I am currently an intern for [redacted] Literary Agency. I read your blog post about switching genres when writing, and it made me think of a question that I have been wrestling with. I am in the process of becoming an associate agent, and my strength is fiction. However, I want to continue to improve in non-fiction and memoir. Other than reading a lot of best-selling non-fiction and memoir, what are some ways that I might gain a really good sense of the genre. With fiction, I just know what works (plus, I have an English BA and MA (creative writing emphasis). I want to get to that place with non-fiction and memoir. Ideas?
After having a number of interns come through BookEnds, roughly three or four a year for five or more years, I've gotten a better understanding of what it takes to make a good agent. Certainly reading is big, but so is instinct. I'm not sure how else to describe it. I've seen some of the most well-read people come through and yet have no understanding of what makes a book work or what doesn't. It's not about properly placed commas, it's about pacing and market, plotting and characterization. And of course it's about voice.
I think to a certain extent agents have an instinct for certain genres and, yes, I think some of it comes from what we love, but it's also a basic understanding of why certain genres work. I credit most of my knowledge from working in the business. For five years I was an editor, and every week for five years I sat in an editorial meeting and watched and listened to editors discuss books. Not only did we discuss books that were published, but of course we discussed books we were hoping to publish. For almost every book an editor wanted to acquire she had to have others read it and discuss it in front of everyone in the meeting. Some of those discussions were brutal, but all were passionate. I learned more from those weekly meetings than I ever could from reading on my own.
We have similar meetings at BookEnds, but I'm afraid we don't discuss as many books we offer representation to as we probably should. Instead my interns are required to read and write a lot of reader's reports for me, and I make a concerted effort to comment on those reports and discuss the books with them myself. I ask them to write revision letters for me on books I already represent. Sometimes they'll see something I missed and a lot of the time it's a way for me to teach them what they should be looking for.
There's no magical way to understanding a genre. Read, talk to agents about books, ask for second reads on manuscripts. That's probably the best advice I can offer. However, I really think that if it's a real struggle to understand a genre, it's probably just not the genre you should be focusing on.
Jessica
Viewing: Blog Posts Tagged with: good writing, Most Recent at Top [Help]
Results 1 - 9 of 9
How to use this Page
You are viewing the most recent posts tagged with the words: good writing in the JacketFlap blog reader. What is a tag? Think of a tag as a keyword or category label. Tags can both help you find posts on JacketFlap.com as well as provide an easy way for you to "remember" and classify posts for later recall. Try adding a tag yourself by clicking "Add a tag" below a post's header. Scroll down through the list of Recent Posts in the left column and click on a post title that sounds interesting. You can view all posts from a specific blog by clicking the Blog name in the right column, or you can click a 'More Posts from this Blog' link in any individual post.
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: agents, agent preferences, good writing, Add a tag
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: good writing, Add a tag
When writing your book and later your query, it's important to remember that a successful book, and therefore a successful query, isn't just about life happening to the character. To make a book, and query, work, you need to have your character be an active participant in life.
Therefore, if you're telling me that your character's house burned down, her husband left her, her best friend died, and then her dog ran away, I'm frankly feeling your book is a little ho-hum. Clearly your book is happening around your character, to your character, but your character isn't doing anything. Maybe if her husband left her and then she shot him I might be more interested.
Jessica
How about her dog is on the lam, cause he shot the husband who was philandering with the neighbor? Also, there are vampires.
wv: osistr (which is exactly what I can hear somone say to this comment "oh, sister!")
Janet, you forgot the zombies.
and the fact that the husband now comes back as a ghost to help her find the dog
I see your point. But Barbara Kingsolver's character in The Lacuna was pretty passive and I thought that was a lovely novel. But she is a fantastic writer.
But the dog has morphed into a werewolf. (The bullet was silver.)
A great example of this could be Fannie Flagg's novel, I Still Dream About You. All through the beginning of the book life happens to the mc, and then she starts taking steps and making her own things happen.
LOL - that last line!
One of the many reasons I love this blog. XD
Bad enough if main character is passive. Even worse if he/she whines about all the abuse being suffered.
The description you just made sounds like the story of my life. Richard from Amish Stories
Nothing like a Jessica and Janet tag team scenario to start the weekend! ;)
Awesome! Was just thinking about this concept, character-driven vs. plot-driven. Plot-driven always feels contrived to me. I like to see a character make a huge mistake that affects everything and then struggle to work around what can't be changed. Maybe her husband left because she got caught cheating, and now the guy she cheated with is with another woman, and she has to decide if she's fit for marriage after all while dealing with her dog's unsightly leg-humping habit.
Thanks for the great advice.
ROFL - shoot that man!
No, no, no, the husband and the dog ran away together to escape the zombie-vampire secret society that murdered the neighbor who was about to reveal all their plans to News of the World. Oh, and our heroine is secretly a vampire, but she doesn't know it yet.
Ah, sorry, couldn't resist. :D
Hamlet being the exception, of course. :P
A famous writer (Gosh I wish I could remember who!!!) said, "I make my characters DO as much as possible."
I always try to follow this example.
Happy Friday to all!
Ha! I loved this one...but you did make me question the happenings in A Marked Past. A lot happens in it but I do think the main character is actively involved and makes her own life changing decisions. (no guns though, sorry) :)
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: good writing, voice, Add a tag
When reading requested material, one thing I like to do is simply go through my email and randomly open the attachments. Without knowing whether the book is romance, fantasy, mystery, YA, or nonfiction, I start reading. A good book with a good voice will tell me what genre the book is without me ever asking. In other words, I shouldn’t have to know ahead of time because the author’s voice will tell me where in bookstores the book belongs.
Jessica
This is so true. I can usually spot a YA a mile away with just one "BFF". Takes all the guess work out of whether or not I'm going to need a pocket dictionary:)
I love this post because it states it so simply. Most people get caught up in backstory that it is hard to find the true voice.
Perfect advice. Work on voice. It is on every agent blog.
That is so cool.
How fine it would be to randomly open an attachment and start reading a wonderful novel.
That is so true, Jessica! If I think about the voice in my favourite books, I can spot the genre a mile away. For example, THE TIME TRAVELER'S WIFE is obviously a love story from the start, and THE HUNGER GAMES feels like YA dystopian from the first few pages. This is definitely something I can think about and work on as an author.
Very true! I suppose one can make some exceptions. For example, someone mentioned THE TIME TRAVELLER'S WIFE, which could be considered science fiction, although one wouldn't be able to tell from the voice. This could be just because the SF elements are understated (when compared to Philip K. Dick or similar authors) or because certain genres lend themselves better to having distinctive voices, and TTTW is more focused on the love story anyway. But one should definitely get an immediate feel for the parts of humanity being explored, the audience, and maybe even the themes (in very general terms) from the voice within a few pages.
That is awesome. Thanks for the tip!
Speaking of voice, who is Miss Snark? Some say it was just a blogger, not a real agent. Is there a way of knowing for sure? I understand that SFWA has said that they don't know who it is and neither does P&E or Absolute Write. I sent her a query once and later my idea came out with someone else's name on the byline. Jessie P.
I love short, sweet, smart posts like this.
This is blogging at it's best!!
I have a question for you regarding voice. My novel takes place in two different worlds, modern-day Earth and another world of my creation. The main character is constant in both worlds.
Parts of the story from her perspective are written in first person, and other characters are written in a tightly-focused third person. Her voice is quirky and humorous, and I'm shooting for the third person perspective to be a more serious, rich prose.
