Sometimes you will get a letter from a tip-top editor saying he is keeping your samples on file.

Who me? :)

When I first started out submitting, I would get (hard to read:) hand written notes scrawled on the bottom of publishers form letters ... "thanks, will keep on file" or, " got'em, they are filed for future ref".
I began to doubt there were such things (too many replies talking of art filed, no work:)
Just as I was beginning to suspect the "file" was really the office trash can, one of the Art Director's that had replied years earlier, contacted me about a book.
Yes Virginia, there really is a FILE (though today I suspect there are more bookmarked websites on AD's and ED's computers then cabinets.

I had this exact situation - I wrote my novel to have a complete ending while also having the potential for further adventures. The sequel is the same - it's all resolved, but, should the publisher want a trequel and (oh please publishing gods smile on me) some historiquel prequels, the potential is there too.

What you want to do is create an ending that is completely satisfying while also leaving scope for more. :-)

A book should be complete unto itself, so if you start with a murder, you shouldn't end the book on the cliffhanger, "And the murderer is..." SCENE! But if you're planning a sequel, you should introduce a few new threads towards the end, solve the central conceit of the book, then introduce the cliffhanger that sets up the next book. "And the murderer is John." Then a bomb goes off in the barn. The End. BAM! That's a bestseller right there.

To me it would seem kind of like writing the season finale for a show you’re not sure will be renewed. You want to leave your readers with a sense of wanting to know what happens next and wanting to see more but with the ability of it to stand as a satisfying ending if need-be. If Part Two never comes, you don’t want your readers holding it against you.

Be aware: some readers will hate you for a cliffhanger. I'm one of them. (For example, I felt cheated by the end of Catching Fire and therefore have no intention of reading the third installment.)

I also think cliffhangers are particularly unfair in early chapter books. At a level when reading is still hard work for a lot of kids, IMO they deserve some resolution upon reaching the end of a book.

One of my favorite authors, Robin McKinley, has a book coming out this fall and has admitted that the story wouldn't fit into one book. She's busy typing the second part that is to be released at a later date.

Of course this is Robin McKinley and she is a Newberry winner.

WandaV

I just read Robin McKinley's new book, and I'm certain it WOULD have fit in one book.

I don't know what her editor was up to, but I can't remember the last time I saw so much unnecessary description. I love McKinley's work, so it made me cry to find her pacing so dull. I really think nearly a half of that book should have been cut.

I cannot count how many times I've had people show me the 'illustrations' for the children's book they have written. It's hard to be tactful when the art is so atrocious (Sorry, being an illustrator, I find this kind of obnoxious). I wonder, could an editor be turned off of a story because of the horrendous art done by an author?

Sometimes, pre-published authors contact me (a pre-Caldecott winning illustrator) with a picture book manuscript, asking if I want to illustrate it. Of course I would want to spend weeks on someone else's story, which was not professionally edited and has very slim or no chances of being published, creating characters and settings, making a dummy, while putting aside any other projects I might have on my desk!

I reviewed a self-published picture book some years ago which demonstrated wonderfully why you can't just go grab a talented painter/artist and assume the person will be a good illustrator. The illustrations all showed merit (especially compared to most self-published picture books) but the artist flatly could not carry a likeness through all the action of the book. The main characters were very inconsistently rendered and a publisher wouldn't have touched them...even though they were very nice pictures when viewed individually with lots of action and energy.

When I create a dummy, I tend to do detailed drawings... Once an editor at a distinguished house passed because my character's eyes were *too* expressive. (I was writer/illustrator)

Lesson #1, I guess? turn in pages with generalized scratches on 'em, so the editor can imagine anything they want.
Lesson #2, this business be-fuddled!

To see what was deemed *too expressive eyes* go to -
http://www.jacketflap.com/profile/asp?member=PYXX

In my gallery... scroll to Pic of Marlin, sea turtle and dolphins caught in fishing net!

I dunno... I just dunno. Are they *too expressive?*

Haste yee back ;-)

Thanks for the clarification. I agree, leave it up to the professionals and not "Daddy with a crayon".

Sorry, link to above is...

http://www.jacketflap.com/profile.asp?member=PYXX

if interested!

Haste yee back ;-)

I love the titles of your posts.

That is all.

There's a lot of give and take in these situations. But the thing is, you've got to do some of the giving not just the taking. But I'm getting way ahead of myself -- the "creator" refusing to "bend on this point" suggests an unrealistic attitude toward the editing process. Editors are there to make the book the best it can be, and being open to their suggestions makes for a more developed, streamlined book.

My big concern is that this ms has been written, revised, polished, and NOW the creator is wanting to make a big change. Whoever the creator is they've got to get their head screwed on straight, and fast. 1)Don't give the go-ahead to send out a book if if you're not sure it's done, and 2) this business requires a flexibility in working with editors, and coypeditors, book designers, and on and on...

Short and right to the point. I love it and as always, it is excellent information.

Now I’m curious why this character “has to” be dropped.

Back in the Golden Age of Comics, the word “FLICK” was not allowed because the printing was poor enough that the “L” and the “I” might run together. Thus ended the career of Flitty Flicker.

And this is why ghostwriters normally write and pick up their check and walk away. Now you're in a position of trying to sell a work you're not actually in control of creatively. That had "horrors ahead" stamped all over it.

Oh man, do I feel for the questioner. The same thing happened to me, only in my case it was three years. And I never did hear from the editor. I only count it as three years because that's how long it took to sell the manuscript elsewhere.

As for the editor, she not only moved to another house but became someone Quite Noted in the publishing world.

I have to laugh when EA says nine months is ridiculous. It may be ridiculous where EA works, but it isn't at all unusual for certain houses, big or small. I've had agented mss with editors of large houses for six months without reply. Eleven months in one case. More than three never responded at all, for work they said they WANTED to look at.

I'm sorry for this person, though. It is so frustrating to get that far, get that request, and then not be respected enough to be informed of what is going on. The trouble with "subbing to others" is that most "others" want only agented subs, and so there may not be that many "others" to sub. I'm crossing my fingers for the OP -- to get an editor that both respects their work and their time.

Wow, this has to be a terribly frustrating and disappointing experience. Thanks for sharing how to handle this sticky situation and best of luck to whoever you are, as the writer stuck in the black hole. I hope it works out soon!

How frustrating! But it's also encouraging to know that there are times when it IS acceptable to send a courteous follow-up. As the person sending the query, it's easy to feel like you're at a disadvantage (not to mention, in an information vacuum) when you're anxious not to seem like a pest or a stalker but you still want to know what's happened to your manuscript.

I've luckily never been in this situation. Whenever my full ms. has been requested, I've been rejected mercifully quickly (with one notable exception, forthcoming in January). :)

Here in NZ, I have had my last five books contracted on a synopsis and a couple of chapters.

In the US, my agent has now been trying to find a home for my epic trilogy since May last year!

He hasn't given up. I'm trying not to take it personally. Perhpas if the book wins in its nominated category, it might make some waves.....

We writers have to be very determined!

Ditto, ditto, ditto. I've sold manuscripts after they've been sitting at a publishing house for over a year. And I've also had it happen that I never heard from the editor again (yes, an editor who had requested the manuscript). Once, an editor got back to me with an offer three years later. I was happy to be able to tell her that the manuscript had sold to a bigger (and better) house and was about to be published.

I'm shocked that anyone in business would have no contact with the very person who creates the product the company sells for 6 months, let alone not reply to an email after that long period of time. If an Editor or Publisher knows they are too busy to even email an author they have requested a manuscript from, then why request in the first place? I realize it's hard to say no to something they might love and want to publish but it is just very wrong to put another persons career and life on hold for almost a year (or more as some have said) without a word. At the very least they should warn the requested author about a potential years delay before they can respond.

Well, to be fair--some publishers get 1000 manuscripts per month. Editors come and go, get promoted, have babies. Budgets get cut and new management comes in. Manuscripts get misplaced and found again. It's been this way since I've been in the business (decades). I'm pleasantly surprised when I DO hear back, even if it's just a scrawled note on a form.

You know, I hear how busy people are all the time and guess what, we all are:)
Talk to anyone and THEIR job is always much harder then yours (as they tell it)
Publishers may get 1000 submissions a month but I certainly hope they do not request that many monthly. I do think, in this age of instant, easy and free correspondence, a one line email is not asking too much after 9 months.
I just don't think there is really any excuse for this.

Speaking as a teacher-- it's pretty hard to get today's kids to sit still for a picture book that long. I'd advise the writer to see if she can't rewrite that story a whole lot shorter.

Or longer, for a chapter book.

I have a question about this. Isn't "original legend" something of an oxymoron? Are we talking about a retelling or a fictional story written in folktale style? Just curious.

This is my opinion only, but it seems to me that attention spans have a natural variability. Not every kid of a certain age will sit through what some others might.

Also, attention spans can be strengthened and lengthened, similar to the way muscular strength and endurance can improve with exercise.

So it seems to me there are at least 2 elements of potential audience for such a work - those who are already inclined to enjoy longer pieces (even in a post Sesame Street world) and those who can be enticed to if the work itself is well-crafted and compelling.

Now, as to promoting such a work, I think there will be a lot of "the kids won't sit still" reaction. You would need to promote to the counter-trend. Find teachers and librarians who go the "extra mile" to move kids to more advanced reading. Find the iconolasts within the profession who pride themselves on doing more than "business as usual".

And, the most important of all - be sure the work is well done enough to actually compel attention. Find a way to expose some actual kids in your target age range to the work and pay close attention to their reactions. Better if they are not your friends or family and have no vested interest in saying what you want to hear.

Just a thought,
-Steve

Here in Michigan, fourth grade teachers are required to teach the legend genre, so you might be able to market it that way. However, I agree that it's hard to get kids to sit for a book that long. I read Nim and the War Effort to my class (3,600 words) but it's easily the longest picture book I use and I do it over two days.

What about a graphic novel?

A graphic novel does seem look a good idea for an in-between length of text.

Could this be the first picture book trilogy?

As a school librarian, I miss having picture books to read to older children. It seems to me that there were more picture books suited to third-to-fifth graders fifteen years ago. Since the success of HARRY POTTER, publishers have spent more money on chapter books for older children, and picture books are tailored towards the needs of younger children. That being said, if your manuscript is 3500 words, you can probably get another 500 words out of it. Try reading it aloud to a group of children and pay close attention to the places where you hurry because they're restless. Then cut those places.

Steve, sometimes you've got to believe a teacher.

We work on getting kids to lengthen their attention spans. We have to.

Sesame Street was on when I was a child, and I've got gray hair. The stuff on tv now (and on videos, and video games) moves much, much faster.

There are already so many too-long books out there... when I moved into my classroom I inherited a bookshelf full of picture books. Maybe half of them could hold my students' attention, if I read with lots of enthusiasm. None of the long ones could.

What they really like: rhythm, rhyme, interactive text (Is Your Mama A Llama?), interactive books (Pat The Bunny), and interesting pictures (A Day In The Life Of America, Richard Scarry books where you have to find Lowly Worm, those science picture books with the transparent overlays).

What they really like: rhythm, rhyme, interactive text (Is Your Mama A Llama?), interactive books (Pat The Bunny), and interesting pictures (A Day In The Life Of America, Richard Scarry books where you have to find Lowly Worm, those science picture books with the transparent overlays).


This is SO TRUE for the trade market and for little kids. I mean wouldn't you?



I think we are talking about the educational market here tho.

As for graphic novels (which I don't know too much about but) having read a few successful ones... they seem to have a hell of a lot of action, very high emotion... almost exaggerated, endless masses of illustration possibilities and an unforgettable story line that pulses forward and doesn't seem to let up until well... it is over. And the art really plays a significant role in the storytelling.

My fave is Persepolis (an historical saga set in Persia)

It might be a stretch to take this book to that level. IMHO

Anonymous said:
*********************
Steve, sometimes you've got to believe a teacher.

We work on getting kids to lengthen their attention spans. We have to.

Sesame Street was on when I was a child, and I've got gray hair. The stuff on tv now (and on videos, and video games) moves much, much faster.

There are already so many too-long books out there... when I moved into my classroom I inherited a bookshelf full of picture books. Maybe half of them could hold my students' attention, if I read with lots of enthusiasm. None of the long ones could.
********************************

It's not a matter of belief or disbelief. I will acknowledge that, in general, what a classroom teacher reports as their experience in the classroom is what actually happens. My point of departure might be what that actually means.

A little background. My mom had been a kindergarten teacher, before she quit the job to parent myself and my younger sister. She returned to teaching in the early sixties with a 3rd/4th grade "split" classroom in a small town school system. Her class consisted of kids who had various problems (the "slow" kids, etc.) but who did not meet the qualifications for a Special Ed. program. I always speculated that she got that assignment partly because she was new in that system, and partly because she was very good at what she did. She was constantly thinking about how to "reach" a kid who might not have an active interest in learning and light the spark of interest. She would even sit and talk to me about it. So my perspective on the role of a teacher really is grounded there = not so much a job as a mission.

As to Sesame Street, I was already a young adult when Sesame Street burst on the scene. Although I can't deny it may have played a role in assisting the less literate to become literate, I also accepted the criticisms about the impact of the show on attention span as basically a no-brainer. If you begin from an assumption of limited attention span, and adaptto that as context, your results will tend to replicate your chosen context (Duh?). If you liik up age-level attention spans in a child-development book and create a learning program based on those numbers, you will tend to produce kids who conform to those numbers. (Garbage in, garbage out?). I alwasys thought more highly of the Mr. Rogers approagh. He talked slowly, and I thought he made the kids "stretch" waiting for the next sentence.

I agree with you that media is *much* faster paced today, and if there were a way to indict the perpetrators of that trend for child-abuse I'd be for it :(

Perhaps a work of the length we're discussing is not suitable for reading to entire typical classroom. There are plenty of other things to do with books. Every kid is differnet with their own unique needs and abilities.

Of course, all this assumes - sight unseen - that the work itself is of compelling quality. If not, revise it or ditch it on other grounds. But I think a quality work can find a useful role in the educational arena regardless of length. (Of course, I speak as one who read habitually beyond my "level" throught school. But I'm not unique).

-Steve

Putting aside the "kids won't sit still for something that long" angles (why must all picture books be read-alouds?) and the "does it fit the curriculum" angles, I wonder about the market for picture books for older readers in general. Whether or not older kids CAN get lots and wonderful things out of a picture book, a lot of people-- from the clueless to the supposedly well-educated-- automatically ASSUME that picture books are for younger kids, chapter books for older. It's like once you start on the one, you're Too Advanced for the other. I have parents all the time in my library telling kids they're too old for picture books, as if picture books were only about reading short pieces with pictures to help decode.

Want to see something that will make you desperately inspired to run a program for parents on wordless picture books? Go look at the one-star reviews on Amazon for "The Lion and the Mouse," this year's Caldecott winner. Every one of them is from someone who is disappointed that the book has no words! How can this be a good book for someone who is learning to read?!

I think Accelerated Reader has something to do with this too. Picture books only earn a kid, at most, half a point each on AR. OBVIOUSLY they want to read longer books as soon as possible, so they can get more points! They dump those picture books as soon as they find a chapter book on their "official Reading Level!"

So THAT'S the problem with picture books for older readers-- nobody actually understands the point of them. Not saying they're right or wrong about that... okay, I AM saying they're wrong about that. But it would take a lot of work to convince enough people that they're wrong about that to make it work in the market!

But I do like the graphic novel idea. It seems like people are more willing to accept illustrated books for older readers if they have longer than 32 pages.

