Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're after you

I'm a Melbourne writer. I'm lucky enough to have a literary agent, and I have two completed mss to sell. My agent has been submitting them and both of us are learning just how tight the fiction market is at the moment. Where the first one almost got across the line with a couple of the conventional large publishers, the second one (which she thought would be a dead cert) also is struggling. My agent says my work is of a very high standard, she is an experienced reader and editor, and is selling her other clients' work, so I'm wondering if something else might be sabotaging the submissions.

1. My age? (I'm over 45 and it's a first novel situation. I've been published in lit journals etc but no book-length works published and no high profile/celebrity/'amazing personal story' for PR).

2. I wrote a couple of reviews on my blog in which I said I didn't love certain Australian books; have I been *blacklisted*. Does such a thing happen? 

I've asked my agent and she said she doesn't believe either of these things are relevant, that it would all be about the work in the view of publishers, that's all they look for. But really, can that be true? Don't publishers want as many positives as possible to try to sell more books, market etc.

Perhaps it really is just such a bad time.

I'll forgive you for being from Melbourne. Now let's move on ...

1. Your age is irrelevant. There appears to be a belief held amongst some unpublished writers that publishers (and agents) are madly judging all writers based on their age, but they're not. And if they were, that would be silly because most readers - especially those who actually buy books - are not twenty-five, ifyouknowwhatImean. There is no 'right age' to start out and if younger novelists were preferred, why do we need a whole literary award dedicated to them (the Vogel's)? 

2. If there is a blacklist, let me know where it is. Because I'm probably on it and so is everyone else in the industry - we all have books we don't like and most of us aren't shy about our opinions. If everyone only liked the same few books, we wouldn't have so many books published each year.

You haven't said what type of fiction you write - and that detail is important. Chick lit is, apparently, 'dead' - that is the term one publisher used when speaking to me recently. So times are tough for chick lit writers. Crime fiction is always hard, mainly because publishers believe it is - but that's a much bigger topic ... And 'literary fiction' (definition still elusive) is always hard.

In general, though, sometimes you just don't find the right publisher at the time when your novel is being submitted. Timing is so important: the right publisher needs to be in the right publishing house at the right time with the right sales and marketing support. And, yes, it really all does come down to the work. The bells and whistles are great but they're no substitute for the work. Bells and whistles we can help with; the wriiting, we can't.

So your time may not be now; it may be next year or it may be several years off yet. If your work is good (and your agent thinks it is, so that's a clue), have faith in yourself - and, most importantly, keep writing, because maybe it's your next manuscript that will break through. Then you'll have the current manuscript available just in case the publisher wants another one ...

Does anyone love books for boys? Anyone? Anyone?

I have written a YA book which is targeted at older teenage boys. It's been well-received by (allegedly) grown-up blokes as well, and I believe it fits into that "crossover" area that stretches into both YA and adult markets. Nonetheless, it was conceived and written for 15-17 year old boys. It's a military science fiction story. As you would guess, it's heavily skewed to action, but also has strong characters and explores themes that go somewhat beyond military hardware. I'm now out in the world seeking an agent, two of whom have asked to review the full manuscript, so – without getting too far ahead of myself – I'm comforted there's at least a level of interest, and that my writing is of an acceptable standard.

My first question is this: is there an easier way for me to identify agents who are actively seeking works for the male YA market? In all my research, I have only found one agent who claims this area as a particular interest. Invariably, even for those agencies that are open to YA sci-fi, I find I am writing to female agents, a number of whom make no bones about the fact that they're looking for books that are primarily written for girls. Many also say that they want books with strong female protagonists. One agent went so far as to invite me to rewrite the manuscript and turn the hero into a heroine… (Sorry, no.)

I assume this is not just a display of industry-wide sexism (!), so I'm guessing it's market-driven. I haven't seen any stats on this, but maybe teenage girls just buy more books than teenage boys? If that's the case, it brings me to my second question: would I be better off submitting my work direct to some of the more obvious sci-fi publishing houses?

I'd appreciate any insights you can offer.

I love young adult fiction written for boys and look after quite a bit of it, but I can't tell you my secret identity so there goes that opportunity to submit ... unless you already have. Let me go and check ...

Yes, it's true that literary agents in Australia tend to be women. That's probably because there's not enough money in the job to tempt men, and also because the publishing industry has a lot of women on the editorial/publishing side of things, which is where agenting sits (sales and marketing is more evenly matched, if not weighted towards those in possession of XY chromosomes). As to whether or not there's a way to more easily identify the agents' tastes in books: peruse their client lists and if that doesn't provide illumination, ask them. As I've said before, if agents don't make their submission guidelines clear enough to enable you to send in a submission (or not) you should ask them to clarify (which, in turn, may make them have clearer guidelines).

It is believed that women and girls read and buy books more than men and boys. Women often buy books for the men in their lives, and they often reach for books that seem 'likely' - books on war and Ben Cousins, for example. Publishers are thus trying to publish books that the women-who-buy-for-men can easily identify as being books for men. The same probably goes for books for children and teenagers, which are primarily purchased by parents and schools.

It is a truism of publishing and bookselling that women and girls have more eclectic taste in books - they'll give most books a go - but men and boys don't, usually. Part of the conversation around 'men's writing' and 'women's writing' is that women will read books written by both women and men, but men don't return the favour.

There are very few books published that are explicitly for male readers of any age; usually we're trying to appeal to both men and women (boys and girls) but we know, deep down in our ex-library-monitor hearts, that we're more likely to have female readers than male. I suspect this is true of all countries that have a publishing industry and there's probably a PhD that's been written about it somewhere examining the reasons why.

