Purgatory's Pit of Doom

Catwoman said:

Teri -- you rebel, you! When you get rich and famous and everyone asks how you did it, are you going to say, "I broke all the stupid rules and disobeyed all the editor guidelines to get here"?

Click to expand...

I believe the guidelines are there to trap the unwary.

But for that matter, I believe agents are there to trap the unwary.

Bad Cat says something like, "After all, the agent's job is to prevent manuscripts from reaching New York editors."

I have another story. I was chatting with an assistant editor (email chat) and I asked her, "So how do editors feel about a writer checking in after 3 months?" She said nobody minds a polite check-in after three months. Then she said, "But you have to remember that most editors feel they have to read the agented stuff first, so you may have to wait longer."

(This is a house which says NO UNAGENTED SUBMISSIONS by the way.)

Now when I was younger and less wise, say 1 year ago, I would have heard that and felt like I was a second-class citizen because I wasn't represented.

now, being older and wiser, I know editors did not respond any quicker when I was represented. A few responded very quickly, like after 2 - 3 weeks, but most were 2 - 3 months. There were also no responders when I was repped.

How sensible is it to spent a year getting an agent (query, wait, partial, wait, full, wait wait wait, revise, wait some more) to maybe shorten the wait time by a few weeks.

So now, instead of feeling like a second class citizen, I feel like I elected not to get screened out.

ETA: I posted but deleted as unnecessary my usual disclaimers about how yes, the agent model works for some people. And obviously, doing things this way is no cake walk either.

Yeah, because...and I don't want to be too shiny for the Pit...but my agent experiences have been totally different and very positive.

Yup I deleted my standard disclaimer. It happens, certainly. DWS does a good job of explaining how and why it sometimes works.

A lot of writers though go in circles revising for people with no qualifications as editors or who change the manuscript without necessarily making it better.

For a lot of people it's a ridiculous waste of time.

Agents told me to revise tarpaper school, but none of the suggestions turned out to matter or be correct. I selected Crazy Dame because of my offers at the time, she was the only one who didn't demand revisions. The book sold without any of the revisions other agents suggested/demanded. The editor who bought asked for a major revision none of the agents anticipated. He let me do the revision under contract.

Also, I really like taking my ideas directly to editors, especially nonfiction ideas.

I just started with a nonfiction idea, but I anticipate it will save about a year per idea.

I have limited years left . . .

Everybody's experience is their experience, you know? I just am very hesitant to make too many broad-based claims about what works and what doesn't, because it tends to be a very individual thing.

What I will say is that I revised with an agent, it worked really well, he sold the book, and now that I am at a house where they seem to like me, the whole process is speeded up considerably. If I branched out into other genres, I'm sure it would be different, but I'm not waiting a year to see whether someone is going to buy my next book or not -- it's spelled out in a contract how the option clause works. If we came to a parting of the ways, again, things might be different, but I think it's important to state that having an agent does not necessarily slow things down, and in terms of access, can sometimes significantly speed things up.

Particularly in a situation where the author is the rights holder for most things (e.g., foreign, film, audio, etc.) it can be very helpful to have an agent/agency who acts as your business manager.

But this is my situation and my preference. I am simply not comfortable acting as my own representative and my own negotiator.

That said, I think authors need to understand the basics and the parameters and what that contract you're negotiating and signing means. I know some people who have signed some really sh1tty contracts and have some or a lot of regrets about them. My contracts, as much as I've been able to understand and compare with others, have been good, fair and transparent. But I've been fortunate in both my agency and my publisher, I think.

I share my experiences to call into question the accepted, conventional wisdom on AW (the accepted conventional wisdom being that writers need to revise for an agent and have that agent submit for them.) Obviously the accepted method words for some people or it wouldn't be the accepted method. For a lot of people, the conventional method can send them down a rabbit hole.

I've spent the past year learning that the conventional accepted way isn't the only way & I post my experiences to share what I'm learning.

P.S. Whether an agent speeds things up with a particular house or slows things down after the writer is publishing there probably depends on the house and the agent, but most people aren't worried about that yet. They're trying to figure out how to get their books accepted for publication. You can always hire an agent later.

I would rather have an agent if I could find one, but in my experience, editors respond as quickly to my unagented requested submissions as to the agented ones. I think my fastest response to a requested full was two weeks, and the slowest was from a nudge at four months, but those stats are exactly the same agented and unagented. I also had the same nonresponse rate on materials requested by editors, both agented and unagented, about one in six.

The big difference is that I believe almost every editor a decent agent pitches agrees to read, whereas when I've been unagented, a fraction of editors request a full. And some houses really are closed, closed, closed. But most, at least in children's books, keep the door cracked open.

If I were to be so lucky as to get an offer an agent might consider worthwhile, I would probably seek an agent. But the part I really want an agent for is selling, not negotiating. And no agent has offered to represent me lately

I think the majority of us still want an agent. I know I do. Now, I will not query a newbie, someone without proven sales, and someone who isn't "seasoned." But I think there are good agents out there who will do far better for me than I could on my own. Moreover, I work a sixty hour week, quite often. No way could I do what was needed.

Querying alone was a challenge for my last go-round. I would send my ms out days after the request.

What works for some, doesn't work for others, and vise-versa. *shrugs* That's the way of the world, n'est-ce-pas?

Oh, obviously most people want an agent.

I don't know of a single other writer who hangs out on AW in my situation making the choice I'm making.

People email me and say, "I can't find an agent so I think I'll submit on my own. How do I do it?"

But that's not choosing to go it alone. That's saying I'm temporarily single until I can find a mate.

That puts me in a group of one. A pretty small group.

