I've never been in this situation, but I've heard the exact opposite of this from agents and editors at conferences. That if you are in a critique group with one of their published authors who liked your work that they are more likely to dig your manuscript out of the slush pile and give it a look. Don't some agents and editors only look at manuscripts referred to them by someone else in the first place? Of course, in the end, no one will publish it based on that, so maybe it doesn't matter all that much.

That's fair, anonymous-- if one of an agent's clients liked another writer's work enough to recommend it to the agent, it may make a difference in how fast the agent reads it.

It still won't make a difference in whether the agent takes it on or not, though.

You'll notice, however, that the question doesn't tell us whether the beta reader did like the manuscript well enough to recommend it-- one has to assume not, since he/she did not offer to recommend it to the agent.

The letter writer also specifically states that he/she has not asked the author for permission to use their name when contacting the agent. NEVER use somebody's name as a reference without asking them first!

As an author, I would rather not have anyone mention my name in a cover letter unless they've talked to me first, and my agent knows this.

The exception is if they're just referencing my book in a general way--saying their book is in the same vein or would appeal to the same kind of reader--that sort of thing is fine.

And if I think a ms. I am critiquing would be a good fit for my agent, I would definitely tell the person so they could get a true recommendation from me. Though at the end of the day, it's still the agent's call!

I'm beginning to think Adam Rex is one of your writers.

Okay, I'll shut up now and go look at the link. :)

I'm beginning to think that, too.

It's fabulous! Definitely makes me want to buy the book, and I will.

You sound like HAL, EA.

As an illustrator I would not recommend animation courses as much as I would learning to work digitally on a tablet, save a lot of pennies and splurg on a Cintiq, the rolls royce of ditigal illustration tools:)
Using a tablet and painter (or photoshop, though painter is far more REAL a medium) you will be ready for the brave new illustration future. In fact, it's basically here, as more and more I get requests for submitting work digitally. (saves the pub money too, no large original art to be sent for scanning.... though I personally think the illustrator should be getting paid more for this extra work:(
More books have already been published using digital media, more then anyone would guess as the medium has gone from the very digital looking, pixilated cartoonish look to art that is exactly like a hand to paper watercolour work, or thick acrylic on canvas. Can't tell which is which anymore.
The artists will always be the same, it's just the tools that keep changing:)

Whoops, I meant the dread pirate Roberts. The dread pirate Roberts is here for your souls.

Very interesting concept. Great question from the reader.

Great concept and great treatment of the thought. Thanks for sharing this idea!

Where's Andre the Giant when you need him?

Let's see, it would be just about three years ago now that I started sending crazy person letters and writing crazy person blog posts about the "enhanced book." Now Simon is actually using that exact phrase.

Enhanced e-books are a lifeline to a dying publishing industry. They should be leaping on it.

Here's why: self-publishing will be the mainstream very soon. Discounters are pushing down prices on dead-tree books, e-books will push prices down even further until the dead-tree book makes less and less sense economically. There is no way to sustain a business model that involves writer-publisher-printer-shipper-warehouser-distributor-retailer when it competes against a model that involves only writer-publisher-e-tailer.

But that's not the end of legacy publishing's problems. The efforts to peg the e-book price at 9.99 will fail pretty quickly. In part that pricing structure will be killed by established authors going self-pubbed with iBooks or Amazon. The longer the legacy publishers try to hold the e-book price at 9.99 -- which is nothing but an attempt to prop up the dead-tree model -- the more attractive ebook self-publishing becomes. After all, authors don't really need publishers to publish e-books. We can do that all by ourselves and undercut that 9.99 pretty dramatically. Again, it's simple: a model that involves writer-etailer is simpler and more efficient than one that inserts publisher in there.

So Costco and e-books cut the price of dead tree books, and self-publishing cuts the price of e-books, and what's left for the legacy publisher to do?

Enhanced e-books. Because enhanced e-books are a vastly complicated bit of business for a self-published writer to pull off. Enhanced e-books leverage the strengths of the legacy publishers in acquiring rights to, or creating, video, music, pix, etc...

For e very crude, very stick-figure, for illustration purposes only example: http://getfre.com/0/

Just when I thought you couldn't be any cooler, you pull out The Princess Bride.

Beware the ROUSes.

I got the Dread Pirate Roberts reference. I heart you.

Hehe. <3 Princess Bride wonderful way to reference it. :)

christine... I write and illustrate. As of Feb this year I switched over to digital via Painter 11 and the Wacom Intuos 4... learning the program is my bug-a-boo, but I'm sticking with it. I have my eye on the Cintiq 21, (currently out of stock), do you have one, if so, how do you like it?
What settings do publishers generally use, ppi and size dimensions? I've not uploaded anything digitally except to web, which only requires 72 ppi... exciting times as Michael Grant points out with self-publishing and all the other opportunities present.

EA... do you free-lance Edit or does that strike you as an anathema! Is there a list or organization composed of qualified editors either on a consulting or free lance basis? If not, should be, to cover the e mania onslaught! Digitality will eventually kill copyright, so you're still gonna need a hybrid, agent/attorney staying atop legal issues and an ever changing landscape of rights nationally and internationally.

