Does the slush pile still live? (old thread)

PeeDee · Jan 20, 2007

johnzakour said:
Actually, I am almost always shelved next to Zelazny and it does seem that far more often than not, I have to bend down to find our book on one of the bottom bookshelves. I'm not saying this is a factor in sales, I'm just saying that would be nice to see my book shelved at eye level more often.

Has it hurt your sales any, though?

I've had some bookstores where they've had authors I'm looking for on shelves that are way, WAY to high up to reach. Our local Barnes & Noble, for example, is under the impression that I'm well over six feet tall. The point being, if a book's up that high and I'm interested in it (and frequently, it's not an author I know) then I'll get it, somehow.

The amusing thing is that authors (some authors; Pete is generalizing) looking at Getting Accepted For Publication as the big gate you have to get through, to make it. The amusing bit is that mostly, that's the easier part than getting sales and staying published...

maestrowork · Jan 20, 2007

MightyScribbler said:
I think we all wish there was an easier, quicker way, but until someone comes up with one that will benefit all: the writer, the agent, the publisher, the book seller, the book buyer, the book reader, etc., then it's a process we just have to live with.

Everything good is worth waiting for. I find this impatience of writers rather interesting. Granted, I get impatient, too. But upon reflection I think it IS interesting. We spend a year or two or 10 writing and revising the darn thing, then we want the submission and publication process to go as fast as possible, like in 2 weeks. Our perspective suddenly changes -- we can take ALL the time we want, but they can't. It's an egocentric world view on the writer's part: it's always about his or her BOOK and only hers.

The way to do this is to be patient, follow through with the process. In the meantime, work on your second, third, fourth book. There's only upside to that: a) you don't go crazy waiting for responses, and b) if they ask you "Do you have anything else?" you're well prepared, and c) by the time the first book is accepted and published, you will have another ready to go or already in the queue!

That's what a career means.

maestrowork · Jan 20, 2007

PeeDee said:
Has it hurt your sales any, though?

I've had some bookstores where they've had authors I'm looking for on shelves that are way, WAY to high up to reach. Our local Barnes & Noble, for example, is under the impression that I'm well over six feet tall. The point being, if a book's up that high and I'm interested in it (and frequently, it's not an author I know) then I'll get it, somehow.

But this assumption about shelf location could be flawed. My book is shelved next to Virginia Woolf and Stewart Wood. Sometimes it's on the top shelf, sometimes in the middle and sometimes at the bottom. It really depends on how many other books are there. Now, if your last name is indeed Zoolander, chances are your book will most likely go to a bottom shelf UNLESS it lands on a top shelf and they start a whole new section below it. Shelf space is limited at book stores, and they try to utilize it. There really is no formula to calculate where your book will be. And don't worry if you would be next to Stephen King or Hemingway -- chances are, you will be shelved next to someone much more famous than you are. It's actually a good thing. Just be glad that it IS shelved. You're already ahead of the curve.

Moon Daughter · Jan 20, 2007

I don't think a series for a first time writer is a bad thing necessarily. Of course, I'm not one who could say for sure since I'm definitely an amateur and am just trying to start in this business. But I've seen some very successful first time authors like Laurie Stolarz. I think she published articles before she wrote her first book of her BIFN series, Blue is for Nightmares (which turned out to be decently successful). I think if anyone truly feels they have a good story for a series, regardless if they're a first time author, they should go ahead and write it.

Sorry if my post seems irrelevant. Just thought I'd put my two cents in.

johnzakour · Jan 20, 2007

PeeDee said:
Has it hurt your sales any, though?