Not that I intend to do everything alone. With the next contract I plan to hire a literary attorney. What I hire the attorney to do entirely depends on the needs of the situation. If things get complicated, I will need the attorney to do more. There are literary attorneys who have also worked as literary agents who do understand the biz.

I think it's been very enlightening to hear Teri and Kell's experiences with direct submissions. I honestly wouldn't have thought their queries would even be read. I would love to see both of you with deals out of your efforts.

Was just talking to a writer friend yesterday about finding an agent, and was asked an interesting question: Are there any agents who are signing people they think will be midlist? Are there people there not getting signed simply because the agents think the advance won't be "big enough" or in a genre more prone to multiple book contracts, like YA?

Made me sad to think about.

Teri, I appreciate hearing about your experiences. While it's not the path I've been going, it is something I bear in mind.

Kellion, hearing about your responses and the time taken to get those responses is interesting as well.

Please don't quote this, because I'm probably going to want to delete it. But I'm not sure I ever want to be agented again. I stopped looking about six months ago.

I just write so many different things, with appeal to different reader tastes. The chances of finding an agent who wants to sell everything I write are pretty slim, and I doubt there's an agent out there who'd split rep, especially within the same genre or sister genres.

I feel like an oddball, because I'd prefer an agent who'd rep a particular BOOK, and not one who wants to rep ME for my career. If I could seek different rep for different projects, the same way I can look for a different editor when one turns me down, I might be more tempted to seek representation again.

It would be nice to have an agent dealing with contracts, selling foreign rights, etc.

But it sure isn't nice when your agent doesn't like your next project and has no interest in shopping it. And that's the situation I'd eventually be in again if I got representation.

I understand that many other writers want someone to help shape their career, but I just don't. And I understand that it's hard for an agent to try to sell something she truly doesn't like, or that she doesn't feel represents who she is. But that's one of the problems—for me—with the arrangement.

The children's book world is more open to unagented for sure, partly because there are categories of books that are hard to get representation for, like picture books, early readers, and chapter books. The advances for those books are low and the odds are slim, so few agents are interested. I think it may even be more common for picture book writers (especially those who are not illustrators) to get published first, then get agented after a book or two when the rights become difficult to manage. And rights are more difficult -- children's books have more opportunities for ancillary products and licensing.

There are a couple children's houses that closed to unagented subs recently, and I suspect that it's a top-down decision. Some editors are used to getting queries and keep doing what they're doing, no matter what the bosses say.

You feel like an odd ball, Wordwrestler? Look at me, the lone agent-disser in a culture which is predominately agent love.

But just when I feel that I should shut up, enough people tell me not to shut up.

I have some of the same issues. I want to write different types of books across different genres and for different audiences. Right now I have several very different projects circulating. Waiting for agents to submit them would mean I’d need a second lifetime.

Also, I really want to earn a living at this eventually, and I can tell you that doing one book at a time with my current publisher would be lots of fun, and would give me a nice side income, but not enough.

As far as hiring an agent to manage your business, that is an entirely different subject depending on how you want to manage your business and how much of your income you want to keep. For my law practice, there have been times I’ve had so much work that I’ve hired help. Now that I cut back on my caseload so I could write, I have no payroll and contract out the work I need to vendors. I’d never give away 15% of my legal income. Hiring a literary attorney for all a writer’s needs comes to less than 15% of gross.

Well, I guess once you publish it's easier to strike out on your own. When you're the new kid with no credits, you need the agent to help you make the sale without getting hosed too badly.
Or not, maybe I don't know anything.

This is interesting-Penqu1n made a deal with BN to have Penqu1n boutiques within select stores, separate areas selling only select Penqu1n books and related merchandise. link

studies have shown that most customers don't look at who the publisher is, so this looks like they are trying to build a brand name

That is interesting, Amarie. I think Penguin has done branding pretty well with their classics -- I always used to look for that little penguin. Carrying that quality recognition to other imprints and books is a good move. Scifi and romance imprints are good at branding too -- readers know T0r and Har1equin.

I'm surprised that there hasn't been more effective branding for YA imprints, but so far, I don't think readers think, "Oooh! It's from S1mon Pu1se! Oooh! H@rper Teen!" I don't think they notice that stuff as much as we do, but there's plenty of opportunity.

Count me among the clueless. I hadn't even heard of Tor until I started hanging around AW, though I'm sure I've read dozens and dozens of their books.

You're right-it would be smart for YA imprints to do some sort of effective branding for the average consumer. I know people in the business start to realize what the different imprints lean toward, but not so much outside. I heard one editor speak at a conference about the Poppy line of YA, though of course I've forgotten which publishing house she was with. They were trying to market all those books so that if a reader liked one, they'd likely enjoy another.

When I was a kid, I really trusted Dell Yearling paperbacks. That cute little horse in the circle was like a friend -- always happy to see it on a bookcover.

Very interesting, but yeah, I wonder how much the average customer knows or would care. When I look at my shelves, I realize some publishers (imprints as well, of course) are distinctly missing. Other imprints take a disproportional share of my space, and within those imprints, certain editors. Yet, on the whole, I'm not sure how useful that knowledge would be, and I'd hate a system where I had to go to each imprint's own store to browse.

And... this might make no sense since I haven't finished my coffee yet.

Someone is retweeting some of J.Reid's tweets this morning about a group authors' blog with a post on it she says is boneheaded and racist and stupid. Now of course I'm curious. Anyone know which one?

Ooh, someone being boneheaded who is not me! What fun.

Mornin', Pit

No, I have no idea, Amarie. Of course, my curiosity is piqued.