Painter 11 has very basic animation capabilities, but good enough for now providing a bit of enhancement to e books.

My digital attempts... thus far -

http://www.jacketflat.com/profile.asp?member=PYXX (first three pics)

Haste yee back ;-)

Oh my god. I can see all hell is going to break loose (IS breaking loose!) I think I'll make myself a cup of tea.

I remember back in the late 1980's, Upper and Lower Case (trade publication) devoted a whole issue to the topic of, well basically, "Computers. Flash in the pan or wave of the future." And there were a few wistfully writing/wishing that this new technology wasn't going to completely change the industry.

I'm afraid I'm a luddite at heart, but I just can't imagine sitting down at bedtime with my 3 year old twins and an iPad. Or, worse, letting the little sticky-fingered book lovers curl up on the floor with my iPad to "browse" through their favorite picture books. Animated or not. Please, please, please, keep publishing a few of the old fashioned kind of kids' books that can be chewed on, pored over and loved. (Although I suppose the back-lit screen will make reading under the covers a no-brainer).

No, sadly I do not own a Cintiq... yet! I have cursed myself for not moving forward faster. I have had a number of those Scholastic "big book" projects (I think the idea for these huge pic books is so a teacher can read it to a class and the little guys can see the pictures from the backrows, without stampeding over each other to get to the front) The Cintiqu, along with using painter, not photoshop, would have elminated packaging these over sized paintings and the costs incured.
Drawing to any size, then ftp the work.
While I bemoan progress in most area's of life, it is what it is and it's the adults, not the children that don't like the idea of cuddling with a good ipad story together. Kids lives are full of technology, they don't see this as foreign. What I will miss when all books go digital is the passing down of family novels. I have so many of my mothers and grandmothers books, with names and ages written on the inside pages. From back in the day when owning a book was a rare privilage and usually only given as gifts, for birthdays or holidays.

Well, imaginary unless you sell 15-20k copies. Then it'd be a credit...

I really appreciate the bluntness of your response. I've been avoiding the vanity presses and now I have even more reason to do so.

I just want to point out that not all self=publishing enterprises are scams of the sort referred to by your questioner. There is reputable self-publishing in which the Author owns the ISBN of the work, and which is not the same thing as subsidy or vanity publishing - although many subsidy houses refer to their enterprises as "self-publishing" to muddy the water. Some legitimately self=published authors achieve respectable sales figures, and I think those credits would be appropriate to list in a query. (If not, why not?)

-Steve

Steve, I'm not sure what you mean by "reputable self-publishing". If the author pays to get their book published (a requirement to buy copies of their book counts as paying), then it is self-published.

It doesn't matter if the publisher was up-front about it, or the author owns the ISBN, or whatever; anything self-published basically doesn't count and should not be mentioned (as it can sometimes even count against you).

Unless, like Livia says, the sales numbers are fan-freaking-tastic. But that's far and away the exception.

But... the magic beans worked! They grew a beanstalk to the giant's palace and Jack ended up a hero and filthy rich. I've yet to hear of this happening at PA.

LOVE the blog! Just picking on your analogy <3 <3 <3

I agree Steve and there are a good number of hard working Authors out there self publishing their work and selling and it's also worth stating that difference between publishing your own work and being caught in a scam. If Self publishing Authors book sales are at say, the 10,000 mark, I would consider mentioning it in an Authors bio or resume.
Thing is, they are SELF publishing, using a printing service and that is not, of course, what Publish America is, as we hopefully all know by now. In this posters case it's PA and EA's advise is perfect. I wouldn't bring up PA at ALL. Very sad but, I think, the correct career move.

Recently, the local news had a feature about an 11 year old published author. My daughter was very excited to see this story. Of course, the feature says she wrote her novel, her parents edited it and then, after getting “good feedback” from some publishers, they decided to self-publish it. I had to explain to my daughter that this was not the same thing as an 11 year old getting a book deal. This was two parents spoiling their child. I was surprised that the news station either misrepresented things for the sake of their feature or they didn’t understand the difference.

Hi Adam and Christine,

Adam, I was trying to make the kind of distinction Christine is referring to. Since I'm not familiar with the details of the process, I didn't describe it as well as she did.

Christine, thanks for clarifying.

-Steve

Mark-- the news does that all the time. Someone sends them a press release "Local Man publishes his Book, makes school visit!" and they act like he's JK Rowling's second coming, but living in OUR TOWN. No skepticism. No digging deeper.

This is why the legacy media is going to die, honestly.

As someone who has self published and recently accepted an offer from a big six publisher, there is not one blanket answer to this question. It really depends.

First and foremost you must have a a well-written and well-edited book. Without that, the rest is moot.

I would say if you have promoted your book exceptionally well, if it has received consistently postive reviews from 3rd party reviewers (book clubs, Midwest Book Review, customer reviews that are NOT family and friends), won an award, and sells well (in the thousands of copies in a 3 to 6 month period - even on Kindle), you could potentially mention that and it won't count against you.

