How to use this Page

i can't imagine anyone in the publishing industry would agree with this, but i think good writing makes a reader work. it makes a reader think about the story when the book is closed and the lights are off, want to read passages out loud because they are so well-written, discuss it with their friends.

there are some obvious markers of bad writing (awkward tone or voice and unbelievable characters, etc.) and i don't mean the reader is supposed to "work" through those.

but ease of reading experience or being a "page turner" certainly aren't prerequisites for something to qualify as good writing. the best examples i can think of for contemporary authors are Gao Xingjian and Cormac McCarthy.

Soul Mountain is beautifully written but it certainly doesn't suck you in immediately. Blood Meridian wasn't easy or even pleasurable (that book still haunts me and it's been years) but the writing was... stunningly good.

on the flip-side, i could not put The Davinci Code down but i would hardly call Dan Brown a craftsman.

I think there's obviously bad, clunky writing, writers who are trying too hard, and writers who are lazy. We can all weed those out pretty quickly. But after that, the waters grow murky and opinion and taste play heavily upon our judgement.

I look for a variety of things in books. I judge some as good because I immediately forget I'm reading and if the writer breaks any of the supposed rules of storytelling, I don't notice it. I'm so immersed in the story the writer can do anything he/she wants short of disappointing me.

And when a story really resonates, the first thing I want to do is read it outloud to someone or retell it after I've finished. Sometimes it's the storytelling itself--a solid story with interesting characters. Sometimes it's the language, the turn of phrase done well, the vividness of the colors the writer uses to paint the picture.

While I do care about good writing, it's the story that's more important to me. Good writing can make for a great story, but a great story does not always need good writing.

John Grisham, to use as an example, isn't the best writer. His characters and dialogue can be limited, but he's a first-rate storyteller.

I've seen beautifully written manuscripts that bored me because the story didn't grab me. There's lots of good writers trying to get published with perfectly edited manuscripts, but their stories are weak, so they can't make it beyond the slush pile, while those with not the best writing but with great stories, get published.

Erik makes an interesting point:

All of the various things that people talked about ... are important, but only to the extent that they help get the reader into the work so that it can have the right effect on them.

The only fiction that "works" is that which comes alive in the reader's imagination. Every trick the writer uses has to be aimed at turning on the reader's right-hemisphere brain.

Good writing MUST be subjective. If not, every novel published would be a bestseller and there would be no need for someone like you to evaluate talent.

I also think that you must maintain two separate sets of subjectivity. Based on your personal tastes, you may love a work, but the tastes bred from you professional experience and knowledge understand that even a wonderful story may not fit what editors are looking for.

For me, good writing wipes away the real world and places me body and soul into another place where I can smell the sea on Chesil Beach or taste the ash on McCarthy's road. Poor writing moves me, too, mostly to the top of the page to see how many I have left or to the clock to wonder if I have anything better to do.

I work in management for a national retailer and part of my job is evaluating talent in the form of job applicants. I have passed on several people over the years that have gone on to work out great at other companies, but I know if I don't feel that chemistry right away, it will not benefit me or the applicant if I make an offer. In such a case, my subjectivity is not just a matter of whim, but a key to maintaining a successful business, just as I know yours is while you shovel through the slush.

Of course, all my fiction is good . . . except the stuff that isn't.

Bad--for some values of bad--can be spotted a mile off. It confounds our expectations (of grammar or humanity or what have you) and gives us nothing in return for the extra work it requires. Separating the good from the merely competent is much harder and more subjective.

Spotting the salable is beyond me. I'm the person who stocks up at the supermarket when I find something new I like, because it's pretty well guaranteed to vanish without a trace in a month or two.

If writing, good or bad, was not a subjective craft, there would be only one agent and one publisher.

For most of us, the cash register at the book store is the judge that counts.

Aloha,

Ahhh writing...

If read good to me...than plenty good writing.

If no read good to me...than plenty no good writing.

If no read good to me...but brings millions to agent and publisher and editor...then my thoughts are insignificant...though writing remains no good...for me.

Maybe you should ask James Patterson - he apparently thinks he has it all covered & seems bent on making an impact on the YA market - so that "his" work will make kids say "wow" & read more. If we only knew ahead of time that all we needed was for him to write for kids to start reading more. In my objective / subjective opinion, his writing ain't all that" but he's a commercially powerhouse. It's all about taste - or lack of.

Sadly, I have to agree with crapshooter.

Money talks, and you can never tell what opinion it will voice or what book it will choose.

By the way, that video was harsh. Nathan, please don't ever be that cruel to us again.

I think that Tolkien (Lord of the Rings) is a bad writer. His dialog is stilted, he wanders off on tangents and gives overlong descriptions. He also tells us stuff without showing us.

But the world he created is wonderful. So I struggled through the writing to get to the world.

So who's to say what's good or bad? I agree with those who say if it captivates a reader, then it's good.

YOU'RE ALIVE!!!

Ahem, sorry about the outburst. Nathan, I think we'd all given you up for dead when you didn't post promptly for two days. Don't scare us like that!

As for good writing... I just go by a simple rule. If I don't *notice* the writing (that is, if I don't pick out errors, frown at the metaphors and wonder if a character would really do that) than I consider it good writing. The writing itself should go unnoticed, leaving the reader with only the characters and a good plot.

"I think that Tolkien (Lord of the Rings) is a bad writer. His dialog is stilted, he wanders off on tangents and gives overlong descriptions. He also tells us stuff without showing us."

With all due respect, anon

"I think" and the rest of your statement are completely at odds.

So wonderful worlds would be the only reason his novels captivated and continue to captivate the entire world?

I think Tolkien is a mighty fine writer. Conventional? No. A good writer...? Ignoramus question.

A question or statement flung by a pour soul who grew up suckling from the MTV teat and regurgitating the jealous and critical words of Pullman, a writer who wallows around in Tolkien and Lewis-envy.

Have a little humble pie with thine ego dinner.

Hmmm -- There are objective criteria available for judging the use of the English language, at least for standard NA usage or standard British usage. However, what those really do is reject imperfect usage -- they don't establish good writing.

It is perfectly possible to do technically perfect writing without any redeeming characteristics. It is also possible to do evocative, effective writing that breaks many of the rules. A lot of the New Wave authors in SF back in the '70's "broke the rules", but did so effectively.

I think that perhaps the question that might be better asked is "Can good writing be consistently recognized (discriminated from poor writing) by a number of readers." I believe that the answer is "yes", as long as we take into account the question of cultural biases and balance for taste. For instance, the question of Dickens' abilities, as criticized by his contemporaries was brought up, and I mentioned the New Wave SF authors above. "The Worm Ourobouris" is not to everyone's taste, nor is "Dhalgren", or "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy." (I picked those because by at least some criterion, they are all "well written.")

Whether such examples of good writing will be more or less successful than "Buffy the Teenage Vampire Detective" is an entirely different question.

-- rambling along...

well...it's easier to see bad writing in other writers' work. LOL
If grammar, capitalization and punctuation were that important then ee cummings wouldn't have gotten too far.
Everything is situational.
*puts head down and keeps writing*

So you tell me: how objective or subjective is good writing? How do you know what's good? And who decides what is "good" anyway? Should it be the people who sell the most copies? Experts? Critics? The publishing industry?

Whether or not a piece is well-written can be objectively judged.
As a journalist, I see a lot of really bad writing cross my desk. I even create some of it sometimes. :-0
It's the style of writing, voice of the author and the content of a story that is subjective, and writers need to trust those in the publishing industry -- agents, editors, publishers -- when they say they believe something is or is not salable. They are the ones who best know the trends in the market.
Ultimately, it will be the reader deciding whether or not something published is "good."
As far as critics, I don't know anyone who has picked up a book at the bookstore and said, "I have to read this because (critic at national daily) said this is a great book."
I have more faith in what my friends tell me is a good book.

Anonymous 3:24 pm said "If your judgment on books is typical of most successful agents and editors, how do you account for the fact that publishers lose money on most of the books they acquire?"

Hi Anon--

I felt compelled to answer your comment. If only the world worked that way. You write a good book and it sells like gangbusters. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. A lot of great books with really quality writing just don't find the right audience. And it's not always about the way it's marketed, or the publisher support...sometimes it's just about luck.

Does that mean I think there aren't any bad books published? Certainly not. There's always the stinkers.

But I don't think it's fair to equate not-so-great sales to a bad book. It just doesn't always work that way. Especially in today's consumer market.

It's not difficult to identify them both, I think. One makes you wnat to submerge yourself in it, the other has you running for cover. In the final analysis though, I would imagine that someone like yourself who does this for a living should have no problems blending objectivity with a little subjectivity

"Good" writing is that which engages you even if you don't care about the subject. It's writing that people will still want to be reading in 50 years. Anyone who has lived on a steady diet of good reading over a lifetime--a diet which must include the classics--is qualified to judge whether writing is good or bad.

Good writing rivets you, makes you want to keep reading. Good writing is beautifully written without being "overwritten." It employs metaphor, and other poetic devices. It incorporates style. It imparts wisdom and knowledge even if it is fiction, without hitting you over the head. You know your own writing is good if someone says they felt like they were there, in the moment with the character.

"Marketable" is questionable. So many books are horridly written and agents and publishers think they are marketable. What is marketable? People write books and have so many people tell them they were enthralled and chapters have been nominated for a Pushcart Prize, the subject is unique, and yet agents say it is not marketable.

Marketable is seeming to be what will appeal to the lowest common denominator, to the masses and herein lies the rub. Books that people (the public) would be interested in, books that have authors who already have a fan base from other genres, poetry, for instance, will be ignored, because an agent can't see the book would sell.

Agents and publishers say they want something new, but when it comes their way, they say it's not marketable.

Anon 9:56PM, I agree with Anon 9:26PM who said Tolkien wasn't the greatest writer. I think Tolkien's prose was turgid but his world was amazing.

I also think people who sling insults around rather than presenting any kind of convincing case for their opinions aren't worth listening to. You really expect to change anyone's mind with an argument that can be summarized as: "U R STOOPID AN JELLUS BCUZ U DONT AGREE WITH ME"?

And then you had the gall to say, "Have a little humble pie with thine ego dinner." Funny--I only see one out-of-control ego here, and it belongs to the person who apparently believes his opinions are correct simply because they're his.

The final arbiters of whether a book is good or not are the reading public, and any subset of them may decide that a book is good or not for that particular subset.

with all due respect to Thomas, who wrote:

I've seen beautifully written manuscripts that bored me because the story didn't grab me. There's lots of good writers trying to get published with perfectly edited manuscripts, but their stories are weak, so they can't make it beyond the slush pile, while those with not the best writing but with great stories, get published.

perhaps you're missing the point. any story -- one day in a man's life, someone's funeral, the lives of poor farmers, whatever -- will become a good or even great story if well written.

the reverse is not true.

I'd say pretty much ever aspect of writing is subjective. The only things that aren't are spelling and grammar. Word count? subjective. I know some agents who will feed a query to their dog simply because the novel in question is longer than they'd like, while others will give some that's over 150k a fair shot.

As a student of writing and a writer myself, I'm very tempted to immediately pounce on authors who have crappy character development and pacing problems, but those aren't things I can take into a lab and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt must be done a certain way.

There are several agents out there who have passed up on books that have gone on to become hugely successful. But even those big successes are still loathed by many.

Writing's a strange beast. It's nigh-impossible to find any one piece of writing that everybody can agree on as being good or bad.

Nathan,
Do you see passive voice quite a bit in the queries you receive? I would think that most people would know to summarize the novel in a paragraph. Your examples were on point. :*)

demon hunter-

Sadly, the passive voice is found in many query letters these days. And it is causing many headaches.

You make everything so easy for people who want to query you Nathan. Thanks alot for that. I'll be sure not to keep you medicated on advil liquid gels and cold packs to the head. :::Re edits query letter::

My question:

Why do 99.9% of all writers say:

She was wearing...

Rather than

She wore...

??? Inquiring minds want to know.

hurrah! keep these gems coming! =D

Thanks Nathan. I don't know how many times I will need to be hit over the head to get this concept. Umm... I mean... I don't know how many times fine Agents as yourself will hit me over the head with... I mean... Oh never mind.

Thanks.

A novel is not a place where things happen, a novel is a place where characters do things.

That should go in bold print on the top of every website and book on writing.

was wearing is a misuse of past progressive. PP indicates a "continuing action" while another action happens. So technically, she "was wearing" clothes while doing something else works (unless she got nekkid first).

Hmmm. Nekkid.

Sorry. Got distracted.

Misuse occurs when there is no other action, or when the reader naturally understands that she is still wearing clothes while the new action occurs.

I find a search and destroy on WAS solves many verb issues, not just the past progressive ones.

I'm a Tech Writer by trade, so passive voice is rampant in my neck of the literary woods. Object have sh!t happen to them all the time, as far as Engineers are concerned.

People speak in passive voice because it's perceived as being more polite. (Ambiguity = polite. Go figure.)

Unfortunately, people write in passive voice because they hear it in their head.

I maintain it is THE hardest writing habit to break. It's the last of the grammar hurdles. I promise you that you can pick up any best seller on the table at BookWorld and find three examples of passive voice in less than two minutes.

But for the love of God, get it out of your query letter and all other business correspondence.

A guy who writes the query that way probably hasn't completed his book. He's sending a query, hoping you'll bite on the concept, figuring he'll rush the book out if you say yes.

Dorothy Parker is reputed to have said:

"The Passive Tense should not be used."

I advise learning German. Passive voice practically does not exist in that language, so once you think a bit bilingually the passive voice will be purged from your speech patterns.

I also reccomend avoiding the Midwest, where passive voice is rather standard. That could be seen as a good idea, you bet.

Oh no, Nathan! I'll send you virtual Tylenol and chocolates. Those people obviously have not read your blog or the retired Miss Snark! :*)

My query and synopsis are fine, it's just my polishing that's draining the life from me now, but it's worth it. A saleable novel is what I am working towards.

Once, as a joke, I wrote an entire bank robbery scene in passive voice. It was amazing how it gave the sense of a huge hole in the middle of the scene, because the people taking actions simply weren't on the page.

Passive voice is useful for somethings: If you don't know who committed a murder, then "Bob was killed while trying the crash the set of THE HILLS" works just fine. If the person receiving the action is the most important thing at the moment, then "Bruce Willis was hit in the leg by a sniper's bullet" does the job.

Most times, though, Active sounds better.

Not just novels and queries but short stories as well.

I'm a screening judge in a national short story contest, and PV is a big reason for my not letting a story advance to the semi-finalist round.

I was under the impression that the space monkeys stole the bannanas. Yes, we have none today.
As a former TA myself, I applaud this post above most others. Such writing is useful for politics and social sciences, but I've always recommended against it nonetheless. Good writing is good communication. We write well when we communicate effectively.
However . . . is great writing more important than great story-telling?
Have a super day!
David

Amen, Nathan!

Gah! Passive voice! Also a killer on resumes. But the all time, hands down favorite of politicians who need to say something without assuming any blame. The old, "mistakes were made." Lord I hate that.

And Dave K - I have a cocktail napkin that I picked up at The Algonquin just last week that reads, "I love a Martini - but two at the most. Three I'm under the table; Four, I'm under the host." Dorothy Parker. She will be missed.

But Nathan, what if you extend the passive voice?

Veronica killed Jake. <- active

Jake was killed by Veronica. <- passive

'By' is a trademark word of the passive voice.

Obviously, an entire query letter written like that would be annoying, but the same could be said about a query written only using active. Shouldn't we mix it up a little? :)

- Steph

@Steph- I'm not Nathan but he seems to have made it very clear that all intending to query him must avoid passive voice like the plague. Perhaps it is another way of him forcing the personal letter out of us all - thereby preventing a heart attack...and insomnia.

I see a definite pattern here.

steph-

I wouldn't rule out that the occasional use of the passive voice could be well-placed (such as, say, if one were writing dialogue for an evasive character), but I don't really think it would be possible to write an effective letter in the passive voice. It's just vague by definition, and vague has no place in a query letter.

I have a question which is admittedly off of the passive voice subject matter but I've wanted to ask.

You've said you like humor in query letters, but how much is too much?

adaora, you read my mind. I'm going to post on humor in queries... hopefully next week.

Well, I'm thoroughly depressed now. Just when you think you have something figured out someone turns on the light.

I agree, Nathan, that the passive voice should be avoided, especially in queries. As for the MS, I offer a small "however" as someone recently sold and not seeking representation :-))) If you make a list of all the "don't's"--never use passive voice, never use gerunds, never use adverbs, writers will drive themselves MAD trying to adhere to all the rules and may end up editing all the personality from their work. Sit down and WRITE. Do your best to avoid the don'ts, but don't make yourself crazy trying to make it perfect.

Love your blog! I read every day and this is the first comment I've made.

Thanks Nathan, it is something I've been itching to ask for some time now.