Based on your comments above, would that bother you or perhaps put me at a disadvantage? I'm really striving to make both perspectives engaging. It begins in first person, then switches for the first time about 40 pages later.
So very true!That's a great test:)
A very succinct and simplistic way of saying something so profound. Thanks.
Might we be allowed to edit comments? That would be lovely. Its as a possessive needs no apostrophe, as I'm sure the commenter knows, but those pesky fingers do get ahead of us sometimes.
And simplistic isn't a synonym for "elegantly simple." It means "oversimplified" and indicates that complexities have been overlooked so that the resulting argument is no longer true.
Just a pet peeve. But then, all things considered, that commenter may have used the word with perfect accuracy.
"Might we be allowed to edit comments? That would be lovely. Its as a possessive needs no apostrophe, as I'm sure the commenter knows, but those pesky fingers do get ahead of us sometimes."
If the commenter had enough time in the day to waste worrying about edits on a blog thread, the commenter would have more problems than an apostrophe :)
Every one says work on voice. While I agree with the advice. I have yet to see someone say how to do it. Is this one of those simply you got it or you don't type things? What I do is read and write, read and write. I read my genre, marinate and let my mind wonder. Then my voice just kind of speaks as I type.
Thank you Jessica for the clear and concise post. Hope your queries happen in the same aspect for you.
Bri
@Anonymous at 7:44
I don't see any reason to be so condescending. It was rude and was intended for no other reason than to humiliate another, grammatical errors notwithstanding, and I notice you did not leave your name and take responsibility for your actions.
I believe an apology is due.
I remember reading that Oscar Wilde once said that while writing a poem, in the morning he put in a comma, and then in the afternoon he took it out again.
Agreed. I had a recent submission evaluation to do and while the story wasn't bad, I had no clue what genre it belonged in. There wasn't enough in the first three chapters I was given to indicate that information to me. It would have made the novel stand out more if the voice had been a bit stronger.
Um, yes, yes and yes on this. And yet how come I never thought of it? Thank for this!
Very concise and true. I think the mood set on the first couple of pages is very reflective of voice.
Voice is the thing I struggle with most. It's so challenging to nail down a consistent voice throughout.
True, though these days I think there are some cases where things could get tricky. For example, reading a paranormal romance for the first time - would you know if it went in the fantasy section or in romance? ;D
Anon 12:39
You queried Miss Snark? I wanna see the scars.
People come up with the same ideas all the time. You just make yourself crazy assuming people are stealing yours.
I totally agree an author must have a "voice," however the voice can be mercurial.
I have one voice in the captions at "marjorie-cartoons," and quite another voice in the poems at "marjorie-digest."
I believe an author should constantly be reinventing herself. I code switch... like some multiple personality in a maze.
@Anon12:39
If you queried Miss Snark (Why in the world would you query an agent you know nothing about, not even a name?), she probably didn't even read it once she realized it was a query. She certainly didn't steal it and give it to one of her writers. Ideas are a dime a dozen.
I realize it must've been years since you queried her, but if you haven't already, it's time to start researching publishing. Querying an anonymous blogging agent means you're not up on the business side of the industry, which makes you prey for scammers and bad agents and vanity publishers. Once you learn about the industry, it should ease your fears that someone stole your idea.
Anon 12:39-- The late, lamented Miss Snark was a character invented by a real agent who prefers to remain anonymous. Several people threatened to sue La Snark, including an unscrupulous faux agent who accused the Stillettoed One of being a "dragoon."
It's best to let the mystery be.
Kind of like the secret of how to develop "voice."
And how to writer a good query.
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: rules, rejection, agent preferences, good writing, Add a tag
This is going to be a rant, unless I can reel myself in.
Frequently enough I reject or give my opinions on someone’s work, things like I didn’t find the character likeable enough or had a hard time understanding the world you’ve created, or the story didn’t feel like the genre you’re targeting, and all too frequently the author comes back with something along the lines of, “Well, that’s because I don’t write the typical Alpha hero or Beta heroine or I don’t write the formula plot blah, blah, blah.”
Do you really think I’m so narrow-minded as an agent that I don’t understand books unless they follow certain formulas or rules? Tell me how I could possibly have any success if that were the case.
When an agent tells you that something isn’t working, it’s typically not because you’ve decided to break whatever rules you think exist in this business, it’s because it’s not working. A character not being likeable enough usually means that readers didn’t like her. Now, sure it’s possible another reader might have another opinion, but it’s also possible that in your attempt to make her tough and damaged you’ve made her unlikeable.
Jessica
That was far from a rant, just laying out the facts :)
And as someone who's been rejected (although not by you) I can proudly say that I simply believed the agent when they told me whatever they told me was the reason for rejection. And yes one of those was a 'frankly, you're heroine isn't likeable enough to be marketable'. I took that as valuable input and altered my character for the better :)
Whoa…back up the truck !
As a third party observer I see something very interesting going on here. Both author and agent have been poked with a pencil where it hurts.
Author…how dare you tell me my character is unlikable, she’s been rattling around in my head for months…well actually years. You narrow minded so and so…
Agent…how dare you tell me I don’t understand books, they are my life, I am a success you narrow minded so and so…
Both…don’t tell me how to do my job you narrow minded, blah, blah, blah…
Ms Trite says: Oft’ times when you poke people with a pencil the ‘point’ you’re trying to make breaks.
I don't disagree with you and I think that authors should take constructive criticism and use it to their advantage. I am finding though that the characters that get created are like people I know. Maybe even more so than people I know, because I know their inner most hopes and dreams. I can see in their minds and feel everything they feel. I love most of them and I can honestly say that I have created a antagonist that I loath. I guess what I am trying to say in too many words is, writers look at it like you’re cutting on our loved one. And putting the passion in the story and the characters is an integral part, but you have to be able to grow as a writer and not be so overly sensitive. Trust that the people that are the experts will lead you down the right path.
One of the first things I've had to tell anyone I critique or anyone in any critique group I've ever been in, or when I was working my way through school as a writing tutor, was "Do not defend your manuscript."
Unless you plan to stand over the shoulder of everyone reading your book and explain to them what you meant to write, you'd be better off just writing what you meant to write. I hate it when I tell someone "This isn't working" and she comes back with five minutes explaining to me why it should work, why I'm too stupid to understand the great art she was striving to achieve, and how unenlightened I must be (and, I'd note, everyone else).
In one of my writing classes in college, the professor imposed a "cone of silence" on the person whose story was being critiqued in order to prevent exactly this because while defending, we're not listening.
Rant away! It's absolutely true.
The "delete" button must be a very good friend of yours, Jessica.
Yes, they probably do think you just "don't get it", but that's because THEY don't get it. Sure, it's possible that this story just didn't work for you and could work for someone else. But the author's defensive response gives me the feeling they should take another look at their work. A professional would just move on, either tweaking their ms if they agreed or leaving it as is if they didn't.
Please continue to give opinions in your rejections when you think it's warranted, Jessica. They DO help. If someone doesn't want to accept your comments, that's their problem, not yours.
I'd give my left arm to hear an agent saying what doesn't work. At least I know she's looked at the writing and taken the time to form an opinion instead of just rejecting.
If a writer can't take that kind of constructive criticism, they're in the wrong business. This kind of response tells me they are not looking to write the best possible book. They're merely looking to be told how smart and fabulous they are. To which I say, "Yeah. Good luck with that."
