AW manuscript grading service

newshirt · Sep 21, 2007

I suggest an AW manuscript grading service that all agents, editors, and authors (at least in these forums) should adopt as a de facto standard. My idea is designed to reduce agent risk, and give authors objective feedback. Here are the basics below. Does it have any merit?

1. Authors submit first fifty pages to AW, plus $100 fee
2. AW representatives read and grade, using objective check points
3. AW certifies final grade with a unique web page for that submittal
4. Authors query agents with AW grade and URL (from step 3)
5. Agents respond with canned email if grade is missing or too low
6. Agents click AW URL to read reviewer’s comments
7. Authors improve their work, submitting $100 fee each time

Other details:
1. Grading: 0-59% = unpublishable, 60% = publishable, 100% = Pulitzer
2. Agents receiving a graded query agree to return a meaningful reply

--ray

victoriastrauss · Sep 21, 2007

Ah, Ray...I'm assuming this is tongue in cheek?

- Victoria

newshirt · Sep 21, 2007

victoriastrauss said:
Ah, Ray...I'm assuming this is tongue in cheek?

- Victoria

Actually, no. There seems to be an ugly cycle this could help prevent. Authors don't know if their work is publishable, so they just throw it out there, hoping for the best. They essencially spam agents with substandard work. With so much crap to wade through, agents miss good work, and even refuse to answer queries. Publishing houses recieve so much crap, they won't even look at it.

This idea sets a common bar that all authors, agents, and editors understand. Think Numismatic grading service for coins, and you'll see what I'm describing. The numismatic grading system sets standards for a very subjective industry - quality of coins and currency. Why doesn't the publishing industry have the same?

--ray

Toothpaste · Sep 21, 2007

Um isn't this like agenting for agents? I mean aren't agents supposed to be the gatekeepers for publishers? Now AW will be the gatekeeper for Agents? Then someone else will offer to be the gatekeeper for AW. . . and so on and so on . ..

And who would be the people who defined good taste here at AW?

And why is AW the benchmark for good taste?

I dunno, I see serious problems with this idea. It's nice in theory to have a standardised rating of submissions to agents, but in the end, as flaky as it sounds, we're still dealing in art, and art is wildly subjective.

MidnightMuse · Sep 21, 2007

To say nothing of blowing Yog's Law right out the proverbial window, eh?

Stew21 · Sep 21, 2007

oh lord.

newshirt · Sep 21, 2007

Standards bodies succeed only to the degree that they are able to publish and maintain high standards. Its easy to disagree with them. But, if a consistant standard is held, they become de facto standards for quality. This is why the numismatic grading system works. Its easy to say, "your judgement is wrong," but consistant quality eventually rings true.

So, I'm only suggesting a quality rating that survives the years of naysayers. It is the act of stepping out in the marketplace and jabbing a stake in the sand. Like it or not, we have standards.

--ray

Stew21 · Sep 21, 2007

you're suggesting that people pay

and last I heard money is supposed to flow toward the author.

Calla Lily · Sep 21, 2007

Not necessarily true (the numbers system). I've entered a pretty prestigious contest for unpubbeds 3 years in a row. Pro or semi-pro judges.

Year 1, I sent dreck and got appropriate scores.

Year 2, I sent something pretty good, made the final round, and got 2 judges who H-A-T-E-D everything, even grading my grammar and sentence structure low. (Um...this book landed me an agent, so...)

Year 3, 2 judges loved my entry. 2 judges were indifferent. The latter 2 scored me in the dumps on the same categories the former 2 scored me in the high 90s.

Honestly, I distrust a numbers system. And I agree with the Yog's Law comments here.

Soccer Mom · Sep 21, 2007

All right. I'll play.

raywhite said:
I suggest an AW manuscript grading service that all agents, editors, and authors (at least in these forums) should adopt as a de facto standard. Thereis no single standard because there is no single group. Why on earth would people agree to such a thing? They are all independant players, not members of a group. My idea is designed to reduce agent risk, What risk???? and give authors objective feedback. You can get that for free. Critiques can be had for free. Queries only cost postage. Submissions are the same.

Here are the basics below. Does it have any merit?

