Comments on: Submissions Guidelines (31/1/2011)

By: Stephen

Stephen — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:34:30 +0000

Wilf, editors have always had that power, so if agents become the gatefkeepers of what does and doesn’t get published, I’m not sure that changes anything there. The diminution of variety in favour of safety (i.e. publish stuff that’s like other stuff that sold well rather than new stuff, which I think was your core point) is troubling for readers and writers alike, and I know agents and editors who dislike it too. In some ways it’s art vs. money, and I suspect the only way that art wins in the long run is though patronage. That and maybe you’ll get some writers who write what’s popular until they have established themselves as a ‘brand’ and have the power to start heading off-piste.

By: Wilf Jones

Wilf Jones — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:04:49 +0000

Just read a resume of Andrew Franklin’s speech at the LIBF re the future of Publishers. He denied they will ever be an irrelevance as they are the ONLY guarantor of quality. By extension, because editors never go out and find the stuff themselves, it is only in agents that we as readers can place our trust. We’re all doomed – readers and writers – if this is true. Of course there are technically bad writers to be weeded out, and all decent agents can do that, but a great deal of their business is in attempting to second guess what the public wants to read. But in that attempt do they not actually determine what the public should read? Haven’t they become the arbiters of taste? They know wht the market wants. They know what the market doesn’t want. Their evidence lies in what is selling now and what has gone before – they extrapolate the future. The problem of course with them following the market is precisely that they are following. So yes they will fill the many slots that come free in the wake of Harry Potter – but will they ever find the Harry Potter in the first place? Sing Hallelujah! if you can find an agent concerned only with promoting what he or she finds to be good and damn the fashions or trends.
Our problem as aspiring writers is that at present the success or failure of our efforts is almost entirely under their control. If agents don’t like your book then it almost certainly won’t get published.
Submission guidelines then? Well I agree it would be good if we strugglers could impose a few rules of our own I can’t see it happening. Not until publishing changes. And that’s another argument.
Cheers,
Wilf

By: Sarah S

Sarah S — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 08:55:41 +0000

Hello, I’m new on here and looking forward to being a part of the conversation !

By: Stephen

Stephen — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:28:42 +0000

KJJ, I have to disagree – a *good* agent will save you a great deal of time. I understand it must be frustrating to find such a small number of agents who’d even consider genre fiction, though.

By: KJJ Carpenter

KJJ Carpenter — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 05:52:39 +0000

Ah, Mr Deas. You truly are an inspiration to us all. I completely agree with you.

In Australia we have a total of 30 or so agents. 30! And only 2 of those accept fantasy material. It’s pathetic. I went right past an agent and to a publisher, and I’ve found a pretty decent hook, so we’ll see how things go.

Basically, agents are a waste of everyone’s time unless you manage to nab the right one, and that in itself is rare.

By: Daniel Chuter

Daniel Chuter — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:29:03 +0000

*heartedly.

By: Daniel Chuter

Daniel Chuter — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 10:28:29 +0000

Whole hardly agree. Agents are far too strict with their guidelines. Especially that bit about only approaching one agent at a time, ESPECIALLY since most don’t accept or reply electronically.

I mean, come on agents, it’s the 21st Century. iPads are infiltrating every house on the planet, quietly infecting our electronics with iSkynet. We don’t have time to be old fashioned!