I see this as a *learning curve* all aspiring authors go through in order to attain publication.
They're no more stupid or mean-spirited than a baby learning to walk who falls down and cries in frustration. Like that baby, the thing to do is
Try Again.
And again.
again.
again.
again.
Cry if you need to, but keep on *learning* the craft and *trying.*
Rules of Publishing: Mondays are for squishing ants. :-)
As a published author and college English instructor, I internally laugh at anyone who gets their panties in a bunch over their writing.
As I tell my critique group and my students--if you have to sit next to the reader telling them that what you're writing is off-formula or why the unlikeable heroine really is likable--that means you haven't done a good job with your writing. Since the writer isn't sold along with the book, you better make sure your writing/thinking/reasoning is 100% apparent on the page.
-S.
i agree with anne in that it is great to receive feedback. doesn't matter to me if it is good or bad as long as it's constructive.
you rejected by ms with a standard form rejection, okay the ms wasn't for you i could take it, but there was a tiny part of me that did want to know what it was that turned you off. after all how am i to improve my story and make it the best it can be if not for feedback? i hesitated to contact you and ask this question (honestly i did) as i appreciate how busy you are, but i really wanted to know. so i contacted you and i have to say you were very gracious and told me the ms was too convoluted. i appreciated it because i needed to hear it (and it went on to get me a great agent).
I think we're talking about two different subjects here. One is whether or not a given reader buys into a story (subjective). The second subject is whether or not a set of common-sense rules exists in publishing. I believe they exist and as a writer you have complete control over whether or not you break them. And you break them at your peril -- that is to say, if you want to earn a living as a novelist, you have to provide something publishers can sell and consumers want to read. That's the first rule. So if in the process of writing your book your characters take you into realms you never thought they would, where these unwritten rules start to snap, you'll probably have marketablity and/or credulity issues. Other examples: The likeable protagonist is a big one, especially if you want to start a franchise. Knowing who will buy your book and aiming in their direction, or better still crossing demographics to lure in more readers (Potter, Hunger Games, where YA crosses age borders). Subject matter or even word count stays within genre norms. Avoiding elements that a given readership won't relate to (Tom Clancy military detail in a supernatural romance, for example, even if a key character is in the military). Or maybe your story embraces too many potential "turn offs" (too violent, sexual, political, religious, etc), or not have enough of something a genre requires (supernatural elements, romance, forensic detail, whatever readers love about a genre). Chances are if you aren't mindful of these things, you won't sell your book because all of these so-called rules swing you back to the first subject -- subjectivity -- and agents and/or editors won't be seduced by your story because it won't ring the bell for what type of book they need in a given area. And we certainly know that virtually every book needs to fit in a given area. Of course this stuff is never fun to talk about. Creative fields in reality -- when you talk marketability and consumer-friendliness, etc -- lose their sexiness when you realize that you can't just let your creation go where it wants/needs to go because even if it's one hundred percent where it honestly needs to go as a narrative, you could lose the reader. Whereas if you adhere to certain rules, maybe you won't lose your reader and you'll sell your book. Art and commerce, always a lively debate!
You may both be right. You don't know the writer, the writer doesn't know you. You're both making assumptions and you're both being awfully protective of your credibility and authority in your separate parts of this business.
It's all subjective.
And that's why it's sometimes best to just send a form decline.
Every person who reads a manuscript that isn't theirs, is casting it through their own spyglass. Every reader, from beta readers to editors to agents, brings their own subjectivities. And in the case of editors and agents, they not only run the manuscript through their overt subjetivities of what they *like* to read, but also their covert subjectivities (disguised as objectivity) of what they think will sell, based upon their vast experience in the industry.
Sometimes writers really do need to improve their works. I think making a character likeable is running the most subjective route. Some readers need to like a character, some don't. But works can always be improved.
But I also think some editors and agents get in their own way, looking for the sure thing. They look so hard for the sure thing, that they miss the sure thing.
Lord of the Flies was declared “An absurd and uninteresting fantasy which was rubbish and dull” by an early reader. It was rejected by 20 publishers before selling 14.5 million copies
Anne Frank's diary was described by one editor thusly, "The girl doesn't, it seems to me, have a special perception or feeling which would lift that book above the 'curiosity' level." How's that for someone not liking the character. Of course it was also rejected by 15 other publishers.
JK Rowling's Philosopher's Stone was rejected by nearly a dozen publishers including Penguin and Harper Collins. No doubt, they feel justified in their rejections.
Certainly authors and editors/ agents have work to do on both sides of the table. So, I have two final comments.
1) If a writer believes in his or her book/ character, wait until someone can see what you see. You'll both be the better for it.
2)Agents, please offer constructive comments whenever possible. An author's "defense" is knee-jerk. But, if there really is a glaring problem to be pointed out, then the author will grow because you took the time to illuminate it.
Thanks.
This really does fall into the category of authors learning to deal with criticism...in a broad sense.
The worst criticism is often a good thing most authors don't recognize. In other words, there's nothing more boring than a book on amazon three star ratings all the way down the line (snooze). Usually, the books with a balance of one star and five stars that are the best.
Sorry if this sounds more author oriented than agent oriented, but criticism is something all authors need to learn how to deal with if they are going to maintain their sanity.
Do you really think I’m so narrow-minded as an agent that I don’t understand books unless they follow certain formulas or rules?
I don't think the complaint is that you're too narrow-minded to understand the book. I think the complaint is that you're too narrow-minded to take a chance that the book might be a hit despite the supposed flaw you've noticed.
For example, what I'm hearing in your post is that books with unlikable characters are never published, no matter how brilliant the book may be otherwise. I know that's an untrue generalization, but it points out the problem. Published books follow certain formulas. Agents are scared of books that step outside those rules, even if breaking a rule is necessary for the story the author wants to write. An author who wants to tell a story about how an unlikable protagonist redeems herself is facing an uphill battle against the preconceptions of agents who demand first and foremost that the main character must be likable.
And yes, I've tried to sell such a novel, although not to you. :)
As a reader, how many hours will I spend with a character I don't like? That would be zero. If an agent -- or any experienced, thoughtful, respectful reader that I trust -- tells me something's not working, I am damned well going to thicken up my skin think about it.
Anne,
I hope that you would not give your left arm for any such thing.
I used to think that if I could just get one book published by a major publisher I could die content. Now that I've had several, I know it's not that simple. There isn't any Arrival, there isn't any moment when you've achieved your goal as a writer. Ultimately writing itself is the goal, and sometimes you wonder if any of the sacrifices you've made for writing are really worth it.
Certainly a left arm wouldn't be.
I see this conversation: "Your character just didn't grab me: she's not likeable, etcetcetc" vs "I just don't write the typical etcetcetc" as a lack of communication, not a real argument that can become a productive learning experience.
The Agent has been hard-trained to be objective, and to develop a subjective response to what will be popular with a very clearly defined market.
The Agent is all about marketing to a broad enough readership that the Agent's cut will make the Agent a living.
The writer is all about stirring heart-strings that are in tune with the writer's own.
The Agent is saying "give me something popular" and the Writer is saying "Make THIS popular, not that."
The Agent knows where to find the market, and how to recognize what that market is already hungry to devour.
The Writer has no clue where to find a market. The writer feels (not thinks) that the things she reads from a particular market that she ALMOST likes mean that the market will welcome her work because it corrects the flaws in the market's taste.
The two aren't talking about the same thing, so they don't communicate.