From experience, editors at publishing houses don't frown on self-publishing as much as literary agents do if you can demonstrate your book is well promoted and has a market they can sell to.

Unfortunately, a lot of self published author believe that by virtue of transforming their book into a physical product, that agents will be impressed by it and that's not the case. You really have to get out there and promote and sell it.

Mark Herr @12:41 brings up an issue that I've seen over and over.

I had one YA pubbed by a major house. When I contacted my local paper (mid-sized city) they said they didn't have any room to mention it (they had a small book review section, done by outside review sources). I was disappointed, but shrugged it off because that's how the world works.

Imagine my surprise when, a few months later they ran a huge feature article (with half-page photos) on the front of the lifestyle section about a gifted 18 year-old local "author."

The article quoted her as saying she couldn't "afford" to get an agent, so she just decided to self-publish. Oh, and the cover they chose for her historical prarie-girl story was inaccurate, but that was just "the way it works in publishing."

It's one thing for someone new to publishing to not understand the difference between self publishing and REAL publishing, but apparently reporters -- who work with words for a living, for fuck sake -- don't know, or even care.

I hold no ill-feelings toward the "author" in question, but HOW do these people get that kind of publicity for self-pubbed crap?! In this case she was a very pretty, homeschooled girl. The amount of photos and raves were staggering -- quotes from her family, friends that had read her book, etc.. I remember one photo in particular (there were MANY) of her feedng her horse, with her long hair flowing in the wind.

No wonder writers drink.

That makes sense, Steve. The difference between self-publishing intentionally and getting scammed into it. Thanks for the clarification (you too, Christine).

That last line cracked me up for some reason.

:-P

Sigh.

Considering countless other agents and editors have said they automatically reject novels with word counts over 100,000 words, I really don't think the OP was being silly.

OP, make every word count. YA novels over 100,000 words are a much harder sell. It's certainly not impossible, especially if you write sci-fi or fantasy, but it is harder.

Editorial Anonymous is one of my favorite websites, but EA, sometimes your advice contradicts advice of other agents/editors. That's fine, except that you often present your opinions as fact. Every agency/publisher is different.

ha ha! that last line cracked me up too.

I have to say I'm with Anon at 2:21 on this. EA, not to lecture your sweet ass or anything, but if a 100k ms gets submitted to you by an agent it probably is fantastic. It would have to be, because most 100k YAs will never GET an agent -- agents take a look at that long ass word count and don't even bother asking for a partial. It's super hard to place that unless you are already a "name' author.

PARE THAT SUCKER DOWN. I bet you can slice out at least 25k and it'll be all the better for it.

To the anons:
I appreciate you adding to this post with your own experience.
I agree with you both that most novels of that length could be shorter, and the fact that there are long novels on the bestseller lists shouldn't be taken by anyone as permission not to edit their own work.

However, I see novels of that length sold, and for good money, so I don't think anyone should be making rules about how long something MUST be.

And I don't feel I should need to point out in every post that I am one person, with one person's experiences, and one person's opinions. That ought to be fairly obvious, yes?

It's just that I get a sense that the OP already knows the ms is too long and instead of doing the super hard work of cutting, just wants to be justified (EA says it's OKAY!!)

She stated her query is only "so-so" AND her novel is 100k, well, hell. That's one tough road to travel, isn't it? I'd hate to see her burn up all her query options by a simple word count. It's REALLY though out there right now.

"And I don't feel I should need to point out in every post that I am one person, with one person's experiences, and one person's opinions. That ought to be fairly obvious, yes?"

Yes, it ought to be obvious, but still I frequently come across writers who latch onto one blog entry in support of their ginormous novel.

"My query isn't getting any bites. I don't get it!"

"Well, your contemporary YA novel is 120,000 words. Perhaps that's the problem?"

"No, no! Fat books are fine. EA says so!"

Sigh. "Best of luck to you."

I agree that there are no definite rules regarding word length, and that there shoudn't be. But writers need to be aware of the realities of the business, and 100,000+ word novels are a harder sell, according to many agents and editors.

-anon #1

I think I'd avoid the murals entirely. With all due respect to EA and her ilk, I don't think any good ever came from asking an editor (or art director, or art buyer) to use her imagination when looking at your portfolio. She doesn't really have to–someone else will give her a full portfolio of book-ready images and assuage her fear of hiring an untested artist.

Maybe take a little time to recreate your favorite murals in a print format. At least you won't have to worry about doing a lot of preliminary sketches–you've already figured out your composition.

If you are projecting outline drawings onto the wall, that might be a good thing include - they'll be more to scale.

You can find some great advice on creating a portfolio at danidraws.com (actually, all her advice is good) http://danidraws.com/2008/12/02/artist-portfolios/

If your stuff veers more towards fantasy/gaming, you can't miss http://artorder.blogspot.com/

and Escape from illustration Island has a great series on building your portfolio as well:
http://escapefromillustrationisland.com/2010/04/29/fine-tuning-your-portfolio-series/

good luck!

(oh, and sign up for SCBWI or your local equivalent - you can get great advice - including portfolio critiques - from them, too!