I third the graphic novel idea. Or something like Tashi which is a heavily illustrated chapter book. My dyslexic boys LOVE books like that and so do many struggling readers who want to look like they are reading a big chapter book like their friends but struggle with too many words on a page.

This project might interest a small publisher. That's what happened to me. I had a 3,400-word Appalachian version of a popular fairy tale that I'd originally used for a oral presentation. After rewriting it, I'd queried it around but didn't get much interest because it targeted such a small market.

Then a small publisher—who wanted regional material that could be used for home-schoolers as well as general readers—took it and the accompanying study guide I'd written, sent the manuscript to teachers for their input, and eventually did a 2,000 copy press run. The 56-page book has illustrations, but it isn't a picture book, per se.

It was published a few months ago and is doing well. It didn't hurt that the cover blurb is from a NY Times best-selling Appalachian author.

Your work probably has an audience—albeit a small one.

I LOVE YOU FOREVER has always given me the willies.

Well-said. Succinct. Good summary.

I confess I won't let my 6-year-old daughter read Junie B. Jones books even though I've never even cracked the spine on any of them. The title of one ("Dumb Bunny") was enough to turn me off.

I've also never read Love you Forever to my children because it creeps me out.

I seem to have a split personality. I was totally creeped out by I Love You Forever but bawl my eyes out every time I read The Giving Tree. I detested Junie B Jones but laughed MAO as I read Captain Underpants to my son. (I admit his giggling made me laugh no matter the subject, but that silly name generator was funny.)

There is a role reversal in my house now that my kids are teens. They come to me, favorite book in hand saying "Mom, you gotta read this" And I turn up my nose and say "ooh, the bugs coming out of that half of a corpse is just too creepy" (Bone) or "I cannot take any more of that heroine's obsessive fixation on her boyfriend."(bet you can guess)

"Being a child is a tough job; a heroic job."

I love you for this.

Lately several of our kids' church activities have been scheduled for early Saturday morning, which I've thought regrettable because it's the one morning a week my kids get to sleep in or lounge around. It's important to me that my busy kids get some down time, and I've felt that the adults who scheduled these Saturday-morning events didn't respect that down-time need. It was just one evidence of a feeling I often get that some adults think of kids' time as much more expendable than their own, and are willing to ask things of kids they wouldn't ask of themselves or other adults.

You can count my husband and I as two parents who like the Captain Underpants books, grossness notwithstanding. We like the books' wit and wordplay, and that they engage our kids so well. Currently, along with the Ricky Ricotta books, they're our three-year-old's and six-year-old's preferred bedtime stories.

(Yes, this means we're churchgoers who love gross kids' books (certain specific gross books, anyway) which makes us part of what is probably rather a small demographic.)

Regarding your question (people writing for children when they don't know about children)I wonder if it's because of some bad premises: writing for children is easy because the texts are short, and it's easy because children aren't discriminating readers who expect lots of literary quality in their books. And, hey, we were all children once, so that goes far towards experience, no?

Well, no. Children today read stuff that I wouldn't have when I was a kid, just as what I read likely wouldn't have appealed to my parents when they were kids. And let's face it, if you don't know about kids RIGHT NOW, you'll never connect with their reading interests. That's not to say any of these books are bad, just that tastes change.

(And I sincerely hope I don't have to expand on my "easy because" comments... since all writing is fairly rigorous, despite its length or perceived complexity.)

I remember a story Maurice Sendak told. A mother related how she kept trying to read 'Where the Wild Things Are' to her kid even tho it creeped him out. "Why do you keep reading it to him if he doesn't like it?" was his reply. "It's an award winner," she said, "he should like it!"

Hmm, writing for wombats? Interesting.

I wrote for kids before having them. I was able to stay in touch by refusing to grow up.

I don't write differently for kids now that I have them because I still refuse to grow up.

Writing is that rare career where immaturity is not necessarily a liability.

So I should shelve my proposal for the chapter book series, Lil Dexter, Ruler of Dahmer Elementary?

Great Post. As the mother of two boys I have all of the Captain Underpants collection in my home. Do I love potty humor? No. Do I live with it? With two boys, the answer is yes. Do I think they will be scarred forever because of Professor Poopy Pants? No. But we sure do share a good laugh and it gives me a good opportunity to talk about what is appropriate language at appropriate times.

As an author I try to gear my stories to the kids but keep the adults in mind. There is nothing worse that having to read a boring story, unless it is to read that same boring story 100 times.

Thanks for the great advice.

Putting on my mom hat for a moment---



As a parent who reads aloud, I want books that are fun to read. I want books that let me do the voices and that enthrall my kids AND that are funny, exciting or interesting enough that *I* want to read them! (Current favorite at my house with the 6,4, and 2 year old? Cressida Cowell's dragon series. The kids are basically living, playing, dreaming and breathing Hiccup.)

Believe it or not, parents want interesting books too. A lot of us don't care if the book teaches a GOOD lesson, as long as it doesn't teach a BAD one. And not so much because I think my kids will base their morality on the chapter books I read them-- it;s more that if a book DOES teach a bad lesson (Say the bad guy kills the hero and gets away with it and lives a happy long life of world domination...), my kids cry. And complain. And bedtime goes from happy dreams of sword-fighting on treasure heaps and instead turns into "That's not FAIR!"

So, as a mom looking at books for my kids, I try to weed out books that are dull, badly written (because I hate editing as I read!), scan poorly (if poetry), and are too upsetting for my kids. (dead parents, OK. Abusive parents, not OK. Divorce, not ok for my kids but may not bother other people's kids as much)

Now here's the rub - not all parents are looking for the same things. Not all parents find the same themes problematic. So if you set out to write a 'parent safe book' that will appeal to the generic parent, you'll get nowhere.

Write the book you want to write. Try to avoid OBVIOUS problems-- no parent is going to read their kids a picture book about space-villains who flay their victims alive and then eat them--- but if you tell a good story, and tell it well, parents AND kids will snap it up!

Thank you for your sage advice. Writing for MG and YA it's always a toss-up on what to include and what to leave out. I guess a tempered balance is the key.

Your examples of books which kids love and parents abhor made me laugh out loud. I cringe when Junie B. on CD comes into my home (her poor grammar is doubly frustrating in the audio version). Captain Underpants also gave me pause, but, oh how I love it now. Both series were instrumental in making my children enjoy books/reading. Pilkey's work also inspired my son to spend hours creating comics in honor of Captain U. Perhaps that is why I have a special fondness for Professor Poopypants and J.B.

I hate to be a creep, but this is an excellent post.

Interesting point about how many writers who want to write for kids seem to know nothing about them. Of course, we were all children at one time, but times change, and you have to understand TODAY'S young generation, not just your own.

Wait a minute. What person in her right mind would be outraged by Junie B?? I discovered the Parks books as an adult, and I like those little guys very much!

Methinks that any who disapprove of Junie B were Tattletale May when they were in first grade.

Pah. A pox on them and their entire houses, too.

One of the things we fight in slush all the time is people who want to write for children and really don't know much about children at all. (Why do they do this? I would never decide to write for wombats. It perplexes me.)

But they get published ALL the time. They appeal to adults. I HATE THAT. Their main characters are adults. They write about things that adults savor and kids throw on the ground. There is no audience (kid and hopefully kid/adult participation and nothing really that appeals to kids at all... but has humor for adults. What gives?

I have four children and I love to read to them. We have a pretty good library of awesome children's books.

(I wouldn't try writing for children myself - it's a lot harder than it looks. And a lot of people who write for adults perhaps don't appreciate exactly how hard it is until they try it.)

Anyway, my children are young and they're at the stage where they love detailed illustrations, ones that tell a story. A clever example of this we're poring over at the moment is a series called, 'The Little Red Train,' by Benedict Blathwayt.

I do look for books I'm going to enjoy reading to them - not too simple and that sit nicely on the tongue. (Kara Wilson's Bear Wakes Up, kind of thing, Jane Yolan's dinosaur books - that sort of thing.)

So yes, I pick the picture books, and they have to be fun for me to read. I don't care about message, and I agree with Deidre, so long as the message isn't negative I'm pretty good with it.

Ugh, I hate the Junie B Jones books. I once tutored a twelve-year-old girl in English and those were her favorite books. They really didn't help her. I ended up trying to use them as examples of what she should't do...

Very true; thanks for your insight.

And then there is also the difference between books that librarians will like and that will fill the shelves across the country, and those that are too edgy to make it past the gatekeepers. I suppose this is more of a YA title issue, and certainly more of a sales rep perspective. But, ultimately, the gatekeepers dictate what titles will be seen by the parents at all....

If you’d like, please stop by my blog for a chance to win an original giclee art print...by me :)

LOVED the Captain Underpants series. But I couldn't finish reading the Booger Boy one out loud -- it is the only book that has ever actually caused me to throw up (just a little, thank goodness). My son was unfazed and finished it on his own.

>Wait a minute. What person in her right mind would be outraged by Junie B?? I discovered the Parks books as an adult, and I like those little guys very much!<

Cynthia, ha, thank G I'm not alone! I also discovered JBJ as a grown up (age wise at least) and I loved, loved, LOVED her) It didn't hurt that Denise Brunkus was already a favorite illustrator by the time I discovered the series years ago now. But, it is Barbara Park's characters VOICE that has me in stitches with each turn of the page. I'm not a writer but I hear a lot about finding your characters "voice", and JUNIE B has this. Park is a huge talent in my eyes and, as EA speaks about here, knows her audience, knows children.
Personally, as a parent I had nothing to do with my children's book choices. I would take them to the Library, stand around, pick out my own books, then drive them home. That was the extent of my involvement, I read to them what ever they brought home. Some I liked, some I loved, some I were bored silly with. Love you forever creeps me out, the art doesn't appeal to me either but amazingly 2 of my children loved it (even when they were young). Have to admit, it can bring a lump to my throat alright but it's hard to get past the mother coming into the son's bedroom and his wife not rolling over in bed, elbowing him and saying "wake up, it's your mother again, she's wandering"!!!:)

I will admit to both not liking The Giving Tree and also Junie. I am not outraged by her, but having three kids, I just don't have any tolerance for how she acts and I just don't really like her.

It's tough finding good books for kids. My middle son is 8, and he's at a weird age for books. He's not interested in Captain Underpants and other books are too formula-driven for her ("I like these but they're always the same story"). We found a few Eoin Colfer books ("The Legend of..." books) that he loves.

Wombats can read??? :O This is why I love your blog! I learn somethign new every day!

Very well put. I also think that children develop their taste very young. Although they may not be able to purchase their own books yet, they'll keep choosing the same ones to read. (I know my mom tried to "lose" a few after a while.)

Junie B. Jones is great.

Books are not medicine. They aren't intended to make you "better." They are entertainment and education, and when you deny a kid a book they want to read you are doing the child a disservice.

Stop being so frightened by media -- your kids' problems won't come from the media, they'll come from abusive adults, bullies, indifferent educators, their own genetics, random chance and all the other real world factors that make life interesting and sometimes difficult.

Let your kids read what they want to read. Don't erect barriers. Don't suck the joy out of reading by imposing your own overly-sensitive so-called standards. Taking a book out of a kids' hands is far more morally questionable than anything they would find between the covers.

My daughter started pre-kindergarten this year. Every school day she goes to the school library and picks out a book by herself that she wants to take home and read. I'm always interested to see what she brings home. Most often she chooses a nonfiction book about an animal. I think it is wonderful that the school encourages children to pick out their own books, and I've started encouraging my daughter to pick out her own selections at the public library, too. So to answer your question...no, it isn't always parents picking out the books.

Glad to hear you say being a child is a heroic job. It weirds me out when people (especially people in the kidlit field) don't respect children.

Considering that children have different learning styles and those styles have an effect on their interests, a book that is popular for one child, may not be for another, and that's okay. Some children like to hear a story by being read to, regardless of illustrations (auditory), some children need shorter sentences with action-packed art (visual), and others need to interact with the text (kinesthetic). It is important for parents to be aware of those differences so when their visual child isn't responding to a lengthy, award-winning book in the same way that the auditory learner down the street is - it's not because their child doesn't have taste - it's just a different taste.

Nikki, I think I can safely say that exposure to JBJ is NOT the reason your young student had a problem. More then likely she had a problem much more severe then reading a book in her youth that used childish speach.
This IS how children talk. Often, as parents, we think it cute and repeat it, encourage it in a sense.
Just today I heard a report on how some group or other is pleased that most family movies are portraying the use of crosswalks, seatbelts etc, then mentioned the movie "Elf" standing out in the crowd, as it showed the main character being hit by a taxi and ending up without a scratch. Sigh, what do these anal people want??? (though the group was pleased that "ELF" was hit while at least using a cross walk:)
Parents, in charge of picking childrens books, is most often a bad thing. Few of us can remember being a child, so how do we think we can be the gate keepers of our own children's reading material?

I want to defend Love You Forever. I won't dispute that it's geared more to adults than kids (although, if I recall, my older son and daughter did find it amusing, if silly) but I don't think it's dysfunctional--I think it's a playful, camp, absurdist expression of the truth that moms love their kids forever, even if they can't still rock them to sleep every night. Yes, of course it's dysfunctional if moms really try not to let their kids grow up. But I don't think the book is really advocating that; it's just expressing nostalgia for the loss when they do grow up and leave, as well as expressing that even though they do, the love will still be there. And I even think some kids feel reassured by the message that growing up won't mean losing the love of their parents. (Pshew, I think that defense was longer than the book.)

I won't try to defend the Giving Tree, though, because all I can remember about it was that it was either a) boring or b) kind of weird. Maybe I would like it if I gave it a second shot, but that was my youthful impression.

I think Silverstein must have written the Giving Tree as a sick joke.... because if it's earnest, it's totally out of character....

I hate the book, but I keep thinking that if I can unlock the humor, I'll realize it's really Uncle Shelby's ABZ book in coded for so it can slip past classroom censors--

either that, or maybe he wrote it in a fit of pique after someone complained that his poems didn't teach good moral lessons?

Graphic Artists Guild Handbook: Pricing & Ethical Guidelines ( http://www.amazon.com/Graphic-Artists-Guild-Handbook-Guidelines/dp/0932102131/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1271948638&sr=1-1 ) gives some VERY BASIC outlines for work for hire fees. Most libraries have a copy, too. Check it out, and you'll at least be able to make a rough budget.

If you find an illustrator who is willing to work for significantly less then the GAG fees, well, you get what you pay for....

I get requests like this fairly frequently. I think most illustrators do. And it isn't just the drastically lower fees that make these jobs difficult to consider. There's usually no art director involved and the author is usually calling the shots. That can be a setup for trouble as that author may find it impossible to give the illustrator the creative control to contribute their VERY important half of a picture book.

as an illustrator, you are looking at about $150 per illustrated page. And that's for an okay illustrator.

I know that the self publishing co. I went with (Xlibris)it was $149 per illustration with their team of artists.The samples I have seen are ok and I was very pleased with my cover.One idea might be to ask at a local college(art class)and see if some of the students can help with illustrations for a small fee.

May I be the elephant in the room and say put your hard-earned money in your kids college fund instead?

Or take a fun trip. Or buy your mom a nice gift for Mother's Day. Or give to the heifer project where an African villager will be able to earn income and have a better quality of life from your gift of a real, live cow.

You've come here for information, and instead I'm lecturing you. I know. It's true -- I am sort of a bitch.

But please understand, I'm not condemning you, because God knows a lot of us are in the same boat. But when you are talking about having built-in publicity, why squander that publicity on a sub-par project? Even if the text is stellar, illustrations often make or break the book. Editors have years of experience in what works and what doesn't; they can guide a first-time illustrator, a writer usually can't.