I blog about writing craft (from a professional mass market writer's point of view) with practical step-by-step break-downs of how to imagine the story-idea and then shape and craft that idea to fit a market before ever setting a word down in electrons.
It's what the writer does before "having" the idea that causes this non-argument conversation over a completed manuscript.
I've taught writing for more than 20 years and had many successful students finally "get it" and take off.
My blog post last week was another in a long series on Worldbuilding, and Nov. 16, 2010 (I post on Tuesdays on a co-blog) will be step-wise instructions on what I call "Information Feed" (techniques to avoid the expository lump which is often the cause of the "didn't grab me" and "not likeable" reaction).
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/11/worldbuilding-with-fire-and-ice-part.html
Anonymous's comment on "learning curve" is just exactly true. Coordination is gained by practice! I try to supply something to hold onto while you practice creating a Mass Market product.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
There should be a warning with this post that reads: "If you're in a bad mood and you feel like having an agent for breakfast, please don't read this."
And I'm in a good mood today :)
That's the danger of email and instant insults. You can fire off a reply as quick as hitting "reply".
People who send out things like that are the reason so many agents don't even send rejections anymore. That way there's nothing to reply to.
And what planet is that guy on that he thinks "alpha hero / beta heroine" is the "norm". Go to the library and read a few recent books. They don't all follow that pattern.
@Remus Shepherd
I don't think the Agent-Response is about "unlikeable character" (even when that's what the Agent has to say) but about "likeability that isn't broadly appealing enough to suit the market I can reach."
As far as selling a book about a truly unlikeable character (who does or does not "redeem" him/herself), the writer must have a huge track-record of sales on other titles, a developed following the writer can count on to buy a book and finish reading it, because in other books the writer delivered the goods.
EXAMPLE: Marion Zimmer Bradley's TWO TO CONQUER about a rapist.
Books are one market, but film is expensive and so needs an even broader market. To learn how to present an unlikeable character in an appealing light, read Blake Snyder's SAVE THE CAT! series.
"Save The Cat" is the first action you see the character performing - an act that suggests the character's redeeming feature without nailing it on the head. Immediately, you relate to the character, then find out about the flaws. Snyder teaches exactly how to do this.
You never get a second chance to make a first impression.
Likeability is all about SHOW DON'T TELL - or as I said in my previous post here, about INFORMATION FEED.
What you illustrate first, what you illustrate second, etc. -- the way you intro a character is what counts. Expository lumps, non-artistically chosen actions can make a loveable character icky.
And it's also about Worldbuilding - how you illustrate the world the character functions within, the contrast between internal and external worlds and how you choose point of view.
All these craft techniques have to be mastered and interwoven, orchestrated with ease of performance before you can tell the story of a really unlikeable character to a broad enough audience for an Agent to make a living off their cut.
But most beginning writers are actually telling the tale of a truly likeable character who seems unlikeable because of failure of technique and craft.
That's why they argue back "You just don't understand" -- the beginning writer doesn't understand that the words they have presented don't say what they imagine in their minds.
As Anonymous said, it's a baby learning to walk, clumsy and tumble-bump at first, then smoother.
Agents aren't in the business of teaching writing craft. Don't expect anything more than "the main character just isn't likeable" as a response.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
Sorry, I forgot to click the box to get an email on subsequent comments. Now I'll listen to the convo!
For a rant, pretty pitiful.
When a writer gets comments, they need to shut up - except for a sincere "Thank you." no matter what is said.
Although I consider it to be a separate topic, I agree with 'wry writer' that agents (and I would add, editors) typically don't welcome or take criticism too well themselves (though it isn't my perception that they generally ask for it or want it).
Regarding 'subjectivity', helloooo. These opinions are subjective, but they aren't reckless or made without reason. In this corner, with a record of 78-10-15, with 35 knockouts, at a trim and taut 102 pounds, we have Experienced Professional. (Cue wild cheers, stamping feet. [Maybe not.]) And in this corner. with a record of 1-0-10, at a bloated-as-their-manuscript 250 pounds, we have Would-be Novelist. (Cue derisive laughter, jeers.)
Whoa! Stop the fight now! I think we can see how this ends.
Part of me wants to say, "Oh, for God's sake agents, PLEASE do stop your whining and grow the heck up." and the other part of me says, "Thanks for the insight, it's always good to know what/how agents are thinking or reacting to what we write, do, or say."
But honestly...
Writing a 'black-hat' hero, a bad guy readers wind up pulling for, is a tough thing to do. Study Terrence Lore Smith's books. He did it superbly.
As my grandmother would say: What a shit-storm! Jesus. Somebody just say "Uncle" already.
And we wonder why agents send form rejections.
Having been on the author end of criticism I didn't want to hear, I understand the heat. I think it best if an author responds with, "How can I improve this, in your opinion?" but that isn't always easy to say.
Jessica, you have the DUTY to spot the flaws. You also have the decency to point them out. It's unfortunate that you get razed for it. I don't blame you for being upset. At the same time, it's still subjective, and there's always the offer to the author to submit it to another agent if they don't care for your feelings about it. Someone else might love their abrasive character. Of course, from your end, THAT isn't easy to say in the heat of the moment either.
Yucky Monday! Hopefully the next thing you read and the next bit of correspondence is brighter.
It sounds like you are reacting to the type of writer who either 1) can't take or acknowledge criticism 2) lacks the self control to refrain from immediately blasting back a defensive response or 3) isn't able to shrug it off when she sees the agent clearly doesn't "get" the work. (If that's the case, that agent wouldn't be a good fit for the book anyway, hmm?)
It must be frustrating to deal with this kind of response, but on the other hand, I doubt there's anything you can say to change their minds and convince them your criticism isn't totally off base. They will believe what they want to believe.
I guess you could just reply with a link to this post going forward, though. :)
I've had a lot of people tell me that the reason I get rejected is because agents are just looking for formulaic crap or something that rips off whatever is popular at the time.
I actually get rather annoyed whenever I hear the sentiment. I tend to think that if I'm being rejected it's either because my work wasn't good enough or because it just isn't for someone, but when people try to comfort me about rejections I always get the same comments.
I think there are a lot of people out there who really believe that the majority of books published aren't any good and that their books is better because it's the one standout in a crowd of mediocre crap. Granted, they're kind of making the rest of us look bad, and that's irritating even if we're not the ones directly having to deal with it as you are.
Why reel yourself in? If you want to rant, what the heck, let loose with both barrels and have at it. You're entitled. Plus it's healthy to vent now and again. Especially, as you intimate, someone really ticked you off. Let it loose. Sometimes you just gotta get it off your chest. Actually, I found your rant rather restrained. What I'd really like to see is one unleashed and reel-free.
Maybe if enough writers tell you "You just don't get it." you will finally get it. Why, we're just trying to help - and offering our rightgeous, bitchin' manuscripts to help you land the monster deal. Honestly babe, we are growing weary of waiting for you to catch up. We're happy to give you a second chance, an opportunity to recognize the brilliance, but you've got to get serious or we might move on.
Likeable and unlikeable are both really, really subjective. There are people who love Bella and Nora. I hate them and think they're two-dimensional and in need of personality transplants. There are people who love Felicity Worthington. I don't. All that means is that I find them unlikeable, that doesn't mean that they ARE unlikeable because clearly people like them.
The same is true for you. You can find a character unlikeable. For you, they ARe unlikeable. But that doesn't mean everyone will feel that way.
so true.