Not as much as it hurts my knees bending down so I can give my books a "turn out". (I'm getting old.)

johnzakour · Jan 20, 2007

maestrowork said:
But this assumption about shelf location could be flawed. My book is shelved next to Virginia Woolf and Stewart Wood. Sometimes it's on the top shelf, sometimes in the middle and sometimes at the bottom. It really depends on how many other books are there. Now, if your last name is indeed Zoolander, chances are your book will most likely go to a bottom shelf UNLESS it lands on a top shelf and they start a whole new section below it. Shelf space is limited at book stores, and they try to utilize it. There really is no formula to calculate where your book will be. And don't worry if you would be next to Stephen King or Hemingway -- chances are, you will be shelved next to someone much more famous than you are. It's actually a good thing. Just be glad that it IS shelved. You're already ahead of the curve.

Relating this back to the series question, one thing that does stand out is when you have 3 or 4 books in a row. Then they kind of jump out nomatter where they are shelved.

Toothpaste · Jan 20, 2007

Moon Daughter - I totally get what you are saying, but this is why I get concerned when first time authors (I am one myself, btw) write a series. Forgetting the whole fact that publishers want proof your book can sell in the first place, before they commision more work. The biggest thing about first time writers who want to write a series in their first try is the sheer quality of the work. For some reason, and especially in the fantasy genre, and even more especially because of books like Harry Potter et al, many first time writers decide they want to write a series. Not that they want to write a story that covers a series, but that they want to follow the example of their writing heros. They almost see it as something they have to write, because they have been so infulenced. They might not even make the choice consciously, the concept of series fiction (especially as I said in fantasy) is so entrenched in our culture. So that instead of focussing on a book, they are focussing on three books (or more) and spreading themselves too thin. They want to be a great series writer, they want to write an epic story. And very rarely then do they want to write a good story.

This is of course a sweeping generalisation, and you can always find someone out there who breaks the mold (Mold? Mould? Mold? Man I suck at the whole spelling thing), but I have to say from the many WIP's I have read, and from my attempts as a teenager even, the writing of a series can often outweigh the importance of the writing of a good story.

(Now this is all said despite the fact that my book deals with all my publishers are for two books in the beginning of a series and I am a first time author myself - however my first book is very much stand alone)

Moon Daughter · Jan 20, 2007

I understand what you mean, Toothpaste. I'm sure there are many failed attempts at a first time author trying to write a series. Do you think writing a (successful) series could really weigh in on which genre the author is writing for?

Toothpaste · Jan 20, 2007

I don't know if it is a question of success or not, but I do think certain genres do lean towards series. Fantasy/Sci-Fi of course. And Detective/Mystery as well. Then of course there is almost everything in the Middle Grade/Young Adult universe, which is very much done on purpose. Kids like to collect things. I think the fantasy genre though tends to be the most popular choice, and the genre that causes the most trouble series wise (as in writing cliff hanger endings as opposed to a novel that can stand on its own and then a sequel to that), as Detective novels need to end at the end of the book because it's all about solving the mystery, and children's books must end in one book too to maintain the kid's attention. Fantasy is nowadays greatly inspired by Tolkein who practically single handedly invented the concept of the triology, and which as we know was written initially as one book - hence the cliffhanger style. It seems to me that most fantasy writers, published or not, find it hard NOT to write a series eventually. I think it also comes from the fact that their fantasy worlds are so detailed and they spend hours and hours working on them, that it seems a bit of a waste to only write one book in that world. Which I can totally understand!

PeeDee · Jan 20, 2007

I am much more willing to give an author's series a shot if it's not their first book.

And most of the big series around right now, if you think about it, are NOT the authors' first books. Stephen King had had a successful writing career before he began writing the Dark Tower. He had quite a lot more successful career before he FINISHED it, for that matter.

Robert Jordan was a very busy, very accomplished author before he did anything with Wheel of Time.

the only authors I can think of who have done very well with series (and I'm generalizing again) are Terry Goodkind, and J.K. Rowling. Out of the two of them, J.K. Rowling does better. Goodkind exibits gently some problems with writing a series first-off. He wanders, loosely, all over the place, and not in an interesting manner.

Harlan Ellison had some interesting -- and scathing, typical Harlan -- things to say about authors writing series. I can't remember what he said specifically. It was something along the lines of, if you can't tell your story in one book, then you've failed. And come to think of it, I believe he was talking about sequels and not series. It stands the same anyway.