Erik,
I learned what passive voice is by learning Spanish. I wasn't aware that German doesn't make much use of it, either.
Dave F.,
Nathan's right: it's not a tense; it's a voice.

Mark Terry,
"Was wearing" is past progressive tense. "Wore" is past tense." The English language loves progressive tenses almost as much as it does the passive voice. Progressive tenses suggest a continuum, whereas the past tense suggests finality or an "of the moment" sense. It's all about connotations of the choice.

Yes, passive voice removes one from the immediate drama of the scene. Consider the passive voice phrase "I was born in July." The active voice alternative is "My mother bore me in July," which just really brings up a much more graphic picture that most people wish to avoid. (Yes, we can use "gave birth to," but that uses a different verb.) Personally, I'm sticking with passive voice when it's appropriate; none of my characters will be saying that their mothers bore them on a certain date.
This is why learning grammar is really not such a bad thing, folks. When you know the rules, you can use or break them without worrying about making mistakes you don't understand.

In addition to passive voice, I sometimes see troubles with passive constructions. A good sentence has the right subject and the right verb. A sentence with the wrong subject or the wrong verb can seem passive, even if it is grammatically in active voice.

When I was revising my book, I cringed every time I read a sentence with the subject "thing" and the verb "to be." It's my worst writing habit. "The first thing to remember is..." "One thing I noticed was..." "The most important thing is..."

Nathan,

Thank you so much for your blog. Lots of good info. Writers can fix passive voice if they just pay attention. Good reminder though.

Stephanie

Good point on how prolific the passive is in queries.

Uh, I do have to say that the passive is alive and kicking in German. It's especially used as a way around the sometimes unsure situation of whether to address someone with Sie or du. (See, even talking about it throws me all into passive.) Das ist ziemlich oft benutzt!

Just remember not all "wases" are passive voice.
The sky was blue is not passive. Not a great sentence. Not even interesting, but not passive voice.
I also search for "had" to make my sentences more active.

Vengeance will be found HOW?

By looking down the back of the settee and finding it's next to the tv remote?

- Britbeat

Back when I was in university, we had to use passive voice for all our lab notes for the specific reason that it's not *who* does the experiment that's important but *what* happened.

On the plus side, I now find it quite easy to root out the passive stuff and concentrate on the active.

Ahh!! My brain is being hurt by all the passive voice!

Still love your blog though.

YES!!! And thanks for the reminder.

Vampires will never die, it's just the nature of the beast.

Was that a bad pun?

Sadly, Lynne Spears will never die in the sense that there will always be another child-star mom pimping their kids out for bucks. However, few will flame out in quite the way this mother of a schizophrenic and teen mom has (and it was with a Christian publisher, fer you-know-who's sakes!).

Ahaha! Year in review for the win!

Thanks for your interesting, and always entertaining, views into the publishing world. Have a fantastic holiday!

So are you concluding that the vampire genre is undead?

Have a happy and prosperous new year, and thank you for providing such an informative and fun blog!

Thanks Nathan.
And you mentioned Robert Jordan! But now I heard that Terry Pratchett has a rare form of Alzheimer. :(

Happy New Year everyone.

They'd better not be dead, 'cause I got one more thing to say about 'em . . . or ONE in particular.

Happy Xmas!

Well I hope you have a peaceful and meaningful Christmas...and that you get to read some great books for the pure fun of it!!!

(Because this time of year brings out the sentimental side of me, let me just say THANKS for putting together such a great blog- fun, informative, and with occasional shots of rum!)

Sophie W.-

I'm thinking 2008 is the year of flying cars.

Any year now....

2007 - Condensed. I love it. :) You should come up with a list of predictions for 2008. Then come December, we can look back and giggle. Or laugh in a very manly way, in your case. I'll giggle.

I hope you have a peaceful vacation, Nathan, and see you in the New Year.

I was actually hoping for something along the lines of robots to do my calculus homework for me...

Whew what a year!

Nathan have a Merry Christmas and the same to all you bloggers who show up and make writing so very interesting!

See you next year, Nathan! Thanks for the info and the laughs.

Jet-packs in '08!!!

Hi Nathan, I'm on vacation, but do you think I'd miss your blog? I'm not even watching The Young and the Restless (the only TV I watch, sorry!)- but I'm tuning into you and Janet and a few others. And I'm actually having a lot of activity going on with a top editor and agent right now! So I'm glued to my Dad's computer. Thanks for all your sweet encouragement, and have a great holiday.

...And through all of 2007, Nathan Bransford remained the nicest man in publishing.

Your blog makes my day happier. Thanks.

Margaret aka Original Bran Fan

Nathan,
I hope you have a great holiday! Thanks for giving us so much in 2007.

Nathan, you’ve been a shining star of 2007.
Wishing you peace and joy. ☺

That face is meant is meant to look smiley!
Blogger seems to have made it frown.
Sorry!!!

Thank YOU, Mr. Bransford, for providing such a nifty blog all year. It's been a lot of fun to read every day. Here's to '08. Cheers.

Sing to the tune of Frere Jacques: You are clever and so funny yes you are, we know you are.
Mr Bransford, our fantastic Nathan Bransford you're a star. You're a star!

Have a wonderful, starry holiday. :)

Thanks for a year's worth of great posts, Nathan. Hope you have a wonderful holiday.

Thanks for the great blog, Nathan. You amuse and inform me every day. Except Saturday. And Sunday. And some holidays. And when you take vacation. Those are all sad, dark times. But I soldier on.

Happy New Year!

Thank you, Nathan! Thank you for this hilarious and very informative blog. I wish you much success in 2008 and a special thank you from those of us you took a chance on in 2007!

All the best,

Hilary

Thanks for the memories in 2007 and more than a few good tips and laughs.

Merry Christmas to all and to all a good write.

JW

Happy Holidays!
You do serve a great need-
A book about doing this blog and the writer questions would be a great read...

Nathan - This blog has been awesome. Thank you for your insights, encouraging advice & engaging sense of humor. I've learned so much from you & many of your regular contributors. I really believe that great things happen to good people, so I hope you're ready for tons of well deserved success. Have a great Christmas & a fantastic New Year. You da man!!!

Congrats on a great year of blogging, and thanks for taking the time to impart your wisdom on all us eager hungry writers.

Aloha,

Mahalo Nathan for your insights, spiced liberally with mirth.

Hope the holidays give you a much needed rest.

Now, where did you want me to send your Xmas bag of poi?

Very funny and Happy Holidays!

"2008 will be the year of flying cars"
Zounds! A flood of Herbie the Love Bug stories? I guess it could happen.

Thanks so much for providing a great place for the write-minded to hang out, and especially for the groovy contests. I can't wait for the first Bransford Competition of 2008. Any hints as to what we might be sharpening our pencils toward?

Happy Holidays and wishes for a very prosperous new year. Thanks for blogging and providing such useful and entertaining information.

Merry Christmas Nathan!

Hi Nathan,

THANK YOU for your excellent blog, so useful to writers around the world. I enjoy reading your blog not only for the information, but also your style of writing.

Wishing you the best for 2008 too.

Happy New Year!

What an interesting year in publishing it's been! I didn't realize.... until this humorous post! Thanks!

Happy new year to you too! Thank you for your wonderful insight. Not only do we learn alot, but you make us laugh!

Happy New Year.

Bobby

Oohhh! ooo! oooo! I wrote a dog book! Where can I send it?
Jessica Faust is a saint...God bless her critique-ability.
:)
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
(I also have a Vampire book...I guess I should finish that before its really dead.)

I love the blog and think it's terribly witty.

I'm young, literary-minded and career hunting. Therefore I would be overjoyed if you would someday address how one becomes a literary agent and why anyone would ever be crazy enough to want to do so.

Thank you!
-Eileen/Speak Coffee

Sending you wonderful wishes for a great new year! Happy 2008, Nathan!

This was great, Nathan - as was your entire blog this year.

Happy New Year!!

J.F. Constantine

I didn't realize how much text that was going to be to read until after I'd written it. This way is much better - but I want to know, what was the costume and which "important" author did you read?

Merry Christmas, Jane

look this is the "diet" i told you about you should really enter the site :) bye enter the site

Samatakah,
Back when I was young and slim, I went to a Halloween costume party as "Irizumi--the spirit of tattoo." I had a friend paint "tattooes" all over my body and I wore a sheer wrap (actually a fringed table cloth!)). It was unseasonably warm that Halloween, which was lucky, so I could show off all of the great body art.

Important author--Jane Austen. I'm not sure how I missed her in high school and college. I was an English major for two of my 4 years at college, and I still missed out on reading her, although I'd certainly heard of her and read about her. I also went back and tried to read Thomas Pyncheon, but never made it through his books.

Angelo, Merry Christmas back.

Adam--stop spamming. NO ONE should enter his site. (but I leave the spam as a warning to all who blog--be prepared!)

I've only lived places where it's too cold to go about half-naked on Halloween!

I was Sappho in 1990 while living in Tacoma, WA, and pretty much ruined the toga look by wearing my longies underneath. But I didn't freeze.

I was living in Cleveland, Ohio at the time. Like I said--it was unseasonably warm--one of the only Halloween's I ever remember in Ohio where I could dress so "fashionably."

Sappho sounds good. Did you recite her poetry?

Nathan, thanks for addressing this. I consider the US my home and won't be in Mexico forever, so while I'm writing about Mexico, it's not my target market.

Sorry about the Hills - but thanks for keeping us in the loop.

Who gets custody of the jellyfish?! Nathan, you're closer to Hollyrock than I am, would you start lobbying for a Spencer spin off show?

C.J.

If I were in charge of the networks there would be a show where Spencer and Justin Bobby hit on random girls at bars. It would be huge.

nathan, do you know when the curtis brown website will be up and running? is there going to be one now at all?
thanks, emily

emily-

It's coming soon!

I know, and it's probably already happening - they'd just have to film it. Writers' strike, Schmiters' strike.

Sigh I wanted more detail about The Hills . . . I guess I could go to some MTV site or something. But I like your wrap ups best!

Must remind self this is an agent blog, agent blog . . .

Nathan, what if you're an American writer and you believe your work will be better received in Europe (most likely the non-English speaking countries)?

Any advice? Should you consider foreign agents for your query list?

BTW, a guy in my writers group who lives half time in the UK (and half time here in FL) says unknown writers don't need to have a complete MS to get representation, just a partial and syn., in the UK. Had you heard that?

I'm so glad to see this question addressed, as it is something that I've been wondering about. I'm American, but live in and write about the UK and am very uncertain as to where I should begin querying. You mentioned that there is a difference in readers' tastes on either side of the pond. Can you elaborate on that at all?

Hi
It's great that you are willing to comment on a submission before it hits your desk. Bravo.

Anyway, I'm so relieved to hear that being overseas isn't an issue. While I'm a native to the U.S., I may be going to live overseas for a very long time, and this was a concern for me. Thanks for clearing this up Mr. Bransford.

Thanks for answering the question, Nathan!

Jessica, I think it's just the cultural differences. For instance, you might've heard heard of the bestselling TWILIGHT saga (by Stephenie Meyer). In the US they're huge, right? Well, here in Brazil, they're basically unheard of. There's not even a Portuguese version of the books. Likewise, Sidney Sheldon books are huge here, and in the US, they're successful, but they're not the constant center of attention. Every country has its own market, I suppose, and you should see where your book fits best.

:)

Nathan, here's a follow up to that. I'm up in Canada (eh) - I know some Canadian authors and their agents see benefit in selling US and Canadian rights separately because then the Canadian author will get a 'push' here at home whereas if they sell NA right all together, they may not. What's your take on this?

Hi Nathan,

How do you approach slang used in manuscripts from non-US authors? Is it a deal breaker if a Brit has used words like "wanker" and "plonker" and "numpty" in the text and references to UK shows/magazines etc, or are you more interested in whether the overall story and voice grabs you?

- London Lass

joanne-

The Canadian situation varies from publisher to publisher and from book to book, and it's tough to generalize about it. Some US publishers have Canadian subsidiaries and will try and coordinate publication, other times it might make sense to break up the rights with two different publishers. So it all depends.

London Lass-

Some slang and UK spellings shouldn't be an impediment for a US reader, but if the work is too dependent upon UK cultural references it may be difficult for an American reader to fully understand it. But ultimately it's all about the writing. I'm sure I missed more than half of the culutural references in James Hawes' SPEAK FOR ENGLAND, but I still really liked the book.

Nathan,
If I would translate my novel to Dutch, and be able sell it on the Dutch market (no bestseller, but no embarrassment either), would that increase chances to sell it in the US?
Or would the general reaction be: who cares about the Dutch market, go sell cheese!?

luc2-

Honestly, unless you're the absolute most beloved/famous author in a foreign country and your name is mentioned in conjunction with a possible Nobel Prize, US publishers aren't going to take notice.

FYI: Googling "Spencer Heidi unengaged"

You've made it to #1!

I don't think ebooks will ever entirely replace paper books, but ebooks are definitely in our future. I give it another decade before they're really useful, though. We're still in the equivalent of the cell phone's bag-phone-plugged-into-the-car phase, ebookreaderwise.

I answered Never, but it really depends. For technical or certain reference books, I've already mostly replaced my books with PDFs or online sources. For example, although I have a couple of pretty good dictionaries, I usually go to a computerized dictionary first.

I also think that poetry's future might be electronic. It's usually short, which makes it easy to read electronically, and publishers just don't have much financial incentive to publish poetry. Problem is, of course, that most, but not even close to all, self-published (online) poetry is crap.

For regular reading, such as novels, stories, or nonfiction I'm reading either for fun or research (which is often even more fun than "fun"), gimme books.

I have tons of research material in PDF form, but I rarely use it because it's less enjoyable to read than in book form, even if I print it myself--which can be more expensive than buying the book, by the time you buy printer ink, paper, and a binder.

A year and a half ago, I swore I'd never read an ebook--I like my paper, thank you very much! But in the last six month or so, I've changed my mind quite a bit. Unless I'm buying one of my all-time favorite authors I go e-book, usually Mobipocket or eReader depending on the discount. If I love it, I'll buy the actual book (you're welcome, my favorite authors!). I absolutely cannot read a book from my computer screen so I load it into my Palm. It's much easier on the eyes, and it makes me look busy ;)

I will probably get to the point where I have to buy some ebooks (I see myself buying nonfiction that way) but I will always prefer regular books.

Yes, when the portable reader is as convient and easy on the eyes as a book. They're not there yet.

Okay, this is like asking which do I prefer - blueberry pie or pumpkin? I like the both and want some of each. The pumpkin I can scoop from the pie plate and walk around eating while I'm doing other things - even when it's piled with whipped cream. The blueberry, on the other hand, is for devouring from a deep plate, snugged in my chair, as I savor the sugary blue juice and flaky crust. If I'm alone I'll even lick the plate.
And another thing; how do you give an e-book as a gift? My Amazon order just arrived with books for Christmas gifts(including Kim Long's "Almanac of . . ." Thank you for putting us on to it, Nathan) and I just don't see how I could give them in e-book form.
So - both. Pumpkin and Blueberry.

I wonder if the e-book will replace paperbacks, with hardbacks shifting position in the market to become a 'luxury' item.

That's how it went with manual wind watches and to a lesser extent stereo turntables. They never really disappeared from the marketplace, but are now mostly high-end items that trade on a certain chachet.

Give you one guess as to how I voted.

Nathan, so glad you're doing polls. Did you know agent Donald Maass asks lots of poll questions of his audience whenever he gives a talk? He's always taking the pulse of readers, trying to get a handle on what books they buy and why.

I'm looking forward to Santa bringing you a Kindle thingie. Curious to see how user friendly you find it.

Never. I like paper. I like being able to hold a big fat book in my hand. I might be willing to buy e-books...but not mostly.

Never say never. There may be a day that some books won't even come out in print, leaving me without a choice.
Still, I voted never.

Nathan,

I'm rarely able to buy books due to these little people running about my house demanding things like milk and sweets.

I belong to three different local libraries.

What do you see happening to our beloved libraries?

I'd like to see an e-book reader that didn't drain your pockets with uploading, downloading, reloading and page loading fees. Also, a clicky wheel. The only reason I bought an iPod was for the cool clicky wheel.

That said, I'll probably only buy books that are only available in e-book format for my e-book reader. Too much screen time is bad for the eyes. (Says the girl who spends 3 hours a day staring at her computer.)

I haven't paid total attention to this since I first read about it in Publisher's Weekly. Once you purchase the books, will you be able to "lend" it out?

Definitely, if only so I can carry around two hundred books at once. :-)

Plus, I can't afford a house big enough to hold all the books I want.

I don't think ebooks can ever replace paper books. A electronic gizmo like Kindle is just as easy to ruin as a book, and possibly less portable. Books are one of those perfected technologies that have staying power. That said, ebooks have a future - one that's probably analogous to dime novels. They'll become a haven for hacks and pulp artists, and a generation later their readers will be nostalgic.