1. Authors submit first fifty pages to AW, plus $100 fee Wow. Are you serious?
2. AW representatives read and grade, using objective check points Objective check point? Such things don't exist. Will there be new points for each genre? What about scripts? Comics?
3. AW certifies final grade with a unique web page for that submittal
4. Authors query agents with AW grade and URL (from step 3)
5. Agents respond with canned email if grade is missing or too low
6. Agents click AW URL to read reviewer’s comments
7. Authors improve their work, submitting $100 fee each time

Other details:
1. Grading: 0-59% = unpublishable, 60% = publishable, 100% = Pulitzer
2. Agents receiving a graded query agree to return a meaningful reply

--ray

This is flawed on so many levels. The most basic problem is this: Why?

Why would agents cede their ability to read and evaluate work to AW? Why would writers pay $100 for something they can do for free?

Look, someone is going to be reading the slush. All you are doing is moving the slushpile into a different office. You aren't eliminating slush. You aren't helping the slush get read any faster. You aren't raising the quality of books that get published.

You are charging a reading fee.

It's the worst idea I've heard since my son suggested we shave the cat so she wouldn't get hairballs.

Kitty's gonna keep her hair.

mscelina · Sep 21, 2007

Hear hear. Or...is it here, here. Damn. I never get that right.

No one has to pay me at AW for me to tell them that their work is crap. Heck; they don't even have to pay me to say that it's good.

They shouldn't have to pay AW either. Let the agents do whatever it is that agents do with their slush piles. As writers, we should be more concerned with polishing our work meticulously before submitting it than trying to meet some wholly subjective list of guidelines so that we don't get trashed in a review that we paid a hundred bucks for.

Word.

Soccer Mom · Sep 21, 2007

Word.

:bumps fists and does a complicated secret handshake with mscelina:

MidnightMuse · Sep 21, 2007

Soccer Mom said:
Word.

:bumps fists and does a complicated secret handshake with mscelina:

Yo' Mama!

Oh, I mean . . Word.

Calla Lily · Sep 21, 2007

Go, Soccer Mom!

[attempts cool handshake and misses, sinking through the floor in humiliation]

CACTUSWENDY · Sep 21, 2007

....Do we get to bump hips too? (Inquiring minds want to know.) Will brush up on my multi-hand grips. Oh....love the use of 'word'.

What it is, man.

Calla Lily · Sep 21, 2007

Bumping hips irresistibly carries me back to my HS days when we disco'ed to The Hustle and The Bump.

[Remembers how utterly horrid most of HS was and runs screaming from the room...]

melaniehoo · Sep 21, 2007

what if we put $100 with our query?

Calla Lily · Sep 21, 2007

Do we really want an agent who can be bribed with anything other than our blinding talent and charm and killer query?

melaniehoo · Sep 21, 2007

It'll move it out of the slush pile!

Soccer Mom · Sep 21, 2007

You send the $100 dollars to me. I pass it on to the agent.

You can trust your Mommy.

victoriastrauss · Sep 22, 2007

This doesn't really fit in Ask the Agent, so I'm porting it to the Roundtable.

- Victoria

Shadow_Ferret · Sep 22, 2007

raywhite said:
1. Authors submit first fifty pages to AW, plus $100 fee

As Uncle Jim has said on numerous occasions, money should flow TO the writer, not away.

SpookyWriter · Sep 22, 2007

Shadow_Ferret said:
As Uncle Jim has said on numerous occasions, money should flow TO the writer, not away.

Darn tootin! So send me $100 and I will do something constructive with the money. Promise.

RG570 · Sep 22, 2007

I can think of nothing worse than further standardizing what is good by shifting it all to one little club.

You can't just make a blanket "grade" on everything based on critique standards, which are not necessarily the same standards agents and editors will have.

The way it is now isn't perfect, but at least you have subjectivity on your side (or not, I guess, in many cases). If all they had to do was look at some stupid cheat sheet that sums up a novel in a grade derived from a checklist, you'd end up with the same novel over and over again.

Maybe it would work with some tweaking, make it into a slush co-op or something, but it's totally unnecessary and a waste of time.

kristie911 · Sep 22, 2007

RG570 said:
but it's totally unnecessary and a waste of time.

Not to mention, at 100 bucks a pop, a waste of money.

AW manuscript grading service

Almost competint

Writer Beware Goddess

Almost competint

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

Midnight Reading

Almost competint

On hiatus

Crypto-fascist

Teh doommobile, drivin' rite by you

Crypto-fascist

Midnight Reading

On hiatus

An old, sappy, and happy one.

On hiatus

And thus we begin the edits

On hiatus

And thus we begin the edits

Crypto-fascist

Writer Beware Goddess

Court Jester

Happy to be here