Take Adam's advice. I'm certain he knows more about it than I do.

No employer likes to take a leap of faith, I agree. At the animation studio I work at, it's hard when students show us good work that we could never use (like, really nice figure paintings or still life paintings, we have no possible application for that specific work).

The applicant probably has the SKILLS we need, but that's asking us to take a bet that they can do the WORK we need.

Here's an idea, for your website, have a nice picture of yourself taken in front of the best mural you've done, and stick it on your "about" page.

In addition to the links Susan mentioned, Irene Gallo is a must read- http://igallo.blogspot.com/

I totally want to see the cat fur pics.

Jon Schindehette, Senior Art Director Dungeons & Dragons® Wizards of the Coast, just posted a brilliant piece on what to include in your portfolio at http://artorder.blogspot.com/2010/06/what-to-put-into-my-portfolio.html

I think I'm just going to go on believing that the editor is simply too stunned and amazed by my work to get back to my agent.

It let's me sleep at night.

Also, they will crush the life out of you, and if you are smart you'll avoid them entirely.

Really? I thought that it was a good idea to wait until their stated response time had elapsed; don't houses prefer to consider one MS at a time from any given author?

Sure, they prefer that. But with hundreds of manuscripts coming in every week, how in hell would they be able to tell?

LOL! Fair enough, EA.

One publisher says -- I wish I knew which one -- that they prefer you to wait the three or four months for them to read the first sub (and usually reject you by not replying to it) before you send them another. They say its so everyone can have a chance at getting read.

I have an unusual last name, so I'm always scared they'll just toss my stream of subs in the trash if I don't follow their directions.

This reminds me of someone who blew onto a writer's board a few months ago asking for the "secrets" to getting published, then stormed off screaming that everyone on the board was an elitist because they wouldn't tell him anything other than "hard work and maybe some fortuitous circumstances".

You need to learn how to spell. Learn basic grammar. Learn capitalization. Learn punctuation. Don't use text speak unless that's the format of your book.

Sure those things come easier for some than others, but that doesn't mean that anyone is obligated to drop their standards to make it easier.

Josin-- Gross motor skills (running, kicking, jumping) come easier to some than others too, but noone sees a problem with telling someone that they're not "professional athlete" quality.

I'm not sure why we're willing to admit that some people have more athletic, musical, political or artistic talent than others, but CAN'T say that some people are better at Writing, or Math, or Science.

For some reason, there's this idea that anyone can write. But all you have to do is read a random selection of blogs and comments to realize that sentence structure DOESN'T come naturally to most people......

There was an old poster in my school library when I was growing up. It said "Good writers READ."

Harold Underdown's book won't really help you if you don't already HAVE a pretty good skillset. If you want to be a writer, READ. Go to your library, check out huge stacks of good books, and devour them like Godiva Chocolate. Read genres and authors OUTSIDE your favorite few.
Find a few who take your breath away. Make an effort to write as well as they do. You'll fall short. So read more and write more. Write letters to your family. Make your emails sound professional and clean.

If you want to be a swimmer, you have to be willing to totally immerse yourself in water. If you want to be a writer, you have to be willing to sink down into a sea of words.

(And with that bit of purple prose, I'm off to sink into a sea of LAUNDRY. Words would be better...but the kids are more likely to give me writing time if I make sure they have socks and underwear!)

"how do i get something published or become a known writer?"

Well, you don't get something published or become a known writer by not caring about spelling and grammar. A good idea is not enough, it's how you execute that idea that matters. Can you learn to use spell check? Hell, yes. I depend on it. Can you learn grammar rules? Yes. I have.

But it sounds like you just want to "be published," and not become a writer. There is a big, huge, freaking difference. Knowing the difference is the first step.

Read. Read. Read. And then read some more. Pay attention as you read, as to how authors' handle dialogue, action, description, and plot.

Go to a writer's conference if you can afford to. Hob nob with other writers. Join SCBWI if you can, they have great newbie info.

When you finish a book let it sit and then go back and revise it. The whole thing. If you think it's perfect and doesn't need revision -- a lot of revision -- then trust me, you're doing it wrong. The best writing, no matter who's writing it, is rewritten a hundred thousand times.

I recommed Query Shark to learn how to write a query letter. And Nathan Bransford's blog and FAQ are invaluable. Look through Ed Anon's archives, too.

Being a writer is a continuing journey, not a destination. It's not an object to gain, but a lifestyle. It's not for everyone.

As a profession, writing is not for everyone.

Why do people think there is a formula? If you're interested in formulae, become a mathematician. If you want to be a writer, learn the craft and then put your own spin on it.

First, write something. If you're writing non-fiction, you need to be an expert or an academic type (which, no offense, you don't sound like) and then you only have to write a proposal. If you're writing fiction, which would be my guess, first thing you want to do is figure out what your word count needs to be. Depending on genre, etc. you want to be somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 words. And you MUST MUST MUST have a completed manuscript before you try to step into the world of publishing for fiction.