I honestly don't see why people care about the medium. If it was up to me, all my entertainment would come in the form of barroom banter - stories told to me by strangers. All this mass media stuff, from books to teevee to magazines, requires you to use your imagination. So use it, fer godsakes!

Okay I said Maybe - how's that for a definite answer :o)

Spyscribbler - carry 200 books at once - now that I like!

erik I have visions of your work on bar room napkins after that post. I'd read'em!

Being with a large e-book publisher (Samhain, born from Ellora's Cave) I've quickly learned the value of e-books. Not for those volumes you KNOW you're going to keep (like my hardcover Harry Potter collection or my beat-up but collectible Annotated Alice), but for those you know you'll read and not read again. I look at my tiny house and the piles of books on the floor that need a new home and I think "Yes, I need an e-book reader".

I just found out that, as a writer, I can use it as a tax-write off, since I mostly buy tween fantasy, which is what I write. They call it 'market research' HA!

I'd buy a Kindle if they weren't so dang expensive. For now, an ebookwise will do for me.

I probably would have said "never"... but then again, I remember the first time I downloaded an mp3, and I thought, "This has its uses, but I'll never give up buying CDs. Never never." And oh, how ironic that has become.

Then again, perhaps the analogy doesn't hold. If you have a CD, it's easy to transfer it to mp3s; if you have mp3s, it's easy to make them into a CD. That means it's easy to share the stuff you like with your friends, and while we're less likely to give music as a formal gift, we can still give it as a favor. So far with ebooks, there's no easy way to transfer, and there doesn't seem to be one in the making without major changes to the process.

I'll bet the majority of people commenting haven't seen an e-ink display yet. They're really good, absolutely as readable as paper, very sharp with high contrast and no refresh/flickering at all. Once you see it, a lot of doubts will disappear.

But here's where I see it going. Even though I'm not opposed to e-books, the reader that I would buy hasn't been made yet. It would need to have the same wireless functionality as the Amazon Kindle, but be reduced in bulk considerably. I don't want any border around the page and just the most minimal of buttons/controls. It also needs to be black, not sure why that's important, I just don't want it looking like a piece of hospital equipment. It would also be using the next generation of e-ink displays, which can do colour (and even refreshes fast enough to do video - JK Rowling eat your heart out). Could even be flexible or foldable while we're making a wishlist. Basically, it's a about two revisions away from what I want right now.

The second thing is, I wouldn't stop buying books. I'd still want a nice library of classics, books that mean something to me or are straight up essential. You can't have a house with no books in it, it's not right. Similarly, too many books is oppressive, that's why people thrown them out.

So in a couple of years I'll have a little e-reader (made by Apple, no doubt) and a bookshelf that has awesome written all over it. Totally going to happen.

You know I'm one of those booksmellers.

I've just learned to never say never.

My 10-year old is dying for an IPOD. That's just crazy. $250? She got an MP3 player, much cheaper.

But I am tempted to buy my kids a computer--just so they'll stay off mine. Never thought I'd get to that point.

So ebooks are definately intriguing. Especially if there is a backlight on the Kindle and I can read in a dark car without disturbing anyone (when I'm not driving of course).

I don't want to be "Britney Platinum Blonde Call Her" personally. Or anybody on Brody Jenner's phone list.

As of this post, the poll stood at 89% Never or Maybe and 7% Absolutely.

This from people that read a blog about the publishing industry. What would be the response from people coming and going from a grocery store (beyond, "get the F^@& out of my way!")?

sam-

I'd look at it another way. 44% never, but 51% say either yes or maybe. If half of people by half of their books as e-books that's going to result in a significant change in the book industry.

I've read a few and yes, I still read better on the page than on the screen. E-books are great and serve their purposes but I suspect that, for me, they will always be like audio books: Fine for some, but I prefer the real thing, heavy in my hand.

(did I expound enough, or should I write another chapter? This WAS sort of short for me)

Quite honestly, no. LOL. It's not necessarily because I don't think the technology will improve and be close to "the real thing." It's just that I'm in front of the computer _all the time_. It's nice to put all gadgets aside and just sit with a book without the inclination to pop on my email, etc. A reader would probably help, but I dunno... I like the smell of fresh, shiny books. (g)

Because I'm a decisive person, firmly grounded in my own beliefs, I voted 'Maybe'. Because, y'know, they kind of might maybe some day, but then they might not, so I don't really know...

Here's something that's just occured to me. A lot of where civilisation is today is born of a few huge advances in technolgy, like the mastery of fire, the invention of the wheel, and the printing press bringing enlightenment and education to the masses.

We'd still be in the dark ages if someone hadn't thought of typesetting words and printing them on paper. And in the few centuries since then we've invented cars, aeroplanes, radio, television, computers, the Internet, space travel, and blogging literary agents.

We'd have none of those things without the printing press, and here we are debating whether or not a piece of mass produced plastic is going to finally kill off a method of communication that has essentially changed very little since its inception.

Mmmm, smell the irony.

No. I enjoy the look and feel of books.

I have books from the 1800's I adore, carefully. Where is the pleasure in looking over a screen? I love the worn covers and pages showing the books were read and loved by many.

Give me lots and lots of books to curl up with and surround myself with.

Of course, I am also one of these people who mourns the passing of letters, handwritten and treasured.

I checked absolutely, but I'm concerned about quality. I've read a couple of ebooks recently from small ebook publishers and they were extremely poor. The authors were obviously not yet ready for publication, but they were published anyway. That's a concern. I know some startup electronic publishing companies will buy anything they can just to build inventory, and that's a bad thing for readers.

E - books will 'take over' but I think the option for either will remain available for a long time. There will probably be a premium added for the paper versions (tp prod acceptance?). That makes Conduit's 'Maybe' pretty safe, though I can't smell the irony all because of Susan's pies. When the e-book thing takes off & since the cost exposure for production & distribution would be greatly reduced, maybe publishers would take more chances with their acceptance of writers & their (well written)work. I gotta go buy pies now.

Speaking of ebooks, I see publishers are now selling eARCs prior to release of the hardback edition. Isn't that interesting? Is it ethical to sell ARCs? If everyone who's interested in reading the book buys the ARC, will the hardback hold as much appeal? Lots of food for thought. Read about it here:

http://arcaedia.livejournal.com/130842.html

I answered Never even though I've put a considerable amount of effort into my ebook reading software. (Doesn't matter which - I'm not here to self-promote.)

The idea of ebooks is great ... entire libraries in your pocket, read anything anywhere, buy without leaving your chair, lower prices, etc, etc.

The reality is different. Books are a physical product you can buy, hold, sniff, enjoy. And they still have a value when you've read them ... you can pass them on to family, friends, others. You can line your house with bookshelves and set out to collect certain editions. You can get them ... gasp ... signed.

If you're buying something to read, then ebooks will do the job. But to me, wanting to read a book is only about 60% of the reason for my purchase. The other 40% varies, but none of it is met by ebooks.

No way. It'd feel too much like 'work' if I read on a Kindle...sorta like I was multi-tasking at work on my Blackberry.

I love the feel of paper. I love how its edges grow dark over the years. I love poking through boxes full of paperbacks and hardcovers at flea markets. I love cover art with its raised lettering. Most of all, I love having bookcases full of the ones that wouldn't let me toss them into the yard sale box.

My research habits involve opening lots of books at the same time and spreading them out on the desk with book marks and post-it notes sticking out everywhere. I'm willing give E-Books a chance, but how many Kindles will it take for me to hit my comfort zone as described above? Maybe I need to start thinking more linearly as I work. Or, maybe I can't. This question seems to be laden with hidden stressors for me, I'm beginning to realize. Anyone else?

Hi Nathan,
I actually had a quick question completely unrelated to your blog topic (sorry!). I've been trying to research Curtis Brown Ltd, but I can only ever find info on the UK branch. Is the US branch planning on creating a website? Is there somewhere I could find a list of who reps what? Whenever I search, I only see the same two or three names over and over again, but I thought there were more agents? Thanks for your time!

Yes, I have and I will continue to. I just recently found out that some countries don't have printed books in stores like we do in the USA. ha. Are we spoiled or what??? I also discovered that books cost a fortune in some countries. Ebooks are a better choice.

I suppose I should exhibit a little support, since my first two releases start out as e-books. But there's nothing like a real book. Nothing.

Paper, for sure. However, when the industry ever gets smart, it will come up with a reader that someone 40+ can read, that can support any ebook format (or at least a common one), and is reasonably priced. They are no where near that yet. Bought a Rocket Reader, got burnt when they went under. Never again until the industry gets it right.

Probably not. Until there's an E-Book I can read in the bathroom, there will always be a place for paper books in my house.

I agree with whoever said that e-books are great for those books that you intend to read once and toss. I get a lot of free books that I read and recycle - stuff I'd never buy, never want to take up space on my shelves.

Also for traveling, when I read them and leave 'em behind.

Also if I need a book in a big, tearing hurry and can't find it at my local bookstore and don't have time to order it.

I say this as a person who owns many, many paper books and plans to keep buying them.

The only advantage an e-reader can have over a real book, for the general population, is weight. So until an e-reader resembles a folded piece of stiff card, which when forded out can have a left and right page visible at the same time, I don't see it catching on. Also to be really convenient it would have to incorporate other functions such as GPS, maps, photos, video, films, tv, and be something you can write on like a piece of paper. We are a long way from this yet.

The other thing which will really drive the e-book is when publishers can make more profit out of an e-book than a paper book.

Peter
MervynBright.co.uk

I'm curious.
As an agent, do you ask for electronic submissions or need them printed out?
So far, I have not heard of many instances of agents or editors who accept submissions other than paper

I would love to have my entire library compact so I could bring it everywhere. Why wouldnt I, why wouldnt you? The only problem right now is the price. I'm am so cheap! Unless a book is hardcover and attractive I dont spend over 10 dollars for it and I would never normally spend even more than 6 dollars for a paperback. I love hunting for books at used bookstores. Once I found a signed copy of Vivian Vean Veldes ( or however you spell it book's) it was only a dollar fifty. I'm pretty sure the people who worked there had no clue it was signed. So unless the e-books are really cheap I would never use my money on them.

Wait a second!!!!!!!!!!
Now I'll have to to descibe the concept of books to my kids!!!
I never thought I'd see the day.

I can't afford new books so e-books are out unless they end up at the quarter rack at the library book sale...

Interesting question CarBeyond (how many publishers and agents accept e-query). The number appears to be growing. I wonder how many print out the submissions they REALLY want to read.

I don't think it's likely I'll ever pay for electronic books regularly, but not because I'm so devoted to paper books, just because I'm used to finding my electronic entertainment for free.

Additionally, I don't see the ebooks being necessarily a terribly sustainable model for publishers. Not only is it difficult to protect electronic content from unlawful distribution, coming up with and maintaining a systemic method of distribution is bound to be expensive, and the likely result would be a system too inflexible to keep up with the market and changing technology. Plus, there already are several electronic distribution models that cut out the middleman, with varying degrees of success, and a publisher would have to offer far more than their shiny name to compete with those models effectively, at least from an income and reputation standpoint.

I know that if I were a writer, I would never even consider selling my electronic rights to a publisher unless what they were offering me was better than I knew I could do on my own (that just makes sense, right?) Based on my experiences in webcomics, that means they'd need to not only have an extremely solid plan for protecting my material from unlawful distribution as well as encouraging lawful sales, they also would need to be offering me extremely healthy advances and royalties... I would expect to be making on the higher end of five figures a year at least by allowing them to handle my electronic distribution for me.

I realize that sounds much too high from a print market perspective, but my husband and I currently make our entire living from VOLUNTARY payments for an otherwise free electronic distribution product, and that has perhaps given me a different perspective on the electronic market. It may not be the most stable income ever, but if my husband and I are doing that on our own, I don't think it's unreasonable to require that publishers show they can do at least as well before handing over those rights.

I voted "absolutely." I LOVE my paper-and-ink books, and I hope I always have the opportunity to buy them. However, one of my biggest heartbreaks is that I will never own a house large enough for both my family and my books -- at least not all the books I WISH I could keep. (Unfortunately the rugrats take first priority. Darn them.) Every year I give away boxes of books, sadly waving good-bye as the Goodwill truck fades into the distance. Once e-books are the norm, I will NEVER have to get rid of a book again.

I was watching a program last night on the influenza pandemic of the early 1900's that killed millions worldwide. Part of the method used to track the killer, isolate it and make a vaccine, depended on notes made by doctors who tended to the dying. The doctors notes were published in printed volumes so scientists could study them at a later date. It occurred to me that ebooks are too transitory and that what can be read in an ebook today might not be readable ten years from now as the technology changes. Paper and ink are permanent. I can and have read books over 100 years old. I doubt I'd be able to do that with an ereader. I'll likely read some ebooks but I will always have a library of the real thing.

Conduit sed:
We'd still be in the dark ages if someone hadn't thought of typesetting words and printing them on paper.

Yes, all that you said is true. A little time spent understanding the Reformation, the 30 Year's War, and its net effect on the development of three continents shows the importance of the press. Publishing the Bible in vernacular languages was the key to ripping apart the largest empire the world has ever seen.

Fast forward to today, and it seems to me that everything moved along at a reasonable pace after that, more or less according to Hoyle. While the technology grounded us nicely and made other things possible, the really interesting bit was the splash the press made when it first arrived.

So if you feel nostalgic for the printed page, remember that there's a decent chance we might live to see the new technologies really turn a corner in ways that are unimaginable now. Charles V might not have seen it coming, but I think we can.

Linnea-

Paper's not permanent either, if you take the long view!

I've bought a few reference pieces in the form of e-books.

You're right, Nathan. Paper isn't permanent. But a 100 year old book has character and history. When you pick up a 100 year old book you know that particular book has been read for 100 years. You can see it on the flyleaf in the handwriting of its first owner, the first time it's given as a gift, the first time it's sold in a used book store, the stains, little tears and bends in its pages. Books have 'soul'. Ebooks are nothing like them. Maybe it is simply because I love history that ebooks will never replace a real book that I can hold in my hand.

Nathan,

I love to feel the pages between my fingertips, run my hand down the page, smell the book (as Heidi said). The reading is a whole multi-faceted sensory experience for me.

Also, I feel that any house, without the books jammed in the bookshelves of many kinds and types, lining every wall, is a house lacking in soul.

Reading an e-book for me would be like making love to a robot. That might work for some, but it just doesn't get to the "heart" of the matter for me. ;)

I like hanging out in bookstores, losing hours of my life exploring the books inside. That's a habit I developed as a kid, and I'd hate to see it go.

But then, I think about things like PDF files and rich text format, and eBooks aren't that far off. I suppose if they can somehow figure out a way to simulate that experience or, ideally, preserve it, I wouldn't have a problem with buying eBooks on a regular basis. (Sure would save space by not having huge bookshelves filled top to bottom in my house...)

I like that the technology could make "small" books available for years to come. No more going out of print! Also that it can help save trees.

While thinking about this topic, I actually collected a complete large garbage bag filled to the brim of breakage with junk mail and old bill and bank statements over the last year.
Now, I would want to keep my best books always,
but if i am going to save trees, please let's get rid of bills and junk mail first, NOT books!!!

You have made my day! I haven't read the top 10 either. Thanks for the encouragement, seriously man. I was feeling inadequate.

Sean Lindsay is a Golden God.

Where'd you get the extra three hours from? Please share.

Are you sure that wasn't the "top 10 books the average reader doesn't know exist, nor will most likely ever read" list?

It's always difficult to tell if the New York Times is lying or telling the truth. I'd take anything they say with a couple grains of salt.

I love DWTS and was actually able to watch the last two weeks (they don't show those things down her in Mexico). Bring on the scandals!

Thanks for including the Top Ten list. Nothing I bought last week was mentioned, but I'm sure they were 11-20.

Welcome back, Nathan. Your Bran Fans missed you.

That first paragraph was unfathomable.

You know, I would Stop Writing, but now that I've found out there is such thing as a Bad Sex In Fiction Award...I must continue!

HA. Love the Justin Bobby references. That just made my day. In addition, I haven't read any of their supposed top ten books either. So I guess I'm in good company. But actually the book I really want to read I'm banning myself from reading until I FINISH MY YA NOVEL.
Go me.

Nathan,
You posted today, so that's what counts.

The 'books are graying' piece was interesting. Now that financial planning commercial on TV with Dennis Hopper makes sense!!

DWTS? Mel B. was robbed, I tell ya!

If I read the NY Times list correctly, there are only two books by women mentioned. I'm not a raging -ist of any stripe, but I must ask: how does this happen?

Yay! Graying books will now match my natural hair color.

The ebook technology will, no doubt, get far more complicated than necessary. Just like cell phones. I don't want a damned camera, ipod, text messaging and all that crap! Just give me big push buttons and a screen I can read in daylight and I'll be happy.

Saw this and totally thought of you...:) Thought I'd share with all the Hills fans swarming your blog!

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/56c2d6a703

Top ten - hmmmm I'm with Melanie - I'm certain the books I bought this week are right behind her 11 thru 20 and filled the 21 thru 30 slot.