This summer my critique group said my character was unlikeable. I wanted to say, "But she's damaged, and rebellious, and hardened by life." But none of that mattered if still no one wanted to spend their precious time with her.
I changed her. The plot is still the same. The story, however, is completely different.
I'd call that a mini-rant if anything. :) I understand why agents don't like to give feedback because it's a two-edged sword. Writers (myself included) say we want to know why you passed on us, but many can't handle the truth.
Anonymous:
"Likeable" is not subjective in the terminology used in commercial markets. It's a technical term, jargon or code.
They don't mean whether "everybody" or even "anybody" will like a character.
They mean whether enough diverse people would like that character to make the product commercially viable. It's not personal, it's business (yeah, real bad taste in the mouth).
An Editor or Agent is trained the hard way (punishment and reward shocks) to recognize what has the broad commercial profile to make enough money to make it profitable FOR THE AGENT -- calculated on effort-to-return ratio, or Return On Investment (ROI in investing).
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
I know I am guilty of being blind to my own flaws as a writer. I hope I never hassle an agent because of my own shortcomings.
My dearest wish (and there are probably writers/agents/editors who will agree) is that science will invent a Common Sense injection (though, not a vaccine--television already took care of that).
Oooh, it's awfully dark and gloomy up there.
There now, you see how wrong people can be? That there is what you might call the doorway to a place of enchantment...
Too many aspiring authors show the reader reason after reason not to read before they show any hint of a reason to read. Then they want to bully the reader up the chimney. It don't work that way.
It's a pretty human reaction to want to blame others for your own failures. When a writer says, "You just don't get it," they're doing exactly that--trying to protect their ego by blaming someone else for the fact the writing didn't connect with the reader.
However, owning your failure is a necessary first step to improvement. You have to comprehend that something is not perfect before you become capable of making it better.
Learning hurts, but you'll never rise above the level you're at now unless you accept feedback. Take it on the chin, everyone.
Oh my, we’re all taking ourselves a bit to seriously today.
Here’s my ‘part two’ comment.
Once a writer figures out what the hell it is agents, publishers, editors, and readers want they have weathered many a rejection storm. For a writer to get pissed at an agent because ‘said’ agent doesn’t get the gist of the character, or whatever…that writer is either inexperienced or soooo… famous he or she feels they have a right to tell the agent to pound sand.
Really Jessica…you criticized someone’s work, does it really matter to you what they think? You are not in the business to make friends you are in the business to…what is it that you do…oh…represent and present.
That’s it babe.
To the writer…your inexperience is showing. You don’t like what someone says about your efforts…two words…move on.
I love Mondays.
I love it when you cause a ruckus.
Me, too!
As someone who is currently in the query process, let me add my two cents. I appreciate feedback and will not be ungrateful when an agent takes the time to clarify why they said no.
Two words: Lisbeth Salander
Ended up loving the crap out of that dysfunctional, mean & nasty little person...and she was obviously highly marketable.
Personally - be it from an agent's or author's viewpoint - I think it's all subjective.
Anonymous:
My point is that the Agent doesn't know -- and it isn't their job to know -- why they can't market a given property.
"The character isn't likeable" is a response that could mean "fix the point of view" -- but the Agent isn't required to know if that would work or what it would take you to make it work.
If the Agent gives you a clue, take it to a professional writer (not just a published writer, but someone who knows how to teach what they've learned) and find out what to do to fix that problem.
Chances are good you don't have to change the character, just the place where you start Chapter One.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
JJbene...
you are beyond correct..owning failure is the first step to success...it means we're paying attention to more then ourselves.
It's "above and beyond..." to give a meaningful explanation for a rejection, and reasonable people would be grateful. But then there aren't too many of them.
I hope you will be kind enough to continue to give your explanations, despite the unkindness of man's ingratitude.
I just thought I'd check back in to see what transpired during the day. Ha! So many panties in a wad, so little time! Thanks, Jessica, for stirring the Monday pot. :-)
Jessica,
I love your blogs. They're so entertaining and stimulating and educational. I love the way they get everybody riled up and thinking about the good, the bad, and the ugly.
You go girl!!
I wish ALL agents would give us feedback like that! It took TWO years of polite rejections until finally an editor hit the nail on the head. Now I know what's wrong and am revising like crazy. Telling a writer "I didn't fall in love" is a waste of time.
I hope to find an editor turned-agent--what a big help and time-saver. PLEASE keep telling it like it is--we're listening!
The only rule to remember in writing is that there are no rules.
If there were, I wouldn't be published, because I break just about all of them!
@ Saturday Writers
Quote: "I love it when you cause a ruckus."
The sad part is, she doesn't actually have to do anything. A blog post of five words that reads "I don't rep space monkeys," will instantly generate the following response:
5 people who agree that space monkeys don't actually constitute a genre in fiction.
14 people who agree that Jessica should rep whatever she wants, and if space monkeys aren't on the list, that's ok.
2 people who wish Jessica did rep space monkeys, as that's what they're writing.
1 person up in arms against Jessica's racist denigration of space monkeys.
3 people who are fed up with all the rules about space monkeys, but continue to visit the blog anyway.
1 person to explain that publishing these days is too narrow-minded to take a chance on space monkeys, and that's why there aren't any good books published.
1 person who skims the post and fires back in defense of NASA.
1 patient response from Jessica, reiterating that she really doesn't have anything against space monkeys, it's just a personal taste, and she can't sell what she doesn't love.
And....
1 snarky response from somebody who wishes the insanity would just stop (me).
There, did I miss anyone?
Memphis Knit Mafia Need holiday gifts? We are having a fundraiser and will make hats, neck warmers, cowls, muffs, and fingerless mitts for your holiday gift needs! Contact us for custom orders and photos to come!! Please tell us if you are interested
it is very interesting story
@ LUCY... LMAO!!
@ Anonymous... This quote "I wish ALL agents would give us feedback like that! It took TWO years of polite rejections until finally an editor hit the nail on the head. Now I know what's wrong and am revising like crazy. Telling a writer "I didn't fall in love" is a waste of time."
I second this motion!
Anonymous:
"Likeable" is not subjective in the terminology used in commercial markets. It's a technical term, jargon or code.
They don't mean whether "everybody" or even "anybody" will like a character.
They mean whether enough diverse people would like that character to make the product commercially viable. It's not personal, it's business (yeah, real bad taste in the mouth).
An Editor or Agent is trained the hard way (punishment and reward shocks) to recognize what has the broad commercial profile to make enough money to make it profitable FOR THE AGENT -- calculated on effort-to-return ratio, or Return On Investment (ROI in investing).
I've never read of an agent thinking or saying that they disliked a character, a book's plot, an author's world building or the entire concept of a book, but taking it on anyway because it was commercially viable and they had no plans to ask for revisions. I know some agents will take on something they feel needs work, but they ask the author to revise.
Likeable refers to the characters or other factors. Jessica said that a tough and damaged protagonist could just be unlikeable. She didn't say that there's no market for a tough and damaged protagonist. There is. I read a rave review about a book with one such protagonist not long ago. There are books with characters who are out-and-out barely-if-at-all sympathetic bitches, and some people love them while others don't. Likeable does not mean commercially viable. IT means likeable.
