a book. Unless you are forunate beyond belief in your choice of an agent, this is truly dumb.

So go either way, but make your own decisions.

Click to expand...

*snipping mine*

Which "too many" writers would that be, just out of curiosity? As far as I'm aware, the general advice given on this forum and others is to take all criticisms (even from agents) with a grain of salt, to look at trends in rejections and determine the course of action best for you and to maintain your artistic integrity within your work whether for an agent or for a publisher. We also advise to maintain control over marketing a book (which is a no-brainer considering how few writers actually get professional marketing campaigns done for them these days). As far as I can tell, also, the agent-author relationship is usually portrayed and preferred as a partnership--not a dictatorship.

Advising caution is one thing; broad generalizations like this are hardly helpful.

To the OP--just out of curiosity, you're sending to smaller publishers, yes? The slush piles at the major houses that accept unagented submissions are monstrous. I know the reply times at Tor, for example, are clocking in at a healthy 1- 1 1/2 years at the moment. And most full manuscript requests end in rejection; that's the nature of the beast whether it's the agent beastie or the publisher beastie.

Generally, if you're submitting to publishers, you don't submit simultaneously submit to agents. You've already shopped the project you're seeking representation for to the publishers, so an agent for that project would be fairly useless. Unless, of course, as jamesritchie mentioned you get the manuscript sold. Then, you can approach agencies with your sold manuscript and gain representation fairly quickly.

I'm very pro-agent myself. They're good to have since publishing is a rough business and there's tons of legal stuff to deal with -- most of which I have no clue about. They look out for your best interests and can open doors for you that you can't get to on your own. Your publisher options are limited subbing on your own.

Any agent or a publisher will end the relationship if they reject your full because you have no actual relationship with them. (in most cases) It's like going to buy a car. You might take up the salesman time all day, but if you decide not to buy the car, do you have a relationship? Nope. He's doing his job selling cars, and you're looking to buy a car. Agents are looking to "buy" (rep) books and you're "selling" one.

If you send to publishers you shouldn't also send to agents. Say you finally get an agent. Then they find out you already sent your book to X many publishers. You've limited what they can do for you because you've already shopped it around. Odds are they have more editors they can send it to than you did, but you still put a dent in the potential pool. If you have a book that has a smaller market potential, you can really hurt your chances. It also says to the agent "X many publishers already said no" and that doesn't encourage them to take you on a client.

Or, best case, you get a publishing offer and go looking for an agent (If you do get an offer, this is advisable by the way. Don't sign or agree to anything without someone looking over the contract). If all you sent the book too were smaller publishers you could approach yourself, you have no idea if one of the top houses would have bought your book or not. You might be missing out on a great opportunity.