How DO they come up with this list? And why does it make me feel like a bad reader?

I read the comments and then clicked over to NYTimes, wondering if I would have heard of these books either. And most of them I'm not familiar with, but I'm happy to see OUT STEALING HORSES listed. I read an excerpt of it in TIN HOUSE. I was so bowled over, I've hinted to my family that perhaps Santa would like to bring me the book this Christmas. Here's hoping the book lives up to the excerpt.
Also, the Toobin book looks good--how can you pass up a chance for insight into the Supreme Court? I may get to it once I make it through the 10 unread novels sitting next to my bed right now . . .

No Harry Potter on the top ten list? How could this happen?

Not only haven't I read those top 10 books, I haven't heard of them.

Oh well.

Good to hear which ones everyone is recommending.

This will happen when The Eagles keep their word and don't reunite yet again.

This will happen when the rock group KISS actually turns down an offer to make more money.

This will happen when Hollywood refuses to make a sequel to a box office winner.

This will happen Pamela Anderson stops walking down the isle.

This will happen when Oprah selects an Urban Fantasy as her book of the month.

This will happen when Gilligan and the gang get off that island without the help of the Harlem Globetrotters.

I think a large part of it will be if the display on an ebook or e-reader type device gains an information density equivalent to, or greater than, that provided by paper and commercial printing presses.

It's why most people print documents instead of reading them on their monitors--the monitor (on average) provides a resolution of 72 dots per inch. The same area on paper, printed with a press, has a generic resolution of closer to 1440 dots per inch, more if it's a photographic print.

So as of today's technology, in terms of transmitting information, paper is still better for non-dynamic content that doesn't need to update constantly or change. Once e-readers manage to match resolutions, then they will have isolated and eliminated paper's greatest advantage.

aden-

Not sure if you've gotten your hands on a Sony Reader or Kindle, but in my opinion they've really already solved the dpi/readability problem. The only annoying residual is a "wipe" effect, which I imagine they'll figure out soon. I don't think we're very far off from a time when screens are truly as easy to read as paper.

PS: not to mention the fact that on these devices you can adjust the font size -- definitely an advantage over the printed page.

I hope never. I love books. I love bookcases filled with books. I love bookstores and libraries and I can't imagine not holding a paper version I can flip back and forth between, or dog ear, or mark up, or make notes in...you know all that stuff you can do on paper that you can't do on little screens.

If it is inevitable I think it will be a long time coming. Like magazines, I think people love holding a book in their hands, seeing the cover, and feeling the pages...hopefull it's not just me ;).

DRM is going to have to go. When I can loan an electronic book to a friend as easily as I can a paper book; when I don't have to worry about Amazon going away and taking my legally purchased books with them; when I can make notes and highlights in the text as I go.

Also, someone is going to have to perfect an electronic version of walking into a bookstore and wandering through the shelves, grabbing the pretty titles at random.

I think people start calling e-books books and call the other kind paper books (spelled p-a-p-e-r it's that thing that ancients extracted from the tree pulp after they stoped writing on dead animals' skins) twenty years after fourteen year olds refuse to read any other way. Paper book will be a novelty item but will stay here for quite a while like CD never really completely replaced LP. There are people who buy them and people who make new ones...

I'm so glad you said all that.

I've been whispering it around ever since I bought my husband that ipod that plays movies.

Everyone I've said it to (in my writing circles at least) has looked at me like I was a heretic...a blasphemer.

I give paper 10 years.

Hey! Remember on Star Trek, the Next Generation where Captain Picard had that hard-bound, paper book inder a glass case?

We've made it to the future!

Ooooo, I can't wait for the food simulator-thingy to be invented.

"Tea. Earl Grey. Hot"

"KFC. Extra crispy. Now, dammit."

They won't.

E-books will definitely have a place in the market, just like audio books do.

They could be useful for technical manuals and other material that is often read on the road or in the field (which ever field it happens to be), especially if they can handle PDF and have a good search mechanism.

They could also be useful for people who have visual impairments that make the print in books hard to read, especially if the readers can read the books aloud.

For those two niches, they are an exciting technology. For casual reading, especially for ardent readers, I just don't see books going away anytime soon. For most readers, I just don't think these readers have any advantages over the traditional book, other than the nerdy-cool factor.

There might be some use for them in academia, where text books are back-breakingly heavy and have gotten as expensive as tuition, almost. If the reader has a good notation feature and makes it easy to print out the notes for study, it could be a great alternative to traditional texts. But, if that happened, I doubt the text book companies would really reduce their price all that much for electronic versions, plus the used text book market would become obsolete.

I just don't think it's going to happen.

Remember in the 1990's when everyone was talking about how POD was going to be the end of traditional publishing? It didn't happen. And very, very smart people--people who were inside the industry, were the ones who were wrong.

I don't know if it will be different with e-books or not.

I think it is funny how Nathan is 100 percent certain that his job won't change. LOL, Nathan!

Anon-

Two questions:

1) What is it about anonymous commenting that makes people so sarcastic?

2) How do you think my job is going to change? Care to elaborate?

And for the record, I didn't say it wouldn't change, just that the role of literary agent will continue to be necessary, perhaps moreso when the landscape becomes more confusing for authors to navigate.

I'm sure you're right. Since I'm one of those who prefers traditional paper books, I cannot begin to imagine the answer to your question. I think I'm probably in the minority.

I do sometimes receive ARCs electronically to review on my blog. I just cannot relax and enjoy the reading experience on a screen. I do my best though, because the author deserves a fair read.

krw3b, I'm still waiting for my replicator to get here too. I hate to cook.

To weigh in on the wrong side of the writerly sensibility, I think the reason this is such a hot button topic here is that the majority of us are writers, which makes us all (I hope) ardent readers... We love our books. Bring them to bed with us (not that way, don't get all offended), take them everywhere we are and expound on them endlessly... when something is that important in your life any change is seen as the enemy.

That being said, with my hearty disclaimer that I, personally, would rather have the flesh and blood book in my hands, the issue isn't really what sells to writers. We're a relatively small percentage of the book buying public. The issue is what sells to readers - and I have to go with Nathan here, ebooks will eventually take over the majority of sales.

There will still be the buyers who want the book, but you can get that through amazon, and I'm afraid bookstores may, too, go along the wayside in time... I give it under ten years - and yes, I hate myself for saying it.

But with the downfall of the paper book comes the uprising of the technologically advanced readers... the technology won't change the need for great stories from wonderful story tellers. I'd wager that everyone on this blog will be able to get their books in either format for the remainder of their lives... there will be enough of us that prefer books for there to be a market for printing them. I don't think they'll go away, it's not like the vinyl album or 8-track, paper books had more than a ten year reign in their venue.

As far as the big publishing houses, I don't think they'll have a problem advancing as long as they take advantage of their expertise and consistently put out quality material... it's the biggest advantage they really have over the start ups, most e-presses don't have the same quality offerings. But this venue will be an equalizer, if the small presses are committed to quality and to their readers, they will have a better playing field to compete on.

I...dunno.

I think I see room for both. I really like techno gadgets (I own a bunch) and I would get an e-book reader (if it was functional and cute and not too expensive) as a way of reading, but I don't see it as the only way I'd want to read.

Then again, I still use a film camera.

i think the scales tip the day they release 'ulysses' for these e-readers with all the hyperlinks to maps of dublin and homeric references embedded. at least that's the day they're going to sell one to me. the wikipedia function is a good start though. my prediction for years 'til ebooks get half the market share: 10. i feel like the amount of books that are purchased as gifts will keep hardcopies in business for a long time (just like CDs vs. music downloads).

I love gadgets and gizmos - love them. But I have to say I don't see it happening.

While I love the reasons you posted (I'm for saving trees to - but they thought plastic bags was a good idea to) I don't think the reasons out weigh those who love an actual book.

Too many issues to be compaired to music cd's and movie dvd's. The book hasn't gotten to the cd or dvd level to merit a gadget and I don't see it happening any time soon.

Plus don't you feel it is a different crowd from the cd/dvd crowd? Librarys and upity yuck-yuck folks would delay any real take over. I don't mean to sound sarcastic or rude - just stating a fact that it may be a different crowd.

You said, "When they're better than books."

I agree, but add, when they are significantly cheaper as an alternative path. We may be forced into e-books by e-conomy.

One of the ways e-books could surpass regular books is by adding in-context community and content links. Start with Shelfari or some such app, find out how books you have rated high match with those of people you also rate high and borrow a book from their shelf. Read a topic in the book, highlight it and search for other books of the same tone, from the same genre, with the same topic.

Also, research could work better, if every time you grab a quote from an e-book, Word automagically places the correctly formatted citation in the document.

If they're locked down and you can't do any of this, then they will continue to bite dogs.

Nathan, I think you should conduct a poll by age group as to who will buy/use this gizmo, or embrace any kind of e-book form.

Something tells me that it's those of us who are old enough to be your mother :-) who reject the idea that paper books will go out of style; my bets it's the oldsters who want to douse the Kindle.

Perhaps as the boomers die off and the kiddies who first started reading on a gizmo or computer screen grow up will you see a beginning of the end of traditional paper books.

Heck, look at what's happening to newspapers.

I don't think it will happen in our lifetime, but I think it will happen within the next 100 years or so.

There are so many factors to consider:

Environmental issues - We are not as concerned about conservation as our descendants will be. Something like Kindle might even become mandated for them.

Economic issues - It will take time for this technology to become priced so that people of all income levels can afford it. No one would want to deprive the poor of the ability to read.

Business issues - At some point in the future, this will cause an upheaval in the publishing industry. Agents and authors will probably still do their jobs as usual, but publishing houses will need to restructure. Houses that are the top dogs now, might not be once the dust settles, if they can't or won't regroup to meet the demands of the technology. The smart houses either already have or will have divisions to handle e-books so they are ready when the change is necessary.

I could be completely wrong on my projections, but this is my theory.

PS: Merry, good point about the skewed demographic here on Nathan's blog.

Ah...I was waiting for this one! "Your friends don't fathom me," is perhaps the best line ever. Ever!

And dork that I am, I had to pause and reply (in slow-mo, no less) the whole "kiss." Let me tell you, MTV missed it. No footage. What they pulled instead was a blurred out image of...wait for it...Justin Bobby leaning in to kiss Audrina. Oh the drama! That's worse than the notorious voice-overs. :) The Hills at its finest. Gotta love it.

And finally she-Spencer. (!) is right. For a minute there I thought perhaps I was on hallucinogenics. Scary!

Wow, I'm amazed at the number of people opposed to e-books.

I'm about as ardent a reader as can be (easily a novel-a-day if I have a good supply and can evade my responsibilities...) but I have no attachment to paper and binding. It's the story that matters. The easier to obtain, read, and carry around the better! If I could get direct writer-to-reader telepathy, I'd take it!

That said, I agree with Barbara. For now, the DRM is too onerous. And the prices are usually much too high.

I don't see it happening within the next 25 years or more. Maybe never. In some ways, it's a neat idea that any book could be read by anyone - -but I think there are too many obstacles still to overcome before we're anywhere near that.

I can't speak to the long term, but in the short term I think it would be a fantastic supplement to regular paper books.

There are so many rare and niche books that it's just not cost-effective to print, but that it's tedious to read on the computer because you have to actually be at the computer to do it. I'd love to be able to download obscure books or PDFs of my friends' writings and read them in bed on a paperback-size reader.

This technology would also be good for some college texts, which cost a bundle and end up being revised every year to reflect current research.

There's room for both old and new technology, I think. Both have their unique advantages.

Nathan, I completely agree with all you’ve said.

But I think it’s still eight years (yep, I know that's precise) until the tipping point.

There will be a lot of advantages for writers, as there have been for many musicians since the changes in the music industry.

People will still be allowed to love books. I love books! I also love my vinyl LPs (super-cool), my CDs, my mp3 files, and my iPod.

I am old school. I love film cameras, records and a world without paper books would just suck.

Absolutely. It's the natural order of things. Not that things are natural anymore. But the Kindle and its ilk are simple and elegant, as physicists like to say, and solve more problems as a format than the printed book can solve. That's the goal, right?

I love books. I have collected them all my life. However, one of the happiest days of my life was the day I donated my entire art and art history library to my daughters' prep school. Giving up stewardship of such physical mass was as liberating as losing weight.

Go, kindle. Light makes right.

I still love my eight tracks and reel to reel. I own a bunch and still have working players. I love my records, though needles are getting hard to find. I love my mp3 player, it holds so much. I write on paper first, then when I am happy I put it all in my computer, than it really starts to take shape. I am hoping for a marriage between real books, and electronic. I am building a library for my children. I have one of the original prints of Swiss Family Robinson, and I actually have a full set of the World Book Encyclopedia. (My kids think these are funny, we actually researched our school work with those.) We have over a five hundred books in our library here at home, and I wouldn’t want to trade them in for the world. E-Books will happen; my worry is not being able to adapt myself and my work to them.

I don't think e-books will ever take over.

Their niche will grow as the different technical details are worked out. And until they can make it comfortable to read in bed, I don't think it'll take over.

Hardcovers are not so easy to read in bed. But paperbacks are nice and bendy, allowing you to shift position and adjust your grip on them to suit. And if you fall asleep on top of them they're kind of pillow-like, their corners don't stab you, your face doesn't stick to them, their batteries don't run low and your page is usually easy to find again because you've bent the binding so the book falls open in just the right spot.

If you fall asleep on an e-reader wrong, who knows what would happen. And how would it handle a little bit of drool?

That little peek into The Hills made my eyes throb nearly out of my skull, and--oh, oh god--blood's dripping out of my nose.

I'll try to maintain consciousness with this:

I think eBooks will become prevalent in the next twenty years. Figure the progression of audio media; cassettes were around for a long time and CD's were only available on a limited basis. But then there was a sudden acceleration, a format which never really took off commercially like mini-disks (sort of like beta in video media, but beta became industry standard and is still used by most network television stations, just the same many radio stations use mini-disks--those that haven't gone satellite). With mini-disks you got the wide-spread prevelance of several digital audio file formats, but mainly mp3, which is easily compressed, user-friendly, and has little loss. This is what made the iPod possible. The Internet only accelerated this. Once software engineers come up with a fluid way to read, annotate, and transfer book media files, the actual hardware will quickly take off just the same way that people now have music on their phones. By the same token, we have a resurgence of things like vinyl which offer a richer, warmer, better quality sound than the lossy digital audio.

It sucks that eBooks are inevtiable for people who have lived in the Twentieth Century. It is the natural order, and I'm curious how they will make things like writing in the margins possible. That's really the challenge programming the software. I'm adverse to it for a lot of reasons, but I think mainly because as living creatures, we fear changes to our environment. As writers, we're afraid of this change because it's hard enough to get published and find a niche in the marketplace and now the game will potentially change, slightly.

laurel amberdine said -Wow, I'm amazed at the number of people opposed to e-books.

I don't think it is so much that the folks here oppose it but just feel it won't happen or at least not for a long time.

So yeah, maybe a poll would be cool but remember we are a pretty cool group to begin with and wont exactly represent the regular reader. I'm 41 and I don't think its the older folks who might resist change.

But then again maybe I'm wrong?

I would like to think there's room in our world for both.

I'm tempted to compare non-fiction on a Kindle device with on-line encyclopedia. The information can be updated regularly which is prohibitively expensive with paper. I agree that text books could be replaced without anybody shedding a tear.

Also, the Tree Thing.

But you know how I feel about booooooks and yes I have a vinyl record collection too.

As for writers and agents, I have to compare this again to the music biz. We've been in music for 20 years. Dizzying changes in that time. Guess what? People are still making music. Record sales are in the toilet. But I still never see my husband because he's in the studio recording musicians. He's clicking a mouse instead of aligning a tape machine...but there is music being made.

Here's what we should really be concerned about, and I think this is happening in the book world already: Anybody with a computer can make a recording/ write a book/ call themselves a genius. The world is polluted with music/ words/ genius!!!

And now I must slink off and not make this comment any longer...

It does scare me. The issue is what do we do about libraries. How does that work. If it doesn't work the way it has for the last 100 or so years, we just created a knowledge under-class. And to me, that is a really scary thing. If you have to have a Kindle and the $9.99, or whatever, to read books--to be informed--then there's a big problem for a democratic society.

I agree with Scott and Heidi and the others who mentioned there's room for both.

Online stores haven't decreased mall presence. But they have provided a valuable addition to the economy.

There will be niche markets where e-books will fare nicely--the ones Scott pointed out, for example.

I don't see paper books and e-books being mutually exclusive.

Great topic!

Two Months ago, I attended a bookseller's conference which featured a number of panel discussions on TEXTBOOKS. Understandable, a textbook is unlike a typical novel; however, as much as the college bookstores want to push E-books (with the same profit margins minus the shipping costs), nobody wanted them. The students wanted something they could write in, highlight, read on a bus, use as a pillow, flip back and forth in class, and dog ear the corners. The professors didn't want e-books or textbooks. They wanted to use excerpts and journals and others stuff (some of which is copyright protected but they don't care about such matters unless they hold the copyright.)

