Writer's Conferences?

I've been to two conferences, and am unpublished. I enjoyed them, but they were very different in style and usefulness. I think it has a lot to do with the speakers, agents/editors present. A lot of basics were covered -- of course, you can never get enough of those. And the energy from being around other writers made it worthwhile for me.

That being said, I wouldn't plan on more than one or two a year. Cuts into the real writing time.

I've been to various conferences, but none for writing fiction. I think one of the keys to writer's conferences is networking. Getting to know agents, editors, and other writers can be useful.

I've made some interesting friends and had some cool correspondences with people I've met at conferences.

It really depends. I've had some really terrific experiences at conferences, and some not-so-great-ones.

In all honesty, I don't attend so much for what I can learn but simply the opportunity to meet interesting people and well-known writers whose work I admire. I do participate in the workshops, usually, but again I think a lot of times it's more for the camraderie than anything else. And I think that if you attend a conference with that thought in mind, you're probably apt to get a lot more out of it. I don't always come out feeling like I've learned a heck of a lot (but then again, as I say, it depends on the conference--I've had some great teachers at some!) but if I can say I had a good time and made some great friends, I usually consider it money well-spent.

I have to say I'm a bit leery of the practice that a lot of conferences are engaging in, which is to charge extra money (usually an additional $100 or more) for personal consultations with agents and editors. While it sounds great in theory, I think there's potential for abuse, with marginal agents and editors exhorbiting great fees just to skim over someone's work and then give them the kind of standard advice they can get from any self-help writing book. Also, most people who pay this fee are natuarlly doing so in hopes of being "discovered" by said agent or editor. They don't really want to hear constructive advice (and when you think about it, who does want to pay $100 or more just to hear that your manuscript sucks and is not marketable in its present form? But this is what a lot of writers are getting for their money). I've seen more and more writers come away from these sessions feeling more discouraged and hopeless than when they went in, in addition to being $100 poorer. And most of them end up saying they didn't really get that much out of the experience, and/or don't intend to make the changes the agent suggested. So what's the point?

Unless it is a VERY well-known agent or edior with superstar clients, I wouldn't fall for it. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a scam, but it does seem in the end that it's little more than a draw for these conferences to attract more participants (and thus more money) and for these "agents" to line their pockets with more money from hopeful writers willing to pay.

Mike, I was also at the Surrey Writer's Conference! It was my second time attending, and I will go again this year, but it's local for me so it's not too expensive. The first year I went I learned a lot because I was just beginning to write. I wasn't sure it would be as useful the second time around, but I had a couple of key learning moments that were worth the price of admission.

I think the most important was the "SIWC Idol" panel. Writers anonomously submitted the first two pages of their manuscripts, which were then read out loud to a panel of agents/editors. My submission was one of the many that were mocked and then rejected by the second paragraph. I couldn't blame them. My work just didn't stand out. It's one thing to know about slush piles; it's another altogether to witness a group of people working through one. There were a few upset writers after that panel, but I went straight home and started reworking my opening.

A side note for blackbird: at this particular conference, your registration fee includes at least one session with an author plus one with an agent or editor (you can get more if appointments are available). I had a great session with SF author Matt Hughes.

I haven't been to any other writing conferences, but I plan to travel to at least one this year (besides Surrey). I can always learn more, and it's nice to spend time with other writers - published and unpublished.

Conferences

I think writer's conferences can be good places to learn just where you stand. Other than the fun of being around famous names, I don't think there's much benefit in attending one unless you get your work seen by an agent and/or an editor. Workshops are nice, meeting famous people is nice, but neither is likely to get you any closer to being published. Going to conferences for thee reasons realy falls under the heading of taking a vacation.

It honestly takes very little effort to tell the quality of the editors and agents who are at conferences. The bigger conferences pretty much always have some top notch agents and editors, and whether they hand you good news or discouraging news, it should be worth the money.

Conferences are not places where encouragment is the order of the day. Neither are slush piles. The agents and editors at such conferences are really the only people there who can do you any good. They may love what you write, and they may hate what you write. They may blow you right out of the water, and you may leave crying and vowing never to write another word.

This, too, is worth the price of admissionm and whichever way it goes, it's the best reason for attending, if getting published is your goal.

In all honesty, writers usually have no clue how well they write, how far along they are in the process, until and unless they get their work in the hands of an agent or an editor who can tell them where they're going wrong, or what they're doing right

Submiting enough work to enough agents and editors can accomplish the same thing, but it takes longer, and you probably won't get much feedback if you're doing pretty much everything wrong. You generally have to be doing something right to get much feedback through the submission process. Though receiving no feedback through the submission process is very, very good feedback in and of itself, and should tell teh writer they have a lot more work to do.

But I don't know. I've been to some conferences, though I was never there to learn about writing. I went to keep in touch with what publishers were doing, and to see people I already knew again.

I suppose if you can afford such conferences, and if you enjoy going, then go. But if publishing is the goal, I think the reason to attend is solely to get your work into the hands of a good agent or editor, and to hear whatever it is they have to say, be it good or bad.

The best way is to apply for grants or schlarships to attend conferences. Almost all of the bigger conferences offer these, and if you're lucky enough to get one, you can usually attend with all expenses paid (though agent/editor consultations are still usually extra). This is the only way I've been able to attend most of the conferences I've been fortunate enough to be a part of.

And, yes, I agree the feedback is probably worth the money if you can get a top-notch agent or editor to read your work. But for the most part, they're not going to agree then and there to take you on as a client. Not saying it doesn't happen, but the chance is very rare, and my experience, both personally and via other writers, is that the feedback they get is so generic it's not much better than what you could have received through the submission process.

But, again, and I will stress, it's an individual thing that varies from conference to conference. The quality of the agents/editors in attendance, as well as their helpfulness, will differ with every conference. Some will blow you off; others may remember you ten years from now. So I guess that's really a judgment call that you, the writer, have to make.

Also remember that the goal of any conference is to draw in the maximum number of people -- regardless of their skill level. So, some people who are already multi-published will get a lot out of the Donald Maass talk, while the unpublished will respond as you did. Unfortunately, when every workshop/panel is geared ONLY to a certain level of writing skill and/or whether they're published, the attendance drops by half or more.

I agree with James that a conference is pretty much a vacation where you might meet some people or learn a few things. They're not the be-all/end-all of learning to write. Sometimes engaging, sometimes inspirational -- but the reality is sitting down and pumping out the words.

Still, I've enjoyed the few I've gone to.