After your manuscript is complete, polish and revise it until it is high enough quality to show to other people. Then show it to other people (not your mom or someone otherwise unable to separate you from your writing.) Incorporate their advice until you have a final draft. Not a first draft, a final draft.

Your next step is to write a query letter for the manuscript you wrote. This is a short, frankly brilliant letter that showcases both your writing talent and what your manuscript is about. Then you want to query widely to agents and publishers. Preditors and Editors is a good place to start, as is Publisher's Marketplace, to find the people you want. Also, don't waste anyone's time. Make sure they're interested in what you wrote. Some agents only represent non-fiction, some publishers only publish romance, etc. etc. Also, make sure you follow their query guidelines closely (i.e. I want only a letter, I want a letter and three chapters, I want a single plum floating in perfume served in a man's hat.)

Don't worry about getting past the query stage now, just think of that as your current goal. There are a few more steps after querying before an agent or publisher will take you on, but you must complete your manuscript first and then begin querying before anything else will happen. Not to pimp my blog, but here are my thoughts about the next few steps:

http://manuscriptsburn.blogspot.com/2010/06/so-i-couldnt-fall-asleep-last-night.html

Then, start on your next manuscript, and lather, rinse repeat. Hopefully after repeating the process a few times you will have developed the skills and knowledge to write and publish a workable manuscript. Anything I left out, much better informed people?

And one more thing: good luck.

Dear questioner,

You can't sell an idea, no matter how great it is. You can only sell a book.

And books consist of words and sentences. Therefore, step one is you need to learn how to write words and sentences correctly.

Worry about step two after you've mastered that. No reputable publisher will take your work seriously until you have.

Good luck!

You know, I hope this doesn't come across as snarky. But I am certified as a high school English teacher, and my question for this writer is: How well do you read?

Most community colleges can test your reading levels and skills. In this case, I think you should probably have these checked. Yes, I do mean that, in the kindest way. If you're having so much trouble learning from the advice to writers that's posted all over the Internet, then either you're not looking in the right places, or you're having trouble processing what you read.

My experience has been that if your reading skills are below college level--if you read on the same level as a 9th or 10th grader, for example--you're going to have a lot of trouble at this writing game. That's not to say you won't make it, but some very hard (and even remedial) work may be ahead of you.

Good luck!

Redleg, that was a very complete and generous answer.

I would bet money that the questioner is a child or teenager. I wish people could be nicer.

Anon 5:05 - they were VERY nice!

I agree with Redleg - write something and then you'll have made a start.

As horrible as this sounds, you really do need to put in the hard work. It will take years.

Patience is key - and a willingness to put in loads and loads and loads of work before you see any results or rewards.

Writing books is more than knowing spelling and grammar, but poor presentation will be the first thing that trips you up because they show immediately your lack of a deep passion for language. So although you have plenty of ideas, you really do need to work on loving language.

Read widely - read Donald Maass's Writing the Breakout Novel and Robert McKee's Story to get you started.

There is a 'formula' of sorts - and it's based on the three act model, or the hero's journey (Joseph Campbell). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth

Hope this doesn't put you off. But then, if it has, maybe writing isn't going to be your thing and it's time to follow your true passions.

1) Manage to be born with some talent.

2) Write.

3) Learn the business.

4) Get lucky.

It boils down to what other people have said.

Write something.

Get feedback from writers (not friends and relatives) and revise it to make it better.

Research magazines (if it is a magazine piece) and agents and editors (if it is a book) and decide whom to submit it to. Use books like THE WRITERS' MARKET and blogs like this one to help you with this.

Submit your work, following the submissions guidelines that the people you're submitting your work to have outlined. (Some prefer that your manuscript be mailed, some prefer that it be emailed, etc.)

Wait for the people considering your work to get back to you. This can take anywhere from a few hours to several months. While you wait, start writing your next manuscript. Repeat.

It takes a lot of hard work, and a loooooong time. Be patient, be persistent, and always, always revise to improve your manuscript. Work hard at writing well. Ideas are a dime a dozen; it's the writing that counts.

Thanks for the endorsement of my book! And I completely agree with the comments of people who pointed out that it doesn't tell you everything you need to know. That wouldn't be possible in a 350 page book--so it focuses on the practical and business sides of children's book writing and illustrating.

It's not a writing guide. Instead I have an entire chapter that helps you find a writing guide or guides that work for you.

It's also not a comprehensive guide to the books in the field already, though I do have chapters that introduce the different areas of the field and point you to where you can find the award-winning as well as the popular books.

For more information about it, and some sample chapters, please visit the page I set up at http://www.underdown.org/cig.htm

When I read questions like this, I sometimes wonder how E.A. valiantly holds on to a will to live.

As a reader, I thoroughly enjoy a moderate amount of quirky. An excess of quirky is put-the-book-down annoying because it's the author's 'look at what I can do!' showing through.

A home schooled narrator is too quirky or is it something else? My suspicion is that the likely traditionally educated editors are participating in the stigma often granted home schooled individuals. Personally, I see it as intellectual snobbery if that's the case, but I have a rather unique perspective on the topic.