So I don't know if the E-book like we know it is the bullet that will take out the traditional book, but it's obvious that there's a change on the horizon. I'm thinking it will be a slower change than music and DVD rentals, but change is coming.

I think Nathan's job will be more and more important. The way I see his job will be more and more of a career manager than of a contract negotiator... It will be go to that talk show (webcast) and not to that "The Hills" fan club there are only people over seventy in that loony bin... If you were plugging biker chick erotica the geezers will love you but you are writing about the Italian Renaissance - nobody over the age of 12 is interested in that... Or that psycho albino monk is so original! It will be a hit, I can almost smell it..

Give it a couple years of tweaks to the interface, a couple more for a cool design, and a few after that to build the market to the point where we get economies of scale and availability of material. I'd say around ten years for general acceptance and a solid market share.

One of the cool things I predict is that, as paper copies of most books fall out of favor, you'll see really nice binding for those that do exist. Everybody who wants the cheap copy will get it electronically. Nifty extras will be provided to tempt the rest.

Well, I'm sorry but prefer to live in denial. I NEED my bookcases packed with all the books I love.

If it doesn't work the way it has for the last 100 or so years, we just created a knowledge under-class. And to me, that is a really scary thing.

Amen, brother. We are already well underway to doing this, given the decline in public education and public discourse. Libraries are one of the few genuinely democratic institutions left. Without them, we might as well admit we are living in an oligarchy masquerading as a democracy and call it a day.

I think it's interesting how passionate people are about this. I love books. I really do. And I not only write, I also work in publishing. But I'm kind of like ehn, if we move to digital, we do, and if we don't, we don't. We'll adapt when/if/as the time comes.

It's the content, not the physical object, that matters to me. Truth and beauty and love can be communicated just as easily on screen as they can on paper. As long as words still move people, I don't mind delivering them in whatever format is the most useful to them. Now, if we ever decide words are obsolete, we have a problem.

I don't see why we can't have both. I like ebooks, and with the right reader I can see myself loving them. In a, you know, healthy and platonic way.

But the book as it currently exists has been around with very little change for hundreds of years. That's because it works very, very well. Certainly print runs will get smaller as ebook sales get to be a bigger chunk of the market, but there will always be people who for whatever reason prefer a physical book.

Think of it this way: if I drop a book in the tub, it does not destroy the rest of my library and electrocute me. If I drop it onto concrete, it does not cause all my books to fly into a lot of pieces that cannot be put back together. If I lose one book, I still have all my others. And the batteries never run out of my book just as the pilot announces that we're parked on the tarmac for the next six days*.

I suspect textbooks will be the first to go entirely ebooks, and I suspect that print books will remain in place primarily for libraries. Keep in mind that not everyone can afford an ebook reader. Or a computer. Or an iPod. Or a cell phone. Or a car. Or food. But they can still go to the library.

*of course, I may run out of book at that point--in which case I hope I brought an ereader along. See? We can have both.

The real problem will be managing the licencing and copyrights to the media files. (Music files now fly around everywhere without much regard, so that whole issue will have to be resolved, too.) It's not the fall of civilization. Just think, we'll have an ultra-literate global society since we've increased the access to information. And if they add a function to one of these 'readers' that translates between languages, there will be no boundaries and nations once confined by dictatorships or totalitarian rule that block information will not be able to suppress the people's ability to reach out to the rest of the world.

Paper copies of things aren't going anywhere. In such things as the legal field, judges and attorneys still want paper copies of contracts and transcripts.

Never. Although, I like the idea. It doesn't exclude writers from the equation.

Remember when Final Fantasy came out with an animated movie and everyone said that animation was so lifelike that actors would be out of a job. Ten years later, Beowulf. But it is still one in thousands. I think people will always want books, but maybe there is a market for an alternative. Time will tell.

I'm an oldster (I wrote my senior thesis on a typewriter, yes, that old), and I can see having one of these in the future when they are not so expensive. I agree with Heidi - there's room for both. I would use it when traveling, that way I won't be embarrassed if I'm reading trash on the plane (no one will know!!!!!).

Plus, if I'm on a remote beach in a foreign land (I can dream, right?) and I run out of things to read, and the resort has internet . . .

On an aside, I'm reading Feed by M.T. Anderson right now, so the whole technological progress thing has made me a little nervous.

I think it will have it's place in the world of words as another vehicle to distribute said words but I don't think it will ever completely take over the market. Don't forget, there's a whole world outside the US that is still way behind on the tech front.

Plus technology breaks at the worst times. Books don't break.

It feels like we're already on our way and it's mostly a matter of technology. My guess is it'll be a clear trend within ten years, just like watching movies on portable devices is a clear trend now. The Kindle doesn't seem quite portable enough: an early step maybe, but not convenient enough to be there yet. I think it would take technology like a cheap flexible display screen that could be compressed to fit into a pocket, like a pocket book does (sort of), or maybe a heads-up display about comparable to a pair of sunglasses. Given resolution of the screens on iPod and similar devices, the heads-up display doesn't seem too far off, especially since it would play movies, display web pages, etc. as well. Then it would just be a matter of how long it takes people to adapt to the distribution (a la Amazon) and paying for the device. There are still a lot of older baby boomers who won't use online services.
I'm curious why publishing houses would survive, though. Basically, their function is to marshal resources. Remove the need for most of those resources (paper, presses, physical distribution, advertising budget) and the need for publishing houses pretty much goes away. Then publishing would be a matter of writing, editing, simple layout, maybe some artwork, a basic sales contract with an e-distributor like Amazon. And that contract could be automated pretty easily, which means that agents as we know them probably wouldn't be needed either (sorry, Nathan). Prices would go down, but more of the profit would go to the author/editor (I'm guessing some sort of online collaborative process would develop). It would be self-publishing on steroids with no more advances and every hobbyist doing it. I imagine that, with no more gate-keepers, the landscape would be a lot more like U-Tube and the blogosphere: a sea of low quality stuff around with the occasional good piece floating to the surface.
As a writer, I don't know if that should scare me or intrigue me.
Oh, and copyright/piracy issues would be a mess. That's definitely scarey.

Nope. I don't think they'll take over. They're not reader friendly.

On the other hand, I have a much more reader friendly give-away on my blog today--a brand new compact DVD. And shipping is my Christmas gift to whoever wins! Can't beat that for friendly :-)

dave-

I think publishers will still be relevant, just in a different way. They are still the ones with resources for advertisement, co-op money and placement, they provide editorial services and of course the endorsement that comes with being published by a major publisher. It seems to me that their position will be weakened somewhat, but I don't really think they're going anywhere.

And contracts are getting MORE complicated, not less, with the advent of new technologies and a rapidly changing environment. This increases the need for the expertise afforded by literary agents.

We're not going anywhere either.

This is tough one. The modern technology is very exciting though. I hope there will always be room for both. For authors, it's way more exciting to have a hardcover book that WE wrote in our hands--something tangible. But of course if the new wave brings mass sales, can't complain about that.

I think the only people that would gain from this would be the Publishers. I mean there's definitely gonna be less cost involved with publishing an electronic book and I don't see how that will give the authors more money. Especially when the electronic books cost considerably less. The lower the book price, the lower the royalty payout. Right?
And the following comparison is a leap but electronic greeting cards haven't ousted the paper card industry? I think the Kindle and E-Books will be an added surplus to publishing and book sales with print books still in higher demand.

I'm thinking Booksurge is going to bigger than this Kindle thing and possibly put all agents out of work. I'm just kidding. Nathan, I have no doubt that you'll be the last agent standing for a good long while:)

No doubt you're right, Nathan. I was just putting my speculative fiction hat on, while you're monitoring the industry, real world, from the inside.

I sure hope so, anyway. I don't really think I'd like the chaotic future I was hypothesizing. I'd much rather have collaborative specialist-to-specialist relationships with an agent and editors. Looking for an agent is probably about as entrepreneurial as I'm comfortable with on my own.

I've been doing more thinking on this and I'm wondering if there will be a difference in the way writers get paid.

(Not that I've been paid for writing- YET)

I tried to think of more ways an e-reader would be handy. Weekly dose of People mag? Maybe. But wouldn't that be like taking your laptop to the can with you? Come on. Admit- where else do you read trashy mags???

I'd like to hear what students think. Lightweight, easily updated? OR highlight, underline, make notes in the margins?

I'm using a gorgeous MacBook right now but I get irritated when I'm on a hot streak and the batteries wear down. My Moleskine never runs out of batteries. And the debate rolls on...

I thought about this thread last night while I was reclining on my bed, reading Iceland's Bell by Halldor Laxness. I asked myself whether I'd be as comfortable holding an ereader as I was holding the book.

I don't think I would be. I think reading would lose some of its intimacy in those curl-up-with-a-book times. I realize that's largely psychological and it reminds me of back in 1983 when I was writing with a computer and friends said they could never do that because the computer puts distance between them and their writing that they don't have with a pencil and paper. My thought then was, the computer is a tool and the pencil is a tool and it really doesn't matter which tool you prefer.

Ereaders might be the same kind of thing. Maybe it doesn't matter how the story is delivered, not really, but to the person on the other end, it might. Cold plastic (or even warm plastic) doesn't match the feel of a book.

I thought of another disadvantage. I'm a research addict. Whether I'm researching something for a writing project or just for fun, I usually have several books around me, open to relevant pages so I can compare what they each say. I can't afford that many ebook readers.

Even this Laxness book I'm reading. It's not an easy book, and it's taking me a while. It contains a number of cultural references and Icelandic and Latin phrases that aren't familiar to the average English-speaking reader, so I'm frequently flipping back to the endnotes. If I could mouse over the term and have the note pop up like it might on some e-readers now or in the future, that would be a cool thing (and another reason why these things would be useful for students).

But often, reading involves flipping around in the book. I might need to flip back because something I read makes me want to double-check something that I read earlier in the book (like, to admire a writer's use of foreshadowing), or I might need to flip ahead to the endnotes or glossary or a map or whatever. That's so easy in a book.

SO, I think that we'll see more and more ebooks as time goes on, but I just don't think the paper book will go away, especially as paper scientists develop better recycled paper or even a synthetic substitute. But I just don't think that integrated circuits and LCD displays will be the thing that does to paper what paper did to vellum. Something will, someday, but I don't think this is it.

People talk as if MP3s have replaced CDs and downloadable movies have consigned DVDs to history. Well, I was in my local HMV store a day or two ago and they still had plenty of both on the shelves. There is a tactile experience even with CDs and DVDs, a sense of ownership, that doesn't come with the digital equivalents. But the digital equivalents are doing very well. If we apply this model to the publishing industry, I think we'll see both printed books and E-books exist alongside each other quite peacefully.

One interesting thing has happened in music as a result of the MP3 format: new talent is finding its way past the traditional gatekeepers. Word-of-mouth has helped people like the Artic Monkeys and Kate Nash get straight to the public, leaving the big labels playing catch-up. The overall effect has been beneficial for the music industry. The public had gotten fed up with the constant diet of pre-packaged plastic groups the music industry was feeding them. There has been a shift, however, and now the public can find new music for themselves. It's then up to the industry pick up the ball and run with it.

With E-books, we could see the same thing happening. Perhaps writers will establish their own readerships across the Internet, meaning new talent can break through without the accountants having to do profit analysis before signing a new author. One of these days, a new writer is going to become a hit without the assistance of the traditional industry. When that happens (and I believe it's a when, not an if) we'll see some radical changes.

But here's a point: With the ubiquity of the Internet and the emergence of portable reading devices, as well as PDAs and mobile phones that gain more functionality day-by-day, it follows that the way people read will affect what they read. We keep applying this debate to novels as they currently exist as bound paper, or nonfiction books that sit on our coffee tables. As time becomes more precious in modern life, and chances to read become fewer and farther between, how will that impact the nature of the content? If a person has twenty minutes on the train to read twice a day, will they want something that fits that time? Will novels become shorter? Will chapters by necessity become snappier? Will the short story or novella make a come back?

Or will other ways of gathering words and ideas together emerge that fit with the modern world? After all, this whole blogging thing is only a few years old to most of us...

Oh, and in my view, Nathan is spot on: the agent, and the publishing industry as a whole, won't go anywhere, but the nature of what they do will almost certainly be transformed in the not very distant future.

Aloha,

I hope it doesn't happen in my lifetime. I'm a dinosaur. I like being a dinosaur.

I only surf on boards over nine feet in length, with paraffin on their decks and no %#$%#& leashes. I like never talking on the telephone unless I am at home or in some pay booth of my choosing. I listen to music in my car...not voices. (unless, of course, it is a rough day and I'm talking to myself).

I like grabbing a book and taking it on a plane or a train, or taking it to a park or the beach, and never worrying about it needing batteries.

They have not yet made the gadget that I will read books on...

I'm sorry to keep coming back but I find this topic fascinating!

I am interested in what Conduit said about the sense of ownership. That's part of it for me. A downloaded song does not feel real to me. But then, I'm oldish. We old people like the old ways better, grrf grrft grunt.

I think some of us have an identity thing with our books. If it's on the shelf, it defines me, it's part of who I am. This is what I've read. Some people even use their bookshelves to lie. A whole row of classics that have never been opened. Status symbols. Not one of them cost $400 though.

Re: Electronic Books - My Thoughts

Hi. Great topic. Lots to think about in it. Nice touch, the video link too.
OK, to your question:

Where and why do I read? What are my habits and my preferences?

I am an avid reader. I collect books all the time for my library, new books, books I want to keep, reread, share, savor. For Christmas, I am installing eight new Ikea bookcases in my house.

I read approximately 10 to 20 books at a time on a regular basis in bed: usually something like this:
1-3 novels, ranging from Literary Fiction (that illusive genre) to science fiction
1-6 self improvement or spiritual books (Yes, I admit it. I am a junkie for new ideas about how to live well and in harmony - bla-bla-bla, let me at it.)
1-4 reference books, books that give me information on computers, business, formats, art, etc.
1-3 books on philosophy, ideas, theories

Reading in bed is fab. It is relaxed, relaxing, if I want to lean back, think about something, take a break, go to sleep with an idea or a thought or a story passage, I can. All I need are my reading glasses, my books and a lamp. I would miss that most of all.

(Reading on the beach is an extension of that, not to forget you can shake the sand off a book, roll over on it, sleep with it, and its still there.)


I also read on the computer, but research mostly. I gobble up google, whether it is about something that just occurred tome, something someone spoke to me about or connected to a project or writing project that I am working on.

Reading in front of the computer is informational and communicational. I love e-mail and electronic communications. That is reading I start before coffee even.

The biggest problem with computer reading is that it hurts my eyes. I love it for information and communication, but I hate it for pleasurable reading. My eyes feel like two strawberries afterwards.
It is bad for my eyes.

The second biggest problem with electronic books for me is that computers will crash, shouldn't get full of sand on the beach, need electricity, hum, and you can’t unplug with them (unplugging battery dependence too). In addition, they just aren't well loved for the pleasure of the novel, i.e., better send to amazon.com for a novel than read one on a computer.

I WILL read information on a computer, but not pleasurable books or ones I want to really study. I have plenty of friends who publish on the computer. Good stuff too, useful or interesting. But I just don't get pleasure with e-books. They are a must-have and not-available-anywhere-else resort. When I can buy it in print, get back to me.

Personally, I think e-books will be great for college texts and information. It will save a lot of lugging heavy books through campuses or expensive book fees.

However, you would have to wrestle me to take away the pile of books I keep next to my bed to try to replace them with electronic books. I have never met an avid novel reader who takes their novels, by preference, electronically.
I suspect there will be choices and should be. In both cases, bigger print will be needed.

I appreciate, also your take on this subject. I will try to keep an open mind,
(but I have a guard dog for my library coming on e-Bay.)

-CarBeyond

(Typos, like Freudian slips, are usually left behind with great amusement, but in this case, I did try to clean some of them up.)

I get that e-books, to some people, have a slight convenience edge on book books. But not much of one.

I run an unofficial library at my school, as our school library is a quarter of a mile from the freshman building. Though a lot of kids get busted for it, we are not allowed portable electronic devices in the building. I can't see them ever relaxing that policy, because if you can cheat on a cell phone, you can certainly cheat on an e-reader.

Plus, I wouldn't be able to share books I love with people I know will love them too. A good 80% of my group of friends, for one reason or another, is not allowed by their family to go to Books-A-Million. There are times when I'm their sole provider of wordy entertainment. If paper books die off, what happens to that? With e-books, all sorts of bizarro copyright issues crop up if you try to share them. Not just bookstores but libraries would die out, and then what happens to people who don't have an expendable budget for books?

This is a huge bias for me, I admit: just today I put a French-English dictionary in my purse because it was feeling too light (where it keeps company with a Bible, Spanish and Japanese phrasebooks, and the occasional fantasy or historical romance). I love the feel and the weight and the experience of brick-dense paper books, and I'll never stop.

