Child Prodigy, nucleus of novel

[derek]

Jan,

Do what you’re comfortable with. Whether you publish in sections or wait until you have a completed novel, whether you keep it online or make it a physical entity with your photo on the back cover, the important thing is to do it. Yes, you want people to like what you write, but just as much, you want them to read it in the first place. Once I’d realized I wasn’t going to get a publisher through the normal channels, the way I looked at it was that I’d expended all that effort, and all I had to show for it was a word document that no one would ever read and which one day I’d delete away. Well, bugger that. So I self-published. Yeah, sure it‘s vanity publishing and I paid for it with my own money, but a few hundred people have now read my books and some have even liked them; they’ve sent me emails to say so.

So whichever way you do it, make your novel exist.

Derek

[ScottOden]

I'm of the opposite opinion than Derek. I opted for the hard slog to find a literary agent and then a reputable commercial publisher. By going that route, it's easier to find a readership (which is ironic, seeing how hard it is to get that fair initial reading with an editor or agent in the first place); my work has gone overseas to 7 or 8 foreign markets, including the UK. It's been reviewed by the full spectrum of outlets, from Publisher's Weekly to (recently) the Bangkok Times, and it's been panned as often as its been praised. So, based on my own experiences, I say go all out and seek traditional, commercial publishers. It'll be hard, disheartening, exhilarating, depressing, and often slow, but it has the potential to get your book read by the maximum number of readers. Sure, most publishers won't or don't advertise their books, but what they WILL do is put you in a catalog that goes in front of every bookstore owner and retail chain buyer in the business; they'll submit review copies to the industry trades like PW and Library Journal , and if they choose yours as one to review, then it has the potential to be a game changer -- my first book from a small press got noticed thanks to a starred review in Publisher's Weekly, which led to my current contract for four books with Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin's Press.

A couple of realities: it's tough, as Derek said. You have a better chance of becoming a World Series pitcher for the Yankees than you have at becoming the next big thing in the literary world. But, most people want something less than JK Rowling's success. If you're a decent writer who can tell an engaging story, can persevere through a tsunami of rejection, and have even the smallest smidge of luck, then you CAN land a spot at one of the Big 6 publishers. But, did I mention how hard it's going to be? If it were easy, what worth would it hold, eh?

Now, reputable publishers do not buy your book. Rather, they lease a series of rights from you, including the right to issue your book electronically or in print, the right to approach foreign publishers on your behalf, or the right to make films from your work. There are a host of other rights associated with a manuscript, but these are the most sought-after. What happens if you publish your book online, regardless of whether it's an e-book or on a blog? Then you've just made the initial right to publish electronically unavailable. Legally, what they can try to secure, then, are what's known as "reprint" rights (electronic publishing has made some of the terms obsolete, but they've adjusted most of their contracts to reflect what they mean). Reprint rights are no where near as lucrative as the first publication rights. What they might have offered you 10K for, they would now offer only 2-3K. And, unless it's successful -- using their yardstick for success, which in electronic terms would be a certain number of downloads/page hits -- then they'd offer you even less, or pass altogether. Even if it's good. Why? Because for every writer of quality who self or vanity publishes, there's another writer of equal quality whose rights are unencumbered sitting on their slush pile waiting to be read, or whose agent is hounding the poor, overworked editor for a read.

So, and this might seem presumptuous, before you do a single thing (save write -- always write) decide HOW you want to proceed. Research both commercial and self publishing. Talk to successful authors in both arenas, and talk to UNSUCCESSFUL authors in both arenas. Learn the pitfalls of both, the rewards, the pros and the cons. "Writer" is not an entry-level position; even flash-in-the-pan overnight successes took years to get there.

Good luck to you!

Scott

[derek]

Scott,

You're absolutely right. The ideal route is to get an agent, who finds a publisher, who puts your novel in bookstores. But unless you're already someone famous, the chances of a first-time author making it into print are virtually nil. Yes, every year, dozens of unknowns do get their book printed, but many thousands more never get beyond the slush pile.

I agree that Jan, and anyone else, should start by at least attempting the traditional route (and good luck to them), but when they come to the conclusion that they're going nowhere, then don't give up. Unless they've set their heart on becoming a career author, they no longer need the publishing industry. Print-on-demand is very professional now and they CAN see their book in print after all. It's vanity publishing and they'll never make money from it - but so what. The alternative is to throw away all that hard work.

As far as the legal implications. The company I use, Xlibris, makes a point of saying that the author retains the rights and can walk at any time, eg if a traditional publisher later shows interest in the book. I'm no lawyer, so I have to assume they mean it.

Derek

[marcus]

The company I use, Xlibris, makes a point of saying that the author retains the rights and can walk at any time, eg if a traditional publisher later shows interest in the book. I'm no lawyer, so I have to assume they mean it.

Hey Derek,

If it's written down that this is the case, then I would assume that they do indeed mean it. It might be worth having a lawyer check it, though, if you have a tame lawyer ...

(Thanks for your email, by the way - I know I haven't responded, but have been tied up with stuff for the last few days and am only now just about on top of myself! Will respond soon.)

ATB

[ScottOden]

But unless you're already someone famous, the chances of a first-time author making it into print are virtually nil. Yes, every year, dozens of unknowns do get their book printed, but many thousands more never get beyond the slush pile.