I once read on a literary agent's blog that she hated a particular well-known book. She told authors not to query her if their books were like this particular book. She said she didn't care how well it sold, she didn't like it and that was that. Given that books very similar to that one continue to sell extremely well and others are still finding representation, I think it's safe to say that when an agent says likeablie, they mean whether or not they, as human beings, like the work. Otherwise, that other agent would have been happy to take on clone books because they are clearly highly commercially viable. Some agents might use the two terms interchangeably, but that doesn't mean all do. It's not fair to make a general statement that all agents mean one thing. I know that not all do because I've seen them draw that line.
What makes something ommercially viable is also subjective. Books have been rejected because agents or editors thought they wouldn't sell or wouldn't sell well and then those same books have gone on to be megabestsellers. Books that seemed like sure things have flopped bigtime. I know this because I've seen agents and editors say as much.
Jessica and other agents have said that they've passed on something because they didn't connect with some aspect of it, but they are certain it will sell. Agents have said that they've passed for that reason, have been certain it would sell, and then seen the deal, thus proving that they were right. They've passed, bot based on commercial viability, but their own personal taste.
Even in this post, Jessica doesn't say another reading might think a tough and damaged character is commercially viable. She says another reader might like what she doesn't. Even if she meant commercial viability, she's saying herself that it's subjective.
Most of publishing is subjective. That includes likeability and commercial viability, which I see as two different things. You are, of course, free to see them as the same, but either way agents still make choices based on their own taste and how they think the ever-changing, difficult-to-predict market will swing, not based on something they know for an absolute fact because in the publishing world that's damn near impossible. That, in my opinion, makes them both subjective.
Anonymous:
Oh, you're totally correct that Agents choose to represent a title or an author on the basis of a gut-response. Editor's too.
And that response part is subjective, but trained by reward/punishment experience.
But because of those innate traits, Editors and Agents gravitate toward markets and serve readerships with similar emotional responses. You can trust the successful ones with your life.
As for vastly popular works about really repugnant characters -- as I said in previous notes on this thread, it isn't the innate quality of the fictional character that makes it marketable. It is the author's choice of techniques for presenting that character to a specific readership/viewership that creates the marketability.
Once you get it written, then you have to find the Agent who has to find the Editor who can reach the market the item will "hit" with.
It's a huge, complicated problem, and to date nobody has made a science out of it. Each step is an Art.
Commerciality is not subjective, but Art is. Art is entirely subjective.
This post reminds me of something I read in Kim Lavine's Mommy Millionaire. She was dealing with a graphic designer, but as a writer I found the situation highly relevant. She said that creative people see their work as an extension of themselves and being critical of their work is like being critical of them. Sounds like a liability--but perhaps it is the best way to write. Because if you don't risk anything, you don't gain anything.
From this post, it sounds like agents take the negative replies from the rejected authors to heart too, just in a different way.
For people on either side of the publishing divide, I don't think it ever gets easier. All you can do is work that much harder on finding something that works.
Jodi and her fiction blog.
But because of those innate traits, Editors and Agents gravitate toward markets and serve readerships with similar emotional responses. You can trust the successful ones with your life.
If something has to be trained, it's not innate. And I think saying you can trust them with your life is going really far.
You said it yourself. They only reach those with similiar interests. If Jodi Reamer is just publishing stuff exactly like Twilight, she's not going to be someone with whom I want to work because I hate Twilight. So she's not reaching me. But those who work with authors I like and represent books I like are.
Jodi thought, and was correct in thinking, that Twlight was commercial enough to sell well. It would be stupid to say that it didn't. But what about all the other agents who rejected it? Did they not see the commerciality of it? Were they wrong in thinking it wasn't commercial, if that was the basis for their rejection? Clearly. But that just proves my point that what people think will be commercial is subjective.
Reading something and deciding it's commercial is just not objective. At least, not totally. People bring their own thoughts and feelings toward everything they read, and that will influence their decisions. It can't not.
So I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. You think an individual deciding what is commercial is objective. I don't. And that's okay.
Anonymous:
Just to clarify, no I do not think that an "indiividual" deciding what is commercial is objective.
I'm trying to make the point that each Agent/Editor/Publisher/Book wholesaler/book retailer "channel" is serving a "market" - and that's a concept that maybe you and I don't have in common.
"Market" means people who want more of whatever. It's a "place" -- a group - a connected, contiguous thing like "Market Day" in a "Market Square" in a village.
Each week farmers bring produce to this Square in the city, and ranchers bring meat to that square, and weavers are over here and soap makers over there.
Today we have "supermarkets" - where all kinds of stuff is under one roof, and "flea markets" where individuals bring one-of-a-kind stuff to sell or recycle.
"Market" is a technical term these days, but it's a concept that has to be learned.
A natural born "marketer" has to be trained -- just because you have an innate talent doesn't mean you can do the job.
Likewise in Art - or acting or anything else people have talent for -- it takes both talent and training, and sometimes in addition to that it takes education (which is different from training).
If say, TWILIGHT, is rejected by one Agent because it's "hokey" it will be accepted by another because it's seminal YA.
A rejection means the Agent doesn't know how to reach the market for that product. The Agent feels that their market would regard this product as having say, an unlikeable character.
Why does the Agent feel that way? Because they've found that characters they like sell well to this market. (Most Agents can fee4 many distinct markets, but not all.)
If an Agent doesn't respond viscerally to a story, they very likely won't know a market where they can sell it.
That's what Agents do for a living -- they sort the avalanche of product we produce into streams flowing to specific markets, and they do that sort by gut-reaction.
But it's not random, or they don't stay in business long.
Once you find the market-channel for what you write, and get the training to fit your product into that market channel, you'll get what publishers call sell-through.
Even a casual comment from an Agent rejecting your work can clue you in to where your product belongs and how to fit it to market specifications -- or perhaps make you decide that your product needs to make a NEW market.
That's what's happening in the Indie publisher and E-book self-publishing marketplace right now. And it's happening fast.
Romance has been leading the pack, and it's something to behold!
New markets are opening up all around, gathering, agreeing to gather again, grow, become more voracious.
Blogger-reviewers and discussion groups are forging the way.
Find (or make) a Market, and write-write-write.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
"But it's not random, or they don't stay in business long."
This is a non sequitur. It's perfectly possible to stay in business making awful decisions, if the demand is organic and the supply is oligopolistic.
Considering the psychological need for narrative, publishing certainly qualifies on the former criterion, and considering how reliant on "networking" the biz tends to be, there is certainly an oligopolistic element to publishing supply.
The real test of professionalism in such an environment is not in whether an agent and his/her buddy list can stay in business by offering readers what they can't comfortably do without.
The only valid test is in the business fruits of one's decisions. When a book one pushes tanks, that means something. When a book one rejects (as Harry Potter was rejected, for example) goes on to succeed, that also means something. These are professional failures. As agents are quick to point out when writers complain about commercialism, this is a business and the metrics we use to judge success and failure should reflect that.
The idea that agents should react as consumers do, by selecting what they like rather than what they can rationally judge to key into consumer needs/demands, is a complete abdication of even the pretense of professionalism.
A professional chef would never get away with only making his/her own favorite dish, so why do agents think this sort of self-oriented behavior is professionalism? A professional agent seeks products other people will buy, not products they would buy.
And, if an agent can't get beyond his or her own preferences to accurately identify what others like but they dislike ... well, good luck buying holiday presents.
E. Martin: (I've got to break this comment into several parts)
Oh, yes, I agree! I've been represented by Agents and sold to Editors who have that "beyond personal taste" level of professionalism and learned how they do it from the inside.