But, this is only if you are looking for a career, some people aren't. So if that's the case, good luck and god speed. :)

As the illustrations sell the book, I don't think it should be a gratis or "small fee" situation.

Not to devalue a picture book text, but the Caldecott award, after all, is given for the illustrations, NOT the text.

go on 99designs.com, do a contest and then choose the best illustration. will cost $ 100-200

If you're serious about making your self-published work a success, it's integral to consider the costs up front and spend the money you need to make it as professional as possible. After all, why waste the time, energy and money on something that doesn't quite live up to your expectations?

My advice: if you're willing to put in the work to market your book, sell copies, and make it a success, bite the bullet and pay for an excellent illustrator. It's so important, especially for a genre so heavily dependent upon illustration. Best of luck!

I think the most important thing to consider is the art direction because it is about telling a story through pictures. Self publishing eliminates some layers of creative individuals and if the author and illustrator are not completely on the same page, it can be a nightmare. As an illustrator, I'm constantly amazed how self published authors will cut corners by getting someone they know illustrate their book and wonder why it didn't sell very well. If a self publishing author is going to put the effort in to publish, market and stand behind their book, please don't skimp on the illustrations.

Nancy is so RIGHT!

Even when you have an author approach you with their project and they are willing to pay the $5000 or whatever the illustrator thinks is a fair flat rate, there is the horror of no art director to face. All authors are attached to their work and refuse to relase control to the illustrator and their interpretation. They either want you to use the photo of their daughter as the main character or control the scene/settings.
The idea of working with non professional illustrators is just a bad, bad one if the author wants to sell any books. It's not just about the quality of art, it's also about knowledge of page layout, pacing, bleeds, text space, colour saturation for print.... these are things no kid in art college has a clue about.
The art is at LEAST half as important as the text in picture books.
Your asking if there is a standard Illustrator rate and that's fair enough. At least your not thinking an illustrator will work for 4 months plus for a "chance" at a few dollars in royalties IF the book ever goes to print, as many authors do.
For decent quality art that will give your book a fighting chance to sell, I think you should budget for roughly $350 a spread (usually 14 in a book) a single page (perhaps $150) and say $500 for the cover. Remember, we DO judge children's books by their cover:)
These are just suggested numbers and could be a little less, a little more depending on the style of art you are looking for and the detail and research required for the subject of the book.
Remember too, no matter what you pay as a flat fee, the illustrator still should want to retain copyright to the art.
This is not purchasing the original art.

Michael, 99designs.com is a design site, not an illustration site.

If you can't tell the difference between illustration and design, you really need to not be commissioning either of them.

on 99design there are a lot of illustrators and designers as there are on Elance.com too. You have to give them a good briefing of what you want, thats the hard part.

>Elance.com/99designs<

Michael, if an author doesn't care about their book, then they can go your suggested route. You can find foreign illustrators chomping at the bit to do a whole pic book for $200 US, but in my opinion it's ridiculous to take the most important element of a children's book, the illustrations, and get cheap about it.
Just don't bother if the author is not prepared to have it illustrated and printed in a professional manner.

I'm with Anonymous.

Also with all the people who mention the art director's role. I watch the negotiations my publisher goes through to get a book cover designed, and am very glad to be only peripherally ("You like this okay?") involved. For one thing, the artist is just as insistent on his vision as I am on mine. If we had to actually talk to each other... oy.

There are three good reasons to self-publish:

1)you're addressing a small niche audience

2)you believe you or the person you're mostly writing for may not live long enough to see the manuscript published

3) you just want to hold your book in your hands

But a lot of people self-publish in the hopes of launching a writing career. Anonymous is right: that's not the way. Have you sent your manuscript everywhere you can think of? If you have, and have received no encouragement, it's time to put it aside and write another one.

Nearly 3/4 of a million books were self-published in the US last year. The vast majority sell only a few copies, mainly to the author.

I'm with Anonymous.

Also with all the people who mention the art director's role. I watch the negotiations my publisher goes through to get a book cover designed, and am very glad to be only peripherally ("You like this okay?") involved. For one thing, the artist is just as insistent on his vision as I am on mine. If we had to actually talk to each other... oy.

There are three good reasons to self-publish:

1)you're addressing a small niche audience

2)you believe you or the person you're mostly writing for may not live long enough to see the manuscript published

3) you just want to hold your book in your hands

But a lot of people self-publish in the hopes of launching a writing career. Anonymous is right: that's not the way. Have you sent your manuscript everywhere you can think of? If you have, and have received no encouragement, it's time to put it aside and write another one.

Nearly 3/4 of a million books were self-published in the US last year. The vast majority sell only a few copies, mainly to the author.

I have an illustrated podcast - a dark, nautical fantasy called the Guild of the Cowry Catchers. This is what those images look like: http://cowrycatchers.com/?page_id=21

I find my illustrators on Deviantart.com, and I carefully cultivate respectful, friendly relationships with them. I pay $100-$200 per illustration, usually half for the sketch and half for the finished product. I tip if I'm very pleased, and I pay in addition for shipping. I try to give the more than they ask for. I let them chose which scenes they want to illustrate from the text. I don't tell them how to draw, but I do ask that they read the story. I have never been displeased with the results. My audience seems pretty happy as well. :)

When I do get around to selling the text, it will contain some images that aren't available online, and all of them will be higher resolution. I think I'll have good results with this. We'll see.

I'm going to suggest something even radical.

Plough your time and talents into writing a fantastic book. Then write another. And another. When you've written about five or six, take your best one and query an agent who specialises in children's books.

Up until this point, it will cost you little by way of money, but lots in terms of time. Let the publisher do the marketing and publicity, you focus on writing a fabulous book where every word counts.

"Of course, most of the self-published books I've seen weren't professionally illustrated, and that's one reason they sell so badly."
I've seen self-pubbed children's books, and it's not just the illustrations that let it down :-)

Write and write well.

Taken from my blog (as a former art director... in advertising. But much of it applies to publishing I imagine.)

Eventually, I made my way up to art directing. But what I didn't realize is that art directing is not simply coming up with images and matching them with the art. NO, THE REAL JOB is stated below.

What much of it is is quality control which brings the final art to production for print/film.

This involves checking and fixing and finalizing proofs for :

Color
Design
Layout
Type
Readability
Content
Anatomy
Composition
Text Placement
Type with Image Choice
Sizing
Copy Proofing
Storyboarding
etc...

It is a crazy job. Insane at times. Because of multiple projects all needing your attention at once and more.

But without it you get rot for the most part.

B :) I honk for ADs (the under-appreciated, hardworking... "get no credit" people)

(And what Ebony says in full.)

I've actually been tinkering with this idea myself and am wondering where to find freelance editors. Have any suggestions? Thank you for posting this question/answer. It really is a fantastic one!

This is definitely one of those things that should NEVER be mentioned in a query.

I feel like there's the mistaken impression here that *everything* changes once you get that coveted first book contract. You don't suddenly get a key to the writer's toolbox because a publisher pays money for your work.

If you can't edit this manuscript on your own then there's no reason to think that you'll be able to edit the next one either. Are you going to hire a freelancer for every book you write for the entirety of your career? You certainly aren't going to get any better at revising and editing your work if you outsource it to someone else and never practice.

It seems to me that hiring a freelance editor is a very bad idea for an aspiring author of fiction. If you're writing nonfiction or memoir or something where craft is second to the information or story being conveyed then by all means have the actual *writing* part tightened up by a professional.

If you want a career as a novelist then it might be wiser to take a step back and focus on the actual craft of writing without publication as the immediate goal. Write, revise and repeat until you are the professional, no outside consult necessary.

Ashley

Ashley, well said.

The only reason to hire an editor would be if the writer's only goal was to see their book "in print", and intended to use a vanity publisher.

There's nothing wrong with using freelance editors, as long as they further the project and you learn from their suggestions. Writing and editing are very different activities; needing editorial help does not mean you're a bad writer.
But god, no, don't tell publishers about it. It's not that they mind you using freelancers, but all that really matters to them is your writing. You need that cover letter space to talk about your story, not the writing process.

Tough Love,

I agree with you that needing editorial help doesn't equal "bad writer". However, hiring a freelancer can present a catch-22 situation for a new author.

Scenario 1: You don't include in query letter that you had your manuscript professionally edited. It's accepted based on the quality (quality that you couldn't attain on your own). When you submit the next book to the editor at your publishing house, they'll be in for a very unpleasant surprise at the lowered quality of second book vs. first one. This equals unhappy publisher.

Scenario 2: You include in your cover letter that the manuscript was independently edited. Publisher doesn't buy it because they want career writers who are able to work with revisions on their own without outside help. This equals unhappy writer.

A caveat: If the sort of editing you're talking about is a writer getting a revision letter from a freelancer and applying changes to their manuscript as they see fit (in the same vein as feedback from a critique group) then it's part of a learning process and perfectly fine. The problems come up when serious editing (not just correcting typos or small errors) is done to a manuscript that a writer couldn't do on her own.

btw, I saw your recent post on reddit the other day. The online writing world is so incestuous! I know you do freelancing on the side so I hope I'm not stepping on your toes.

People who are looking for freelance editors would do well to find them through the Editorial Freelancers Association website. You can list your job for free.

I disagree with Ashley Girardi... I don't think using an editor makes you dependent on editors for the rest of your life, nor do I think it means you have no skills as a writer.

Especially if you don't have a critique group, a second set of eyes can really make you focus on specifics you wouldn't have considered before.

I've had one book sold and edited by a big house -- what I learned about THAT book's edits, I took with me and continue to use in the books I'm writing now.

Just because you're unsure how to edit in the beginning, doesn't mean you'll always be that green. Editor help makes you THINK about things differently. Which means you write differently from the very first draft. It's called learning...

Ashley, my fellow Redditor ;),

I see where you’re coming from, but I think what you see as a catch-22 is something that freaks writers out, but doesn’t actually matter to editors.

Scenario 1: If it works for you the first time, why not use the same freelancer again? You might need less help the second time around, and if you need the same level, who cares? On the other hand, if you choose not to and your subsequent submissions are of lower quality (because of that or for any other reason), you won’t have an unhappy publisher, just a disinterested one. We see lame submissions from published authors all the time; that’s no career-killer.

Scenario 2: No publisher would reject a manuscript because it’s been edited by someone else. As long as they like what’s been done (and they can’t tell who did what, anyway), it just doesn’t matter. The only reason I don’t like to see “this manuscript’s been professionally edited” in a cover letter is that it looks naïve. It doesn’t stop me from considering it; it’s just not something that’s going to get me excited.

Like Anonymous said, getting an MS edited by a (good) freelancer is a great learning opportunity. Whatever works!

Cynthia Leitich Smith has a list of trusted critiquers connected to the children's/YA book community here- http://www.cynthialeitichsmith.com/lit_resources/for_writers/writers_reading_list/perspiration2.html

Well, poop, I dropped out of my MLS program, too. My first class, I had to buy a book so big you could cut out holes in the pages to live in. Sadly, the book cost more than rent.

Also, thirteen year old PROTAGONISTS don't necessarily mean they're being READ by thirteen year olds-- I'd call a book with middle school protags that reads like MG middle grade without hesitation. I am less certain about my own book with HIGH school protags that reads like middle grade. A Wrinkle in Time has high school protags and yet is clearly more middle grade than many of L'Engle's other books, though; figure that out.

I wish being a librarian made one automatically qualified to get ones manuscripts considered in full! But okay, I wish more at this point in my life that being a librarian made one automatically more likely to find time for writing, but that's beside the point.

Re: the first question -- why don't you just cover all your basis and call the book a tween novel? It sounds like that's what it is.

More mature than what a nine year-old would read, but not quite as advanced as what a sixteen year-old will read. That still gives you a heck of a big demographic.

One of the first people I signed from the slush had quite a few books published in the 80s and 90s. To explain the gap, she said she "then took some time off to collect a couple Master's degrees and a grown child." Not only did that succinctly tell me why she hadn't written in a while, it also mirrored the quirky humor of the query and work.

The only way you could go wrong is harping on it too much (agents and editors understand that real life gets in the way sometimes, there's no need to apologize for it) or not mentioning the gap at all (in which case when google the works and see how old they are, I wonder if the writer was hoping I wouldn't notice, and if their reason for not writing was their books did poorly on the market).

To the person looking for illustration work. If you just want to illustrate, follow what EA said. However, if you want to illustrate a book you've also written, put it aside. Try to get illo work first, develop a relationship with an editor/art director, then try to show them your writing. I tried for two years to sell my first book as a writer and illustrator, but it never happaned. Eventually, I just looked for illo work, and in two months I landed a book. Once I was working on that, I sold that editor my first book I had written.

*deleting 476 pages of armadillo sex complete with footnotes*

Sarah, you made me giggle.

hmmmm. The Rejectionist seems to be working in the field of adult literature.

There Are MFA programs concentrating on writing for Children and Young Adult that are staffed with writers who are multi-published (award-winning) in that field. Who push you to write great books about interesting characters.

I want to improve my writing skills.
I want an MFA from one of those schools.

Well, as a soon to be graduate of an MFA writing program, I have to politely disagree. Sure, we workshop, but that is such a small part of my MFA experience. I listen to lectures on craft, setting, characterization, stereotypes. I listen to editors and agents talk about what they expect from writers. As far as I can tell, no one can teach you how to have a good story, that comes from yourself so if someone is writing about armadillos then it has to do with them, not the program.

And believe me, as much as I love being surrounded by other writers who 'feel the pain', I am way too aware of the fact that I am not writing for them. I am writing for readers, editors, interns, gatekeepers, and everyone else involved in the publishing process.

The best part of being surrounded by other writers though is that hopefully you will make one writer friend that will tell you truthfully that she/he doesn't think there is a market for a book about armadillo sex in a polite, but manuscript killing way.

Venus, good to hear from you.

But if you think a writer friend can tell you when you have a story there's no market for, why do you also think no one can teach you how to write a story there IS a market for?

yo I probably am a genius actually

Anonymous,
Then please ignore my humble rantings. No doubt I will one day lick your boots.

It's amazing the various and diverse perspectives that are all considered part of "being a writer".

For myself, I'm a long time reader (50 years of science fiction) but I never had more than a trivial aspiration to write. Then, at age 63, I realized I had a story I wanted to tell - a YA novel about a rock band, of all things. So now I'm an aspiring YA writer with a prologue and 3 chapters in first draft.

The notion of writing as a profession or life calling - of taking college level programs to become such a professional - of seeking others in that profession as one's primary audience - this is bizarre almost beyond belief to me.

Not to disparage anybody's chosen trip - just to say writing is many more different things than most of us realize.

Life is strange,
=Steve

I laughed when I read this!

I am the furthest thing from a genius that there is. My friends have pointed out to me that I sometimes end my sentences with a preposition. Yikes! I also have a real problem with punctuation. Commas who needs them run on sentences are so much more fun to read because you have to reread the sentence 10 times just to figure out what was said in the sentence.

(I did that on purpose! I couldn't help it.)

Seriously though, I am very lacking in skill. What I do have is an extreme passion for stories.

I would probably benefit greatly from an MFA program, but I am really hoping that if and when I am ever considered for publication, that those editing will make me look like a genius!

(I probably made some ginormous errors there!)

I don't care about the sex lives of armadillos. I was, however, fascinated to learn about The Elegance of the Hedgehog.

Hoping to embark on an MFA next year. Hoping not to end up like this. The truth is, I used to write way too prettily and "purply".

Reading mainstream books, I realised that most author don't write like that. The challenge is to weave a beautiful story using average words, so that's' what I've been trying to do.

