On a scale of 1 to 10, let's suppose your level of writing was about 6 or 7, but you came up with an idea/ set of characters/ plot that had enormous commercial potential. Suppose that your characters had the potential to be turned into merchandise, video games, films, etc - a whole multi-million dollar franchise.
Are agents and publishers more concerned about the level of writing of an author or the commercial viability of their product? In other words, would agents ever accept an author even if they aren't entirely up to scratch because they seem the opportunity to create huge revenues? Or is significant weight still given to the actual literary ability/ style?
The reason I ask is that, first off, if the building blocks of commercial opportunity are there, then might not the agents reason that an editor could simply help this author tighten up his or her writing to come up to a publishable standard?
Second, in other fields of entertainment such as music or acting, one can clearly see that sometimes the producers/ studios etc might realise that a singer may not have the greatest voice of all, but they might be someone whom the studios could market to the masses. With the right technology (and maybe Antares Autotune) they can be made to sound better than they actually are, but it's the commercial potential that appeared to be important.
Certainly with regard to literature such as early comic books like Superman or Batman, it's unlikely that publishers would've viewed them as literary masterpieces. But there's no denying that they have immense commercial potential. I was wondering therefore, if agents ever make decisions in this way. How much does the commercial aspect feature into rejecting or accepting a submission? I picked 6 or 7 on the writing scale, because it's obviously not scraping the bottom of the barrel at 1 or 2, but not right up there as a literary prize winner either.
Feedback welcomed.
Are agents and publishers more concerned about the level of writing of an author or the commercial viability of their product? In other words, would agents ever accept an author even if they aren't entirely up to scratch because they seem the opportunity to create huge revenues? Or is significant weight still given to the actual literary ability/ style?
The reason I ask is that, first off, if the building blocks of commercial opportunity are there, then might not the agents reason that an editor could simply help this author tighten up his or her writing to come up to a publishable standard?
Second, in other fields of entertainment such as music or acting, one can clearly see that sometimes the producers/ studios etc might realise that a singer may not have the greatest voice of all, but they might be someone whom the studios could market to the masses. With the right technology (and maybe Antares Autotune) they can be made to sound better than they actually are, but it's the commercial potential that appeared to be important.
Certainly with regard to literature such as early comic books like Superman or Batman, it's unlikely that publishers would've viewed them as literary masterpieces. But there's no denying that they have immense commercial potential. I was wondering therefore, if agents ever make decisions in this way. How much does the commercial aspect feature into rejecting or accepting a submission? I picked 6 or 7 on the writing scale, because it's obviously not scraping the bottom of the barrel at 1 or 2, but not right up there as a literary prize winner either.
Feedback welcomed.
