Showing posts with label agents. Show all posts
Showing posts with label agents. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Publishing and Other Perils - A Rant

             In the greatly lamented and only partially mythic ‘Golden Era’ of publishing printing books was a gentlemen’s game. The publishing houses were primarily large and privately owned by individual gentlemen rather than omnivorous multi-national corporations. These companies were actually interested in books and belles lettres. They read things submitted by writers as well as by agents and when they found a writer they liked, they worked to build his career, finding them editors who understood their voice, dealing with bookstores for good placement and arranging publicity. They took care of all the mechanical necessities and even sometimes – if they really liked the writer’s work – gave him a second chance if the current release didn’t reach their projected sales. Paying an advance was standard practice. In those warmly-thought-of days, a writer’s job was writing.
     Fast forward to today. Ah, how the business has changed. There are still a lot of different publishing line names on the spines of books, but most are controlled by the Big Five publishing houses, which just a short time ago was the Big Six. During the corporate feeding frenzy of the 80s nearly all the mid-sized independent publishing houses were absorbed – willingly or not – into the current monolithic, corporation-controlled houses, most of which go about selling books with the same techniques and artistic sensitivity as they use to sell widgets or shoes or hand tools.
     It is difficult if not impossible to approach any of the large paper publishing houses without an agent. As they are now the ‘first readers’ and arguably the arbiters for what will be seen, too many agents have begun to regard themselves as the center of the industry… and placing their bottom line over the needs of the writer, the publisher and the reading public. In a devil’s bargain with agents, publishers have been making their contracts more and more friendly to their own bottom line and to further this end making them less and less comprehensible. The writer, without whom there would not be an industry at all, always seems to come at the bottom of the pile.
     There are small and electronic publishers who do read unsolicited/unagented manuscripts, but in an alarming twist many of them are refusing even to look at a manuscript unless it is formatted to their own exacting specifications. Presumably this is so if they do contract the book, they can put it straight into production without having to bother with any typesetters or formatters. Since when did formatting become a writer’s responsibility? And most especially as a prerequisite for submission?
     Also many publishing companies ask in their submission requirements “What platform do you have for publicity? What kind of a marketing plan do you intend to implement?” Apparently it’s not enough for the writer to have written the book, and formatted it, now they are expected to handle nearly all the publicity for it. This is a plan that benefits only the publisher, who does not have to spend money for publicity. Let the writer do it! 
     The logic for this is particularly flawed; not only does publicity take precious time that should be spent in writing the next book, but as most writers are not publicists, it also forces the writer to re-invent the wheel. How much more logical it would be for publishers – who take the lion’s share of the money anyway – to have a well-oiled publicity machine with contacts made and slots ready and waiting instead of having each writer individually either contact every outlet or pay big bucks for a publicist of their own.
      There is a truism in publishing that ‘money flows to the author’ but in this current world it is becoming commonplace for an author to pay to have his manuscript edited before submission, where it will then be re-edited by the publishing house (or not!) upon acceptance. I must admit this leaves me speechless. Do writers think that sending in a pre-edited manuscript guarantees acceptance? Or are they such bad writers that they know without a pre-submission professional edit they would have no chance at all? Neither prospect is particularly alluring.
     And all these responsibilities and all these expenses paid by the writer come at a time where advances are shrinking or are non-existent.
     Some houses ask for a writer’s standardized input on the cover artwork, and with that it ends there for most. No matter if the cover is ugly, inaccurate or stupid, it stays that way because the marketing department says so. This, however, is a fading practice, especially with good small and electronic publishers.
     To make things even worse, after the book is sold and the writer has waited out whatever time the publisher decrees proper, he receives a royalty statement of books sold. Most are near indecipherable, and short of an audit (for which the writer pays, of course) the writer must trust the publisher that the figures shown are accurate. May I amend that? If the writer is lucky he receives a royalty statement; there are several publishers who have to be badgered and kept after (which again steals away time which should be spent writing) to send a statement, a process which is not guaranteed to have any success.
     Kind of makes one wonder why anyone would ever want to be part of a profession that depends on one kind of skilled artist to exist at all but treats those artists so badly. Of course, no one house does all of these things, but so many do enough of them that it does give one pause.
     I would sincerely like to hear a publishing house representative give a cogent and logical explanation of why the writer, who creates the product and without whom there would be no publishing industry, is treated like a red-haired stepchild and always comes at the end of the line. And the money trail.
     Perhaps the most astonishing thing is that publishing houses – especially the Big Five – profess amazement that so many writers are now beginning to self publish. If writers had received the kind of treatment – and the share of royalties – that they deserve, I wonder if self-publishing would ever have taken off.