Hopefully, I'll remember that post-MFA.

OK, M.T. Anderson, the challenge has been issued: give us a story about sexy armadillos!! I think it has lots of potential - the exoskeleton as metaphor for alienation and failure to engage, the small & hopeful tail, the tenderness beneath the toughness...if anyone can write it, Anderson can (oh-oh, he does have an MFA....)

The Rejectionist has a news flash that could have come out in the 1890's - that's how long people have been arguing about whether writing can be taught. It's not news, having an opinion about that.

My opinion: MFA's are often about community - finding it, nurturing it, making friends, leaving the snark factor behind, coming out from behind the armadillo shell. I'm proud to be part of one.

I come from the 'trial and error' school of writing. With loads of errors.

I have no formal training in writing a book, but that didn't seem to discourage my publisher.

My gut feeling is publishers won't care what your qualifications are, they just want a good story that will appeal to lots of people.

Laughing...

In truth, I have mixed feelings about MFA programs. I have considered them, but maybe because it might make me feel more official? More like I deserve the title of writer? More driven to publish because Holy Crap, I spent 40,000 dollars on a writing education so I better be a writer?!!

I went to an MFA program workshop, one where they are trying to convince you that an MFA program is the only way to become a real writer. I did enjoy the workshop. I thought it was well done and worth my time, but I didn't get the feeling that they had anything to teach me that I couldn't learn on my own or for much less money. So when they opened up for questions I asked "What can I get from this program that I cannot get any other way?"

After much mumbling and stumbling and finally "It really gives you a jump start..."

A jump start into what? Great writing skills? A circle of writing friends? Agents and editors? At the end of it all, it would really stink to spend 30,000+ dollars and still have nothing to show for it except perhaps a piece of paper that says you can teach other people how to write.

I still don't think there is anything they can teach you that you can't get in any other way for much less if not free. BUT some of my favorite writers have come out of MFA programs, including Shannon Hale and Kristin Cashore, and I'd just like to know, how much credit do they actually give to their MFA programs for their current success?

EA you are right.

MFA's serve in large degree to separate writing from actual readers. Writers are readers but readers are not writers.

I keep saying this to writers: it's not a group activity, and it's not about "connections" or learning a formula or pleasing the aesthetes. It's about telling stories. If you can tell an interesting and original story in such a way that your audience cannot look away, almost nothing else matters. That's 90% of the game.

As I always tell my students, I disagree with the adage that 'everyone can be a writer with a bit of help'.

Then I go on to illustrate: I will never be a good athlete. With training and practice I might be a better amateur but I will never hit the top ranking.

I know this from childhood experience. I used to twice weekly attend gymnastics with my best friend. She could do flick flaks, walkovers, bend her body in such a way it was scary. I did manage to get to gold (the third grading) but it took me two years of intensive training. Took her three weeks. She was gifted.

I am a great (gifted?) story teller but I need by agent and editor to make the writing better so that readers don't see the cogs, ropes and pulleys behind the curtain. Cos no matter how many times I crawl through the draft, these two ALWAYS go 'What?' and show up my weak spots.

I'm sure you do this too EA for your authors.

As I said on blog, writing is a very painful and hard occupation.

But, I have over the past 15 years of writing, attended some workshops, read a lot, talked a lot to writers and publishers and editors and I am very, very open to suggestions from those who know.

I'm not sure MFA's are useful, in general. Probably far too many of them. But my MFA program specifically, rocked.

I had concentrations in both adult fiction, and children's writing. I had amazing teachers in both concentrations that helped me improve a lot as a writer. (Notice I said teachers, not students).

I came late to children's writing ... had no intention of doing it at all until an extremely compelling idea struck me that happened to be YA in nature, and I knew nothing about YA lit, so I sought guidance. What struck me about the children's community of my university was that it was a "community" -- much more welcoming, nurturing, less pretentious than the adult fiction program. And it was due to my professor taking me to a SCBWI event that I met the first editor who published me. So MFA's have their uses for certain.

I was never a literature snob, and if fact, was worried about that before I applied to my MFA, since I write "high concept" fiction, with literary sensibilities. But since most snobs can't see past the "high concept" I wasn't sure how my writing would go over in workshops. But it's funny, this is the second time in two days that I've heard/read someone arguing (the other was editor at an SCBWI conference) about writing that "sells."

I don't think it's so much a problem in children's literature (on the ground, with editors) and probably not with editors in adult fiction either. But I think MFA programs in fiction teach to the Lit Magazines that they also publish ... and there is extremely little high concept writing accepted by the hundreds of literary magazines that are out there. It's all armadillo sex.

'Nuff said.

I'm one of those (...assuming there are lots) who chose a major I was interested in intellectually because the last thing I would do is major in art. And yet, here we all are, reading the same blog in the same pursuit. Let us Kumbaya, friends.

And also, I would be super testy (regardless of my attempts at being otherwise) if anyone suggested Sociology isn't the best and most wonderful field of study in the history of the universe forever. ;)

Hmm.

I have serious opinions about this.

First off, an MFA should be reserved for those who wish to lecture and teach writing to others, in that tired-and-true manner. Unless of course you prove you can write good books, for which no degree is needed, and you’ll therefore be asked to participate in teacher-in-residency programs, and will eventually, should you chose to accept, wind up teaching literature somewhere in your golden years. So, an MFA doesn’t even really guarantee that approach.

Second, people who approach writing via the MFA track are akin to people who approach any other art via a secular educational environment: they are on the outside looking in. These are the people who, and this is just my experience, who go to a trade school to learn a craft versus spend the same amount of time working at said craft. And MFA is at best a degreed apprenticeship one step removed from the artist studio, the glassblower’s furnace, the writer’s REAL life, at worst a complete waste of time and money.
Sure an MFA will get you networking bonuses, first dibs to writer’s conferences, and the occasional “sit” with an editor or agent. Sadly, or fortunately, depending on where you sit, the Internet has pretty much done away with that perceived edge. What do they really teach you? They teach you to write like other writers, they try to put out Faulkners or Sedarii or whoever they think is relevant, cool, and a positive genuflection/reflection of their alma mater.

Too many times, TOO many times, they are simply trying to produce marble sculptures from wood, brass, or occasionally, diamonds. I see too many writers who have wonderful vision and a refreshing approach to the craft – all stifled because their way isn’t “the way.”

The best way to get better at writing is simple. Read and write. That is all. Sure you should understand the tools of your chosen trade, you need to understand grammar, you need to understand plotlines, the largely ignored art of storytelling (versus writing), and the ever important question of WHY to write (versus the rather easily attained answers to HOW).

All that money spent on an MFA program could be better spent buying out the time it takes to write. Take the $20k and take some time off to write, however much that tuition can buy you. All that time that you bought for yourself, and your stories, is the best money ever spent, and the first and most important investment in your writing career.

[ /rant]

The notion of writing as a profession or life calling - of taking college level programs to become such a professional - of seeking others in that profession as one's primary audience - this is bizarre almost beyond belief to me.

Not to disparage anybody's chosen trip - just to say writing is many more different things than most of us realize.

Life is strange,
=Steve



Steve... I hear you in so many ways. :)

Most of my favorite writers are so because of their being inspired and passion... not being educated. Not that education is bad... it IS necessary to some extent... but all by itself, well that is not enough.

Effective writing entails so many things, indeed. B :)

Wow, thanks for giving me a reason never to visit your site again. This is hugely offensive.

Kasey--

"Sedarii"? I love you. :)

Forgive me for this brief pity party here... but, hell, there are people that can afford 20 or 40 grand on an MFA program and I can't even afford to buy a book I want to read by an author I know I already like? I'm waiting on a reserve list at the library right now (number 93) which means the book will probably come out in paperback before I get to it... okay pity party over, thanks.

Seriously though. I often think that the deep and ponderous question of to MFA or not to MFA is just someone trying to delay the inevitable torture that is writing. If this is your biggest problem in life (and I'm not suggesting it is) it's a rather elite problem. Get over yourself, I say. Sit your scrawny or fat ass in a chair and write. It's going to be torture. Having an MFA isn't going to make make it less so.

Not to offend anon even further, but I enjoyed this post and it makes me want to come visit even more often.

Yo, Annoy on 11 April--

Zut alors, I'm a genius as well! (Not in general. Just in writing books for children. In general I'm pretty dopey.)

Shame there's so few of us, n'est pas? It makes the mean streets of publishing verrrry dangerous these days, what with so few literary lights still shining forth...

Delacroix

The children's/YA MFA I'm most familiar with (Vermont) has both unpublished and well-published students. I can't speak to other programs (though I do hear that many are heavy on the literary), but what I hear about Vermont is that people go there to write *better*--not to get a golden ticket to publishing. That seems completely reasonable to me. After all, your authors listen to you when you edit them because it's going to make their books better, right? I think it's a smart idea to seek out education when you can't do any more on your own. Naturally it doesn't have to be in the form of a formal degree. I think mileage varies considerably with MFAs, and you have to be reasonable about what you expect to get out of one.

I agree that an MFA doesn't make you a working writer, or even particularly help in becoming that. Most of the publishing advice I got in my MFA was geared towards literary magazines, and frankly, I don't really think anyone reads those except other MFA students and their professors.

What my MFA did for me -

- paid time to write. Go to a less-highly-regarded school, get a free ride and get paid to be there. Sure, there was 20K in tuition involved, but *I* didn't pay it. MOST graduate programs in MOST fields pay YOU, not the other way around.

- experience editing. My assistantship was as an assistant to the editor of a professional journal. I edited articles from major players in my field, and got to closely observe what the editor did.

- experiences that became writing, through a strong study-abroad program that let me spend time in a new environment and meet more people to write about.

- the discovery that I liked writing non-fiction and was good at it - never would have bothered to move out of my main genre, playwriting, unless I'd had to take a non-genre class.

Most of my classmates were unqualified to critique, but as such, they were closer to the "average" reader. None of my professors were big-time writers, but the good one was really good.

What mattered most was writing, every week, inspired or not, because of a deadline. I have trouble doing that on my own.

I'd recommend finding a place like Grub Street in Boston, that offers writing classes in a variety of genres, and take some classes if you're not up for a full MFA. It's worth it to practice, to meet people who stimulate you, and to write to deadline.

JULIE LARIOS SAID:

"My opinion: MFA's are often about community - finding it, nurturing it, making friends, leaving the snark factor behind, coming out from behind the armadillo shell. I'm proud to be part of one."

I completely agree. Going through Seton Hill's Writing Popular Fiction Program brought me closer to writing and to the writing community.

Studying under publishing writers and learning about the business has been invaluable for me personally.

Of course, the degree means nothing if the dedication to story isn't there. As with most things in life, you get out of it what you put in to it.

Wendie O correctly points out that The Rejectionist addresses MFA programs that focus on literary fiction and turn out writers who publish in small literary magazines. Those programs seem geared more to preparing people to teach in academia, where literary magazines are the equivalent of scholarly journals and the mentality is one of "publish or perish." Those MFAs will never be able to support themselves by writing but rather intend to teach full-time in colleges and universities--assuming they can find full-time positions in what is basically an academic Ponzi scheme.

I'm not sure, EA, whether you consider a MFA program in writing for children and young adults to have similar flaws--preparing their graduates to write literary material that no one wants to read. Or simply that it's unnecessary because critique groups, conferences, and time spent writing are equally effective in perfecting one's craft and networking for publication.

That said, there are other reasons an unpublished or even published children's writer might want to enroll in a MFA program. I'm published but chose to do so because I lost my day job in a dying industry and the degree will allow me to become certified as a secondary English teacher as well as teach at the college level.

You're painting all MFA programs with a very wide and inaccurate brush. Yes, I will agree that the majority of them are elitist and not worthwhile if what the student wants to write is something for the "masses"--i.e., genre fiction. That's why I did my master's work at Seton Hill University in the Writing Popular Fiction program. In the two years I was there, I went from a mediocre writer who didn't know tight Point of View or how to market a book once I wrote it to someone with a publishable manuscript as my master's thesis. How do I know it was a publishable manuscript? Because it was acquired 18 months after I graduated, and it came out in January 2009 from a traditional (non-literary) publisher. Now, nine book contracts later, I'm working on a new proposal for a three-book series. In addition to that, having a master's degree in creative writing was what put my resume over my competitors' when I applied to work as an editor at a book publisher---and, after just a few years, has allowed me to do just what I always wanted to do: stay home and support myself by freelance editing and writing books.

The best part of the program for me (aside from making life-long friends and becoming part of a writing community) was working under two authors who are published in my genre who broke me of all of my bad habits and helped me identify who my audience is and how to reach them.

Is an MFA worth all the time and expense? If you go to the right program, yes.

This is not a slam to anyone, but I think it's both fitting & funny that these are--on average--the most verbose comments to appear on ed.anon thus far.

I love the way Josiah isn't slamming anyone but calls them verbose, and Steve doesn't want to "disparage anyone's chosen trip" but calls the choice "bizarre beyond belief." WTF? Maybe people writing longer posts feel deeply about this and are offended by the usual pull-yourself-up-by-your-own-bootstraps rants?? Why is anti-intellectualism such an aphrodisiac in this country? And why do people disparage mentorship and act like talent springs whole like Athena out of Zeus's head? Right - I guess Yo-Yo Ma never needed music lessons or a supportive mentor either, he just sat down at a cello and let his genius take over?

I think people need to write what they want and just see where it goes from there. Maybe I am being naive but it is what I think.

I hope no one took what I said as anti-intellectualism, or indeed anti-MFA.

I think (as I said in the post) that it's great that people want to think hard about writing, and study it, and practice it.

What I wish is simply that more MFA programs would make an effort to teach their students about the publishing industry-- what sells and what doesn't. Not as Rules To Follow... but as Information That May Be Useful To You Should You Wish to Be Paid for What You Write.

I read this on Nathan's blog earlier. All I could think was, what is the world coming to when it is ethical to do illegal things?

Ethical- adjective: pertaining to or dealing with morals or the principles of morality; pertaining to right and wrong in conduct.

His definition obviously added in "according to your own agenda and sense of entitlement."

Someone needs to be fired.

First, I totally agree with Nathan feedback. His analogies show the act in true parallel, highlighting how ridiculous it is to assume you can steal because you bought one form of something.

However, I wanted to point out that ethical and legal are two very different words with different meanings. An army recruiter was looking at me as officer material many years ago and asked me if I had ever broken a law. I asked why, stalling for time (this was the late 70s for crying out loud). He said, "So that we know you have the ethics it takes to be an officer." I had to explain that ethical and legal are two different things. It was once legal to own slaves, but it has never been ethical to do so.

He got red in the face and I realized that the army was not for me.

I want to start with a disclaimer: I agree (mostly) with what Nathan says, but while his peanut butter and jelly analogy is entertaining, logically it is not very useful. After I consume my PB&J, it's gone. After I read a book, it still exists.

If I then take my nifty, old-fashioned, hardcover and give it to a friend, I haven't broken any laws. If she loves it as much as I did and gives it to her brother, then she hasn't broken any laws, and thankfully I'm still in the clear. So far so good.

The next book I buy is an ebook because I just got an iPad. My friend has an iPad too, so I attach the ebook to an email and send it off with effusive praise and a suggestion for a new brand of peanut butter. Now we both have a copy of the book. Did I just become a pirate? If she then sends a copy to her brother, did she break a law? And since the original file was mine, am I in some way responsible for distributing that ebook to my friend's brother?

What is the practical ethical difference between passing around a hardcover and passing around an ebook? The obvious material difference is that we now all have our own copies. Economically, though, the situation is exactly the same.