I have 4 kids, 2 in public school and 2 home schooled. The home schooled kids are taught by their mom, a licensed teacher with years of experience teaching in public and private schools. The ONLY reason they're home schooled is that the school refuses to protect my daughter against a kid who kept threatening to stab her with a pencil. He had "behavioral problems" we, as parents, should have been more understanding of - or so the school administrators said. So, Stabby gets his education like he wants and we have to accomodate...

That was the digression. Here is the good news.

Now that I have some knowledge of home schooling and the communities that have been built up around the practice, if you can't sell traditionally you might want to attempt self-publishing via a PoD or somesuch and market it through the mom and pop run home school sites. Home schooled kids are starved for books they can relate to and, in my experience, spend more time reading than the kids going to public school anyway.

I definitely would not trash the book. If you want to rewrite it, that's understandable. PoD has its own stigma, just like home schooling does. And you're left doing your own marketing. But I do believe there is an audience based on what I've heard so far. You just need to find someone to believe in it.

I frequently get told my writing is a little too quirky by friends that read it. If you are not getting good feedback from the agents about exactly "too quirky" means in your instance, I'd get some writer friends to read it and see if they can make suggestions. They'll have a distance that you probably won't and notice things the agents are noticing.

As someone who was home schooled for 4 years of my life, I am tempted to be offended by the question, but have instead decided to be amused. That said, I have also worked as a public school English teacher for 6 years, and have come across all manner of wrong/strange/scary reasons for home schooling. There are two sides to every story.

So...my wondering...perhaps, if, instead of quirky, you have unwittingly created (or perpetuated) a stereotype. If your character is human, she will have quirks, darkness and light. Let the story show these in tension. We need that break stereotypes, not perpetuate them.

(and a note: it was my vehement declarations in kindergarten that I hated to read that caused my mom to consider home schooling me. And when she did, I became a voracious reader. Then an English teacher. Then a writer.)

Terrific feedback. I agree that quirky can be a distraction. I won't name names, but two relatively popular books I've read in the last year had a very unique format/narrative. I found it wearing after a bit. I completely stopped reading one of them because it was just too cumbersome.

Marissa

I agree with everything EA said, and far be it from me to question a consensus among replying agents, but also ...

I have one ms that I love, love, love. For a couple of years it was my favorite thing I'd ever written. A few people who read it for me loved it as much as I did. The highest praise came from my English professor brother: "YOU wrote this?"

But most people thought it was too odd. My excellent critique group suggested changes to make it more normal. Some of their suggestions I used. But I've stopped submitting the ms. I think it's a good book, but it's not for everyone. Not for most people who would usually be the audience for my work. And it's not going to be the first thing I get published.

I appreciate the distinction between flavor and character development. A good reminder.

Maybe you should get yourself a brutal beta whose brain you can pick and ask for an outside perspective on what about the narrator makes them "too" quirky. Tell them upfront where you need help.

Stop sending queries for now, see if you can't address the issue, and once the MS is shiny and back from the woodshed, try again.

Holy crap what a great answer, EA.

This is such good advice for non-quirky characters, too. A character's POV still has to serve the story not get in the story's way.

STARGIRL is the only book I read where I just hated the "quirk." It was so hard to care about someone who was that clueless that I ended up hating all the other characters too. But that won a Printz or something didn't it? So what do I know. :)

Hi! This is great advice. I've had to accept a few of my favorite characters were simply too quirky and they were trashed, killed...never to be heard of again.

A few others received much needed makeovers and they survived to make me proud. Authors really do have to ask that question. Quirky can be good...as long as readers can relate to the character.

Take care,

Nora Weston

In response to some of the above comments regarding homeschoolers, I don't think we can tell whether the problem is agents' and editors' prejudices about homeschoolers, an overly stereotyped character, an unlikeable character, or something else without seeing the manuscript. That said, personally I suspect that "too quirky" means difficult to relate to.

I agree with Marissa that sometimes quirky can be wearying. I thought the narrator's constant interjections in The Book Thief were cutesy and annoying, and if I were his editor I would have asked the author to get rid of that device and to streamline that content into the narrative. I did persevere with that book because of its reputation, and did find it to be a moving and compelling story. But without good word of mouth, I wouldn't have gotten past the first annoying chapter or two.

(This comment brought to you by a formerly-homeschooled literature snob.)

P.S. One way to keep a quirky character might be to relegate him to a more minor role, so they can provide comic relief or some other distraction without the reader having to spend every minute of the narration in his company.

It seems all characters are quirky, because all people act according to hidden memories and feelings. Providing the motivation of the character, and sharing his unfortunate experiences creates a sense that the reader is a friend with which the character can confide. Character depth, so to speak.

It's certainly possible that the quirkiness is a problem--that it seems unnecessary to the story, or annoying rather than charming, or there's some other issue.

But it's also possible this is a ground-breaking book. It is very hard for such books to find a publisher willing to take on that risk. Success with such a book usually means surviving a lot of rejection first.

And then, readers will either jump on the book because it's fresh and unexpected, and they'll make it a phenomenon. Or else they'll stay away because they don't know what to make of it.

These are the risks of working in a creative field.