I spent close to a year reading slush for a literary agent. There's a great reason those many thousands never made it beyond that: they could not write. They could make functional sentences and paragraphs, sure, but they did not understand the basics of storytelling. Or, they could tell an awesome story, but could not manage functional sentences or paragraphs. But, if you CAN do both, tell a story and handle the demands of prose, then you've just left the howling mass of submissions. 98% of manuscripts submitted (sometimes 99%) will be rejected -- for the most part because they are simply god-awful. 1% will show real promise, but require more tweaking than an agent has time to do. These will get the personalized rejections, possibly with an idea of where the writer can strengthen or revise, and an invitation to resubmit. The remaining 1% will be of publishable quality, or close enough to it that the agent can sign the writer, get started on a few rewrites, and still submit to publishers. Now, "publishable quality" is subjective, and each and every one of us can point to a book and wonder how the hell THAT got published. For agents, publishable quality is based on what they've sold in the past, their genres of choice, and the nature of their relationships with acquiring editors. Obviously, if an agent has had the most success selling literary fiction (such as Annie Proulx or Michael Chabon), then for her "publishable quality" is not going to extend to sword-and-sorcery or historical adventure. She can *appreciate* the writing, but not have a clue who she can approach in order to sell it. This is something every writer needs to remember, and to plan for accordingly.

The way you phrase it, Derek, makes me think I should start playing the lottery, since being published commercially means I obviously have the luck of the Irish

Luck, though, plays only a very small role in publishing. Luck is having your manuscript land on the desk of an editor who just happens to be looking for something historical. It's not luck that gets the writer noticed by an agent capable of getting the manuscript in the editor's hands. THAT is the result of many years of hard work, diligent research, trial-and-error, deconstructive reading, and writing to the exclusion of all things. Luck has nothing to do with any of that. In my own case (and this echoes many of the writers I know), I started writing with an eye toward publishing at the age of 14. I wrote short stories in blatant emulation of my favorite writers (Robert E. Howard and Karl Edward Wagner), submitted them to print magazines, and harvested a forests-worth of rejection slips. I bought how-to books, magazines like Writers Digest, took a few classes, and wrote like my butt was on fire. Still, year after year, I collected rejections like a dog collects fleas. Finally, in 1998, I switched from short stories to novels (because I am stubborn and apparently a glutton for punishment). It took 2 years to write my first, and two more years to find a small, freshly-minted literary agent willing to take me on. All told, I received 79 rejections from agents before she said yes, and another 20+ rejections from publishers before a small press editor with a love of all things ancient Egyptian got a hold of it and bought it. They released MEN OF BRONZE in 2005. I am 44, now, and after 30 years of slogging through the muck of words, I'm still considered an "emerging talent" -- meaning New York is still on the fence as to whether I'm good enough for the big leagues or not. I'm too slow for their preferred method of a book a year, and my pulp roots show in my prose (I can get purple, fast!).

But, my point is this: getting your work published by one of the Big 6 commercial publishers is not a function of luck; you need not be already famous or "know someone". But, you do need patience, perseverance, and professionalism. Patience, because things in the literary world move like glaciers (though technology is making things faster, especially on the submissions front); perseverance, because in the face of being told "no" every day, you're going to need some sort of hidden strength or anger or sheer, animal stubbornness to keep yourself from throwing in the towel -- you can be rejected a million times, but it only takes one "yes" to change the game; professionalism, because writing may be an art but publishing is a business, with its own standards, language, and expectations.

Best,

Scott

[ruthaki]

When I first started writing my novel "Shadow of the Lion" it was to be a juvenile historical about Alexander IV. However after a year of research and a year of writing I realized that this was too political a subject to be covered as a juvenile historical. A writer-in-residence who wrote in that genre and read my early chapters suggested, because of the intricacies of that whole time frame (the fall of Alexander's dynasty) I should write it the way I wanted to tell the story. So I began over again with a multiple point of view which allowed me to not only tell Alexander IV's story (in the novel he is called by his Persian name, Iskander) but also the p.o.v. other others involved including his mother Roxana, a couple of the key generals - mainly Ptolemy - and of course Alexander's long-time enemy Kassandros. This made it possible to delve into the politics of the time and included all the victims of the power struggle. I've expanded on what Mary Renault wrote in "Funeral Games" which was one of her novels that disappointed me because I felt it was too much like a documented version of what happened. And although the spirit of Alexander is a thread throughout my novel, it isn't just about him -- but about the people in his shadow.

[derek]

Scott,

It's reassuring to hear from someone who can confirm agencies do actually look at their slush piles. I spent the best part of a year trying to get an agent and, apart from one positive response, heard virtually nothing. In the end I just lost interest.

Apologies if it sounded like I thought it was all down to luck. I don't. Obviously a book has to be up to standard and it's not difficult to imagine some of the tat that must land in the slush pile.

Anyway, I still stand by self-publishing. It's not for those who hope to make writing a career, but I'd recommend it to anyone who's made the effort and then got nowhere with the publishing industry. Self-publishing got my books into print and I'm content with the results.

Derek

[jan]

Thank you, Derek, for your suggestions, Marcus, and others. Years ago I was involved with a correspondence school called the Institute of Children's Literature in which I wrote and worked with some published authors so that enabled me to understand the process of writing, marketing, and publishing. That is another of the reasons that my book was written with that market in mind, despite the fact that it is rather adult at times.

I have read the pros and cons of self publishing. I appreciate the recommendation for xlibris. I will be sure to check into that. Thanks, again, everyone...