Nathan is absolutely right when he says that ebooks are fundamentally different products, but he is wrong when he oversimplifies the ethical and legal changes that occur with just such a fundamental change.

mallard said: "Now we both have a copy of the book. Did I just become a pirate?"

Yes - giving away or selling a hardback book that you originally bought does not result in "now we both have a copy of the book" There is still one book, and one person has it. Making and distributing copies is a whole different thing, since your one purchase results in multiple copies for multiple people. Kind of like taking more then one newspaper from a vending box while you have the door open.

Get it?

Recently I sent the "Ethicist" an email regarding a letter he replied to and he was so ABSOLUTELY rude (and nasty) in his response that I haven't been able to stomach him since. His self-righteousness perplexed me.

I avoid that part of the NYT magazine and go straight to the crossword section.

As far as the ebooks,I'm gonna agree with Nathan...on all fronts.

Mallard wrote: "What is the practical ethical difference between passing around a hardcover and passing around an ebook?"

Your question is well supported and received. To answer from MHO, buying a hard copy does not allow you to begin publishing new copies of the book. Nor should buying an electronic copy allow you to create more copies (sending them to friends). Now, if you give them your electronic copy, keeping none for yourself, I can see the argument getting fuzzy.

Ahh, but you're not passing around the ebook - you are passing around a copy of the ebook. Because you still have yours.

A better analogy would be that you make a photocopy of your hardcover and send it to your friend, who then photocopies that copy and passes it to her brother.

When you pass on a hardcover, you then do not have the object - it has been designed to be used by one user at a time. You may pursue the convenience of telling your friend to buy her own damn copy since she never returns your books, and she can tell her brother to go to the library.

But when you pass on a copy of a thing, such as an ebook file, you are making more copies, not sharing the copy you have. It is just as illegal and unethical to do so as photocopying a book so others don't have to buy it.

When the publisher releases a hardcover, they know that lending/giving will occur. They hope that since your friend having the copy means you don't, that more copies will be sold.

So yes, you are a pirate.
Yes, your friend is breaking the law.
And yes, you are responsible for passing around a legally-non-passable item.

This is not an ideal situation, and there's gotta be a better way to do it, but that is the reality under discussion.

Mallard, I believe their IS an economic difference. You gave your hardcover book to your friend. Later, if you decide you really want to read it again -- you have to buy a new hardcover (assuming you want to own it that way) because you gave yours away. The same for your friend. You have *chosen* to make your hardcover a "one time use" by giving it to someone else even though you *paid* to use it for yourself forever. Your choice to give it away means it's no longer yours to use unless you invest in it again.

BUT with an ebook, you've now copied the book and given a copy away. If you want to read yours again -- you don't have to pay. The same for anyone who copies it again...over and over.

The second is like photocopying the hardcover and passing it out on the street but keeping your copy so you can read it as much as you want...and each person can read it as much as they want. We know that is wrong. It slams the potential sale of the book to a stop each time you do it because now the person has ZERO reason to ever buy it (unless they simply want it in a different format).

In the case of passing your tangible product on (thus eliminating YOUR chance to ever use it again)...you changed the "use of it forever" to "one time use" because you passed it on. Thus, opening up the possibility that you would buy it again if you decided you'd made a mistake and wanted to reread it again.

The only way to make that work with an ebook is if passing it to a friend erased it from your possession...then you'd have to buy it again if you wanted it again.

Apparently the Nook has a "lend" feature, where you can send a book to a friend and it's automatically returned to your Nook after 2 weeks. Kind of a cool concept...

Why yes, I WAS cornered by the perky-young-nook-sales-girl when I was just running into the store to pick up a few favorites as a 'new baby gift.' How could you tell? (She was very persuasive-- if I'd had disposable income (hahahaha) I'd probably have walked out with a nook.....

The thing about ethics, is that it's based on ones sense of morality. It isn't like etiquette, where a society more or less agrees to certain rules, and it definitely isn't like the law where we're bound to the rules or risk imprisonment. In general though, there isn't one definition of what is ethical behaviour and what isn't. There are many different beliefs, some more well known than others, such as the tenets of Kant or utilitarianism.

Without knowing which philosophy the NYT Ethicist follows, I don't think we can really evaluate whether the answer given was appropriate or not. To be honest, this was a bigger issue for me, because the basis for the behaviour is never really grounded, but seems to be based more on gut feeling of the NYT Ethicist and on absolving the letter writer from feeling guilty.

It's too bad - the column could be really interesting in the hands of someone who could be more upfront about what guides their reasoning.

Mallard, your point is well taken. Certainly there is a financial loss when one person lends anouther their book, in most instances it's minor (and something that has gone on since the beginning of print)
True that lending will result in fewer purchases. You will either ask for the book back after your friend is finished with it or you never want to read it again and will not. Highly unlikely that someone would lend out a book, then just go buy it again. Libraries are a culprit on a much larger scale. What some Countries have done is institute a government run payment system where yearly funds collected from lending and copying institutions are shared 50/50 between publishers and author/illustrators. It compensates somewhat for "legal" lending (libraries/schools) and photocopying of published material.

The article in the NYT gets me in that, he is saying what this person has done is not unethical. I am in the same camp as the columnists publisher friend who is quoted as saying, “Anyone who downloads a pirated e-book has, in effect, stolen the intellectual property of an author and publisher. To condone this is to condone theft.” We can justify almost anything we do if we try hard enough. The fact is, feeling we have right to now own it in many formats does not alter the fact that we are supporting theft and that must be unethical.

"Advances are subject to the publishing industry's full range of hallucinatory optimism and depressive nihilism"

Best line ever.

This is the clearest post I've read about royalties and the expectations of all parties in the publishing industry. Thank you!

By the way, I sympathize with your frustration. People usually look only to their own bellies (I'm being nice with the word choice here, mind), especially when it comes to money.

Great post! Thank you!

It's funny, in a sad way, how some people are never happy. I don't know if the present system is fair, but it's the best hope for new authors in their search for a publisher.

Great overview of what all the terms mean. I hope to get huge advances and royalty cheques with several digits and earn out and and and ...

Thanks for the info.

Thank you! I've think I've read novels on each of these subjects, but you condensed it all in chewable pieces.

I love your comments on earn out. There are crazies everywhere.

The only time you would wish you had a larger advance after the book has sold FAR past it is when the publisher is a creep and hasn't sent a statement in 2 years, nor the royalty cheques owed! (don't even ASK how big the can of whoop A-- is that I would like to open on them:()
I know the best idea is to take a lower advance to begin royalties earlier but.... when you go through something like the above, it colours your view on the value of royalties (not to mention contracts)

I heart the last line of this entry. Actually laughed out loud. Hilarity.

"Which is why you hear some crazy people online saying that if your book earned out, then you should fire your agent because clearly you weren't paid enough."

Dude, that is nuts.

I would note here that a publisher can make money on a book that hasn't earned out its advance. Just because the author never sees a royalty check doesn't mean the book is a loss for the publisher. It's a common misconception that publishers *always* lose money on books that don't earn out. I'm not sure you actually meant to say that, but it is implied, so I figured I'd make the point that this isn't always the case :)

That's true, Nobu. Although I don't have a clear idea of how much that happens, and explaining how it happens is more than I can handle, mathematics-wise.

I definitely think earning out is AWESOME (yay earning out!!) - but the publisher does start making money well before the author earns out... no?

I was under the impression (quite possibly mistaken) that the publisher started earning money right around the point of royalty escalation, which is I think generally well before earn-out proper. (Of course you'd know better than I)

What Nobu said... none of my books has earned out yet. But the publisher seems perfectly willing to keep buying them. Knock on wood. So I have to assume that they're not losing money on them.

"If the publisher doesn't profit, does that mean the author shouldn't either? Most authors would say no: even the profitless books should profit the author."

Except royalties aren't profit for the author, they're income. Most authors, given an hourly rate that doesn't factor in any expenses at all, are working for far less than poverty wages. :)

But I'm probably taking that deeper than you meant to go, math-wise.

I'm overjoyed to see this. I'm pretty au fait now, but when I first decided to work towards publication I was overwhelmed. Blogs I followed were like Greek. MS, MC, Alpha, Beta, ARC- I thought I'd woken up in another dimension.

I always heard ARC pronounced as the three separate letters, and recently heard some people say it as one word - "ark".

What is most typical?

I've only had one paid critique, but I was thrilled with the feedback. The editor pointed out my story's strengths and made suggestions for improvement. She even told me it should be longer and that I could submit my revision to her.

We happened to be in the elevator together later on and she had more questions, so we chatted for a few more minutes (The critique session had a time limit).

Not only was the feedback helpful and encouraging, it was great to network and just get out there and feel comfortable talking about my work. If the fee is reasonable, I think it's worth attending at least once.

I've had critiques at several regional SCBWI conferences. The people who looked at my submissions took it very seriously, and the feedback was helpful.

In one instance, I sent the submission to the conference, and then had my critique group look at it later. (But still before the conference.) The editor's feedback mirrored the critiques I'd just gotten from my group. I already knew my group was good, but it reinforced to me how my critique group was on the right track with their feedback.

When you're beginning to write with publication in mind, it's hard to know what feedback to listen to. So much of it can seem conflicting. Learning to sort through feedback is part of being a good writer- and conference critiques can help with that.

My first paid critique was probably not any more helpful than a freebie with peers, but it did introduce me to my mentor and that has been invaluable.

I had one that seemed to not be helpful but a lot of the problem was my not understanding what the critiquer was trying to say. That was not done in person and I did figure out what was meant - eventually.

EA - Is it the conference or the critiquer who makes the money? Or maybe a bit of both?

While there's no industry standard for critiques, you can ask the conference organizers about what they expect from their critique staff. I've noticed some of the savvier conferences require editors/agents to submit at least a page of comments for each writer to ensure that nobody's being blown off. (I always write comments anyway, but I also like knowing that the amount of work I'm doing is consistent with what the other editors and agents are doing.)

I also sort of wish conferences would discourage folks from getting the same story critiqued multiple times. I feel like at every conference there's always someone who shows up with the same thing year after year, getting more and more confused from the endless suggestions, and it gets frustrating for everyone involved.

And finally, I don't recommend paid critiques for folks who are just getting started with their writing, because invariably the advice is to simply move on from those first efforts. Save the expense for when you're further along (at least a year into it) and you'll get more bang for your buck.

I guess my larger point about conference critiques is that a little planning and forethought can help make the most of everyone's time and efforts.

I've been to a workshop where my manuscript was critiqued by a group of people and that was so helpful for me. Lots of good information that I was able to use for that manuscript, and then for later manuscripts.

I paid for a critique at a conference that was worthless. $35 and she mentioned two minor, minor things that I might fix. And that was it. It took like two minutes and we were done.

Either my manuscript was brilliant (although she wasn't interested in it) or it was so bad she didn't even want to try.

At the level many conference attendees are at, they would benefit much more from a critique with one of the faculty authors than with an editor, but they don't want that.

As a frequent conference volunteer and organizer, I can tell you that too many people buy the critique thinking of it as a way to bypass the slush pile rather than as an opportunity to learn.

If you think about it that way, $35 is a bargain to be assured that your ms will be read in a timely fashion by an actual editor and the editor will then sit down with you face to face.

Where that all falls apart is when the attendee doesn't get the expected response of "Please send me the rest at your earliest convenience." Or worse yet, is assigned one of the authors instead of an editor. I've read many many feedback forms where the chief complaint is that the attendee didn't think the author critique was worth $35. Or they've flat out demanded a return of their money, saying they had expected time with an editor. Time, not knowledge.

I signed with my agent because of a paid critique at a conference. He reviewed my pages, gave very helpful feedback, and asked to see the rest of the story when I was finished with it. Six months later he signed me.

Even if he hadn't, getting such a positive response from a professional really bolstered my confidence. I agree with Kara -- if it's an affordable fee, it's worth it.

I had one amazing, amazing, amazing critique of a pb biography from an agent a few years ago. It was so marked up that I nearly fell out of my chair when she handed it to me. She then asked me in-person questions but I was left temporarily dumb. (She told me not to cry... JK)

She clearly spent a heck of a lot of time on it and asked me questions along with the mark ups.

Then I took it home and sat with it a while. I went back to it over the course of months and revised it line by line, the easiest things first. Then I dummied up the ms.

It hasn't sold to the few places I shopped but is has received personal feedback. I love it and maybe someday it will find a buyer.

It is full of energy like the man himself.

Thank you agent!




I think that the problem tho for most critiqued mss is either they are not something the house does or can use... or a BIG one... they are not marketable.

It is really great tho when you get a detailed, constructive critique to work with. And great in-person advice both writerly and market oriented from a professional.

I agree about writing classes. I've had two. But they are not always up on what is marketable and why. My class mss weren't at all. Good writing was stressed but not hooks and such. They should teach market smarts more in writing classes. But maybe that isn't feasible.

I've had a few paid critiques at conferences. Some have been helpful and thoughtful, manuscript-wise, some have not. But they've ALL been helpful in demystifying the process/showing me that editors are real people. For me that was worth the $35.

If a writer wants a free crit, go to Authonomy.com. It's run by Harper Collins. You need to register and upload a book that is over 10,000 words.
There are over 6,000 books on the site.
A writer can get a lot of information in the forums, when the fights aren't breaking out.
Strayer

I have heard great stories, like Kara Parlin's, from writers who have been invited to submit their work to an agent or editor as a result of a conference critique submission. But even if that doesn't happen, and even if the editor's comments don't tell you how to "fix" your work, I believe seeing and hearing how a professional reacts to your writing tells you something important as long as the conference organizers are up front about what you can expect.

Thanks for an interesting post!

Sarah-- it's both. I didn't mean to imply that the critiquing editors don't get a share of that money.

Frankly, I would refuse to do critiques if I were not being paid extra for them-- because they are extra work. (The talks I prepare are work, too, but I can use them at other conferences to mitigate the impact on my time.)

I was on the other end of this at SCBWI in MIami. They were trying something new in which I'd read a 2 page series pitch and then give the person 5 minutes or whatever it was.

It was strange. I felt like I was on the wrong side of the table. And I don't know that anyone felt it was very useful to them. But then I've never understood the whole critique thing. Writing isn't a group activity.

It's definitely a crapshoot. I've had three of these conference critiques. Two were positive but unhelpful ("This is great. I don't know why you're getting rejections. I don't edit this genre, though."). At the third, it wasn't clear that the editor had actually read the pages at all. She spouted vague writing advice that had nothing to do with what I'd submitted.

Needless to say, I'm never signing up for one again. And yet, I hear positive stories from others.

I'm really an illustrator, but I did do a paid critique once for a picture book that I had dummied up; it was with Emma Dryden, so I was fortunate--but like others have said, since it was one of my first efforts, it wasn't worth the time of such a notable editor. She did like my title, and looking back at the ms now, I'd have to say that that's the ONLY good thing about it. But it was a worthwhile experience. Made me feel more relaxed about the business side of things. I'd recommend it, but only after you've been writing/reading your genre for a few years.

I just wanted to echo the comment that many beginning writers especially would benefit more from an author critique. It's less stressful, for one thing, and the writer can relax and focus on the feedback rather than worrying about making a sale (which isn't the point of critique anyway).

I only had a paid conference critique done once, last fall, and it was worth it for the wonderful boost of confidence it gave me. But that was mostly luck, because it turned out BRUCE COVILLE was the person assigned to do my critique, so I can say to myself "Bruce Coville thought my writing is intriguing and non-sucky!" every time I start thinking that I'm a terrible writer and should just give up. Perhaps a random editor who DOES do this professionally WOULD also be a bit of a pick-me-up to get encouragement from, but it's not the same as saying "Bruce Coville doesn't think I suck!" to yourself.