Oh hell, I eat two bowls of Quirkies for breakfast... how else could you come up with a character who ask his Mom. "Can I go swimming?"

Mom says. "Sure, but don't go near the water!"

So, the kid spends his summer pretending to swim by scooting across Ole' Man Beatie's lawn on his belly.

Haste yee back ;-)

This sounds like a writer who either A) disagrees with the changes their editor is suggesting and is desperately afraid that everything a reviewer points out as being bad will have been a direct result of those changes or B)is unpublished and refuses to let any editor touch their words, largely out of fear of point A, and is bitter that they can't get published unless they acquiesce (and risk point A).

I used to set type, so I've seen the ruination in progress. But I don't know how an ordinary reader would be able to tell such a thing, tbh. And only certain genres of book are that dependent on design decisions--in most situations, as long as the design/production decisions fade into the background, they won't ruin anything.

That said, I can think of one book in recent memory that had the most awful recto running heads ever. Every other page, I cringed. But as soon as I noticed it, I realized that almost no one else would even register it, let alone have it bother them the way it did me.

Besides that, reviewers are usually reviewing review copies, which are cheaply made and do not represent the final product.

I recently read Subterranean Press' release of Philip K. Dick's Nick and the Glimmung. I'd been looking forward to it because--hey! small press! PKD!

There were many, many, many typos. It was close to unreadable. And this wasn't an ARC or anything--it was a finished version that I got from my library.

I'm not sure if that's a design/production mistake, but the fault definitely didn't lie with Philip K. Dick, since he's dead and all.

I'm confused. Does the person who wrote that mean something was wrong with the cover (because some books do end up with toxic cover art) or that the layout was wonky?

This reminds me of a comment I once overheard at a used book sale:

"I like her books, but I wish she'd stop making the print in them so tiny!"

I once posted a review just like this, and the author contacted me to ask me to remove it. He was afraid the publisher would see it and blame him.

Interest concept.

I also wish people knew about (and differentiated) between waht the author does and back cover copy.

This isn't my question but I can think of quite a few books whose fonts are so contrary to the subject matter -- flowery for a depressed MC, hard edged and severe for a light-hearted book, or simply just too damn hard to read -- that it lessoned those books a lot in my eyes.

I've also bought original paperbacks where the spine was less sturdy than an ARC even, and the pages were falling out by the time I finished the book. I know I only paid ten bucks for it and it was part of a series, but it doesn't lend itself to a pleasant reading experience. All of this author's books were like that. It gives off the vibe that the publisher doesn't care about the author or books -- and if they don't why should I?

Covers, obviously, as witnessed on this blog and others, can suck hard, and alienate book buyers.

I don't want to name the books, though, because it's not fair to the authors. :)

I'm an academic & actually did write a review like this when an interesting book on local pop and rock scenes came to me for review with such bad copy editing that "Eminem" had been spelled three different ways ....

I'm pretty sure I've seen Betsy Bird say that before at Fuse #8, but I don't know if she's ever said it in a review in a professional publication if that's the difference. Also, I can't think what particular titles that would refer to, so can't help there, either.

How about D. J. Cole's
"A Writer's Guide to Police Organisation and Crime Investigation and Detection." http://www.amazon.co.uk/Writers-Police-Organization-Investigation-Detection/dp/0709059221
It's an excellent book and a must for all UK wannabe crime writers whether for kids or adults. But why did nobody suggest a better title? Or come up with a decent cover design?

Lynn Flewelling's first Nightrunners book, Luck in the Shadows, was a pretty fun novel, but it had some jarring typos in it--absent closing quotes; that sort of thing.

In answer to the person's question: If a good book has a lousy cover, the chances of people having read the book are smaller. And that means reviews where the reader says, "Good book, lousy packaging" are going to be statistically rarer. That may be the only reason you never see them.

Yes, I have been put off buying certain novels because of their internal layout - the practice of having a dash in front of dialogue, instead of quotes, for example. Or printing on bright white papaer, which always make me thing the novel's been self-published, so it immediately goes back on the bookshelf.
Some front covers have been diabolically bad, and even titles can put me off - if they give me the wrong impression about the contents of the novel.
Sorry, can't name any, as it wouldn't be fair to the poor authors who are subject to the marketting whims of their publishers.

I don't think I've ever seen a book RUINED by design and production. Given less attention than it deserved, or having a mismatch between presentation and content that is a little disconcerting, maybe. But overall, the story is what makes me like or dislike the book.

Although I suppose the choice of illustrator for a picture book has a much greater effect--but I don't read many picture books.

Actually just did a post on my blog of a book that I felt was 'let down' by the editor. Nearly felt like it a rejected re-write (or rather what should have been rejected)

I had to read Pride and Prejudice in my final year of high school for English Lit. The font was so small - then when it came to the letters, they were in an even smaller font.

So I skipped the letters!

Ooops, kind of missed a whole heap of content there! LOL!

Sure, it would have been a fatter book if they'd upped the font, but it would have been a lot easier to read!!!