I guess if bookstores die out, they die out, but I want to walk into a bookstore at least once a week for the rest of my life. If books aren't gone 'til I am, not my problem. Though I want my kids, someday, to love books just as much as I do.

Woohoo, soapbox!

I don't know... a paper book won't crash on me or need recharging.

It'll probably be like how the DVD has eclipsed VHS. Hopefully, however, it'll be a lot slower. All that reading on a screen certainly won't do my eyes-that-need-glasses any good.

The thought of not having a bookstore to walk into a blow my money in is a little frightening, to be honest. I mean, yes, I download an awful lot of music through iTunes, but there's still nothing like walking into an actual music store and browsing.

Or maybe I just don't like change!

I entered the newspaper business twenty years ago. When computers came on the scene and later internet, everyone screamed that newspapers were going to die.

We adjusted by launching a website and on-line job sites.

Twenty years later, our newspaper group has grown. Our classified sales force has grown. There is no gloom and doom in sight.

I love my book. I like to feel it, smell it and hear the 'slap' on the table when I drop it. My daughter, who is 18, spends just as much time checking out library books as she spends online. My sixteen year old son just bought six Clancy novels. Paper ones.

The reading appetite of the public is voracious, whether electronic or paper. It will simply grow. There's no limit.

The other reason I embrace paper novels is because I made a whopping $9.75 on three months worth of electronic sales on my novel. Sheesh.

Nathan! Nathan! Are you ill? It's Thursday night. I came to read your blog and *gasp* there's no entry today. I'm sending you a hot toddy in case you need one (how about egg nog with Crown Royal?), and hope you'll be back soon.

The best thing about paper books is that you don't need any special technology to read them. You buy them, stick them on your shelf, and barring flood, fire or vermin, you can read them over and over for decades. Nobody suddenly takes them "off line" or switches the technology on you.

If you buy an ebook in 2010, are you still going to be able to read it in 2015? Or will the technology have changed so much that it will be like trying to find a way to read a 5 1/4" disk in today's world?

The environmental issue isn't cut and dried. Electronic books use environmental resources too. Unless your ebook is solar-powered, you may be using nonrenewable energy every time you read it. Whereas paper is a renewable and recyclable resource, and doesn't use any more resources after its initial creation.

Thanks liquidambar. Now that you mentioned renewable energy, I can comment on here and count it as work.

It will take one more generation after this one, about 20 years. And you forgot to mention that millions of trees will be saved when all newspapers and magazines can be accessed on the book readers, probably along with tv and radio, music, etc. A ubiquitous device to read and see everything.

As my husband commented, trees may be saved for newspaper and magazines, but people WILL print out their books. How many trees will that save?

I've read quite a few books on my Palm. The feel of reading on it versus a real book in hand wasn't a dramatic difference for me. I liked having a dictionary handy to look up words which I could more easily do on a Palm.

However, I've purchased only one e-book. I can't say as I would purchase another e-book. Why? It's not the feel, but the value of what I've purchased. I can use a software program again and again and still have a sense of its value. A book, I may read once or twice or just buy if I really like it. I can't resell or donate an e-book. (Sorry, have to make room for the new ones.) To sell me on purchasing an e-book would be a low price, but unfortunately at the author's and publisher's expense.

For big time travelers e-books can be a nice solution to space. I like to read some history books when I travel- usualy 700+pages and hate sticking them in my bag and hate leaving them behind. * Portability is an issue. Good travel solution. I believe the ebooks may offer some marketing gimmicks that pull in readers to buying into new authors. I hardley ever buy any books at the book store any more. All *new* used books on sale on Amazon or Alibris or whoever else. That said, I'm an online browser and the ebooks tool may be the next thing for Pushing options to people and subsequently have increased success over time. Adoption of the online ebook is just a question of time and ultimately could represent a salvation for books over time. It seems that the readership community is getting older and older and its good to see a technology that may put more books into young adults hands. Old schoolers may stick with paper but change is on the way for a younger generation.

Kindle... sounds like a suggestion to go burn all of one's embarrassingly old-fashioned paper books.

Yay! The leftovers were nice, but fresh is better.

I never watch TV. Last week (while having my teeth cleaned) I heard an ad for the Bachelor finale, and thought, "Oh good, I'll get to hear what happened from Nathan!" That is pretty shocking!

I suspect people deliberately query you around the holidays so they can have more than five minutes of hope. :)

The kitchen didn't catch on fire. No one got drunk and admitted something embarrassing. No in-law fights on the front lawn. Pretty boring day.

We all made it out alive.

Better than last year...

;)

Don't know if this qualifies as hilarous but it ticked me off...

http://vinster82.blogspot.com/

My in-laws played "Are you smarter than a fifth grader" game after Thanksgiving dinner.

They aren't.

Well, our small group consumed six bottles of wine in just two hours. Dinner was at noon, and my 84 year-old grandpa and I were both passed out in the living room in our turkey coma/drunkenness by 2:30. I'm not sure if that qualifies as hilarious or pathetic, but, it's true.

From my nine-year-old son on Thanksgiving: "I want to go with you to buy my Christmas presents so you get the right stuff, then I'll erase my memory--but without drinking beer."

I had to boil turkey bones for my son's school project on bones. And then I had to look up labels on the internet.

Gee. I hope I get an A.

Yeah, I saw that Kindle thing too. Amazon have a bunch of videos about it, including various big name authors giving it their thumbs up. It looks interesting.

Hi Nathan,

May I ask a question that's unrelated to this post?

Say a person has the opportunity to publish a novel in a foreign country (it'll be translated to said country's language), how does that affect American rights and all that great stuff?

Anon-

Depends on the contract.

Thanksgiving stories? Lord have mercy, have I got an entire week's worth of blog posts of those. Bad food, inappopriate comments, kosher turkey, drunken relatives and strange people showing up at all hours - we had it all.

I want a Kindle too. I was thinking that maybe it could save me having to carry so many books to school, but not all the books I need are available for it yet.

That's hilarious, Scott.

Definitely smarter than an average fifth grader...Watch out.

7 million eh? Yeah, that's a lot. I'd share my turkey story but I'm from Canada and we celebrated Thanksgiving awhile ago.

I don't normally watch The Bachelor, but this time I tuned in to the last ten minutes or so (mostly because a football game was on during the shows I usually watch). At first I was irritated with him, because why did he make that big stink about the first girl and then not choose the second one either?

Then I thought, "Well, maybe he does have some moral fiber -- he didn't want to lead them on."

And *then* I thought, "What kind of guy with moral fiber wants to be on The Bachelor in the first place? He just wanted to meet a bunch of pretty girls and get paid to kiss them all."

That was the funniest part of my week.

Glad you mentioned the Kindle. It’s an odd, unattractive piece of design, reminiscent of a thin, telephone answering machine, or some strange etch-a-sketch/writing tablet. I love technology and gadgets, but in terms of form following function, the Kindle misses the aesthetic spot, for me.

Kindle? It makes me think ‘kinder’ or ‘spindle’. What does Kindle mean? At least zune rhymes with tune!!!

Welcome back!

Glad you mentioned the Kindle. As well as the odd name, it’s an unattractive piece of design, reminiscent of a thin, telephone answering machine, or some strange etch-a-sketch/writing tablet. I love technology and gadgets, but in terms of form following function, the Kindle misses the aesthetic spot, for me.

Nothing but term-paper writing and studying for finals for this graduate on Thanksgiving day, and every day between now and the end of the semester.

Speaking of Kindle, I wonder how hot that thing gets? Kinda like a laptop battery? Ouch. Also seems tough on the eyes too. Even if I had the dough to blow, I'd pass on it.

My Niece's young son turned from an engaging boy into a surly teen before our very eyes. Now he ignores and grunts with the best of them.

My other niece and I actually stuffed the turkey and had it in the oven in less than five minutes. We made the stuffing the day before and had everything ready. Shoved four hands into that carcass, spread some salt and pepper and shoved it into the oven with a cup of Proseco in the roaster. It magically appeared three hours later tender and delicious.

Funny, if two people spent five minutes stuffing four hand into me, I'd have complained. The turkey never said a word.

Josephine,

The e-ink technology takes no power when it's not rearranging into new letters, so the Kindle shouldn't get warm at all. I've played with the similar Sony reader and it was plenty cool.

It really does look similar to paper, except when the the letters dissolve and rearrange into new words.

It's almost magical.

I love technology and gadgets, but in terms of form following function, the Kindle misses the aesthetic spot, for me.

Oh, me too! That thing is ugly. I know I am spoiled by Apple stuff, but really...would a little nice design have hurt?

I agree. The Kindle just doesn't do it for me. Give me a paper book any old day!

Nathan, did you see on Paper Cuts that the "Times of London" named On Chesil Beach as best novel of the year?

Laurel, thanks for the info... now if only I can keep my clunky old laptop from getting hot....

Nathan,

Did you see the pics in the media of Spencer serving Thanksgiving dinner to the homeless at the LA Mission?

He's an angel.

I don't have any Thanksgiving tales to tell, but may I recommend this delightful bit on leftovers by the humor columnist in the Salt Lake Tribune? Robert Kirby is really funny.
http://www.sltrib.com/columnists/ci_7558354

Hi Nathan. I remember you answering this a few weeks ago, but I couldn't find it by looking at your labels.

An agent asks for a partial. When is it okay to send the polite e-mail reminder?

I guess the Kindle would be great for people who need to drag piles of books with them everywhere. It does seem that a lot of thought went into its design, but it is not pretty to look at.

yes I do think that's important. I judge books by their covers. I think lots of people do but not everybody admits it.

I'm not a gadget techno person at all, so the packaging is more important to me than specifications. Also, despite not being into tech, I'm a Mac snob, so I have very little regard for that thing.

Bottom line? I love books. I love reading them, holding them in my hands, and lining them up on my shelf. As much as I hate leaving the house, especially to spend money, I love the bookstore.

I can't see myself owning a Kindle any time soon.

Hi, Nathan.

I just want to ask is it possible to publish a book in USA although author lives in another country and if he has to translate book into English?

Thanks.

P.S.
Sorry for my English

disturbing images of books piled up and flaming high into the night. didn't someone think of this? it reminds me of the campaign to market the vauxhall nova car in italy. 'no va' - doesn't go - tremendous!
anyway, the kindle will NOT take off unless there's a place in it for you to tuck your bus/train ticket. you heard it here first.

Glad you are back. I'm eager to read your take on Kindle.

No great stories from this Thanksgiving but over on my blog I am rehashing my one year of hell as a mall Santa.

My 4 year old daughter said she liked the Thanksgiving Beast.

I'd have been more shocked if the bachelor chose them both.

Still... I worry about this man. Will he find love? Will he maintain those perfect pecks? Will his twin brother have plastic surgery to remove the resemblance? My heart goes out to Glenn... or Bruce... or is it Gary?

Topher, best wait for Nathan to confirm, but I seem to remember he said send the most brief email possible after one month.

Heidi, what about the thrill an author gets seeing people carrying around their book? A kindle gizmo does not give that effect.

re:the Kindle. What about book signings? How does one sign a copy of their kindled book? Will book signings disappear?

I could see book signings becoming rare, extremely high-profile events if things like Kindle take off. To have a physical, signed copy of an author's work would be like owning the Holy Grail of that publication. Publishers would probably limit publications like that to a few hundred and even less would probably get signed.

I have always wondered how you guys/gals (agents) do this. Once again, thank you for the hidden insight Nathan!

Tom

Kelly Ripa does "Bachelor theater" every Tuesday morning. You should check into that... ;)

And just who is this Tim Gunn person? His photo scares me.

I think from a writing perspective it can be interesting knowing the ending (and the story) when you're reading. It's fun at times to see how the author executes and how something works (or doesn't).

Wait, you like Project Runway too? Excellent.

Gosh. Am I the only person who doesn't watch any reality shows?

Thanks for the post. For some reason, I am scared of writing synopses... something about selling my stories short.

Whoa. You mean I've actually been doing something right all along?
Cool.

New season of Project Runway! So cool! Nathan, if every once in a while you post about Project Runway, instead of the Hills, I would so love it!

I personally would love if every book I want to read would come with a synopsis so that I don't have to skip to the last page to see what happens! But I am weird that way.

Wow... you brought out the heavy artillary... invoking Tim Gunn!

I loved your post on "the other things I do in a day". Very good to know. And, I have a dramatic theory that the Bachelor is not going to pick ANYone this season, but my husband thinks I'm playing right into their hands by believing that.

I've probably read mine a hundred times already. It gets to the point where you have a manuscript memorized and can quote verses from it.

Synopsis= ending.

Yay! I did it right!!

Hi Nathan,
Any thoughts on how to develop the "what works" reading style for ourselves? Short of giving up our jobs and moving to New York to become publishing interns for years, I mean.

I really like what I've written. So does my mom. And a handful of less invested readers. And I know how to read for my own pleasure and for English Lit classes. I'm pretty confident my work passes both those tests. But I can't shake the notion that my baby is going stumble into the big, bad publishing world only to fall on its face without my ever really knowing why.

I'd like to be a savvy parent. So how does the "what works" reading style work?

Dave-

Belonging to a critique group can help, because it forces you to read for quality, but honestly I don't know if there's a substitute for manning a slush pile at some point (whether at an agency, publisher, journal, etc.). It strips away a lot of what you think you've learned about writing, books, etc., and really focuses your readin eyes.

Hey Nathan. Great blog (I've rarely read about the Hills more) that I'm glad I discovered. I actually have a question that I have a great deal of difficulty finding the answer to...

If I want to publish a book under a pseudonym, should I send in query letters using that pseudonym or my real name? I fear if I use my pseudonym potential agents may feel 'duped' when I tell them my real name, and choose not to work with me as a result. Am I being paranoid, or are my instincts correct?

Anyway, thanks for having this forum where these questions can actually be asked and answered.

anon-

I prefer that people query with their real name, although if you want to use a pseudnym you can mention that in the query.

When you find design flaws, do you (or other agents) ever take a moment to tell the propsective client in your rejection note just what it is?

Also, are there some "designs" that you just steer clear of no matter what the subject - like, say, word length, do some turn you off instantly?

anon-

I have to respond to queries with a form letter and can't respond to follow up questions. I would never get through the day otherwise.

On partials, I try and give some sense of why I'm passing, but again, I just don't have the time to get too in depth (and sometimes I'm just going on a gut feeling I can't fully explain)

The only time I can really go in depth is with clients or people I'm hoping become clients. Otherwise I just don't hvae the time.

Nathan,

I agree - The Hills is just not working these days. I no longer find myself anxiously awaiting the next episode.

And I hope I'm not spoiling it for anyone, but I fear the episodes will only get worse with the current strike...

Nathan,

I often find myself with the same architectual slant in the reading and revision of my writing (going so far as to become flawed by perfectionism). Because of this, I think I guard the climactic points and the endings of my books and stifle my queries. Is the ending something I should allude to in the query as well?

I think a critique group can substitute for a slush pile, depending on how many submissions there are per week to the queue.

The one I belong to has a wide variety of queues, each with a different genre. I find that by choosing a few from each queue and reading them through--not to crit, mind you, but just to read--then you can get a good idea at the variations in quality.

I've read several submissions that were technically quite solid, but boring when it came to actual content. OTOH, I've read several that had very interesting ideas, but were technical nightmares, i.e. grammar, punctuation, etc.

Of course when you have to read through a slush pile as part of your job, there exists a pressure to read with a far more judicial eye than one might otherwise employ.

Thanks. I neede a couple YA Christmas gifts.

One question, and it's hypothetical but it occured to me while reading the post:

What if the agent sends you a personal rejection that indicates the project wasn't right for them but encouraging you to query them again, does the six month rule still apply or should you try to speed it up before they forget about you?

Merry-

If the agent says to re-query or wants to see a revision, the six month rule doesn't apply.

Justin Bobby must have gone to the David Caruso school of non-method acting, horizontally speaking.

Dear Nathan, a question from the UK. I am at the stage where i feel ready to query agents, and i am keen to query you, but am i better finding a suitable agent from Curtis Brown in the UK?

Thanks, Juliet

Juliet-

It depends on the project -- if it's something that would do better in the UK you're probably better with a UK agent. If it's more universal and you're focusing on selling it in the US, it doesn't matter as much.

And just FYI, although we share the same name and a common past, Curtis Brown and Curtis Brown UK are separate companies and operate independtly of each other.

thanks for the prompt response and info, i hadn't realised that the UK/US Curtis Brown were separate. The novel deals with the universal themes of guilt, sex and dying, but is firmly set in the home counties of the UK, so on reflection i think it would be better if i queried UK agents.

reagards, Juliet

I liked the Justin Bobby and Audrina developments last night...I sense an upcoming defining moment in their relationship/non-relationship.

I know this isn't the point of your blog, but I was wondering if you might have any advice for a recent college grad who aspires to be a non-serial killer editorial assistant.