I think "profit" is the wrong word in this context. The critiquer gets part of the fee but the amount that goes to the conference is not "profit." SCBWI conferences are not run for profit. Critique and other conference fees go toward planning and paying for the next conference, including paying for conference venues, flying in editors, agents and top authors and putting them up in hotels.

A few years ago, I was asked to be part of a critique panel for those who belonged to the society of authors but who had not been published.

We did not get the writing before hand. The poor authors gave us their pitch and then handed us five pages of writing.

One writer's story so amazed me I asked if I could read his manuscript. I told him that I didn't do this ever and it wouldn't cost him anything. I was just hungry to read the story.

As an aside: it's cold here so I've pulled the puter into the living room where it's warm and the dang hubby has just put Star Trek on (the latest one) - waaaahhhhhhh

Anyway the author was a lowly history teacher as I was a lowly English teacher but his story was wonderful.

I told him how I thought he could work it to make it publishable. He worked it. It's now published.

No money changed hands. I'm just pleased I had a part of bringing a wonderful story to the world.

oh, and another thing, I paid a manuscript assessor 1000 bucks to assess my two Mid grade novels because the publisher wasn't sure (think - major publisher who'd published two of my previous works).

The assessor said: wtf these are great (but did suggest some tweaks that any editor might). I sent the manuscripts back to the publisher with the well regarded assessor's notes.

End of story? both books published and sold very very well.

Thank goodness I could claim back on the expense.

Should not have had to do it in my humble opinion.

I have had some dud conference critiques but......

In 2006, I had a conference critique with an editor who not only gave great feedback, but she asked to take my ms to acquisitions. That ms happened to be too similar in setting to another book that was on an upcoming list. BUT...the editor liked my writing style and we kept in contact. Since then I have sold her three mss.

In 2007, I submitted another ms for critique. That editor asked to take the ms to acquisitions and she made an offer a few weeks later.

I always urge writers to submit their BEST work for conference critiques because there is always a tiny chance that great things can happen.

I'd been writing fantasy for years. Then I wrote a fantasy romance and figured I'd better join the RWA to learn more about romance writing, and I was surprised by all the contests offered. They cost money ($15-35), but you get critiques for that money, and of course a shot at winning the contest. It feels like a form of paid critique. Are these worthwhile to enter? I was intrigued, and I've already entered my manuscript in one of them.

The one conference critique I've had so far was a bit of a let down. The agent had obviously read it, but said she didn't believe in writing anything down. That was the most disappointing part for me because at the time, I was too nervous to catch everything she said. I think it would have gone better if it had been on the last day of the conference rather than an hour after I got there. I would have asked more questions.

But like some others have said, it was worth it to gain the experience. I'll do better next time.

I've had my work critiqued three times at conferences, each time by authors. While I was lucky enough to have had authors who actually read my work, I always ended up with authors who didn't know a darn thing about my genre (romance) and in one case, the author was a bit of a misogynist who hated romance. In the end, all three authors resorted to really basic comments, like, "Good job on how you formatted your manuscript!" Similarly, I watched an editor who had no connection to the YA market tell a writer his book belonged in the inspirational Christian market because an angel was the main character - even though it wasn't by any means a spiritual book.

After the third time, I decided to save trees and not waste paper or critiques.

I paid for a conference critique with an agent -- a well known agent, who, as it turned out, was arrogant and unhelpful. He literally said my ms was unpublishible -- and saw nothing I could do to improve it. Hogwash. It got published a few years later (that very same version). But, after that critique I stopped writing for quite a while; I didn't know how subjective the business was.

I suppose it's always a concern -- editors and agents not wanting to discourage writers and at the same time they must see lots of dreck. But when what you've written isn't dreck, it can be devastating to have it labeled as such when you are so green. This agent's m.o. is that he does a lot of "debut" books -- I always wonder if that's because his clients run away screaming after working with him, or what?

"This agent's m.o. is that he does a lot of "debut" books -- I always wonder if that's because his clients run away screaming after working with him, or what?"
--Anon 2:56

No, it's because he fires them when their books sell below expectations.

Kudos for you for not giving up when this fellow stomped on your dreams.

"It just seems silly to spend the money since by attending the conference, you're allowed to submit to the editors or agent anyway, and get your work looked at."

It's true that if all you want is for an editor or agent to read your work and give you a thumbs up or down, you can just submit through the slush pile and save your money. But what the critique buys you is a sit-down with that person to discuss your work, to ask why it is or isn't working, what it might need in the way of improvement. You aren't guaranteed that kind of feedback with a regular submission.

I do agree that a paid, professional critique is a step best taken after polishing a manuscript and getting peer critiques; when you think you're ready for market.

I had a paid critique at a conference last year. I knew someone who had had one the year before at the same conference, and I was expecting the same type of feedback as her, which was basically line edits. I got more general suggestions. It was somewhat helpful but it wasn't what I was expecting. It was a different editor and I should have known better, but I thought the conference might give specific guidelines as to what feedback should be given.

She did tell me that my concept was marketable, which was very valuable. Now if it doesn't sell I'll know it's the writing :-)

I think they're worth having, but don't have expectations. I also agree it's better to wait until you have something polished.

I really think it all comes down to who the Editors are. Is it an Editor from a well known publishing house? If so, more then likely they will take the critique very seriously, read the manuscripts carefully, jot down their thoughts and use the 15 minutes or so with the author well.
I'm the SCBWI Illustrator Rep for Canada East and I've heard both positive and negitave feedback from Authors that have paid for the critiques. Not surprisingly, the ones that got postitive feedback are happy and the ones that were gently (or not so gently) told the work was not good are unhappy. An authors initial reaction to a less then positive critique may be a knee jerk one. Feelings are hurt, the first thought is to blame the editor and not to entertain the notition that the critique may be right. I like to think that, once the day is over and the critque sinks in, they find the positive in the negative and learn from it rather then fight it.
I have to disagree EA that the charge for the critiques are to make money (at least with our Chapters experience) The editors will usually only accept 10 or so submissions and they are paid most to all of the money collected for the critique. Occassionally the invited editors will turn around and donate back the fee to the Chapter... and that is very generous of them, though not expected at all, as there is a lot of work involved in doing a proper critique. We have had only one editor who did a horrible job in his critiques, hadn't read the manuscripts ahead of time, forgot to bring his copies with him to the conference, and then read the pages quickly in front of the authors and hastly said whatever to them after reading a few lines.
We ended up refunding authors (obviously they should have their money back after that) and the guy took his fee. Sigh, happily he has been the exception.

I've had four critiques at conferences, and only one was worth the money. At our conferences, they're all written critiques--no sit-downs or face-to-face meetings. The last one I got was such a sorry excuse for a critique that I've sworn them off. I get more thorough feedback from my critique group.

I know people who have had luck with conference critiques, and the one I got that was worthwhile was very encouraging and helpful. I wouldn't tell anyone not to do it, but I would encourage them to find out if the conference organizers give editors any guidelines or requirements. I would also encourage them to find a good critique group.

Writers are not going to get what they need from a bunch of friends in a sewing circle or from a professional editor at a conference who is not getting paid nearly enough to tell you the truth.

Look, 90% of people who want to be writers are never going to make it, because 90% of them don't have talent. But has any editor or agent at a conference ever told a writer to give it up, stop torturing themselves and go get another job?

No. Because conferences are all about pandering to the mistaken notion that anyone can make it if. If they follow some guideline, if they listen to a critique group, if, if, if.

No one in your critique group and no one at a conference is going to tell you the truth. Not if the truth is "Give up, you don't have it." But in the vast majority of cases that's the truth.

If you have the talent, and you have the ambition and the pragmatism and the sheer force of will to make a living as a writer then you don't need a $100 dollar editorial hand-holding at a conference. You need to get your shit together, do the work, and send it to someone who can either write you a check, or can get you to someone who can write you a check.

If you write as a hobby, God bless, have fun. But if you are trying to get published then you have a simple problem: get someone to write you a check. Do what it takes and don't do anything else.

I've had really good experiences with critiques by editors at conferences. One was a paid critique as an add-on at a conference, and the other six were included with the cost of the different conferences (so technically I paid for those too). None of the editors blew off her responsibility, and although some were more thorough in critiquing style, I learned something from all of them. I think it's always worthwhile to get guidance from professionals.

I have to disagree Michael about the "handholding" of Editors at conferences. You may have experienced such a wishy washy ed but what I have seen is editors that are honest with their critiques, sometimes brutaly so. They have nothing to gain or lose at these events and though they do not wish to dash anyones dreams, they most often tell it the way it is, or, at least, the way they see it. (also, it's not $100, usually in the $35 range)
I've paid the extra for portfolio critique and it's been hard to set yourself up for such a thing. While I may have been one of those that came away not sure if I wanted to believe the opinion of the art directors, I did learn from it. At the very least it inspires one to do better, be better and often there are comments that aid you in just that. I've had AD's tell me which images in my portfolio are weak and why and that has been most helpful because most times you are just too close to your own work to judge.
I do agree with you on your other points but, as with all other professions, it takes spending some money to make money.

Lol! Well some people have trouble giving respect where it's due.

You can say a book is horrifically bad, but that does not change the fact that it sells millions.

There is only one thing that directly influences how well a book sells. That is how many books people buy.

Like you said, you'd think it obvious. But you'd be wrong.

"new coke" anyone?

All the marketing in the world didn't sell that.

Lies! Publishers just like some authors more and spend money on them. Plus it's good for publishers to have failed books because it makes the successful books look even more popular so more people will want to be in on the newest phenomenon.

I know the truth, and I refuse to listen to the industry propaganda. The truth is out there. In my head.

Uma Thurman's new movie earned $130 in it's
opening weekend in London. It had tons of press. Part of the winning magical formula is where the public's collective tastes are when a product is released. Also, certain products take time to catch fire.

Melanie, you mean things like "Catching Fire" take time to catch fire? (That question doesn't actually mean anything; I'm just enjoying that both you and Nathan Bransford used that expression since it's the title of the upcoming last installment of my current favorite literary phenomenon.)

Uh, I mean Catching fire the already-published 2nd installment. Oops.

I know. I know. How patient EA is. Thank you for reiterating once again that this is a professional relationship. No glitter, no ribbons, no testimonials from the grandchildren and please no illustrations provided by those extremely talented grandchildren. Just type on paper please.

Most market guides have directions for what manuscripts LOOK like (where to put your name and such). The directions are in the front of the books, in all those pages that come before the market lists. There are almost always examples to show you exactly how to make your submissions look.

People send you stuffed animals and glitter? I'm sorry, EA, but this is your fault.

Clearly you are passing up a great opportunity. If you would simply explain that while you have plenty of stuffed animals you could never have enough bottles of Bordeaux, or baskets of truffles or, for that matter, diamonds, you'd be far happier.

In return you don't promise publication, obviously, but an upgraded form rejection. Maybe something on nice paper, possibly with raised letterhead. And you'd have to include a nice, supportive phrase, like, "While I don't feel this manuscript is quite there yet, I look forward to your next submission -- which will include something in a blue Tiffany's box."

Are you offering, Michael?

I hear The Rejectionist is offering critical feedback in exchange for mangoes.

Perhaps a revolution in which aspiring authors can barter for feedback is underfoot...

See, this is what Google is for. Also I hate to be the one to tell you this, Author, but writing the book is the easy part.

Hey look! I got another rejection just now!

Here's hoping her manuscript has a tad fewer exclamation points than her letter.

Dental moulds? :O

I love the crazies! They make me look so much more normal!

and perhaps not so many capital letters. I wouldn't read beyond the letter, I'm afraid.

Jan, you're right, the Writer's Market does tell how to format and send a manuscript.

Ix-nay on the staples, questioner. Less is more. Just stick the loose pages (numbered) in an envelope with a cover letter and an SASE.

Yeah, I wouldn't have read past all those capital letters and exclamation points either.

My friend, Julie June-bug arrived... PRESSED?!? Oh dear god. No wonder you didn't accept my 15,000 word picture book!

I have a couple of OBGYNs in the family. It's the kind of job that, as a kid, I just thought was the easiest and most fun. You basically look at, prepare for, and deliver babies all day, right? Because, being entirely unfamiliar with the reality of the people with whom they interact, I could not have conceived of the other side of that business. This is basically the way I feel about publishing. You had me at intimate photos. No, wait, you lost me. You lost me at intimate photos. *vomit*

In addition to Google and the market guides, this is what SCBWI is for. In spades.

If you don't know what it stand for, google THAT.

(When did people decide it was easier to bother people by e-mailing questions than it was to do basic research?)

And join the Society of Children's Book Writers and Illustrators www.scbwi.org . They give you all kinds of newbie stuff and there are a zillion people happy to answer these questions all over their boards too!

First, you are here on EA's wonderful site. Read every post she has made and many of your questions will be answered. At the very least, you will be directed to places where you can find answers.

Second, writing a picture book IS easy. Writing a picture book that someone will publish is extremely difficult. Writing a picture book worth anything at all (even one that is only marginally decent but would never be picked up by a publisher) is in no way easier than figuring out how to send it to a publisher.

Third, the fact that you are asking these questions at all show that you have risen above a huge chunk of people who are widely and indiscriminately (and often annoyingly, unprofessionally, and even creepily) sending their stories to publishers.

Which is great! Welcome to the crazy world of the unpublished and underpublished writer.

Dental molds?

Thanks for this, EA. I'm going through a bit of a genre crisis at the moment so to hear this sort of advice was really good for me right now. I'll be posting your quote about being proud of a manuscript after writing several more in my writing space for motivation and encouragement.

the thing I'm most proud of has been the least successful. I'm confused

Melinda,
What are you most proud of about it? Write more like that.

Love this advice. I'm still in the experimenting stage -- have written YA secondary-world fantasy, adult secondary-world fantasy, adult urban fantasy, adult steampunk, and adult historical paranormal. I'm hoping that eventually one area will jump out at me, but until then, I'm having fun.

EA, I love you, and you give great advice here, but please tell me you understand the difference between schizophrenia and multiple personality disorder. This is a personal frustration for me, because I have a family member who has schizophrenia, which involves auditory and visual hallucinations and sometimes paranoia, but does not involve thinking that you're several different people. (It's this common misconception that makes mystery stories about mentally ill people as the perpetrators so frustrating to me--if you can't get the diagnosis right, why would I believe the underlying motive?)

I realize it's tangential, but it annoys me enough to say something about it.

Duly noted, Stacy!
:)

It's so good to know that others are in a similar boat. I'm working on picture books, poetry, and a YA novel and have been wondering if I should continue to work on all of it or narrow my focus.

I point the questioner to Joseph Delaney's very readable if lamentably misogynist "Last Apprentice" series.

As a bookseller, I'd love to see more horror titles for teens. Darren Shan's fans are both hungry and legion, and they're desperate for new authors.

There's a bunch of horror out there. What's missing is the monthly series horror Stine used to do so well.

A monthly series is a perfect match for an e-book original series. I've thought of doing it myself but I'm a bit committed for the next 18 months or so, and I'd have to go to ghostwriters quicker than I'd like.

But there is a hole in the market there. Middle grade, say 90 pages, some illustration, geared for iPod Touch and iPad and Kindle with a straight-up web version as well, maybe on a subscription basis or with sponsorships. (Yeah, yeah, advertising to kid readers is the Apocalypse, the end of innocence, blah, blah, blah.)

I know the standard response: not enough of a market there yet. But that's because there's no product geared for the market. Sometimes you have to create a market. And every kid in an up-market middle school has an iPod Touch or iPhone. Why publishers aren't all over this -- and quick before individual writers move in and do it self-pubbed -- I will never understand.