Currently reading a book by a best-selling author (I'll take the jacket copy-writer's word for it) published by Ballantine, with several out-and-out misspellings. Not typos. I assume the author spelled things wrong and nobody corrected them. (One of the misspellings is "miniscule.")

A big design flaw in the form of a horrendous mismatch of illustration to text: the brilliant Norton Juster's warm picture book of grandparental love, with nightmare-inducing pictures. I'm thinking the editor has grandparent issues.

I don't see how production decisions would influence the quality of the book itself. Am I missing something here? I could see them influencing *sales*, but if the book is badass, what sort of poor production decisions would influence that?

I've seen reviews before citing poor editing (and I've made the comment myself occasionally when I read), but for the most part if I'm reading a book and telling someone about it, I'm basing my decisions on the writing, characters, world-building, plot, etc. So do most of the reviews I've seen.

Am I just missing something here?

"Covers, obviously, as witnessed on this blog and others, can suck hard, and alienate book buyers.
I don't want to name the books, though, because it's not fair to the authors. :)"

And sometimes it's not fair to the graphic designers. Sometimes we have a gun pointed at our temple by the powers that be. They want it to look a certain way, have a certain photo, display a certain type, etc. All of our expertise, training, and specialized BFAs be damned, they really just want a wrist to execute it. Why? Because they never went to art school.

The example which leaps to mind for me are blurbs. I had an Elizabeth Moon book ruined by its blurb, since the blurb based its description of the book on events which occur two thirds of the way through the book.

It completely changed the way I read the book, and I finished feeling primarily annoyed.

But Pulp there are those among us who think that Chris Rashka's genius was wasted on a sappy story about dumb "grandparental love".

And the Caldecott award, which that book won, is given for art, not text. So one man's "nightmare inducing"...

Anything Oprah puts her stamp on I refuse to read on general principle. And there's really no downside to this practice as those who buy O-books will be pontificating on them over the following few weeks anyway making their plots and themes known to our collective consciousness.

Bridget said...
"And sometimes it's not fair to the graphic designers. Sometimes we have a gun pointed at our temple by the powers that be. They want it to look a certain way, have a certain photo, display a certain type, etc. All of our expertise, training, and specialized BFAs be damned, they really just want a wrist to execute it. Why? Because they never went to art school..."

Oh, I absolutely agree. I think if left alone to do their job, book designers will come up with something great. I think it's always a problem of having too many cooks in the kitchen or being trapped into a certain cover, layout, whatever, because of having to cut costs -- not because the designer doesn't care.

There seems to be some confusion here about what design and production are. Hint: you can't blame them for typos or dashes instead of quotation marks and usually you can't blame them for the choice of illustrator.

You certainly can't blame them for the contents of the blurbs.

Mainly, designers are responsible for choosing the fonts and other graphic elements and figuring out how best to deploy them to serve a particular text. Depending on the house and the designer's place in it, designers can get involved in conceptualizing covers and other art.

Production is about taking the vision of the designer and giving it physical form.

You could think of a designer as an architect, inventing a house for the text to live in. The production people are the carpenters, roofers, electricians, plumbers and the rest. There are obviously areas of shared responsibility, but the jobs are clearly different.

In some places, these people are full creative partners, in others, they're uninterested drudges (I should note that there's no correlation between 'getting it right' and the size of the house: Lots of lovely work is being done at small companies and lots of hacks have jobs in bigger places).

In some cases (covers and picture books), designers, especially, might play a pivotal role (the importance of Chad Beckerman's covers to the Wimpy Kid series would be hard to overestimate).

The Twilight books, for another example, would have been just another sexy vampire series without those gorgeous covers (and, more subtly, the spacious, elegant interiors... there's a lot of breathing room on those pages and lots of tactile goodness in that creamy paper).

The premium presentation gave 'serious' readers permission to pick up what was essentially genre fiction.

Both a perfect cases in point of designers and production people serving a book well.

On the other hand, I can remember a review of Audrey and Don Wood's Tickle Octopus (in Publishers Weekly, I think) in which the reviewer basically said: "Fun book, great idea, but the production work on it is so shoddy that it fell apart the first time I read it. Unsuitable for libraries, school and everyone else. Don't buy this book."

It sounds like the person who wrote in on this topic had some kind of experience like that.

A milder version of this - and one I've met into all the time - is inaccurate color reproduction. One amazing artist I know did a picture book that took her nearly a year to complete. She won awards for it - it's still in print a decade later - but she never did another one.
The experience of seeing her work that mangled was put her off children's books permanently.

I'm a reviewer and my reviews have never been influenced by a book's design.

The question was written by an illustrator and referred to children's picture books, which may suffer any number of unfortunate publishing decisions that destroy the visuals: wretched typography, alteration of images, poor cropping, poor color reproduction, etc.

I'm currently working in the book reviews department of a magazine, and no one says anything about design because we get mostly advance copies. This means that the copies we receive often don't have final cover art chosen yet and don't reflect how the book will actually look. Some of the books we get aren't even bound. Almost none of them have been proofread. Furthermore, even with the more finished books we have no way to distinguish what the publisher vs the designer is doing.