Hopefully that answers your first question. The answer to your second question is: yes. But that 'yes' has more to do with the fact that many agents and publishers don't touch science fiction and/or don't understand it, not with the fact that your manuscript is written for boys.

Greatest hits: The fiction submission rant

I just rediscovered this post, and it all still holds true three years later. Plus there are points involved, so it's kind of like a game!

***

There is no question for this post - I'm writing it because I want to whinge. For there are many days when I just want to never, ever, ever look at fiction submissions again. And it's not because I don't find clients that way - I do - but it's because so much of my time is wasted doing it that I find it hard to justify reading the subs. And why is my time wasted? Because 99% of fiction submissions aren't ready to be seen. (That percentage is an approximation, and possibly influenced by my snarky mood.)

So let's play a game. Let's say I grant every submission 100 points to start with. I'm going to list some common things I see in submissions. Certain things will take off points; certain things will add. If the submission still ends up with around 100 points, then I'll ask for a full manuscript. (In reality it's not that scientific, but maybe I'll change my ways.)

1. Sending in your first draft. LOSE 50 POINTS
1. (a) It's your first novel. LOSE ANOTHER 25 POINTS

2. Asking your best friend or mother to read your novel and then believing what they say and THEN telling me that I should read your novel because your mother loved it. LOSE 20 POINTS

3. Putting your novel away for a while - weeks, if not months - and then revisiting it and doing some more work. ADD 20 POINTS

4. Telling me that if I don't take you on I'll be missing out on the greatest novelist who ever lived. LOSE 10 POINTS

5. Taking the time to understand that to write a novel is to tell a story and that means you can't write 50 000 words of beautiful prose with no plot and no character development. ADD 20 POINTS

6. Being completely unrealistic about your abilities as a writer - everyone may have a novel in them but that doesn't mean everyone should write that novel. If you failed to read any novels in high school, there's a good chance you're not cut out to be a novelist. LOSE 20 POINTS

7. Reading lots of novels, particularly in your genre. ADD 15 POINTS
7. (a) Comparing yourself to those novelists when you submit your manuscript. LOSE 10 POINTS

8. Sending in a half-baked submission 'so you can give me some advice on where my writing should go from here'. LOSE 40 POINTS

And, at the suggestion of one of my authors (some of them know I write this blog - well, only the handsome ones):
9. Mentioning it's a literary novel. LOSE 15 POINTS (he suggested 1000 and used swear words - I'm not going to be that forceful - and please bear in mind that he actually writes literary fiction)
9. (a) Mentioning it's a literary novel set in Melbourne, and you're from Melbourne, and all the characters are from Melbourne too. LOSE ANOTHER 15 POINTS (and before you take umbrage, remember that my name is Agent SYDNEY - that gives me licence for a little fun,non?)


I've just run out of ideas, but there's every chance I'll add to this list in future. And you can probably tell there are more 'lose' than 'add' items. Believe me, I WANT to love every submission I read. I want there to be so many brilliant novels of all stripes out there that Australians only ever want to read Australian novels and forget about overseas authors. But the bitter truth is that I despair. I read the submissions and I see novelists who could turn out to be great but who will get rejected by me - and probably everyone else - because they were impatient. I read other submissions that are truly awful. I read a lot that are just tepid. All of this wastes my time, and when my time is wasted I grow cranky and I'm more and more tempted to never read fiction submissions again.

The biggest problem is that novels are submitted well before they're ready. If this blog achieves nothing else than to make novelists think hard before they submit to anyone, I'll be happy. Because while people like me spend too much time reading submissions that will never get published, we are not spending time on developing and supporting Australian talent.

In the past I have received several emails whinging - yes, whinging, how dare you! - about agents closing submissions and asking why. Well, now you know. We're not a public service - we run businesses. We can't work for nothing. So if we detect that something is wasting our time - and our money-making capabilities - we'll stop doing it. The one thing writers can do to ensure that doesn't happen is to make sure their submissions are up to scratch. Agents do not exist to give you advice unless you're a client. We are looking for writers we can get published. If you can free us up by not sending us your undercooked novel, we'll be more able to look at it when it IS cooked.

The real reason why it's so hard to get your Australian novel published

Whenever I'm amongst a group of writers who aren't clients - admittedly not that often, as such gatherings can end in tears (mine) - or even when I encounter individual writers in the wild, there are usually complaints about why it's so hard to get their novel published or to find an agent. 'Why don't agents take on debut novelists?' comes the plaintive cry, often followed by a variation on the theme of 'Evil publishers just don't support Australian writing'.

The question I always want to ask, but tend not to, is: 'When was the last time you bought an Australian novel*?' Because I know that the answer will most likely either be 'Five years ago' or 'Never', or they'll blink and look at me like I've asked if they think Tony Abbott looks good in his Lycra bike pants.**

Well, kids, wake up and smell the Vegemite toast: this is the reason why it's so hard to get your Australian novel published.

If every person who is writing an Australian novel (regardless of genre) would simply buy one Australian novel a year (regardless of genre), the sales figures would look a lot healthier, and publishers would think that there's a more robust market for it. (This being a capitalist economy, they're quite interested in the whole supply-and-demand caper.)

For example, if you're writing a crime novel, consider buying an Australian crime novel instead of Patricia Cornwell next time you're in a bookshop. Don't write an Australian crime novel, buy only US and UK crime novels and then complain that you can't get your Australian crime novel published. Why should the Australian publishing industry support you when you don't support it?

I am the first to admit that the Australian publishing industry (which includes agents) has perhaps let down the novel-reading Australian public in the past. There were a lot of heavy literary novels published as we tried to pin down a literary identity independent of our colonial overlords. We got children's fiction incredibly right, but a lot of the grown-ups' fiction suffered in comparison to what was coming in from overseas. These were the faltering missteps of a toddler culture. No longer.