I may be wrong, but it seems as though the horror stories these days are more graphic and leave less to the imagination. It takes one type of writer to describe gore, it takes a far different writer to create suspense. I miss the suspenseful thrillers.
Lindsey Petersen

Interesting to hear your opinion, Michael - I often recommend your books to the Shan fans (the older ones, anyway).

As a librarian, I have to second Lindsey's request for more horror stories. Even though they're not new, we can't keep RL Stine or Scary Stories to Tell... on the shelves.

Of course we need more--and we need them for mid-late elementary. The series you mention are all in the teen section. certainly teens need good stuff but the younger kids are looking for more scary things too. RL Stine was super popular when I was in 6th grade and that was too long ago. His stuff still goes but we need something new.

Lindsey:

Thanks!

Lindsey:

Thanks!

This is very helpful, thank you! I haven't started submitting yet (I'm currently in France and would like to wait until I return to the US) and I'm still so new at this that posts like this one are helpful. I don't want to make any rookie's mistakes, like calling over and over, or assuming they've read my manuscript. Thank you!

So if it's in the slush, it's as good as lost until someone gets to it and makes a decision. Discouraging, but good to know. Thanks for this informative post!

Ishta, it's worse than that. I had an editor come up to me at a conference, after I gave a talk, and *ask* to see my manuscript. Not only did she not respond to my asking for a status update a year later, and two years later. But three years later, when I wrote to tell her that I was withdrawing it because I'd sold it elsewhere, she didn't respond and the following year I heard she'd transferred to another publisher.

Interesting read. I write for the same age group as well. And I remember that at that age I was forced to read books about 15 year olds or jaded 30somethings. Nothing was a fit, but there wasn't much of a choice.

Situations like these really hit home the point that publishing is a business.

Sometimes writing the book you love the best way you can just isn't enough.

As much as it undermines the idea of art over product, keeping the market in mind as you write might save you grief later.

Good luck.

>So maybe it's about finding the right adult publisher who sees how to aim it at both markets<

I know less then zero about YA/Adult novels but my first thought was along the lines of your suggestion EA.
I think adults are willing to read down, to an age group younger then themselves and teens are willing to read up. In fact, as an adult I don't seem to care how old or young the MC is in a story.
Having the book released as an Adult novel might be the ticket. My only concern would be the author mentions the 21 year old character ACTS like a teenager, and I would want to know what that really means. If too extremely childish, then it would likely turn the adult reader off.

Mal Peet's (excellent) recent books are all about adults and sell in the US as YA; they're published by Candlewick Press.

This makes me wonder, EA, whether any examples come to mind of imported YA novels where the age of the main character has been changed for the U.S. market.

Not that I'm suggesting this author should do so, though I'd be surprised if the question/consideration hadn't already come up...

"...cross down to teens."?

Ouch.

This is interesting. I am currently working on a manuscript that I had thought of as YA/teens because the characters all act like teenagers, but they are in their first year of college (so they're 18 years old - so they're still teenagers, right?). This post directly applies to what I am doing.

I wonder if what I am doing is a bad idea, or if I'll have trouble marketing it. Or maybe since YA and adult are blurring in many ways, more people will be coming out with manuscripts like the one in your post and like mine? Aside from the age of the characters, what distinguishes YA from Adult?

EA, I'd appreciate any resources you can point me to that would make this distinction clearer.

When you said 'put your characters in an age demographic', does this mean that the majority of book buyers only buy books where people are their own age? This is very different from my buying habits, and makes no sense to me. Why is a story about a 21 year old not appealing to a 15 or 16 year old? Don't teenagers read up like middle grades? I know when I was a teenager, (some time ago, things have changed) I shopped adult sections because YA tended to be immature. Now I find YA to be more interesting, adult stuff tends to be dark and depressing (in the genres I like) but the YA stuff more upbeat. You would know the buying practices of the general public better than I would, but this just sounds very off to me.

Wasn't that why Prep, by Curtis Sittenfeld got turned down initially -- the character was a teenager, but the literary aspects of the book (denser writing, and an emphasis on navel-gazing intropection over plot) made it a better sell to the adult market?

For that matter, the Book Thief was pushed as YA and it was an adult title in OZ.

So it can be done. How incredibly frustrating for this author, to know it has been done, but not for her/his book. Sometimes it seems as if publishers are working against successful authors instead of for them. But please, by all means add another not-really-written-by-James-Patterson-but-his- name-is-on-the-cover YA book to the display tables, cuz hell if there aren't enough of those!

Sarah, I meant "down" in age only--not in any other sense. (C'mon, a little faith!)

How strictly readers read to their own age is something I'm not convinced about; but I know others in publishing who think of this particular age group as a market low point for novels.

Kids tend to read to approximately their age and a couple years older.

Adults tend to be rather more flexible, and read within a decade or two of their age in either direction.

Certainly I Am the Messenger by Markus Zusak has done fine, and the MC in that is 19. The Maggie Quinn series is published as YA and has a MC in college. The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie is published as adult, and the MC is 12. (and thanks, readers, for other examples!)

So I WOULD say that things are changing-- there's more and more evidence of adults reading YA, and of audiences generally being more flexible about age of character. But there are still plenty of people in publishing who are shy of experiments, and that's what this writer is up against.

Ishta, re: where the dividing line is between YA and adult--

There is no simple answer. It depends who you ask, and so you have to be aware that the person who sees a MS at one house will think it's one thing, and the person at another house will think it's another.

But children's books and adult books are different markets, so it does matter that you find a publisher who knows what to do with the book in hand.

Great post! After visiting a book buyer at an event in a local bookstore last Saturday, I also started wondering if I was doing the wrong thing pitching my new novel as YA, when it should really be in the Adult section. The book store buyer told me she didn't think YA novels were set in the past (my novel is set in the 80s)and always asked her reps whether there was sex in a YA novel, which sometimes swayed her decision if she was sitting on the fence about buying it. For more details on the visit you can check out my blog. I've only sent a few queries out as YA so far, but now I am rethinking the whole thing.
Thanks for this post.

The book is being read by everyone here: middle aged women, teens (male and female), uni students, male and female. And this from S&S
"I read [...]right away and was so impressed. All the history, romance, and danger—very exciting! I haven’t read anything like this in a while, and it was so refreshing. That said, I do think this would work best as part of a young adult line, not just because of the age of the main character, but also because of the tone of the writing. It just has the feel of something written for a younger audience, and I don’t think it would translate as well to the readers we target.


I’m going to pass, but I thoroughly enjoyed this! I wish you lots of luck finding [...] the perfect American home."

I'm staying anonymous because I don't want to be seen to be using EA's blog to promote myself.

As to the question about the maturity of the character - no, not childish at all. When I wrote it, I intended for it to be read by the age of the kids I teach (high schools) and the genre I'm known for so it was with delight that it has been enjoyed by all age groups. He just happened to be a young man when he camed to me a fully formed character.

Quite interesting post today. 17 just seems right. To learn the truth about love and beauty queens but also for nearly every Disney princess' age, yes?

Well, I hope SOMEBODY brings this book over to North America, because having looked it up using the clues provided in this letter, I think it sounds fascinating.

Re: Fiction/Nonfiction book -

Deborah Wiles has a "documentary novel" about the Cuban Missile Crisis coming out from Scholastic in May. I wonder if that's the sort of thing this author has in mind? What makes Wiles's title so neat (in my opinion) is the many images and quotes she included that really set the tone of 1962. The book is called COUNTDOWN, it's the first of three such books.

And, as a librarian, I'll put it in the fiction section. :)

Re mixing non-fiction/science and fiction in alternating chapters:

Terry Pratchett's The Science of Discworld series (with Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen) does exactly that, and very successfully. But then, by the time he published the first one, he was already a well-established author and Disworld had millions of rabid fans all around the globe. With a name like that, you can probably do whatever you want. :)

(Great books, by the way - I recommend them to anyone who hasn't yet read them.)

EA, you are the second editor I've heard elide MG and YA as if MG were a subset of YA. Is it?

I ask because I have some MG books out-- if they're YA, why ain't I making more money?

Doris Lessing's recent book Alfred and Emily is a biography of her parents in which the first and larger section is fictional.

I don't think Lessing's book is very relevant to the question that was submitted because not only is it for an adult audience, but I think you are given quite a lot of room to experiment when you have a Nobel Prize on your resume.

But, given this question along with the previous comments, this may be a trend worth watching. Nuala O'Faolain wrote that she turned to fiction after being a non-fiction writer because she wanted to be able to write something more true, and I don't think she was the first to express a similar sentiment.

"... by forcing them to cohabitate"
Cohabit is a really good word. No need to extend it.

You're right, Ivan!
Thanks, I've changed that.

When I was a kid there was an entire series of archeology books aimed at kids that worked sort of like that - they'd have a little novella about a person who lived in the town/ship/etc. that was being excavated, and break it up with periodic (and much lengthier) nonfiction sections focusing on what the people working the dig were discovering and how they were doing it. It was totally effective and directly led to me reading encyclopedias for fun as a preteen. But the novella parts were also considerably less of each book than the actual history and science, and they weren't very long books (usually 50-60 pages if I recall) to begin with, so the stories were probably only about 3000-5000 words long.

Jennifer Armstrong's PHOTO BY BRADY is nonfiction with a short fiction scene between each chapter. I thought it was a really good book--except for those sections of fiction. It seems to be marketed as nonfiction.

rab

Thanks for the informative post. I found the questions and answers to be very thought provoking and helpful.

"You sell a screenplay like you sell a car. If someone drives it off a cliff, that's it." -- Rita Mae Brown.

The same is true of selling a book to Hollywood. The fact that it's published in book form means nothing. We've all seen plenty of novel adaptations go flying off cliffs in the theaters, and they're readying the next one even as we speak.

Script registration with the WGA is only used for writing credit arbitration. It does not protect your legal rights and is not a substitute for registering the copyright.

And EA is right -- decide whether your story works best as a film or as a novel, and put all your efforts into that.

Gosh I hope Jennifer is being careful. The mention of a "foreign investment" gave me pause.

Thankyou for this. There seems to be a band of established authors waving the Agents Are Evil! flag, and between them and the hundred-thousand agent blogs of various personalities and stories, it's difficult for the inexperienced to discern genuine insight from personal belief.

Great to have an editor's view on the topic.

He's got three boyfrie^H^H^H agents? What would the Rejectionist say?

Actually I have seen this advice before -- many times. It comes from folks who got into the business BEFORE the ship became quite so swamped and more houses looked at manuscripts. And now these writers are established in their genre. So they assume everyone can do it like they did it. And they have these students who get into the houses who accept submissions because the folks have learned how to write before jumping into the submission river - so the guys can crow that no writer needs an agent because a few of their better students got into open houses without one.

I also know a lot of writers who got deals without agents -- and some even at closed houses (because they went to conferences and made the connection with an editor via a workshop). Those writers learned to WRITE really well before they started submitting and they didn't break though by sending slush to people who flatly don't take slush. Being anti-agent *IS* going to keep a lot of doors closed for a writer...but not all of them, just some of the ones you wanted most.

But the reality is that the agent is here to stay unless we see some tremendous changes at the AUTHOR side of the system (namely people waiting until they know their craft before they start submitting, and we know how likely THAT is to happen.) What's cracking and crumbling is the "publishers who will look at any slush at all" system. As writers, we're drowning them with crap and there is so very little incentive to read it.

But the day of an editor nurturing a really good IDEA until it becomes a decent BOOK...is probably long long passed. But some agents will still do that and resisting the change from good idea to good book because some guy said not to listen to your agent...well, that's a great way to keep your good idea all the way to the self-publishing trap.

LOL
Good advice EA.

Love this post. Thanks for making me smile this morning!

Loud know-it-all type #36b. (Him not you.) On his #9, "What a publisher is publishing is frighteningly easy to figure out these days by either simply walking into a bookstore..."

Well, it's easy (not sure it's frightening, I must be tougher than I thought) to figure out what they were buying two years ago, anyway.

Fascinating! And it just goes to show that published authors are not really the best people to give advice about the book business. In the end, they're only really experts in their own experiences.

I like what you said, Thomas. I went to a writing conference a few years ago, and all the authors explained how they got published. Each story was different! Authors really can't say the BEST way to get published, they can only explain the way THEY got published.

Thomas Taylor @9:18 said: "... published authors are not really the best people to give advice about the book business. In the end, they're only really experts in their own experiences..."

Man, that is so true. And trying to model your path after someone else's usually makes you miserable.

There's a NYT bestselling YA author on a different form who doesn't stop to consider that her experience isn't everyone's experience. She chimes into discussions with advice like, "Just write the best book you can, it's not that difficult... You'll have your choice of agents... Query letters are easy... My agent always gets back to me in ten minutes... When my book went to auction... Of course B&N will have huge displays, they really are in service of you... I had them reshoot the cover, because I just wasn't happy... It'll only take a month to earn out your advance and then you'll make a ton of royalties, why wouldn't you?"

It's that attitude of: "I'm rich and this is easy and fun, and did I mention for the hundredth time -- on a form filled with unpublished, struggling writers -- that I'm on the NTY best seller list!"

Makes me gag every single time. You can't blame the girl for being psychotically happy, but nor can you take anything she says as relevent, either. Unless you are also a NYT best-seller, I guess. But that's a pretty small club.

If I looked like that I wouldn't look like that!

Wow, and you took time to respond to the list in a civilized manner, shame on you. Where are your priorities? Why aren't you reading slush to find the new Dan Brown lest you get fired?

Quite a talent to be able to hide and distort the few tiny bits of truth by all that rhetoric and condescension and unjustified conclusions.

I thought he was just a cranky, arrogant man who was doing it for what he thinks is a service to new writers until I came to that button that takes but one click....

It's really too bad he twisted things the way he did. As EA pointed out, a lot of what he said there has some truth in it. He says he's trying to help new people, and instead, he's making them run from some of the most helpful people in the business. Showing new authors how to differentiate scam agents from real ones would be helpful. Discussing the kinds of things agents do and urging authors to evaluate their own skills would be helpful. He says he'd never negotiate a contract without an agent. Why not let an agent help you with the rest of your career if you need them for contract negotiation anyhow? I've never seen anything that suggests an agent will take less money if they didn't sell the book. If he can negotiate that, and with his years of law school, I don't know why he needs help negotiating his book contract.

But it is hard to take anything he says seriously when he keeps repeating that an agent is a writer's employee. That is so blatantly wrong.

Thanks EA! And what are you doing blogging? Get back to work!

Wow, it gets even more misguided in the comments. WOW.

Some published authors are very helpful and sympathetic though. I recommend Nicola Morgan's blog as a reliable source of information guidance, laughs and cautionary tales (from a UK perspective):

http://helpineedapublisher.blogspot.com/2010/03/be-careful-what-you-wish-for.html

Do you think the agent would care if the book's already on an editor's desk? I mean, would they still offer representation even if the editor became interested in the book before the author secured the agent?

I ask because a long time ago I applied for a job directly to a company, then went to a recruiter. The recruiter said because I already applied directly myself, they wouldn't work with me.

I'm stuck deciding if I should still seek an agent - I've tried a few queries to agents with no results.

Thanks for this. I'd been intrigued by Dean's posts but glad to hear a different point of view as well. As Jan suggests, it might be a matter of one's own perspective & experience.

As everybody who's been writing and submitting for more than 5 minutes knows, it's a long and frustrating process. The system is highly imperfect. Write as well as you can, send it out, and get to work on the next thing.