I'll generously extend it to the length of a trilogy. If you can't tell your story in a trilogy, you need to reexamine your story.

I don't read 'em anymore, but I always enjoyed Terry Brooks' books when I was younger, because he wrote them in threes. I could read a trilogy at a time, and then take or leave what came next. Each trilogy had a beginning, middle, end. They all tie together, but you can start where you wish.

I infinitely prefer the Terry Pratchett (what the hell is it with fantasy and guys named Terry!?) and his system. Each Discworld book stands all by itself, and you can enjoy them and enter the series at any point. I entered very late. But as you read more and more of it, then bits you dismissed in the first book you read suddenly make more sense.

blacbird · Jan 20, 2007

Moon Daughter said:
I understand what you mean, Toothpaste. I'm sure there are many failed attempts at a first time author trying to write a series. Do you think writing a (successful) series could really weigh in on which genre the author is writing for?

There are many failed attempts at a first time author trying to write a stand-alone single novel. There are many failed attempts at a first time author trying to write a short story. There are many failed attempts at a first time author trying to write a check.

Trust me on this one. I know.

caw

Lindo · Jan 21, 2007

I'm a bit baffled by the interpretation given here to the concept of a "series of novels"...not to mention the idea that it would be in some way a drawback.

Series of novels are not "serials", not cliffhangers that continue their stories...name one like that. What they are is books about the same characters of lead character: Spenser for Hire, Travis McGeee, Nancy Drew, Harry Potter, Sharpe, Flashman, the citizens of Milagro. Authors don't write twenty books, then go shop them: they write a novel and market it and (as advised to do in those Writer's Digress bits people here seem to take as dogma) helplfully mention that they are planning more books with the same hero or home town or whatever. I hope this clears up what I'm talking about here. Namely, the obvious.

I hope it also makes clear how lame it would be for a publisher not to WANT something like that. Of COURSE they want that...it's bread and butter. The only thing readers await more eagerly than a new book from a favorite author is a new book featuring a favorite character. Duh.

So when an agent tells me publishers don't want series' of books, I know somebody is full of beans. And it's probably not the publisher. I guess is it's some Bennington twit who works for the publisher and trying to be haughty and sophisticated at some book fair cocktail mixer. But that's just a guess.

And speaking of trying to seem sophisticated, is that's what's behind this "more first novels suck than are loved" "non-sales is the writer's fault, not the agent's" stuff? I sort of understand why the support publications in this industry line up with publishers, agents, and exploiters instead of writers (they buy ads, writers don't) but I don't understand such insipid sneering at other writers by writers.

Think about it this way. How many times have you read about great books that were rejected time and time again before being accepted? (answer: many, many) So, was that the writers' fault for not being good enough? Or was something like "Confederacy of Dunces" or "Finnegan's Wake" perhaps just something that the writer pulled off just fine, but the publishing establishment couldn't fit their minds around. (Frequently the minds of recent English grads with names like Muffy, Buffy and Cottontail who have less business sense or critical facilities than their colleagues over in the garment district.) And if publishers are failing to get it with so many major books, could it be because the agents also don't get it? Or are unable to put it across? Or aren't very good salespersons?

Just a thought, but certainly as valid as the "lack of sales is fault of writer, not agent" homily.

Sage · Jan 21, 2007

And, yet, many new writers mean the continuous-storyline-through-several-novels-because-I-can't-keep-the-plot-to-one-book type of series. If your story is completely standalone, why mention series at all to the agent? Sure, having the possibility of writing a sequel open is a plus if the work takes off, but if a publisher never picks it up or it never makes back its advance, the agent would rather you worked on something new & fresh, & hopefully better.

PeeDee · Jan 21, 2007

I know the difference between a "serial" novel and a novel "series." I'm quite aware. When I refer to a "serial novel," I am in fact referring to my current project which is a "serial novel," a series of shorter portions adding up eventually to a lengthy work through a series of episodes.