I've rewritten to Editorial spec from people like that, and won awards because of it.
And as you point out, as the business climate shifts, those who can't make that leap beyond totally personal taste will leave the business.
The biz is all about who you know, who's friends with whom. Friendship happens because of subjective elements in common (or contrast.)
But from the beginning writer's point of view, not knowing "who knows who" and "who is friends with whom" just taking a shot in the dark and getting back "well, I can't represent this because the character is unlikeable" -- the beginning writer who isn't inside the social loop in Manhattan has no way to parse that problem or understand what to do next.
As Anonymous pointed out, it's a very complex and complicated and obscure and mysterious and confusing situation.
At some point, you can only explain it by saying "it's subjective."
But really, it's BOTH as you say.
MORE...
...more -- There are properties of the manuscript that are objective, and properties of the manuscript that are subjective, and properties of the Agent or Editor that are objective and properties of the Agent or Editor that are subjective.
And each of those 4 categories can be teased apart, broken down, analyzed and factored into dozens of separate processes.
Being successful in this biz is very much like driving a car or Dancing With The Stars, playing Championship golf, or perhaps winning a Martial Arts Tourney. It's small-muscle coordination run by the subconscious or autonomic nervous system -- it's what you do that you don't know that you're doing.
Success is all about coordinating all those disparate elements smoothly. The economy, the mood of the various audience fragments, the price of paper in China and the taxes on warehoused copies of a book (yes, books in warehouse are taxed).
But the beginning writer hearing "this character is not likeable" simply does not KNOW what that means.
I've had hundreds of experiences that have taught me what that means, and decades in the profession knowing professionals at every level. I try to break down these "buzz word" phrases that Agents and Editors emit into a form a writer with their head and emotions in a character's story can actually use to sell their product.
To that end, I've been blogging at aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com talking basically to Science Fiction Romance and Paranormal Romance writers, but really also to any writer with a story to tell about what to do inside your head with this information.
more...
...more
What to learn, where to learn it, how to practice using it, and why bother -- all to answer the ultimate question, "Why did my manuscript get rejected?" or worse, "Why did my published Mass Market Paperback not sell?" or "Why did I get rave reviews and still not sell well enough to get another contract?"
One big lesson that came to me was sitting on a big plane, in that huge center row, surrounded by professional writers, editors, and sitting next to an Agent who was reading a manuscript she'd whimsically accepted from an unpublished stranger at a convention we were returning from.
She read a few pages, flipped to the middle, sat forward and intensely flipped to the END - looked up glassy eyed, and went, "Wow, this is going to sell big time." She was right. (It was a vampire novel before they were popular - a genuine horror-genre item, not "good vampire," and right now I don't recall the title but the title got changed anyway.)
I asked, "May I see?" She handed me a few pages. I read. I didn't see it, I didn't like the character. She explained. (it was a 5 hour flight) The people around us agreed. Discussion was all about market.
I memorized that explanation and worked on it for years. I have come to understand. I am trying to show people what I learned.
One of those lessons is in my blog post this week, http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/11/information-feed-tricks-and-tips-for.html
It's a huge long post and part 1 of a series. It refers back to previous posts on information feed and worldbuilding.
All of these little craft techniques are ingredients in that final response "the character grabbed me" -- "the character is really hard-boiled, tough, seedy, gritty, disgusting but I loved him!"
Romance often uses the repellent guy as the Romantic Lead, and answers the question, "What does she see in him?" I tackled that here:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-does-she-see-in-him.html
One of my co-bloggers (this is a blog of 7 well published writers) wrote an entry on this topic:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/02/irredeemable-hero-material.html
So you see, this typical Agent comment, "the character isn't likeable" is the sum and substance of what I've been discussing for about 3 years, one post a week.
I can't even approach it in these little comments, and I'm sure the readers of this blog are tired of it by now.
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com
I'm trying to make the point that each Agent/Editor/Publisher/Book wholesaler/book retailer "channel" is serving a "market" - and that's a concept that maybe you and I don't have in common.
"Market" means people who want more of whatever. It's a "place" -- a group - a connected, contiguous thing like "Market Day" in a "Market Square" in a village.
Each week farmers bring produce to this Square in the city, and ranchers bring meat to that square, and weavers are over here and soap makers over there.
Today we have "supermarkets" - where all kinds of stuff is under one roof, and "flea markets" where individuals bring one-of-a-kind stuff to sell or recycle.
"Market" is a technical term these days, but it's a concept that has to be learned.
A natural born "marketer" has to be trained -- just because you have an innate talent doesn't mean you can do the job.
Likewise in Art - or acting or anything else people have talent for -- it takes both talent and training, and sometimes in addition to that it takes education (which is different from training).
If say, TWILIGHT, is rejected by one Agent because it's "hokey" it will be accepted by another because it's seminal YA.
A rejection means the Agent doesn't know how to reach the market for that product. The Agent feels that their market would regard this product as having say, an unlikeable character.
Why does the Agent feel that way? Because they've found that characters they like sell well to this market. (Most Agents can fee4 many distinct markets, but not all.)
If an Agent doesn't respond viscerally to a story, they very likely won't know a market where they can sell it.
That's what Agents do for a living -- they sort the avalanche of product we produce into streams flowing to specific markets, and they do that sort by gut-reaction.
I think we're talking about two different things. First, I don't think predicting what groups of people want to read is innately anything.
Second, no one, no matter the training or experience, can make a prediction about the market that is 100% foolproof. The way you defined markets came across condescending to me, as if I have no idea what you mean. My opinion hasn't changed regarding the subjectivity of likeability and the subjectivity of the opinion of what will reach the market.
Books have come out of nowhere to reach a particuliar market and then some. No one gets it right every time and no one can say that a character they don't like absolutely will not appeal to a target audience. All they can say is they don't THINK it will. Agents and editors alike say that themselves.
Agents, as a group, cannot objectively decide what is commercial or what will appeal to a given market because that is always, always changing. What people bought last year is no indicator of what they will be into next year. They can watch the trends, but all it takes is one success to change them in what can seem like an instant. Therefore, they have to go with their gut. And that's subjective.
Rejections don't always mean that an agent doesn't know how to reach particular market. Agents do not reject only because they don't know how to sell to certain people. They reject based on their personal feelings about the work as well. Probably more often than just because the market is not their market.
This debate is starting to feel circular and I don't think either of us is really getting what the other is trying to say. I am willing to say that you opinon is valid to you and anyone who agrees with you, but I don't agree with you and my opinion is just as valid. It seems pointless to me for the both of us to keep saying the same information in different ways if it
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: rules, writing style, good writing, Add a tag
I've written a couple of manuscripts, though not found myself at the point of querying yet. I'm also an avid reader, mainly of women's fiction, chick lit, romance and erotic romance. This will sound ridiculous, but it just occurred to me that nearly everything I read is in the past tense, yet I always write in the present tense.
As my goal is to produce, polish, and submit a novel so knock-your-socks off that you simply have to take me on as a client - would you say that I should adapt my style to the past tense?
This question coincidentally arrived the day I posted the question about writing a memoir in present tense, and while I’m going to ask you to go back and read that post and the comments readers made, I also think it’s a topic that’s worth revisiting.
In the previous post I said that I don’t believe in rules, that I’m more of a guidelines gal and yes, that still holds true today. While we certainly have, and need, rules of grammar and punctuation, I don’t think there should be rules when it comes to how a writer chooses to actually write the book. That’s part of what is often called voice, an author’s ability to make the work her own. That means writing in the way that best works for your book (and keep in mind what works for your book might not always be preferable to you as the writer). That being said, should you be writing in present or past tense?