Caitlin-

You might check out my post on how to become a literary agent. The procedure is very similar for becoming an editorial assistant, only transpose "agency" with "publishing house." Also, a good place to look for job leads are the PublishersMarketplace job board and MediaBistro.

Jeez, everyone knows that The Wrath of Khan is the best Star Trek movie, and not just because of the immortal line, "You Klingon son, you murdered my bastard!"

I'm sure all writers fall into the trap of reading rejection letters as though they were tea leaves. Did the agent only mean that that project wasn't suitable for him/her, or did the agent actually mean, "God, your writing sucks! Please don't query me again, ever."

Wait, was that a different movie? Oh, well.

could it be that the writers' strike is also affecting "reality" tv?

You mention an agent being a "good fit" and "really liking" an agent, which got me thinking...

Say, hypothetically, that a writer reads a certain agent's blog regularly and shares his goofy sense of humor, love of good writing, and dependency on bad reality TV.

And say this writer has one manuscript that fits within the genres which the hypothetical agent represents--say a YA--but all the rest of her work is stuff he doesn't sell (ie. middle grade and younger).

And the writer knows there's another hypothetical agent at the same hypothetical agency who does handle kids' stuff, but the writer just "really likes" blog-agent and feels he'd be "a good fit" for her one ms. But she also knows the best agents represent careers, not just books.

So...

Would it be stupid for her to query blog-agent? Would it be a waste of everyone's hypothetical time?

That was the long...here is the short of it.

1.There are only so many children's book agents.

2. Many of us who write for children have at least one YA in our drawer.

3. A tempting number of adult agents handle YA.

Is it a mistake to pursue an agent for that one YA manuscript alone, knowing that the other ones aren't a fit?

The whole Adult-Agents-Repping-YA phenomenon can be really frustrating for us kids' writers.

(okay, that was long too.)

krw3b-

Good question. I think a good fit personality and enthusiasm-wise (on the part of both parties) is more important than a strict genre focus, particularly when this hypothetical agent is a genre bender to begin with.

genre bender

hahaha.

I had to read that three times before I got it right.

and thanks.

I'd say it's a toss up between First Contact and Wrath of Khan, myself.

As a former editorial assistant, let me just say: more of us are serial killers than you might expect.

And thanks for the general guidelines--I'm wondering if this applies to a situation in which an agent switches agencies. I queried and heard nothing. Now I learn the agent has moved agencies about the time I queried. Am I safe to try the agent again at the new location?

Redzilla-

Yeah, in the case of the agent switching agencies I'd wait six months and if you haven't heard try again.

What about querying a new book after you have withdrawn a different one because you signed with someone else, but are agentless again?

Clear as mud?

And when you say you rarely take on a middle grade project, would you explain what qualities might convince you to take one on?

And would it waste your time if one were to query with a MG?

colorado writer-

Sorry, I don't understand the first question. But if it's a new book, when in doubt the six month rule applies.

As for the second question, if I'm blown away by a MG project I'm not going to pass on it. I know the editors, I know the houses, the contracts, the success stories etc. etc., it's just that as a reader I don't always respond to MG like I do with other genres, and so my personal threshold to take it on is higher. And it's not a specialty of mine so I don't want to misrepresent my interests.

But if I'm blown away and the author is game I could see it happening. That's why I say when in doubt just go ahead and query me.

You talked about re-querying with a different project. What about re-querying after a year or two with the same project, having greatly revised both project and query? Is that a no-no? (Supposing the response the first time around was an encouraging, personalized rejection, but not an invitation to revise and resubmit.)

Sorry. :) The question was confusing. I'll blame it on the writer's strike or something.

You've answered it anyway.

Thanks Nathan. You are kinda cool.

kate-

Unless the agent specifically asks for a rewrite you're not supposed to re-query for a work you've already sent, even if it's revised.

I really hesitate to make an exception to this rule because it's hard enough reading queries for projects the first time around, but let me just say that all an agent can say is no. But if you do try again with people you risk g alienating someone who could have potentially been your agent down the line. So it's a tough call.

Nathan ---

Thank you so much for the post. :) It clears up a lot.

My question is--

If the agent says to re-query, should you mention that when you do send him another query? For example: Four months ago, you asked me to query you again with another project...or something like that

Angelle-

Absolutely positively 100% mention it and you might also want to include their e-mail to you below your e-mail. Otherwise they might not remember you.

Thank you, Nathan. :)

You know, it'd be nice to think that re-querying tact would come as common sense to me (winces) but I'm afraid I've been guilty of the query rejection rebound. Thanks for setting it straight.

How about when you don't hear from the agent - an agent you met and talked to and who liked your pitch? Should you assume quiet is a no, or that emails get lost? Send the exact same query once again via snail mail, or refer to the old one, mentioning something about how it may have disappeared?

Obsessing? Moi?

anon-

The rule of thumb for follow-ups is once a month, exceedingly politely, via e-mail. Here's a full post on it.

Okay, I'll finally bite.

Is the Hills on cable?

And have you watched Journeyman? It's like The Time Traveler's Wife moved to San Francisco? We watch it with our sons every Monday night now. It's the first show we've watched consistently since our children first arrived.

topher1961-

The Hills is on MTV. And haven't seen Journeyman -- I usually give new shows a season or two, and if people are still talking about them I get them on DVD over the summer.

Let’s say that after unsuccessfully attempting to place a first manuscript, a writer has a second manuscript that an agent would like to represent. Is it a faux pas to ask the agent to read the earlier manuscript, which the agent rejected at the query stage? I would imagine it’s fine, but can also see how it might make someone starting out appear difficult. If this is O.K., how often would you say it happens and how often would you say the earlier manuscript is actually good?

Anon-

If the agent becomes your agent then they're going to want to see most anything you've written. Usually when it's the second manuscript that attracts an agent the first isn't as good and it's put in a drawer, but it's always possible to pull it out and polish it up at some point.

I'd keep the focus on the current manuscript until that sells -- then, when you're discussing next projects, you can pull that one out or chart out new territory. Just make sure to talk to your agent.

Thanks!

Good to know! Thanks.

I had an agent ask for a revision on my thriller. I sent her an email when I finished it. She never replied. So now I'm wondering if I should query with another agent within the same agency.

Heather-

Follow up, via e-mail, politely, once a month until you hear back from the agent who requested the revision. If it's a no, follow the 6 month rule.

I'm going to ask this question even though I think I know the answer.

Let's say I've sent out a query letter to an agent and had it rejected. I then did a lot of research, learned how a query letter should read, and then re-wrote my letter and it's now much more engaging. Can I send the query to the agent who rejected me even though it's the same project?

You're going to say no, aren't you?

(As an aside, when I met this agent at a seminar, she didn't seem to recognize the project, but she did express interest in the idea/plot.)

Sandy

Hey there, I came on over after lots of absolutewrite browsing... hoping to drop in more frequently! Great Site!

You HAVE to be kidding me about the adjective comment. All I hear is "Cut your adjectives, Wendy! Use simple words! No one cares how you did on the SATs!" I edited a nice, fat one out of my paragraph entry.

Ah, put perhaps Good Girl Lit is being facetious. (Or, perhaps, I actually do overuse adjectives.)

Don't you mock me.

Wendy NYC-

Honestly I coquettishly have to pleasantly say that I verily think May is totally kidding.

Whew! I was going to have to pick them all off the floor and stuff them back in my WIP.

Might I totally unsolicitedly suggest that next time you brutally and ruthlessly limit each entrant to solely one entry?

Because shouldn't a writer be able to perspicaciously choose which paragraph he or she has painstakingly written would most propitiously represent his or her ouevre?

I have to agree with the last comment about the number of paragraphs.
If there's no interest with the first paragraph, I doubt more would change that. Then again, the first paragraph could be the best part of the entire works.

But who can resist a plethora of pinatas?

I love "Verily" and use it constantly, incessantly--a plethora of verilys is like an endless supply of Sweetarts. You can never have just one.

nathan, i've heard you mention ANTM but never see you comment on it. are you watching this season??

cyn-

Oh yes. I've been watching, but have been rendered speechless by what were unquestionably the worst makeovers in ANTM history. I don't even know what to say.

Oh, I knew I should have entered that WIP called 'A Plethora of Veritable Cornucopias'.

Fie and forsooth, I have verily missed my chance. I am but a dastardly poltroon with scant understanding of the wants of the readership. A pox on my keyboard, and fiddlesticks to my screen.

Where's the pickle jar? I feel a bout of comfort eating coming on...

Hi Nathan,

Thanks again for the contest.

I recall a comment or ten after the last competition about the number of first lines involving death. This round seems to have even more. Perhaps a few seemingly "live" openers really were about that vampire in the basement. Dead, dying, and undead main characters, plus funerals, murder, corpses ... We seem to be a death-obsessed crew.

Is this death rate comparable to what you see in your usual query basket? Is it a trend? Or perhaps your blog audience skews toward a particular tone or genre? Just curious as to how our batch meshes with what you normally get.

Thanks.

Thanks.

I didn't mean to duplicate the end of that previous post, but I'm happy to thank you twice, thrice, hundreds of times for what is sure to be a very long judging process. I haven't even caught up with today's yet.

Nathan,

You mentioned that runner ups will win a prize too? Out of curiousity, how many runner ups will you have? And if they are getting query critiques, would you mind asking if they would let you do it on your blog so we can all benefit? Would be really fascinating since we are seeing first paragraphs anyway and it could keep take care of several blog posts for you too.

Just a thought! HOpe you are hanging in there!

entry #2

Everyone always stares. I guess they're just curious about what happened, but it still hurts to be different. After many months of being stuck in a hospital bed, I've decided that everyone has scars. Some are just tucked away on the inside. My childhood ended the summer I turned twelve years old. It's funny how nobody ever tells you that bad things can happen to kids too. But here a year later I am reminded of that every day.

Uh, Hi there... You should know, I've given you a forced appearance on my blog for the Thursday Thirteen. *clearing throat*

I only report what I know, of course...and that's not much.

Really liked the Good Girl Lit blog. Really, really... :D Made my post on a non writing forum that has some writers on it a bit more acceptable... LOL, wow, that's complicated. And TOTALLY secret codish, don't you think? No, you have no time to think.

Just ignore me.

Ooo, Ello, Good questions!!

Jennifer-

I agree that Ello left some good questions. And let me answer them as clearly as I can.

1. You mentioned that runner ups will win a prize too? Out of curiousity, how many runner ups will you have?

I have no idea.

2. And if they are getting query critiques, would you mind asking if they would let you do it on your blog so we can all benefit?

I will do so if I feel that the query critique will benefit the blog community. Oftentimes my advice is banal, like, clean up the language, personalize, or don't tell me about your hang nail, but other times I feel the critique will help elucidate a broader point. So I guess the answer to this is we'll see.

mkcbunny-

I feel like the incidences of death on the blog are actually disproportionately more common than my query inbox. I think this is because my regular blog readers tend to skew toward fantasy/urban fantasy, but as you can see from my query stats, I get queries pretty evenly spread from quite a few different genres.

I am LOTFLMAO
I have to drink copious amounts of bourbon just to make it through the first 50. Hey. Can't you market this as a free form anthology?

Do you think the serial scrubber will make an appearance?

There does seem to be quite a few about death, including my own. The question is what makes one different from the others.

A veritable plethora of paragraphs.

I just wanted to say that.

Nathan:

500+ entries. Holy Crap! I admire your bravery, strength, and ability to drink lots of bourbon.

I'm very behind on my Hills watching so thanks for the updates. Why haven't you commented on Elodie's sweet DIS of Heidi? So now you know how far behind I am.

Good luck on the LIFPC! I am afraid for you.

--jessica

I don't watch the Hills because I don't watch much TV. Not a snob thing, just a time thing
anyway. I'm a regular reader, but not a poster.
But you guys are way too funy.
cmr

Great contest. Have entered via your myspace page!

530 so far and still climbing!!!

Bless your heart!! Long night ahead for May and Nathan.

Spontaneous outburst: I LOVE THIS BLOG!

Nathan:
Already I'm in awe of you and May. My head spins as I try to work through all these very different openings. Sooooo many of them are sooooo good for vastly different reasons. I don't envy your work ahead, but I deeply appreciate it!

Thanks, Jessica! And yes, Elodie's dis of Heidi was pretty spectacular, made all the more so because Heidi really didn't see it coming.

As for the contest, bourbon is my only hope.

nathan, you mean it's not cool that salecia looks like tootie after her makeover? haha! you're right. i do love ANTM. the dra-ma, the bad makeovers! if only i could write a novel as deep and exciting. 8)

Do you think the serial scrubber will make an appearance?

Orion,

Snarkalicious! ;-)

From Rita Skeeter's Guide to Wizards in Love

It was one of those nights when the coquettishly waxing moon was almost full and neither one of us could sleep. My lover kept turning, each time pulling the covers off of me, and I had to rely on our pre-sleep bourbon to keep me warm. We’d had a fight just before bed—a plethora of bad breath, bad words, and bad feeling. He still insists he’s not gay, that he just likes to have sex with men because it’s rougher. And there’s a veritable cornucopia of men willing to have sex with him. I liked that first idea, that we weren’t gay, we just liked the sex. I mean, I didn’t want to be an outcast. Yet I found that I not only like the sex. I, quaintly, liked Grindelwald. Loved Grindelwald if that was possible in the little bit of time we’d known each other. That night, though, I finally had had enough of the charade and climbed out of bed, planning to sleep on the couch. “Albus,” Grindelwald called. Where are you going?

Please remember to post in the original thread! I'm not going to check other threads for entries.

"Please click around the archives, subscribe, and stick around!"

Wellll...I have been around, on mute. You know, like a submarine that goes "all silent" when they don't want another sub to know they're sniffing around? Your blog is feeding into my igoogle and my Yahoo 360 page, and I check it frequently. In fact, the "should I use a rhetorical question in my query?" post started a nice discussion on one of my writers' list several months ago. So while I'm bothering to write to confess I'm part of your silent audience, I'll take the time to say, "hey, thanks for the great advice."

Nathan - you made me dribble diet coke boogers out of my nose! Warning label next time!

And may I state for the record, "Please remember the assistants of today are the agents of tomorrow" so karma can come back to bite you bad if you are not careful.

Have a nice weekend!

"Exhiliratingly bleak" is the new "uplifting and inspiring." Hooray for 2007!! We're all going to die.

Made my day. In a weird sort of existential, absurdist kinda way.

I'm just glad that "exhiliratingly bleak" isn't the new black. Well, it sounds like black, perhaps with happy polka dots.

I miss the old fashioned kind of bleak. When I was a kid, bleak was black and that's the way it was (and we liked it, oooooh).

I'll be the fangirl that laughed out loud at reading Orlando Bloom is only famous for being some pirate.

I love me some books, but who are these people who steal them? I associate 'book fair' with a traveling event that showed up at my elementary school, where I would spend my allowance on many books, and I always felt good about spending the money. I'm surprised, I guess, that others don't...

Uh.. Nathan? Did somebody around here say "contest?"

Could have sworn it was you. Or perhaps the Evil Albino climed out of the jelly tank and used his home boy phone to hack your blogger accout and get us all in a tizzy over the potential for a little friendly competition.

I for one am already shaking by booty for Conduit to win it (whatever the contest is).

Josephine-

Contest next week! Hopefully I'll figure out what the contest is going to be by then!!

OK. Totally understand if you're still not yet recovered from the last one.

Enjoy the weekend. Bet it's nice and cool there in SF, whereas it's still 90+ here in FL, and no let up from the heat in sight. :-(

Nathan, if you don't come up with anything, you can always do a contest about the best idea for a contest.

I love your new tags! I must search now for all of your "America's Next Top Model" entries!

Nathan, thanks for making things easier with the tags! But no comments in how many reference monkeys?

"Exhiliratingly bleak" for 2007 is right on the mark!

Who the hell in their right mind is rude to assistants?

My next novel is "tragically comic."
and can be described as "distractingly focused"
It's "amazingly trite" in a "deep yet shallow way"...

I agree.
My FAVORITE PERSON IS ADAM who is UBER assistant for Dorian at WMA!!! He more than ROCKS.

It's also important to bring the wonderful beings in mail rooms macadamia nuts each time you visit NYC.

When I was 14 and didn't have an agent or a clue what I was doing, I directly called the assistant to the head editor at Scholastic to pitch my book idea....(I look back and shudder). And I didn't even get to talk to her; I got patched through to security instead. Now I think she's the head at some other big house :) and probably still remembers that strange kid she sent to the security line.

I've had many a book lost from my classroom texts and library, but only 3 stolen -- and all by the same author.
The three books were Terry Deary's Horrible Histories. When I went to a signing of his in 2005 and told him his books were the only ones I'd ever had stolen from my classroom, he was actually quite pleased.

I'm so glad you don't make more than one blog post a day. I'd never get anything done otherwise.

"Exhiliratingly bleak" is the new "uplifting and inspiring." I am so not hooked on that one.