I can tell you from the fiction submissions I see - most of which I have to reject, because the publishers are reluctant to take risks on new novels because they think no one will read them - that there is some terrific, robust storytelling happening out there, much of it in genre fiction. A lot of it is written by my very own talented clients (who, obviously, didn't get rejected). There are so many great Australian novels available. So I'm sure that there's one - at least one - that you, an Australian novelist who wants to get published, would like. And the best thing you could do for the industry that you would like to part of is buy that one book.

If you're one of those writers who regularly reads Australian novels, fantastic - we love you, you help keep our local fiction publishing alive. If you're not, please first consider why that is, and if it's simply that you don't have the habit of reading Australian novels - that you reflexively choose novels from elsewhere - try to change that habit one book at a time. You'll be glad you did when publishers realise that there is a bigger market for Australian fiction than they thought, and then they're more likely to look for new novelists, and then I and my agent colleagues will have more incentive not to reject so many of these submissions we receive.

Yes, I realise that many novels are very expensive. Believe me, it's not because some of us aren't trying to get the prices adjusted, especially for first novels. We know that the cost is prohibitive for some people. Which is why I'm only suggesting you buy one per year. It's an investment worth making - in your own publishing potential, if nothing else.

*I define 'Australian novel' as 'novel written by an Australian' not 'novel about Australia'.

**I know this because when I have asked the question, these have been the responses, although I added the Tony Abbott bit for embellishment.

Humorous novels and agent specialisation

Just browsing your site re US agents and wondering if there are many agents in Australia who are dedicated to humour/satire genre or is it best to approach a US agent?

Would much appreciate any advice you have regarding this, my partner has written 2 complete novels and madly starting his third, is as yet unpublished and about to approach some agents with one of his manuscripts.

Agents in Australian can't really afford to specialise in one genre of anything - some reasons can be found here - so you're not going to be able to find out if they're interested in humour/satire unless you send a submission. You can presume that if an agent or agency is accepting fiction submissions, they'll be interested in a funny story unless they explicitly say otherwise. Your partner may also wish to query US agents at the same time and he should mention that he's doing so when he sends his submission to Australian agents.

Greatest hits: The slush pile and how to emerge from it

**Recently I was talking to a friend about this blog and I mentioned that there wasn't much for me to do any more, as I've answered a lot of questions over the past four years. She suggested that I post some 'greatest hits' for the newer readers. So here's the first of them. Let's hope I can find others! And thanks to my friend K for the suggestion.**

Reader kaz posted the following question in a comment, and I thought it was worth pulling into the main site:

"I’ve placed three first novels in the past few months, with good prospects for others." How do you find new authors, Agent S? Do you just stumble upon them in the 'slush pile'? If so, what makes them stand out from the crowd?

I have stumbled across some in the slush pile; others have come through referrals from existing clients or are writers I've met in the course of work.

Those who came from the slush pile have a few elements in common:
1. Fantastic query letter. You'd be surprised how often the covering letter says something like, 'Here is my novel. I hope you like it' and that's it. All the written communication from an author is an indication of how they write, from their cover letter to their emails and all points in between. I'm sure that often writers don't know that they shouldn't do this (hence one of the reasons for this blog - to shine a bit of light on what authors need to do), but they really shouldn't. Because a letter like that makes me think that the author can't articulate what their novel is about, they can't tell me who they are or what they want from their writing, and they certainly can't tell me why they approached my agency. Writing a query letter is a skill, and good writers refine their query letters several times. There are workshops on it in the US, and you may find the odd one at a writers' centre here too.

2. The author has taken their time with the manuscript before sending it in; it is usually the fourth or fifth draft or beyond by the time they send it in (and they say this in the query letter). They may also have done some courses, such as QWC's 'Year of the Novel' or a program at Varuna. This indicates that are realistic about how much work is involved in writing a novel and will therefore be more realistic about the publishing road ahead.

3. They are great writers. Their prose may shine like a jewel; or maybe it doesn't but they tell such a fantastic story that the prose is not the focus.

4. They are polite in their communication with the agency and respectful of the amount of time it may take us to make a decision about their manuscript. This point is actually quite important, because I, at least, feel that I'm 'auditioning' writers for publishers (and that does not mean that I think agents should be treated as if on a pedestal - although I do like my grapes peeled occasionally). Writers who are unreasonably difficult with their publishers often never get published again, because the Australian publishing culture is quite genteel and really doesn't take well to foot-stompers. So if someone is routinely shirty with me, I know exactly how they'll behave with their publisher and what that will mean for their book: usually, not much. It takes more effort to be angry than to be reasonable, and it's easier to be reasonable when you remember that agents and publishers aren't the enemy. We love books - that's why we work in publishing. We just don't have 24 hours a day to read submissions, so it will take us some time to get back to you. If you respect our request to give us three months to read your submission, we'll respect your writing. If you, instead, call after two weeks to complain that we're taking too much time, that doesn't really bode well.

Stell-aaaaaa Stell-aaaaaaa

I wonder if you've been keeping up with the recent debate about a perception of bias against women in the publishing industry (widely defined to include publishers, publications, writing prizes, and book reviewers)? And if you are across the debate, what are your thoughts?

See also:

• http://blog.taramoss.com/index.php?itemid=662
• http://thestellaprize.com.au/news/post/stats-and-more-stats/

Love your blog, by the way, and only wish you'd post more often.

Okay, last point first - thanks for the compliment, and the reason I don't post more often is, first, that people don't ask me questions that often any more and, second, after four years of doing this I don't have too much left to say that I haven't already said. Oh, and there's a third reason: blogging takes up a fair bit of time and I seem to have more to do than ever, what with the keeping up with digital issues and whatnot. So even if I wanted to blog about non-questiony things, I just wouldn't have the brain power or, frankly, the time.