A "series" is something like The Wheel of Time.

Certain publishers and certain genres have no problems with novel series. Sure.

What *MY* problem is, is that a first writer who's first work is trying to do a whole series, all at once, you're not learning the necessary skills you need as a writer. It's like trying to go straight into the Boston Marathon without running a mile or two first.

I see all sorts of writers who get bogged down and miserable and depressed because they've decided to write a thirteen-book fantasy series -- just like their heroes, just like Rowling and Jordan! -- and they're in over their heads, miserable, and doing nothing.

I would rather see writers who do one or two stand-alone books, or more. You learn more. You learn about letting a story grow, and then bringing it back under control and in for an ending.

You don't need to just learn how to fly an airplane, you have to learn how to land it too.

Dave.C.Robinson · Jan 21, 2007

Lindo, you're right, publishers do want series.

Having said that, it does not necessarily follow that they want to buy a series from an unpublished writer. Nor does it follow that a series is the best thing for an unpublished writer to write. One problem is that one's skills improve over the first few novels, and if one writes a series then the sale of all depends on the weakest link.

There's more, but I'm dead tired and can't put the words together tonight.

Toothpaste · Jan 21, 2007

You're right Lindo. There are lots of reasons why books don't get taken on. The ones you listed. And the ones we've listed. The fact of the matter is agents and editors miss out on good books and the blame lies squarely with them. And also it is true that many of the writers in the slushpile who miss out on getting an agent and an editor . . . suck.

HapiSofi · Jan 22, 2007

(burns incense in front of a picture of Victoria Strauss)

Moon Daughter · Jan 22, 2007

Blacbird, I know there are many failed attempts for all kinds of projects. I wasn't implying that only first time authors who write series tend to fail. Sorry if I said something confusing lol.

Lindo · Jan 22, 2007

I said:

hey write a novel and market it and (as advised to do in those Writer's Digress bits people here seem to take as dogma) helplfully mention that they are planning more books

She said:

why mention series at all to the agent?

What else can I say. How about...Why NOT mention to the agent that you might have another book in you?

Toothpaste · Jan 22, 2007

I think Lindo this may simply be a case of a specific individual. In my query letter I wrote I was planning on writing a sequel and when I met with my agent just before she signed me on, she wanted to talk about what my plans were for that book. It's probably just a matter of taste. Like I have said before there is a stigma attached with the first author and a series. This is not quite the same as saying that you have another book in you. An agent likes that. And one would hope you would have another book in you (agents are planning on taking you on for a very long time and to take care of your career) It's about saying, "I've planned a 12 book series here is the outline and a cast of characters . . . "

I don't mean that this is you at all at all. I mean that if you want to talk about other books, just be reasonable about it. Don't try to sell a series. Sell one book. And sell yourself. I dunno. I can't offer any more suggestions. Anyone else?

NicoleJLeBoeuf · Jan 23, 2007

Jamesaritchie said:
I don't think this is true at all. I don't think it's even remotely true. Most first novels just aren't very good, and the reason pubishers take chances on most of them is simply because they have slots to fill, and take the best they can find, which often means not very good.

I dunno. What you say here sounds like an odd conflation of "a writer's first novel written" with "a writer's first novel published." Most writers don't find publishers for the first novels they write, precisely because they aren't very good. But the first novels they publish, some acquisitions editor decided they were at worst so-so-but-marketable, right?

Maybe it's not so much that the first novel an author publishes isn't very good, but more that every first book an author gets published is simply the debut of a new author--of all authors who ever get published, the ones that are very good are undoubtedly in a minority surrounded by the merely so-so-but-maybe-it's-marketable. The significantly smaller number of authors whose second books get published testifies how many new-author-chances didn't play out the way the publisher and author hoped.

J.S Greer · Jan 23, 2007

PeeDee said:
I don't read 'em anymore, but I always enjoyed Terry Brooks' books when I was younger, because he wrote them in threes. I could read a trilogy at a time, and then take or leave what came next. Each trilogy had a beginning, middle, end. They all tie together, but you can start where you wish.