Hey, Mr. Bransford, I'd love it if you blogged more on 'genre hopping.' What exactly is it? Why is it a bad idea? When is it a good idea? Do aspiring authors really need to worry about it since we don't have a name for ourselves yet? Thanks!

kimber an-

Good idea! I'll add that to the "future blog" list.

Nathan,

Okay I plead ignorance, and will take a wild guess on this.

“The Hills” must be a TV show that does not air on my one fuzzy CBS channel picked up by rabbit ears. I have no clue what you are talking about. But in all likelihood, most of your “frequent fliers” probably don't know that the rabbit ears I am referring to have nothing to do with a rabbit hearing anything. LOL

Jennifer Griffith--

The HILLS is a show on MTV where a group of wealthy twenty-somethings live out the daily drama of their personal and professinal lives in sunny LA.

Some of them have jobs at Teen Vogue, but mostly they seem to shop, gossip, look really cute, and kiss people. Oh, and eat out.

One character named "Justin Bobby" often wears combat boots even on the beach and "isn't into commitment and labels and stuff" which routinely breaks the character/girl "Audrina's" heart.

There's also talk of a sex tape involving a cute brunette and someone with strange blond hair named Spencer. Spencer now goes out with someone named Heidi.

I know all this from having watched exactly ONE episode. And I admit I only watched that episode after hearing Nathan talk about it on this very blog.

Oh, the powers of corruption, that Nathan Bransford has. Tsk, tsk...

--CC

Thanks for clearing that up for me, CC. Now I know why I have never heard of it, until Nathan's blog. LOL

Nathan--

Thanks for the Spencer article link. That's a gem!

And "ditto" on the assistants. They're not only the gatekeepers, they're the ones with the paper shredders. :)

Nathan,
Is it ever appropriate to re-submit a query letter?

For example...In the query letter you critiqued the other day, you admitted that the premise sounded interesting, but the lack of a clear plot was a major problem. If that author edited her letter to better explain the plot, might you reconsider? Is there any recourse for an author in this situation?

Thanks!

Interesting post, Nathan! I'm a debut author who sold a four-book series on one completed manuscript and three outlines, so as you noted, it can be done. ;)

This is a great post and can apply to novelists loath to stuff that first manuscript under the bed and start number 2- It was my third manuscript which got me represented and sold. I am now ruthlessly plundering my other manuscripts to create a brand new number 2.
No drinking for me! I have NO remorse!

Congrats, Jessica! Just out of curiosity, would you mind sharing how it came about? Does the first novel have a stand-alone plot or was it always intended to be the first part in a series?

I know there are so many counter-examples to my post, and it would be interesting to hear more about the other side of it.

Wow, so my willingness to delete in cold blood is a good thing? I think I'm feeling better today. Great pair of posts.

How true. My WIP is about my fourth and it's self-contained, though I will be leaving a couple small doors open, just in case. Otherwise, it'll be on to another story.

As for deleting, what I find myself doing is completely rewriting the questionable section/chapter from the ground up, without even looking at the original until the end. I find things turn out much shorter that way. Sometimes, I even realize I don't need the section at all! Then off it goes to Buddha . . .

I was writing the sequel to my first manuscript while I waited for responses from agents I had queried. I've received only rejections so far. My first one was from Nathan. (sniff.) As a result, I've sidelined the sequel in favor of a new project. Even though it was a stand-alone, there's no point in investing time in the next one. I'm moving on.

I think the greatest writing advice ever given was: Kill your darlings.

Sometimes the darling is a entire novel that should never see the light of day.

Stuart Kaminsky told our writers group he has 2-3 early novels that he'll burn before he dies, novels that this Edgar Grand Master recognizes were really bad, more writing exercises and learning experiences in the disguise of finished novels.

That's the way I've come to think of earlier work; they're not something I'm going to show to an agent in the "cleaning out of the closet phase" once I do get representation, or something I can re-work because I don't have any fresh, new ideas.

But I have to admit it took me a long time to reach that level of writing maturity.

I find cutting stuff cathartic. I mean, in my manuscripts. Not, uh, stuff in general.

Nathan,

In the Romance genre, most first contracts are for two books, not one.

And my friends who write sleuth mysteries tell me they were forced to keep writing about the same cast of characters after the first book was sold, even though that wasn't what they wanted to do.

They also lament that if they had known that they would have been more careful in defining the cast of characters in the first book in a way that left room for future plot development.

For example, writing a married sleuth really cuts down future plot possibilities. So does anchoring your sleuth in a way that defines him in time, for example, making your sleuth a Korean War veteran, as Archer Mayor did with Joe Gunther.

When I'm working on the first draft of something, I make my Inner Critic go sit in the timeout chair and I let everything slop down onto the page. Then, when I'm in editing mode, each day I resave my file with a new name that includes that day's date.

That way, I can feel to chop away without regret, because the text still exists elsewhere. Perhaps a scene doesn't work in one book, but might have some snazzy dialogue I could steal for a future project -- no problem, it's preserved.

This system has other benefits, too: One day, I was reading a chapter of my manuscript and realized I was missing an important transition. I looked back at a file from earlier in the month and, lo and behold, there it was: I'd accidentally highlighted too much during a deletion.

So I kill my darlings ... but I know where I stash the bodies. :)

While I'm not a professional writer (YET- mwa hahahaha!) I have learned the joy of hitting the delete button. It feels so good knowing that I can recognize total crap when I read it.

It's hard to let stuff go. But if we don't, we never move onto anything else. I'm querying my fourth book and as much as I think it's the best I've ever written, it might not be the one that sells. That terrifies me, but hey, there's always another book waiting to come out of my head. Movin right along...!

I had an idea for a series but I've had to admit that the first book wasn't stellar. It was nice and cute and gentle, and it lives on my shelf. And it'll stay there.

The great thing about the computer age is that you can cut stuff and save it. You'll probably never use it again, but knowing it's still there can be comforting. I've pulled from yanked stuff before, or referred to it in other work to recapture something like a description or fact of some kind or antoher. But usually the cut crap gets forgotten, never to be seen again.

I was blessed to sit under Mark Spragg's instruction this past weekend in a very small class. He spoke on the "delete" button. He said when you finally reach the point where your ego dies, that's when good writing and good self-editing begins.

"Death of ego."

If you haven't read "Where rivers change directions" by Mark Spragg, you should.

Is Mark Spragg pretending to be Jennifer I. Griffith?

I wrote my first book, a romance, as a stand-alone. It was my editor who asked me to go back in and leave room for sequels.

So that's what I'm working on now.

Looks like it's time to purge the ol' hard drive...

Just kidding. But it's funny that I just recently started deleing huge portions of older manuscripts in revision and really felt much better about the piece as a whole. Those parts just weren't working. When I first started writing, as an exercise, I would spend a couple hours writing a short story, then delete it so I could never write the same thing twice. (Unless it was good.) Somewhere along the way, I lost my developing ruthlessness. Guess it's time to go back to the basics.

Nathan, do you think you could do a follow-up to your follow-up (but not necessarily a series-ha!) about the difference between a series that is basically all one long story, and a series that is new adventures of continuing characters? We seem to be treating them as one and the same, but they are different.

OBF-

They are different indeed, and there really should be a different name for each of them. Although I'm not sure what more I could add -- was there something in particular you had in mind?

Mr. Bransford,
Your two last posts convinced me to shelve my YA fantasy trilogy for now and write a stand-alone. I have an idea for YA stand-alone novel, but it's not fantasy. How bad is it to hop between genres? Thanks.

Helen-

I think it's ok to genre-hop to a certain degree, but generally I recommend sticking with the one you want to break out in and devoting yourself to it, because it's hard enough to break out in one genre let alone several with different audiences.

For what it's worth, my brother refuses to read any book that isn't part of a series. He says he doesn't want to invest in characters if he doesn't get to revisit them in other books. I'm just the opposite; the last words I want to see on a cover are "Book One of." And since I read fantasy, that makes it hard to find new authors.

Until last year I'd only ever written standalone books. And then last year I fell in love with the world and characters I'd just finished with and, um, well, now I'm on "Book Three of" and there's no end in sight. But I am having fun, and it's all good practice even if I never sell this series.

I killed an entire "darling," a novel, stabbed it dead and literally burned the corpse, and this was after I had a request for the whole ms from a very well-known agent (not you, Nathan), and a subsequent invite to submit again after revisions. That was 3 years ago and I've never been able to revise it to my satisfaction. Instead I've been making the rounds with my second, which I think is much better, but harder to pitch succinctly.

This thread has me feeling inspired to go back to the mortuary urn of #1 and instead of merely sifting the ashes, dump half of them out and see if there are still a few bone chips left worth saving.

Aloha,

As always Nathan, mahalo for your sage advice and teachings.

I would also like to second your motion to have Jessica Burkhart discuss her magical touch.

"Kill Your Darlings" has proven the most useful advice to date (By Stephen King in his book 'On Writing'- I recommend it)
I scribbled those words with a red flair across my printed MS as my reminder when editing. I'm a huge fan of the book series, though I have noticed that after 3 or 4, they tend to be predictable. On the writing side - don't think a series is something I would consider - but if there was a 'market'....... who knows.

Woo-hoo! I'm a professional writer! I knew there had to be a definitive definition out there somewhere. Not only do I hit the delete button, but I also throw my head back laughing wickedly as I do.
;)

Hey Topher1961,

I take that as a compliment!!

Uh Oh, I better watch my ego, or my writing might go down the drain.

Hi Nathan,
I'm so happy to read this post because I ruthlessly purged over 15,000 words from my WIP after helpful feedback from a very nice agent and was feeling a little uneasy. I felt good doing it and stick by it, but I actually blogged about the whole idea of editing being an art. Anyway, I'm glad to know that I'm on the right course!

I am SO SAD.
This whole thing just took me back.
I posted a memorial to Miss Snark on my blog just now.
sniff.

But you know what, Nathan?

I've been running with professional writers for years (and consider myself to be at least semi-pro, based on work-for-hire nonfiction publication). At this point in time, my opinion (based on what I've seen from what's happened to my midlist writer friends who've done the work-for-hire Star Trek, Star Wars and Bladerunner novels) is that you keep your day job and write what you want. Yes, you're professional about your marketing, but from what I've seen happen to various friends, the best thing is to write what gets you excited and involved, rather than phoning it in.

That said, there's exceptions to the rule out there. It depends upon the genre--and can we say Barrayar/Vorkosigan? (Lois McMaster Bujold sold her third book in the series, then went back and sold the first two. But she kept writing, and the books are reasonably accessible at any point in the series).

I think this is really a genre issue. SF and fantasy are not the same thing as mainstream.

(and while I might not turn down a Star Trek novel if offered to me, I'm not burning to write to contract, either. I figured out that writing ain't getting me out of the day job unless I get struck by lightning...but the best way to court the lightning is to keep writing two to three novels a year.)

I've had this discussion, and once again, Nathan, I must disagree. Specifically in urban fantasy, writing a standalone first novel with the intention of keeping the characters and world going for a few more has become not only standard, but expected. A sequel or even a three book deal is now not the exception; it is more common than a one book deal. Publishers of urban fantasy are actively looking for a book that has this series potential -- a successful series is a gold mine with built in readership.

John-

Certainly for some genres it's more common/more important than others. But I still think it makes sense to make the first novel something that can stand-alone. It doesn't preclude expanding it into a series, but the plot should work on its own. That's all I'm saying.

Thanks, I feel better now. I've been hounded and hounded for a sequel to my first novel and I just don't care about those people any more. I've moved on but not without a twinge of guilt. Next time someone bugs me I'll just tell them YOU said I don't have to care!

Nathan,

You asked if I had anything more in mind, but you may have said it all in your response to John. Yes, the characters might have more adventures in them, but this particular plot should stand alone. That's pretty different from the book that is actually one looooong book broken into three (or thirty).

I wish we had a better vocabularly, an easy-to-use word for the difference between the two. Anyone got any ideas?

Another thought. With Harry Potter, JKR did kind of have it both ways, successfully. Harry had a new adventure each year, but some of the things were ongoing as well. Wonder how she did that?

I usually just lurk here, but I had to post. You sent a very polite rejection to me last week for a novel that I have been shopping on and off for a year. It is part of a series. I know how the series ends and I've written the first three chapters of the second book, but I forced myself to stop there. In Feburary, I started writing another book, my third novel. I am almost finished. It is in a COMPLETELY different setting, with a COMPLETELY different mood. It's the best thing I've done, in my humble opinion. Most importantly, it STANDS ALONE!!!

I run a blog for debut fantasy novels and one of the novels I announced recently, THE SWORD-EDGED BLONDE is the author's SIXTH novel. On his website (his name is Alex Bledsoe), he has links to all his unpublished novels. It's great inspiration for the unpublished novelist.

Thanks for sharing, Tia! I'm so glad you started fresh and have your best work. That's awesome.

And wow -- six novels! That's persistence!

Professional writers are RUTHLESS with their own worlds and work. They will walk away from something or delete 150 pages faster than you can say Justin Bobby, and half the time they won't even really sweat it (the other half of the time they'll start the drinking and wonder why in the world anyone thinks writing is fun). Professional writers press the delete button because know they can do better.

Truer words were never spoken.

Ok, maybe, but not by Nathan!

My first novel is a stand alone, but I have more ideas for the characters in future stand alone stories. Guess I went for the best of both worlds. :)

Bobby

Nathan, I want to thank you for turning down a query letter for my manuscript! You heard me. Because you did that, I took the time to think about my story. Today's particular message is important because I wrote a book, decided it was too big and broke it into a trilogy of books that will easily be three hundred plus pages apiece. The story is complete, all three, but I'm unpublished. Your advice is well taken. I recently set it aside in favor of a single novel I'd been daydreaming about. I decided it was too darn big, and I want to 'gtow up' as a writer before I tackle it, that way I can give it the attention and strength it deserves. Your advice is much appreciated! Oh, by the way...I never ever delete. I archive. If something doesn't work, I yank it (yes ruthlessly) and store it. More than once I've found a home for work that I'd taken out, and more than once, I deleted something to my regret! Cheers!

Sylvan

Now we can't write sequels?

What's up next with you industry hacks anyway?

Are you going to tell us next that--for future reference--we can't use the letters "I" and "W" in our novels?

So sad.

You sit here and bitch about not having that Great American novel under your belt, yet you complain about your shrinking bottom lines and a tight market each and every waking moment.

Instead of addressing the problems which are AFFECTING your precious career-minded jobs--you sit there around the table think of new ways to restrict our ability to tell and write a story--because you're too damned afraid to take RISKS yourselves!

Because you've poisoned yourselves with the notion that new things and new ideas aren't worth your time and effort to explore.

You're simply too caught up in your own little comfort zones to notice that the world you're seeking to subvert is changing far more rapidly than you realize.

And that is going to put you in a most difficult position in the future--when faced with either base survival or outright extinction.

Because no matter what YOU do to us, it's not going to stop us from accomplishing our goals.

Traditional publishing or not, we will continue to write however we see fit.

As Admiral Kirk once said in Star Trek III: "Young minds, fresh ideas: Be tolerant."

You can't stop PROGRESS.

I cover major new debut novels with new ideas all the time over at Fantasy Debut. There are at least ten major new fantasy debuts that come out each month, and that's generally not covering YA and only covering paranormal romances and small press sporadically.

Right now I'm featuring a modern-day retelling of the book of Job, from the Bible. That's not risky? It's fabulous. My last review was about an afterlife romance, and the one before was an pseudo-African based fantasy, where most of the white guys were villains.

I have two debuts to announce this weekend. Both books released on Tuesday by major publishers. One takes place in the bowels of Hell and the other is a story about a vampire child.

Take a closer look at the industry and you might be surprised at the number of debut novels each month. I was.

"Professional writers press the delete button because know they can do better. For-fun writers linger and linger in the same world or with the same characters and can't bear to start a new world or delete anything. And unless you press that delete button or start fresh or create a new world it's impossible to get better."

You restrict this point to authors, but it is really true of everything. We all put our faith into things that don't deserve it. Some people escape too early, and some people keep the faith too long. Aim for the middle - discard the useless things in your life, but give them enough time to prove themselves first.

Good job!

I actually secretly think (I guess it's not a secret anymore) that this is a fairly good distinction between professional writers and for-fun writers. Professional writers are RUTHLESS with their own worlds and work. They will walk away from something or delete 150 pages faster than you can say Justin Bobby, and half the time they won't even really sweat it (the other half of the time they'll start the drinking and wonder why in the world anyone thinks writing is fun). Professional writers press the delete button because know they can do better. For-fun writers linger and linger in the same world or with the same characters and can't bear to start a new world or delete anything. And unless you press that delete button or start fresh or create a new world it's impossible to get better.

I wouldn't believe you, except I know it's true.

Great post!

Oops, I'm quite late jumping back in! :) But I always intended the first book to be part of a series. My agent pitched it as such and it was well received that way.