Now, to your question.

Yes, I've been keeping up the debate. I try to keep up with current debates in all sorts of things because it makes me seem less unedumacated when I talk to people.

I don't think the problem is bias against women in the publishing industry. I think the problem is bias against women in the culture generally. Male sports players, male musicians, male writers, male film-makers, male newsreaders dominate our cultural outpourings. Et cetera. This is not new news. We have a male-dominated culture - for now. This is not to say that all men support this culture, or that men are solely responsible for it.

Why it seems weird in publishing is that women buy most of the books. Often they buy those books for men and, rightly or wrongly, they have their own perceptions about what sort of books men will read. As do the men themselves.

This often goes no further and is not more complicated than the author's name on the cover. Female name: men don't buy. Gender-neutral name (i.e. female author uses initials or has a first name that is gender-ambiguous): men probably buy. Male name: men buy. NB: women will buy books by anyone for themselves, but not usually for their son, father, brother or husband. (This is my observation and not a scientific statement.) But I know men who are really eclectic readers, in that they will read books in any genre, but they categorically will not buy a book written by a woman because they think it has no relevance to them. Apparently women don't have the same issue regarding male authors - and thank goodness, because Dan Brown and John Grisham et al would never have had careers.

So where does this bias start? At school? In the home, when those men are little boys being read to by their parents? Who knows. But it's there. And booksellers and publishers are businesses - they will go where the money is, so they are reluctant to publish books in certain genres that will only appeal to women. That's why you see a lot of authors with initials on the covers of crime novels and thrillers. And not just in those genres: JK Rowling, anyone?

This debate has focused on so-called literary fiction. There has been a lot written about it by people far more eminent than me. But, in short, the genres that women traditionally read and write are not, and are unlikely ever to be, considered to be 'literary' fiction. So that genre is in the blokes' domain. Hence, there are more blokes nominated for literary prizes for literary fiction. As far as I'm concerned, they can have fun with their prizes while Harlequin laughs all the way to the bank and dominates the publishing landscape in the digital age. But I am not a literary novelist trying in vain to get published in a genre that seems to favour people with different chromosomal structures, nor am I a book reviewer or someone trying to get a book reviewed. I completely understand their frustrations. And to that I shall say what I usually say to people seeking to change institutions and institutional structures: subvert from within.

What's hip and groovy for young adults

In my opinion, the wave of YA vampires is collapsing into seafoam and air (boy wizards are LONG gone), but the wave of YA steampunk is building. I also think it's higher in America than anywhere else - which means Australia will love it more and more over the coming months and years. 

Although it's never wise to follow a current trend (because you'll finish that book when the trend has just been tapped out), what trends are you seeing and/or liking lately?



While I'm quite fond of highly imaginative (i.e. speculative) fiction for adults, I actually like more realistic YA, so that's usually what I'm looking for - and no doubt that's just because it's what I was used to growing up, so I'm constantly trying to recapture the days of rapture of my reading youth.

I try to stay away from trends for YA because once the trend is identified it's usually on the way out - although this may change as publishing time frames become shorter with more digital publishing (although children's/YA publishing probably won't move as quickly to digital as genre fiction for adults). So it's just the boring old finding-identity-in-a-small-town-or-bit-city kind of thing for me. I also love it when there's a dark edge to a story - genuine darkness, not a showy attempt at juvenile delinquency to suggest 'bad boy' behaviour - but it's often very hard to get those stories published. Adults, you see, don't like to be reminded that teenagers have a fully functioning awareness of the crappy things in life and, more specifically, the crappy things adults do.

Whither horror?

Where is the demand for the horror genre market on a scale of 1 to 10 today, and why hasn't there been another horror author to even come close to achieving the staggering heights of Stephen King in the 1980s?


I'd say horror is about 1 or 2 and likely to stay there. And it was there when Stephen King was at his horror peak too. Stephen King is Stephen King - he's an extraordinary storyteller with an equally extraordinary work ethic. Regardless of the genre he chose, he was probably going to be wildly successful. He wrote horror stories because they were the stories that came to him, and some of them become movies that were 'scary' more than pure 'horror', and thus he entered the mainstream in a massive way. This is a wildly generalised summary of a long, rich career.

My own theory about why horror isn't more popular is this: chicks don't dig it. And when chicks* don't dig a book genre - either to read themselves or to buy as a gift - it's very, very hard to get it consistently on any bestseller lists. Most women I know - including me - would not voluntarily read a horror novel or watch a horror film. Alien is probably as horrific as they'll go, and even then it's a 'space film' so we can convince ourselves that it could never happen on earth, ergo, it's not as horrific as it could be. We'll watch/read crime stories that come close to being horror, but we're mainly not interested in horrific - really nightmare-creating - stories. The women I know who read voraciously (and some of the men) will not go anywhere near a horror story. Of course there are exceptions to this. There are lots of women who've read Stephen King. But he's Stephen King. He's a genre unto himself.

The comments section is there for anyone who wants to seriously go to town on my theory.

*Culturally ironic use only.

Authonomy me, Authonomy you

How much value is there in websites such as HarperCollins’ Authonomy, where authors post their work for critiquing by other amateurs? Works are promoted by the number of comments and recommendations they receive and HarperCollins promise to review the top five each month with a view to publication. Sounds good, but in practice it degenerates into a kind of black market, where authors trade kudos without even bothering to read the work in some cases.