Except for the first three Shannara books, which were intertwined, but completely stand alone.

Good point on the later books though.

Gillhoughly · Jan 23, 2007

pitchbitch said:
there are ways to bypass the slush pile.

Yuh-huh--write well, find agent who sell.

Torgo · Jan 25, 2007

I hope it also makes clear how lame it would be for a publisher not to WANT something like that. Of COURSE they want that...it's bread and butter. The only thing readers await more eagerly than a new book from a favorite author is a new book featuring a favorite character. Duh.

So when an agent tells me publishers don't want series' of books, I know somebody is full of beans.

Naturally publishers want series of books featuring recurring characters. But I think you have a fundamental misconception about how such things come to be. You don't BUY a series like that. They grow out of standalone novels, as James and others have described on this thread. A writer writes a successful novel or two, and that's the point at which the multi-book contracts start coming out, not right to begin with.

Think about it; how does a character become the kind of favourite with readers that would justify a publisher commissioning six books about him/her? By appearing in a successful book or three before that. So you don't go around hawking a series. OK, you can leave the option there - just say, I could develop a series around these characters - but don't waste your time plotting six novels.

(In children's publishing, it's a little different, because 'character' properties and young series fiction publishing are the sorts of things it is possible to commission successfully if you know what you're doing and you have a reliable writer in mind. But I don't believe such things happen very often in adult books.)

And it's probably not the publisher. I guess is it's some Bennington twit who works for the publisher and trying to be haughty and sophisticated at some book fair cocktail mixer. But that's just a guess.

...the publishing establishment couldn't fit their minds around. (Frequently the minds of recent English grads with names like Muffy, Buffy and Cottontail who have less business sense or critical facilities than their colleagues over in the garment district.)

We're not all worthless fops, you know. Plus, the people who make decisions over which books to buy are rarely 'recent English grads'. It was, oooh, four years before they let me commission anything, and I still had to go and plead my case to the gimlet-eyed Powers that Be.

How many times have you read about great books that were rejected time and time again before being accepted? (answer: many, many) So, was that the writers' fault for not being good enough?

Hey, you can pull anecdotal evidence to make anybody look like a twit. Let's say we apply a little bit of empirical evidence. I see probably twelve hundred manuscripts a year of which, in my humble opinion, a fraction of one percent are anywhere near publishable quality. Let's say I'm a huge twit and miss a Finnegans Wake (no apostrophe, by the way, says the editor) or a Dunces every month. It's still just over one percent that are publishable. There are a HUGE AMOUNT of people writing.

I've seen this from both sides - I've sold books of my own to publishers and I've bought books as a publisher. It is difficult, and I don't claim to know everything. However, it always makes sense to minimise unnecessary effort. I believe that trying to sell a series with no pedigree will involve lots of effort and at best you might sell the first book.

HapiSofi · Feb 27, 2011

In case anyone ever reads this thread again --

Know what about first novels? They're published on the basis of their own strengths and virtues.

It's true that bad things sometimes happen behind the scenes that lead to subpar books getting published, but those subpar books are almost always part of a larger series, or project, or multibook contract. A book that bad by an unpublished author would never see print.

Granted, some first novels rise no higher than "pretty much okay, if you like that kind of thing." But without even trying, right off the top of my head, I could name you a dozen or two that were strikingly good. And when times get hard and the industry has to tighten its belt, first novels become an even better bet, because publishers who are having to watch every penny are not going to be enthusiastic about a book that's only sort of okay.

Does the slush pile still live? (old thread)

Where's my tea, please...?

Fear the Death Ray

Fear the Death Ray

Dangerous with a Keyboard

Dangerous with a Keyboard

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

Where's my tea, please...?

Our Lady of Parentheticals

Where's my tea, please...?

... with the High Command

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

Hagiographically Advantaged

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

a work in progress

Feel the power!

Grumpy writer and editor

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Hagiographically Advantaged