Janis Patterson

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

2011 My Year in Writing

2011 began on a low note for me.  In January, my agent cut me loose. It wasn't that he had lost enthusiasm for my book. He hadn't, he said.  What he'd lost was the ability to sell fiction in today's publishing world. It was a theme I heard repeated later in the year.

Needing an agent, I rewrote my query letter and synopsis. Then I did another revision of the book—the eighteenth draft. In February, I began a new search for an agent. If my previous agent showed his uncertainty about the publishing world by getting out of fiction, other agents are showing it by taking fewer risks with new authors. So far, 57 queries have netted me eight requests for partials and one request for the full manuscript. One agent, after telling my how much she liked what she'd read and after requesting more of the book, decided to get out of fiction. That makes number two. I'm not taking it personal.

I attended two conventions, Killer Nashville and Bouchercon. At Nashville, I learned more about the angst of agents and publishers in the world of e-books. At Bouchercon, I talked to many writers who told me to get my backlist published in e-books. I was ahead of them on that. Locally, as workshop coordinator for Brazos Writers, I organized a screenwriting workshop with screenwriter Bonnie Orr as the instructor. She preached the merits of the beat sheet. My favorite workshop of the year was in September. It was a full day workshop on the Art and Science of Investigation. Our speakers were Steve Smith, a psychologist who specializes in memory and eye-witness testimony, Suzanne Lowe and Jorge Molina, Texas Rangers forensic artists, and Jeff Tomberlin, an entomologist who studies colonization of corpses by flies. CSI is now so boring.

I began four short stories this year and finished two. I have been sending one of the completed stories to publishers. It has been at Alfred Hitchcock for six weeks. the other story appears in a collection of my short stories published by Ilium Books. Game Face is now available for purchase as a trade paperback, or an e-book in Kindle and iPad/Nook formats. I also published six of the stories in the collection as stand-alone e-books for Kindle, Nook and iPad.

The downside of  writing the short stories and publishing the e-books is that I put my novel on hold. My resolution for 2011 is to finish it.

The year ended with reviews from Bill Crider, Helen Ginger, and Jean Henry Mead.

On the whole, I think 2011 was a good year and I'm looking forward to 2012. How was your year?

Mark Troy

Saturday, June 20, 2009

A Good Synopsis Helps to Sell Your Book

By Jean Henry Mead

Condensing the important aspects of a 100,000-word novel into a 10–page summary isn’t easy. In most cases, it’s harder than writing the book. The reason you need to write the darn thing is to prove that your story is logical, realistic and well organized. Are your characters acting and interacting with others in a reasonable manner?

Editors and agents have different views on how characters should react. I once had a manuscript rejected because my protagonist was too reckless. The next editor, who accepted the story for publication, thought the main character was a little too hesitant to act and requested a small rewrite. So luck is always an ingredient in the submission process.

A synopsis should be formatted like a manuscript, usually 5-10 pages, the shorter the better if you can include the essentials in fewer words. Always write in present tense, such as “Tom finds his best friend murdered and decides on revenge.” Characters' names should be typed in bold or capital letters the first time you mention them.

Editors are busy people so make reading easier by keeping your paragraphs short. There’s no need to include secondary characters’ names, colors, descriptions, etc. if they add nothing to the story. In other words, tell the story in the fewest words possible and leave out unnecessary details.

What then should you cover in a synopsis? In order to hook the editor, you need to present your story as concisely as possible with the plot problem, location, main characters’ backgrounds and the time frame or era. Answer every question you ask. Don’t leave the editor hanging.

Your main characters' bios should be brief, such as “John's a stubborn country lawyer, lanky with a mop of red curly hair.” Strive to make the editor feel a connection with your protagonist.

Conflict is essential, either internal or from outside the character, which is where your antagonist comes in. State upfront what the conflict is and don’t forget to resolve it before the end of your synopsis. Also, don’t forget to include major plot deviations whenever something unusual happens. That, however, doesn’t include subplots.

Emotion and action are important plot points that need to be included. Action drives the plot but only include actions that result in consequences. And how does the protagonist react when something jars her world? A sprinkling of dialogue can be included if it helps to describe something better than narrative, but keep it to a minimum.

Novelist Rebecca Vinyard says that a black moment should be briefly described when the characters realize that all is lost and they won’t be able to accomplish their goals. Then, when your story comes to its conclusion, insure that its done satisfactorily. Don’t leave your editor or agent in the dark. They need to know whether you’ve successfully resolved your character’s problem(s).

Remember to avoid passive voice, leave out nonessential details, make your sentences flow, and write a concise and clearly stated synopsis. Most publishers prefer a double-spaced summary because it’s easier to read. Read that publisher’s guidelines and stick to them, include an SASE and your title, last name and page numbers in your headers.

And most important, make sure your synopsis is the best work you’re capable of producing. It’s the only chance you have to make a first impression.