WHAT?!? The internets degenerating into a rogue trading arena with scant regard for ethics and high regard for devalued content? Colour me shocked. (For those non-Australian, non-Canadian readers, that was sarcasm. Yes, it's the lowest form of wit. I've never claimed to aspire to higher forms of wit, because I'm incapable of producing them.)

Authonomy has had its doubters from the start, so I suggest you regard it as you would regard any other online community: engage in it if you want the experience, but don't expect that it will change your life. And then add this on top: it's a marketing exercise for HarperCollins, and a perfectly legitimate one that was kinda smart at the time it was launched. It's also a fabulous way for them to get free content (as it would be for any publisher who had this kind of website).

I don't know how successful Authonomy has been for the authors who have taken part i.e. if it's really translated into book publication and books that have reached a wider audience. I don't know because, actually, I haven't been interested. I'm too busy trying to keep up with my own submissions. I recall wondering what HarperCollins' publishing department would have thought of it, though - it just meant more work for them, reading yet more submissions when they didn't have time to read the submissions they receive via old-fashioned methods. And, probably, Authonomy's effectiveness is limited by this lack of time/resources to properly service it. Still, it gets a lot of eyeballs on a HarperCollins website (and in the future eyeballs will probably be a legitimate unit of measurement) so, from a commercial point of view, the site is there to benefit HarperCollins - they own the domain name. It's nice if it benefits authors as well, but there are plenty of online communities for writers. I'm not sure how this one would more beneficial than another, even if it is run by a publisher.

Of course, the publishing, bookselling and book-reading industry is changing so rapidly - more than many people who are working in it realise - that this is all going to be moot shortly. It's entirely possible that we are watching the dying days of empires, waiting to see which phoenix emerges. Somehow I don't think Authonomy has wings.

Taboo or not taboo

I'm your typical wannabe-writer. I'm 25 and have dabbled a lot but am working on my first novel (it is up to 50,000 words so far). I still have a long way to go. My question is this: are gay characters too taboo to publish here? I'm painfully aware that lesbians in general are under-represented in popular culture and this is even more true in Australia. Is there even a chance that an Australian could get something that is gay (dare I say?) literary fiction published? As a second question, how short is too short? Things I've read say not to even bother with less than 70,000 words, others suggest 60,000.

The question is not whether or not the subject matter is taboo - it's not. The question is whether or not there's a large enough market for it for a publisher to take on gay-themed fiction in this country - and there's not. It's nothing to do with anyone's social sensibilities or lifestyle choices (after all, we work in The Yarts); it's purely about the amount of units they can shift.

The majority of book buyers, and readers, in this country are women: straight or straight-identifying women - that's just statistical, I'm not at all implying anything better/worse by that. The straight sheilas tend to want to read about men who want to have sex with them (or fictional versions of them - heroines). The gay blokes don't want to have sex with them, ergo they make bad heroes for straight-sheila stories. Just look at romance fiction: arguably the biggest-selling genre around the world, absolutely killing it on the e-book front, and no gay heroes in sight. So publishers go where the money is. A gay hero would necessarily be in a story largely written for gay men, and that's a smaller audience. James Baldwin's Giovanni's Room is one of the most sublime pieces of fiction ever, but you'll never hear it - or him - being whispered of in the same breath as, say, Norman Mailer, and it's probably just because not as many people were aware of the novel at the time it was released. (And if you've never read any Baldwin, you simply must - Another Country is almost unbearably beautiful.)

As for lesbian stories - well, same thing. The audience for lesbian stories is mainly lesbians, and that's a statistically small group. Straight women don't mind a bit of a lesbian storyline in their otherwise straight saga - the same way straight women like The L Word because it's about girl world, not just lesbian world - but they're not likely to buy a story that's written purely for a lesbian audience. First, because there's no straight-male hero who may want to have sex with them. Second, because escapism is a powerful motivator for reading stories and it's hard to escape into a world that is so different to your own in terms of how relationships work. There's a reason why Rita Mae Brown isn't as well known as Barbara Taylor Bradford, and it's not because BTB is a better writer.

The good news is that the United States market is big enough for everyone. So query agents there. I'm not saying it would never happen in Australia, just that it's statistically unlikely.

As for your word count: your story is as long as it is. There is so much talk about word count but, really, the story is what it is. Write it first, revise it, revise it again, then see how many words you have. Less than 50 000 isn't a good idea; over 120 000 probably makes it look like a fantasy novel. But please don't let word count dictate what your story is going to be.

The curse of reviews - for the author, that is

How much do reviews matter? I am a published novelist (Aus and UK) and I AGONISE over them. Good ones make my heart soar; bad ones depress me for days. So far I’ve had my fair share of both ... Should I get myself so worked up over them? Do they significantly affect sales? Is a bad review better than no review at all? And as an agent do you watch for and similarly exult/agonise over your clients’ reviews??

There's an old chestnut that says 'Any publicity is good publicity' and I adhere to that belief. Having been a bookseller at one stage, I can attest to the fact that most people remember that a book was in the book section of the paper, and beyond that they don't remember details - including what it's called and who the author is. For publicists the important thing is getting a picture of the cover in - because they know, as the rest of us should, that people will remember what the cover looks like more than any other detail.

I've seen authors - wonderful writers - so distressed about a bad review and they probably don't understand my usual response ('Meh'). But that response is borne of several years witnessing that reviews really don't make a dent one way or the other because most people can't remember the content of a review when they go to a bookshop. Think about how many people would actually read the books section of a newspaper and then how many of them are going to read the review for your book - they aren't big numbers. I can't remember someone ever telling me that I shouldn't buy a certain book because they read a bad review of it (and if they did, I wouldn't let that influence my purchasing decision) but I can remember lots of people telling me that they loved a certain book and I've then bought it as a result. Word of mouth is far more powerful than a review will ever be. If you wrote a great story - if you believe you wrote a great story - then what do you think the word of mouth will be?

