Question for published or agented authors

I suspect very few authors get a book accepted without having to do some revision, whether before or after the agent takes them on. I think what you're asking is, if you have enough talent, is an agent going to be willing to work with you and discover that talent, even if the submission is not quite perfect. That probably depends on if you are related to someone famous or if you are incredibly lucky, but you're better off getting the book as good as you can before you send it out. Good luck.

Balthazar said:

So, what I want to know is this: is this normal?

Click to expand...

I haven't sold a novel yet, but I have nonfiction published. And yes, it's normal. An editor will make minor changes in sentence structure and whatnot, but if an agent or editor likes the ms, but if there are larger change required, the author will have to make them if he wants the book published.

Balthazar said:

Do agents see potential in some writers' work and decide to take them on?

Click to expand...

Yes, this has happened quite often historically, although I couldn't cite any examples off the top of my head. The agent will like the story and writing, but might suggest major and minor changes in order to make it salable to the public. Because that's the bottom line.

Balthazar said:

Would one agent's rejection because of certain issues: pacing, dialogue, tone, be accepted by another because they liked the writer's voice, and believe that, by working together, they could get the book into better shape?

Click to expand...

Yes, and this has happened, too. I've read about things like this in books on writing, like success stories of first-time authors. The agent makes suggestions on what the author must do to make the work salable. However, I don't believe this to be all that common as far as I know. Maybe a better person to ask is an agent if there's one currently answering questions in the Ask the Agent forum here on AW.

allen

Revisions are a normal part of publishing.

No one esapes unless they're a literary Mozart who gets it right the first time. (Or they send it to PubliSHAMerica.

I didn't have to make many on my first novel.

That's because during the two years I shopped it around, I rewrote the whole thing 2-3 three times and redid the first chapter a good 25 times. When the book came back--usually without any comment attached so I never knew why--I redid it.

I got feedback from inexperienced betas, had to guess what the editors & agents didn't like, and went with my instincts and growing skills on the rest. It sucked, but I stuck with it.

Had I a place like AW to post my work for feedback that time might have been cut in half. Or not, who knows.

But the fact remains that I did my OWN revisions in a non-scientific and obsessive manner until the book worked and sold.

Hm. I'm still doing that.

It's a good writing habit. The books sell.

Good luck!

Gillhoughly said:

Revisions are a normal part of publishing.
But the fact remains that I did my OWN revisions in a non-scientific and obsessive manner until the book worked and sold.

Hm. I'm still doing that.

It's a good writing habit. The books sell.

Good luck!

Click to expand...

Glad to hear it. I work like that too. I worked with an agent for about a year. He never suggested any revisions. We parted company and I shopped around the book myself and sold it directly to a publisher. I was assigned an editor but revisions were minimal and not much was changed except for my own decision to rewrite the ending. Editing was another thing. I like commas so there was a lot of pruning. As it was historical fiction, many archaic phrases and such were questioned and reworked a bit for clarity. I think the reason there was so little revision required when it got to publishing was that like you I'm obsessive and will revise pretty much nonstop until the publisher says, enough, it's going to print!
Linnea

My two already pulbished novels each went through 3 rounds of editing. My 3rd is now in its 2nd draft, and I'll expect to do a 3rd.

So yes....there's a lot of editing/revision goes into books before they hit the shelves. However, that doesn't explain why there's a plethora of shite out there in bookshops; bloated books that could have, should have been edited more aggressively.

The Tenderness of Wolves is one such book. My God, I'm stunned that that book got through the editing process in the final state it's in - way too many characters, way too many points of view, way too many meandering subplots that go nowhere, and a pretty wimpy main storyline that limps towards a rather unsatisfying ending.

Now from personal experience, I know there's a helluva lot of agonizing and chin-scratching that editors/agents go through, a lot of 2nd and 3rd and 4th opinions from various sub-editors, focus groups etc etc...

...and yet, there are a lot of incredibly bad books out there. I simply do not understand how so much crud seems to slip past the various quality filters that exist in this business.

On my only published novel to date: The agent asked for revisions, we (this was a collaborative project) made them. Then the agent sent it around until it found an editor. The editor asked for two rounds of revisions. TWO! We made them. Then the book was published, and there was much rejoicing.

I'm ready to do the same with my solo projects.

The non-fiction and short stories I've done have required much less tweaking. But I've never had anything published 100% as I sent it, nor do I expect to.

Garpy said:

...and yet, there are a lot of incredibly bad books out there. I simply do not understand how so much crud seems to slip past the various quality filters that exist in this business.

Click to expand...

Garpy, for many years I've wondered the same. Just finished a non-fiction best seller by a big name in sports writing. He lathers thanks on his wonderful editing team--and the crafting, organization, grammar, style are horrible, though to fan of that sport the subject is interesting.

On the thread question, I've heard Tom Wolfe's first novel came to the agent in a banker's box, over two thousand pages. That agent pared it down to its 700-800. My first novel got edited to pieces by an agent and couple free lance editors recommended by good agents. Some of the edits made it worse, some better, and it's still in a drawer. But then, my second went out to publishers with not a single edit from a wonderful agent about two months ago. We'll see what happens next. g.

I don't think anybody gets "their" final draft published as is.

When I was querying, an agent gave me some very solid suggestions for improving my MS. There was no guarentee she would represent me, but she said she wanted to see my revised MS after I made the changes. I was free to query other agents. The revisions took me about two weeks of very intense work and I stopped querying so I could concentrate on the rewrite. It was a calculated risk, but I knew the changes would ultimately make it a better book.

I signed with the agent and she ended up selling my book after less than two weeks of pitching. We're still working out the contract details, but my new editor has told me that another round of minor revisions will be needed before it can be published.

I'm fine with that. If it gets my books published, I'm willing to spell check the entire document by hand, word by word.

Everybody works through revisions, whether a few or several.

However, to get back to your original question -- the fact that all agents work with their clients to revise does not mean that a gleam of promise is enough to get you signed. Your writing style must be strong enough, and your fundamentals of story and character solid enough, for the agent to feel sure that the writer is capable of the level of revisions the work may need.

Many times it's a combination of voice and premise that attracts agents and editors. When I talk with authors who have multiple books out they all say a fresh editorial eye is crucial to making any book the best it can be. I had several revisions with my agent and three rounds with my editor.

I just finished a round of revisions for my agent, and I'm waiting on what I suspect will be another round, since I had to add a subplot. It'll probably need tweaking.

I tend to write skinny. But I have to say, with her suggestions my manuscript gained 10K (hopefully good) words, so now it's a more "acceptable" length.

I have an agent, no sale as yet. She hasn't asked me for any revisions... but that might be because the entire book went through 7 major drafts before it got to her. Actually, she initially read (and accepted) draft 6, but by the time she called me to offer representation I had rewritten the last third of the book. I sent her draft 7 and she agreed that it was better, so we're going with that.

First agent who asked for a full : sent a nice rejection because he liked the book but felt the tension sagged a bit after the start. I tightened the narrative, added more conflict and asked if he wanted to see it again. He agreed, and later gave me an even more regretful rejection. Though not as regretful as I was. :|

Second agent who asked for a full (and this was a few years later) : called me up to tell me she liked it, but thought the book would be better if I made certain changes. She offered representation at the end of the call, so maybe I came across as easy to work with. I later thought about the changes, made two of them and explained why I didn't think the third would work. She was fine with that, and the ms is out on submission now.

I'd done seven drafts of Unbecoming by the time my agent offered representation. Then she suggested some revisions that changed the direction of the story in a way I really love... and now I'm just waiting to see if we need more before we start subbing or if we're ready to go.