Now I'll go take my own brilliant advice...:)

As someone who variously edits in-house, writes tie-ins professionally, and has been in some frustrating discussions with agents for her original projects I can see where all sides are coming from here. It looks to me as if Dean Wesley Smith is addressing a reading audience that is likely to consist largely of original fiction authors who are outside the business and have stand-alone MSS to sell, but treating them as if they were writers-for-hire.

On the other hand, EA, your swipe at tie-ins in your last paragraph isn’t particularly helpful. Certainly submitting Next Generation fanfic to publishers is unlikely to result in a contract, but there’s more than that to the tie-in market.

Smith’s point about the irrelevance of agents is not entirely unfounded re the kids’ tie-in market – I dealt with no agented authors at all while doing a recent stint on tie-ins in-house at HarperCollins. But will I be seeking an agent for my picture book manuscripts (currently on the back burner but due for revision and sending out)? Hell yes.

This post has got me to thinking that ‘What makes a good tie-in’ would make a worthwhile post, so anyone who’s interested should be able to find it up on my blog in the next 24 hours or so.

All of those commenters are MORE THAN WELCOME to eschew agents IN FACT PLEASE DO. Hee, hee.

Seems like sending things to editors that say they don't want unagented submissions is a good way to end up on someone's internal list of Whackadoos that Can't Read.

This guy need to read about the kitchen of slush. Most of his argument seems to be predicated on the belief that all editors secretly read everything they're sent and that it doesn't matter too much how it comes to them.

I've been reading his comments, though– particularly the later, more critical ones–and I expect even his regular readers are staring to notice that he doesn't so much answer criticism as he simply calls the critic a myth-spouting naif. Or make condescending comments about their "interesting belief system."

I am so glad I have an agent, but that's just me.

I'd rather get 85% of something than 100% of nothing.

Well, I wrote out a longish response to the original post, then I realized it would only be disregarded by the author and his adoring fans. So I'll post it here instead for those looking for more accurate information. If you're visiting Editorial Anonymous, you're looking in the right places.

———

As a former editor at a respected publishing house ("former" because I've shifted gears toward opening a bookstore), I know exactly what you are trying to say. You're trying to tell people not to trust anyone in the publishing industry but themselves. Don't listen to editors when they say they don't want to read something. Don't listen to agents when they show you how to refine and perfect your writing so it is ready to be published. Oh, and while they're not listening to publishing professionals, listen to you because you've written numerous books based on others' ideas. And they should make sure to pay you for telling them what they want to hear, even though it's not really the truth.

On the topic of publishing myths, a big fallacy you perpetuate is that most manuscripts that hit an editor's desk are diamonds ready to be polished with a touch of minor tweaking by the editor, then set upon the bookshelves a few weeks later. Have you worked as an editor? Have you seen the good ideas that need extreme amounts of editing before they are ready for publication? If so, you'd know that agents are an invaluable tool in selecting manuscripts that have great potential, but who then point out where the writer needs to improve their work.

A truth you fail to mention is that sometimes people are not good writers, no matter how much they want to be. Most of the people I know—both professionally and personally—want to write books and have their masterpieces published. The sad fact is that not everyone is talented, qualified, or hard-working enough to become a published writer. Nor should they. I encourage everyone to write, to see if it's something that they do well, but when evidence and rejections stack against them, they should take an in-depth look at whether their writing is a fine hobby, or whether they can really make it as a professional writer. Their writing must be excellent; good or good enough doesn't cut it.

The fact that you're charging new writers for inaccurate information frightens me, because young writers don't know who to trust yet. You've offered enough half-truths that what you say sounds like it could be true, but on further investigation proves the opposite.

I hope writers looking for solid information go to good sources like those listed by Jackie Kessler. If they dig a little, they'll find plenty of great information that will help them improve both their writing and their chances at publication.

———

Why yes, self-purported gurus do frustrate me when they act as though they are the one true fount of publishing knowledge. If that were so, I'd think he'd be more of a household name. Someone who knows everything about publishing must be on the NYT bestseller list in perpetuity, right?

I did try to cut out most of the snarky, but it looks like I failed. Ah, well.

/rant

Hi, interesting comments from an editor afraid to put her own name on her blog. And wow, do I now really understand why my mystery and thriller editors don't want my pen names attached to my media name. I had forgotten that problem until your nasty comments about my 50 some media books. I haven't worked in media for over six years and the last media project I did was five years ago when I was editing for Pocket Books. I only write original novels now, the last out that I can claim from Random House under D.W. Smith name.

I am not anti-agent in any way. I am pro writers using common sense business. I have done a number of chapters in this book I am writing about writing myths, and I teach young professional writers, not beginners. I flat tell them they need a good agent. Of course, over the last two years, writers who have come to my classes have sold 21 first novels. 18 were without agents on the sale, all but three retained an agent after the offer. I have had less than 65 writers attend in the last two years. A pretty good track record, since many who come are already published novelists as well.

Jim Hines just did a wonderful writer survey of a lot of writers, over two hundred, asking about some of these myths. 55% sold their first novel with an agent, 45% sold their first novel without an agent. So I stand by my statement, you do not need an agent to sell a book. An agent might help, she might not.

As you pointed out, I went to law school, but still always used an agent on all of my contracts. Top agents from Writer's House and Trident and Sandford Greenberger. All are still my friends and if I need them, I call them.

My goal is to punch some holes in the myths, many of which you sprouted. Your attitude about media tells me you are very closed minded and that's sad, since new writers will listen to you, even though you hide your real name.

Agents are employees. No other way around it. They are hired by writers to do a service, that is true. But if you would read the rest of the agent chapters and comments after each chapter, I'm sure you will see that I am pro agent, but I am also pro smart business. I know agents don't care about writers first, but care about relationships with editors first. That's why writers hire them. Duh.

But agents are employees, even under tax law. Just as hiring a lawn service to do your lawn is your employee. Just as hiring an attorney to help with a legal matter is your employee. My goal in stating that over and over is helping writers learn that they are in control of their own career. No writing career is the same. No advice is good for every writer.

But sound business practices need to come back to publishing. It's fine to have an agent. Just remember that the writer is in control. If writers came to understand that, a lot of the problems would fade away.

Good luck to you and everyone who listens here.

Best, Dean Wesley Smith (old media whore by this editors belief system)

For anyone who didn't visit the original post, I thought it was rather telling the way he responded to every single commenter who didn't agree. "You're dumb. You'll get it eventually." I don't know. That doesn't rub me as a concerned do-gooder because it simply alienates the very people you claim to protect.

No one's mad at Dean Wesley Smith for how he conducts his own career, but lemme put it this way. I've never seen a donate button on an agent's blog. Why exactly should we have immediately trusted the wisdom of your "myth-busting"? The elements of truth in his diatribe would have been much easier to contemplate if he weren't so Dean Wesley Smith.

Ok, I'll admit the crack about DWS's TV tie-ins wasn't my finest hour.

Apologies.

Apologies accepted, EA. My blog post about what makes a good tie-in is go, in case anyone reads this far down the comments and is interested.

It reminds me of the skinny dietician who said that all people had to do was to eat less and excercise more. In our country we have a well know beer ad called the Tui Ads. They always have billboard statments with a 'Yeah, Right!' after them.

I read his blog and felt a tui ad coming on.

I noticed a couple people had problems with a donate button at the bottom of my chapters. I am a professional writer. I make my living by writing fiction. This is the first nonfiction book I have done in a long time and decided to try the donate button to see if an income stream could be made before the book went the standard publishing route. Interestingly enough, it has. Fun new methods for writers to make a living.

But the objections to a professional writer getting paid for his work is very interesting coming from writers who want to be professional writers. Haven't heard that much before here, to be honest.

By the way, a ton of editors I know who are top editors both teach and do a little blogging right out in the open to plug their books and their authors and to help authors. I have no problem with editors blogging and if I slipped and said I did somewhere or another, I am sorry. My problem is with agents blogging.

So how come you don't put your name here so I know who is attacking me and also to blog the books you publish? As my wife, Kristine Kathryn Rusch (also former editor and bestselling writer) said when I mentioned this, it could be an agent or just another writer blogging. No way of knowing.

Apology accepted on the wfh comments, but actually you helped me. I will pull the focus of those books way back on my site now that it's been so long since I have been away from them. The prejudice is real which is why I write under hidden pen names most of the time, and I needed to be reminded of that. No issue, I do understand where the Dean Wesley Smith name sits in publishing.

And please do, if you have a moment check out my other chapters. I know most editors don't have the time. Editors are the most overworked and underpaid group in all of publishing, that's for sure. I remember well from my editing days and it's even worse when you take the publisher's chair. Writing for a living is a ton more fun.

Thanks for allowing me to defend myself on your blog. Very much appreciated. But do come out into the open and push your author's books. Your advice and opinions will mean so much more.

Dean Wesley Smith
Recovered editor and full time fiction writer.

@Dean Wesley Smith, I was going to poke holes in all your arguments but I've honestly got better things to do than shovel the crap. I'm not sure if you bothered to read all of EA's post because, look:

"Can you get published without an agent? Yes, certainly."

She's not denying anything.

And, yes, I have also decided to be anonymous like EA. Got a problem?

DWS's QUOTE: "... I went to law school, but still always used an agent on all of my contracts. Top agents from Writer's House and Trident and Sandford Greenberger. All are still my friends and if I need them, I call them..."


Yes, well, top agents from Writer's House, Trident, and Sandford and Greenburger are not available to "take the calls" of other writers who aren't their clients. That's why writers need agents.

Um, duh.

And EA is anonymous because if she weren't she'd have thousands of unagented writers pounding down her door -- agentless writers who don't have Writer's House on speed dial -- who would beg her to look at their crappy, unpolished work. The fact that she has to be anonymous proves her point about the value of agents.

(Before anyone can accuse me of hiding behind Anon -- I don't blog so I go by Anon, deal with it)

It is clear to anyone who is a regular reader of EA that she is an actual editor who knows her stuff. She is also extremely helpful and giving of her time to all of us unpublished/underpublished writers.

And, none us regular and not-so-regular readers give a crap if she chooses to stay anonymous. We all understand her motivations to do so.

I'd rather have her anonymous and imparting her valuable tidbits and humor than reveal her true identity and stop blogging.

Another QUOTE, this from the original blog post of DWS site -- "... A form rejection these days says simply “We do not take unagented submissions.” It means exactly what every other form rejection in the history of publishing has meant: Nothing. It means that the manuscript, for one reason or another, didn’t fit their line. Maybe your manuscript sucked, or maybe it was brilliant but didn’t fit..."

This isn't true. WE DO NOT TAKE UNAGENTED SUBMISSIONS means quite a lot. It means they didn't read it. At all. It means they don't know if it sucked or was brilliant. Because it means it WASN'T READ. It means you just wasted ink, paper, and mailing costs looking like an ass who doesn't follow query guidlines. It means, the unpaid, overworked, college-aged intern (whose job it is to sort out the mail) just carted your unagented, unread mss to the shredder, and then sent you a form reject. During which, she was more than likely rolling her eyes and/or laughing at you.

DWS's original blog post would've carried more weight if he'd bestowed some magic formula of HOW exactly to get editors to read your unagented book. You, know, as opposed to reading subs from those agents with whom they've cultivated business relationships with for years and years.

Not going to get into this except to say that if you wait until you get an editor offer to approach an agent, you will be getting the agent who has the time/inclination to drop everything they're doing and read your MS in a day in order to offer representation. Are they the best agent for you? Did you choose them after months of research into what they've sold, their editorial style and if you would partner well together?

All you know for sure is that they weren't all that busy.

Oh, dear. Abrasive much, Mr. Smith? I think I'm glad EA remains anonymous. If she just her blog to flog her authors' books, it would just be another boring PR site...and I think her opinions and advice would feel as if they meant less, not more.

-Another defiantly anonymous

DWSmith,
Good to hear your side of things. Bear in mind that we appreciate EA's anonymity as it allows her to say exactly what she thinks, how she feels about children's publishing. She may be blogging her authors elsewhere, but that's not the purpose of this blog.

EA, glad you're back, and grateful for the time you take to keep us informed--and entertained...

By the way, here is a survey done by a young adult writer about needing an agent to sell a first book. I know, numbers and statistics are the enemy of myth, but alas, I might as well put it here just for the hope someone will read the numbers.

The survey was done by Megan Crewe.

And by the way, I've published about 12 young adult novels under varied names, non media. Obviously none with this editor.

The survey results are on Crewe’s blog at:
http://megancrewe.livejournal.com/251212.html

By the way, I do not know Megan Crewe.

Best, Dean Wesley Smith

On the 'No unsolicited manuscripts' hurdle, there's an excellent post at Help! I Need A Publisher here (sorry, haven't time to make it a link):

http://helpineedapublisher.blogspot.com/2010/01/no-unsolicited-manuscripts-ok.html

and yes, it does discuss ignoring that diktat.

On the anonymity thing, EA isn't only protecting herself from slush, she's also protecting the authors she edits. If either my UK or my US editor blogged, or my agent did, I would want them to be being honest and helpful about the realities of getting and staying published. But I also wouldn't want to be wondering if they's talking about me, when they're talking about how to handle writerly insecurity/idiocy/incompetence or anything else. And I DEFINITELY wouldn't want to read it knowing that readers/students/fellow writers were having fun trying to work out which of my editors' authors were being talked about this time. So Clare, Charlotte and Jen - if you're blogging already, and maybe you are... please don't tell me.

DWS,

Thanks for the survey links. Always good to look at numbers. I think the kind of data we really need, though is not what percentage of *all* authors writing now sold their first book without an agent,because many people have argued here that it was easier in the past to sell without an agent. Rather, we want to look at authors who made their debut recently and see the proportions there. I don't know about a good scientific poll for this. The only info I could find was a survey of the "tenners", a group (82 of them) of 2010 debut authors who are working together to promote their books. The proportions there are different. 82% sold their books with an agent, while 18% did not. The info is here:
http://community.livejournal.com/10_ers/377542.html

Granted, it's not a scientific survey -- they may be sampling biases and whatnot, but it's the best information I could find.

"It means, the unpaid, overworked, college-aged intern (whose job it is to sort out the mail) just carted your unagented, unread mss to the shredder, and then sent you a form reject. During which, she was more than likely rolling her eyes and/or laughing at you."

Are you spying on me? Also, not entirely true. Shredding takes too long. I just toss the recyclables in the recycling bin.

P.S. To all those sending an unsolicited ms: please don't send it spiral bound. I'm big on recycling, and I have to cut each stupid spiral off before I can recycle your pages. I've cut up my hands countless times doing that. So please, just don't.

Livia, I wouldn't use the Tenners as a representative sample of first time authors, because the criteria for being included in that group are very strict. Excluded are small press published debut authors and many debut authors with medium sized publishers that aren't members of the Children's Book Council. Agents tend not to work with small presses because there's no money in it, and the medium sized publishers are more likely to deal directly with authors than the Big Six are.

New post on writer beware with more data! Here's a quote:


- Just over half of the respondents sold their first novels through agents. (Me too.) That means just under 50% sold directly to their publishers. Does this contradict the idea that an agent is essential for a first novel sale to an advance-paying publisher?

Not really. The results look different if you consider the decade in which the books were sold. Author Steven Saus's more detailed analysis of Jim's data reveals that, while direct-to-publisher sales outnumbered agented sales 55% to 45% in the 1980's, by the 2000's direct-to-publisher sales had dropped to 27%, and agented sales had jumped to 67%. This reflects the one of the major shifts in publishing that has occurred over the past 30 years, with agents taking on the gatekeeping function that was formerly carried out by editors.


And the complete article is here