You say that you've had both good and bad reviews, but I wonder if you've stopped to consider that the book you wrote has been both positively and negatively appraised, and from the sounds of it you set the same store by both types of appraisal. In goddess' name, WHY? Surely the fact that there are differences of opinion about your work tell you that no response to your book is 'good' or 'bad' - just as your book isn't 'good' or 'bad'. Each reader has a different experience of the story, and that's what the reviews reflect.

You may also have noticed that reviews of fiction tend to be on the emotional side, compared with reviews of non-fiction and children's books. That's because novelists - often unpublished - review fiction, and they tend to review the author as well as the book. Non-fiction reviews usually stick to the subject matter and the way it's delivered. You'll rarely see a non-fiction review saying that the author is God's gift to writing (or the opposite) yet statements about the author often appear in fiction reviews.

My opinion about some fiction reviewers - and this is probably a controversial statement to make, but my magic shield of anonymity protects me (although I've said it in person to other people, without the shield) - is that they're jealous. Particularly if they're reviewing first or second novels and they're unpublished themselves. Reviewing a first novel - 'well, why should that mug have been given a contract when I can't get one' - is fraught with green-tinged possibilities, as is reviewing a second: 'it could still be a fluke for aforementioned untalented mug'. By novel number three it's harder to pretend that the mug is simply getting away with it, and the tone of the reviewing may shift accordingly. This is, obviously, an unscientific analysis and you'll note I said SOME not ALL fiction reviewers.

So, to answer your questions in a concise fashion:
- It's understandable that you get yourself worked up over them but I believe your energies would be better directed towards your writing. After all, 9.75 out of 10 times, someone else's response/reaction to you has nothing to do with you. Who are these people whose opinions are affecting you so strongly?
- No, they don't affect sales in any great - or measurable - way. No doubt at the local indie bookshop there's some tergiversating about one new Australian novel over another, and a review may swing that decision. I suppose that could happen a handful of times for each book. But word of mouth is far more powerful.
- Yes, a bad review is better than no review at all, because it's hard enough to get a review - if they're going to put your name and your book's name and, possibly, its cover in a publication for people to see and perhaps remember, then yay!
- I watch for reviews but the agonising/exulting within me happens out of empathy - I don't actually feel it myself, I feel it for my authors. Because I know that they'll feel the way you do, even though I try to talk them out of it.

The fiction conundrum

No question for this one, just me ranting a little.

It's always hard for me to find publishers for fiction, especially debut novels. It's especially hard at the moment, with book sales down, booksellers nervous and publishers also nervous about not just the economy but digital publishing too. Even novelists who have already been published are having a hard time if they haven't sold several thousand copies of their last novel.

The fundamental reason for this is that there is not perceived to be a robust market for Australian fiction. Australians don't like to buy Australian novels (although they love Australian non-fiction). There are, no doubt, a few reasons for this, and a big one is that publishers tend to favour literary fiction, which is not the type of fiction most people want to read. There is not a lot of expertise or interest in the sort of commercial fiction that sells in big numbers here when it's written by other people. I've written before that there can be snobbery about commercial fiction. And we see the big sales for overseas writers continue. This could be a form of cultural cringe too - we just don't believe Australian writers would be 'good enough'. The only endeavour in which Australians seem to think we're 'good enough' is sport.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of submissions I receive are for fiction. And I receive a lot of submissions, so that's a lot of fiction being written.

My question to those of you writing Australian fiction (for, if you're Australian and you're writing a novel, you're writing Australian fiction) is: when was the last time you bought an Australian novel, of any type? Have you bought one in the last year? Have you bought more than one? If you have not bought one or have bought only one, I guess we can't say that you're actively supporting Australian fiction, can we? As our economy works on supply and demand, no demand = no supply. No supply is rapidly where we are heading, which means that if you are writing fiction it's going to because harder and harder to get that novel published by conventional means.

If you've just realised that you don't buy Australian fiction, yet you write it and expect to get it published, you may be coming up with reasons: it's too expensive, there's nothing that I want to read or, perhaps, Australian novels aren't as good ... Yes, some novels are expensive (although what price someone's years of intellectual and creative toil?). I try to get first novels published at B formats, priced under $30, but I lose most of the time. It's frustrating. So I understand why you may not want to take a $35 risk on an unknown author. Why, then, would anyone want to take the same risk on you and your novel? And if you have a cultural cringe about Australian novels, why will yours escape someone else's cultural cringe?

So here's a suggestion. If you are writing Australian fiction and want to get published one day, the best thing you can is to buy Australian fiction and create a bigger demand for it than publishers currently think exists. Actively choose an Australian novel over a novel from another country. There are lots of great Australian novels out there. If you love genre fiction, buy Australian thrillers, romance or crime novels over books from other countries. Become a mindful book buyer and reader. We know that energy is neither created nor destroyed, it just changes form. If you put more of your book-focused energy into Australian books, there will be more to move around. This not a woo-woo incense-burning statement - it's science.

My personal policy is that I buy Australian books and I usually borrow books from foreign writers from my local library or buy them as ebooks. I work in the Australian publishing industry and, even though I don't have a huge amount of disposable income to spend on books, this is one expense I will bear because it's important. Is it important to you too?

Too down under to get out from underneath

Is it possible for a manuscript to be too Australian? Our humour can often leave foreigners scratching their heads, and a lot of our slang is unintelligible to anyone who hasn’t grown up here. I realise that I am being incredibly optimistic to even think that I could be published in Australia, let alone have the conundrum of changing things for an overseas audience, but is it possible? Would an overseas agent take one look and reject on the strength that it is too niche-ie?

In short: yes. How many Australian novels do you know of that have gone on to worldwide acclaim? It's not because Australians can't write; it's because we used to be a colony (or, rather, a collection of colonies and - YES, SOUTH AUSTRALIANS, I KNOW - some settlements). You don't see flotillas of New Zealand or South African - or, really, Canadian - writers setting the world on fire. The Canadians have a better chance because they can peer over the border to the US but considering how many outstandingly great writers they have, they're underrepresented on the world stage. As are writers from non-English-speaking countries. And I suspect the issue is twofold.

First, we are all considered to be 'in translation' because we are not writing in the dominant dialects of English - namely, American English and, erm, English English - nor are we considered to be writing stories that will be deemed to be of interest to Americans or Britons, and they have the largest English-language book markets in the world.

Second, as former colonies we are still trying to shake off our own and others' sense of us being 'less than'. The Australian, NZ, Canadian, Indian and South African publishing industries still fight regular battles to get rights to sell in their territories, because the British publishing companies just take them as their entitlement. They simply do not consider that we may want them. Canada has the worst time of it - as members of the Commonwealth they regularly suffer from the UK presuming they can have the rights for themselves, but American publishers want them too, although the Americans can be a bit more relaxed about it. It's a wonder Canadian publishers get anything done (they do, though, and very well).

So for an Australian author writing an Australian story, there's a very small chance they'll get published overseas, and it will probably be in genre fiction where readers are more interested in the story fitting the genre than in its setting. Young adult fiction also travels, because teenagers are less finicky about place than adults. But it's hard and dispiriting trying to get published overseas. If you're really intent on being published in the US or UK, it does make sense to not set your story in Australia and also to research the market for similar books in those territories.

As a point of interest I can tell you that, in my experience, the Americans are less likely to care about an author being from outside the US than the British care about a writer not being in Britain. But they still care about whether or not the story is too Australian for their readers and some things have been changed for some books (but not all) for US publication.

If it looks like a duck ...

A writer friend of mine is excited because the publishing house she likes is accepting non-fiction. She's writing a memoir and I'm encouraging her to call it fiction because she has told me it would be a 'fictionalised memoir' with bits of it made up. She is a journalist who blogs about her life and I know that in her blog entries she has embellished - no, lied - to make things sound more interesting. That's not journalism and that's a whole other story. I've told her how angry and duped readers of A Million Little Pieces felt with vast portions turned out to be fabricated. How would you classify her manuscript - is it fiction or non-fiction?

If she's making up more than the odd childhood conversation and name of her favourite TV show - and some leeway is given to memoir writers because we all understand you can't remember all the little details - she's writing fiction. If her life isn't interesting enough to make a memoir that people want to read, she shouldn't try to get her memoir published. That doesn't mean she wouldn't write a great novel. And while it's okay to pretend it's true on her blog - she's the only one responsible for that - it's not okay to pretend it's true with her favourite publishing company's money and reputation riding on it.

A couple of other points to make:
1. I love it when people say they have a 'favourite publishing company' because this is usually only based on the books they've seen in bookshops, not on anything else they know about the company. And while that's fine if you're buying the books, what about when you're wanting to get published? What about the other publishing companies? Some of them may be just right.

2. James Frey's A Million Little Pieces was hugely controversial but there is a story - perhaps apocryphal - that it wasn't his idea to label it as a memoir. He apparently wrote it as fiction. And is now rumoured to be writing all sorts of fiction stuff under pseudonyms.

Ten rules for writing fiction - from The Guardian

A friend sent me this link yesterday - different writers such as Elmore Leonard and Roddy Doyle each giving their ten rules for writing fiction. My favourite list is by Anne Enright, who wrote The Gathering, amongst other things. Here's a snippet:

'1 The first 12 years are the worst.

'2 The way to write a book is to actually write a book. A pen is useful, typing is also good. Keep putting words on the page.

'3 Only bad writers think that their work is really good.

...

'6 Try to be accurate about stuff.'

Words to live - and write - by.

The manuscript boileth over

I am a writer and reviewer currently working on my second full-length fiction manuscript (the first was unpublished). I have had a lot of non-fiction articles and reviews published but only a few short stories. I have undergone a detailed manuscript assessment on the second manuscript and implemented their changes. The manuscript has also been edited by a friend who has recently completed a University degree in editing and publishing. I also met an agent, who told me to send through the manuscript when it’s ready.

My question is as follows: Where would you recommend I go from here? Another assessment, send it to the agent or go directly to publishers?

Well, here's MY question - why would you bypass the agent if they said to send it through? I don't know whether you accidentally met the agent or did it on purpose, but if it's the latter, it's a bit odd to now not take her/him up on the offer.

Quite apart from that, if you're an Australian writer it will be hard for you to get your novel in front of publishers if you don't have an agent, unless you're participating in one of the various awards/programs now available (Varuna, QWC, Text YA prize etc). So my suggestion would be that you send it to the agent and also investigate some of those awards and programs to see if you're eligible to enter. I only advise going directly to publishers if you have really good contacts within publishing companies and/or you're prepared to wait even longer for an answer than you would for an agent's answer. Whatever you do, though, don't get another assessment - there's a risk your manuscript is going to be overcooked if you put any more cooks in that kitchen.

More on fiction subs

I don't usually read the comments on this blog but I did for the post below - and it seemed I confused at least one reader about where the 'good stuff' should show up in a submission. Mainly because I didn't clarify what I meant by 'submission'.

In the US, an initial submission is usually a query letter. Here in the Colonies of Kevin, it's usually a letter and some sample chapters/first few chapters. So it's in those sample chapters that I'm looking for evidence of the good stuff. And here's a little secret: I can usually tell on the first page. Not because I'm some kind of literary seer (if only!) - just because I've seen enough submissions to recognise the signs.

One commenter mentioned 'platform', which is an American term meaning, roughly, 'publicity hooks'. Platform is not as important for fiction as for non-fiction but it doesn't hurt. If you have an interesting personal story that makes it easier for a publicist to get an interview for you, that's useful.

Thanks to those of you who've been emailing regarding the query letter thingy. I will do it. I just need to buy some scotch first.

The fiction submission rant

There is no question for this post - I'm writing it because I want to whinge. For there are many days when I just want to never, ever, ever look at fiction submissions again. And it's not because I don't find clients that way - I do - but it's because so much of my time is wasted doing it that I find it hard to justify reading the subs. And why is my time wasted? Because 99% of fiction submissions aren't ready to be seen. (That percentage is an approximation, and possibly influenced by my snarky mood.)

So let's play a game. Let's say I grant every submission 100 points to start with. I'm going to list some common things I see in submissions. Certain things will take off points; certain things will add. If the submission still ends up with around 100 points, then I'll ask for a full manuscript. (In reality it's not that scientific, but maybe I'll change my ways.)

1. Sending in your first draft. LOSE 50 POINTS
1. (a) It's your first novel. LOSE ANOTHER 25 POINTS

2. Asking your best friend or mother to read your novel and then believing what they say and THEN telling me that I should read your novel because your mother loved it. LOSE 20 POINTS

3. Putting your novel away for a while - weeks, if not months - and then revisiting it and doing some more work. ADD 20 POINTS

4. Telling me that if I don't take you on I'll be missing out on the greatest novelist who ever lived. LOSE 10 POINTS

5. Taking the time to understand that to write a novel is to tell a story and that means you can't write 50 000 words of beautiful prose with no plot and no character development. ADD 20 POINTS

6. Being completely unrealistic about your abilities as a writer - everyone may have a novel in them but that doesn't mean everyone should write that novel. If you failed to read any novels in high school, there's a good chance you're not cut out to be a novelist. LOSE 20 POINTS

7. Reading lots of novels, particularly in your genre. ADD 15 POINTS
7. (a) Comparing yourself to those novelists when you submit your manuscript. LOSE 10 POINTS

8. Sending in a half-baked submission 'so you can give me some advice on where my writing should go from here'. LOSE 40 POINTS

And, at the suggestion of one of my authors (some of them know I write this blog - well, only the handsome ones):
9. Mentioning it's a literary novel. LOSE 15 POINTS (he suggested 1000 and used swear words - I'm not going to be that forceful - and please bear in mind that he actually writes literary fiction)
9. (a) Mentioning it's a literary novel set in Melbourne, and you're from Melbourne, and all the characters are from Melbourne too. LOSE ANOTHER 15 POINTS (and before you take umbrage, remember that my name is Agent SYDNEY - that gives me licence for a little fun, non?)


I've just run out of ideas, but there's every chance I'll add to this list in future. And you can probably tell there are more 'lose' than 'add' items. Believe me, I WANT to love every submission I read. I want there to be so many brilliant novels of all stripes out there that Australians only ever want to read Australian novels and forget about overseas authors. But the bitter truth is that I despair. I read the submissions and I see novelists who could turn out to be great but who will get rejected by me - and probably everyone else - because they were impatient. I read other submissions that are truly awful. I read a lot that are just tepid. All of this wastes my time, and when my time is wasted I grow cranky and I'm more and more tempted to never read fiction submissions again.

The biggest problem is that novels are submitted well before they're ready. If this blog achieves nothing else than to make novelists think hard before they submit to anyone, I'll be happy. Because while people like me spend too much time reading submissions that will never get published, we are not spending time on developing and supporting Australian talent.

In the past I have received several emails whinging - yes, whinging, how dare you! - about agents closing submissions and asking why. Well, now you know. We're not a public service - we run businesses. We can't work for nothing. So if we detect that something is wasting our time - and our money-making capabilities - we'll stop doing it. The one thing writers can do to ensure that doesn't happen is to make sure their submissions are up to scratch. Agents do not exist to give you advice unless you're a client. We are looking for writers we can get published. If you can free us up by not sending us your undercooked novel, we'll be more able to look at it when it IS cooked.

Having now expunged myself of bad feeling, I'm feeling charitable. Miss Snark used to run the occasional query-thing - writers would send in query letters and she'd flagellate them (or not) on the blog. I'm considering doing the same thing. If you think this is a good idea, please send an email to call [dot] sydney [at] gmail [dot] com. Please don't send query letters yet - just drop me a line to tell me whether you'd be interested.

Trends in fiction

What’s hot in fiction? Do overseas trends affect what publishers buy here?

The winds of change in fiction blow quite slowly. Thrillers, romance, crime, women's saga, chick lit - they're all still popular here and overseas, and they'll remain popular as long as there are authors who do them well - and that's what truly determines what's hot and what's not.

Overseas trends do affect Australian publishers, which is why there are so many US and UK authors sitting atop our bestselling fiction lists (and as soon as more Australian writers start producing good commercial fiction, I'm convinced they'll be shoving the northern hemispherians to the bottom rungs). There's the odd little trend that doesn't translate - vampire fiction is big in the US but, despite all my post-Buffy yearnings, it's never really taken off here. And romance writing isn't really out of the closet here - it's given its own section in Borders but it's still looked down on, despite the fact that it sells much better than most other genres.

We still largely take our cues from overseas, and the emerging Australian writers who actually think about having a career - and what they need to do in order to have one - are starting to realise they need to write what people want to read, which means looking at the bestseller lists each week and checking out which genre has the bigger section in their local bookshop.