Without reading your book I can’t say for sure. What I can tell you is veering too far outside the guidelines can be a bit like trying to sell Beef Stew Ice Cream to a traditionally chocolate, vanilla and strawberry ice cream eating culture. While we’re certainly open to new things, we still like those new things to feel vaguely familiar. Present tense might be a more difficult treat to swallow.
However, it’s about more than trying to appeal to an audience or make something familiar. It’s about the craft of writing. I think the trouble writers have when writing in present tense or even first person is that it becomes a little too much about you telling a story, and the important pieces of storytelling (the showing) are actually left out. You forget the importance of other viewpoints, body language and description, for example. Of course writing present tense, just as writing first person, feels easier because it’s about you and this moment you’re in. However, when you really sit down to read it, it’s not easier to read. In fact, it’s more difficult. It doesn’t give the information that makes a story really sing for the reader or listener.
If you want a straight answer I would encourage you to start honing the craft of writing in past tense. Once you master that skill go ahead and try present tense.
Jessica
Great advice, Jessica, thanks for the post.
I think it's important that the writer sticks to the POV and the tense. Once you make that decision, you need to ride it out. If you choose present tense, but then litter the story with constant flashbacks, maybe the story doesn't really take place in the present.
If you choose first person, but then provide narrative about other characters that the MC should not know, you are cheating; there is no first-person omniscient (with out getting deeply spiritual).
Like so many aspects of writing, it all boils down to the execution.
I've always wondered about this. I've read books written in both tenses, with of course past being the most popular.
When I wrote the first version of my WIP I wrote it in first person, past tense and then when I rewrote it came out in first person, present tense. It just flowed out that way. I hope it flows for the reader too. Nail bite...
Nicely said. I love books in first person past tense. I've read a present tense one, and I found myself frustrated. Didn't like it as much. Anyway, good luck with your writing!
Do you think it makes a difference what genre you are writing for? There is a book I've read where the tense switched from FP for one viewpoint character to TP for another and alternated from present tense to past tense to show when one was talking about the present or past.
Hank Phillippi Ryan writes in first person present, and her series has done well. But her protagonist is a newscaster, so it's appropriate. I know there are some people who simply will not read anything in present tense, but if it's done well you don't notice--or care.
A Great and Terrible Beauty is written in first person, present tense if you'd like to take a look at a bestseller that uses this. I found it a bit jarring but probably because it is so uncommon. At any rate, something about that book works and the voice is very unique.
I think Rick brings up a great point. It would be hard to pull off a story that isn't chronological in present tense. The only example I can think of is The Sound and The Fury Benjy section and that is the POV of an idiot savant with perfect recall but no sense of time.
Emily Giffin also writes in present tense.
I think it comes down to a combination of voice and execution. What tense is the best choice for your story will hopefully become apparent as you write it and then have it critiqued. You can always experiment by rewiting the opening in a different tense and see how it feels, how it sounds. See if the voice still sings, or sings even better.
Present tense feels to me 'too close'. It almost goes with a Second person narrative (think Goosebumps 'you choose' books or personal erotica).
I read a lot of fan fiction, because I'm a geek that way, and notice new writers OFTEN choose first person, so Jessica, I think you're right, that this must be EASIER for a lot of people, but I think it takes a very skilled writer to pull it off and have it not sound amateurish.
You write in whatever tense or POV works best for you. If you write in which doesn't work for you, and the story, it's obvious and the story will bomb. The reader will hurl your book against the wall and never buy again, and she'll tell all her friends not to as well. You need confidence in your telling and that takes knowing you've nailed it.
But, I think this is a common worry when you're not writing just like everyone else in your genre/subgenre. I feel it too because mine is YA, which seems to be almost entirely in First Person POV these days. I only feel confident in deep Third Person Limited POV.
Those writers who like to write in present tense should consider writing YA novels. Unlike adult readers, teens have no problem with that tense, and many first person pov books are actually written in the present tense.
Of course before you jump over to the YA genre, make sure you read tons of books for that age group. Also there's some great writing books geared specifically for writing to the teen market. It's not as easy as some people may think, but it is a lot of fun.
As a writer, I use past tense. As a reader, present tense is a little jarring at first, but I get used to it. I have no problem with third person or first person in both reading and writing.
With viewpoints, I try to use as few as possible, only what is necessary to tell the story. In reading, too, I get frustrated if a PoV change doesn't really add anything. Stick to the main character(s) unless you absolutely can't for whatever reason.
Just my two cents.
Present tense drives me nuts as a reader. I don't care if the book is touted as being brilliant, I can't read it.
YA is dominated by first person narration, it's pretty much the standard, I think, because it is so accessible. But even in YA present tense has a tendency to grate on my nerves. Literally, it makes me nervous.
The thing I really can't stand though, and for some reason this happens a lot in YA, is the second person POV in which the word "you" is used for a couple of paragraphs here and there, even though the rest of the book is in first person. I always think, where in the heck are the editors. Since when is it okay to address the reader directly as "you" when the rest of the book is in first?
I think it takes a true master to pull off a present tense narrative. Too often, I can feel the writer in the background, thinking, "I'm spitting out some real literature here."
I think it depends on the genre, the book, and the writer. I am writing a Civil War narrative nonfiction, a true Cold Mountain, a book of historic adventure and enduring love, in the first person point of view. The book starts off with the main character, Colonel Osgood Vose Tracy, giving a speech at a 25th Gettysburg reunion. He then flashes back to the time he left for war. It reads a bit like Geraldine Brook's book, March, with a couple different viewpoints. Many readers have told me that they like the first person much better than third, that they feel "right there" with Osgood...http://atruecivilwarstoryofcourage.blogspot.com/
As usual, I do my own thing. My women's fiction is in first person present tense and my YA novel is third person. I think you just need to listen for how the story wants to be told and tell it that way. I have no problem reading no matter what the tense is, as long as the story and writing are captivating.
Do whatever serves the story. SIMMER is narrated in first-person present because the narrator changes over the course of the story. By the end of the book, she's changed enough that it wouldn't be the same story if she were looking back on it.
Learn both, use whichever works for the story you're telling. Ditto first and third person.
(One of my favorite books, Alias Grace, alternates between first person past and third person present, and it makes perfect sense for that story, though if you had asked me in the abstract I would have said NEVER DO THAT.)
A great present tense series I've read is Ann Aguirre's scifi Grimspace and Wanderlust.
If you want to read books that work with that tense you should read them.
There's been some great discussion on my blog recently about writing in first person present tense. People had some great thoughts about the pros and cons, and I found it really helpful for organizing my thoughts about it.
Thank you for the advice, Jessica. Great answers, all.
I found a similar post on the Redlines & Deadlines blog:
http://redlinesanddeadlines.blogspot.com/2008/06/writing-in-present.html
(Sorry, I couldn't get the link to work, but there are lots of interesting opinions in the comments.)
I would encourage you to start honing the craft of writing in past tense. Once you master that skill go ahead and try present tense.
I improved most as a writer when I started fluctuating my POVs and tenses, perhaps because present tense comes easiest to me. But I also wrote flash pieces in future and present perfect to intentionally experiment and stretch myself.
Ultimately, I find present tense less awkward for backstory and such, because then I just need to use past tense and not the clumsy past perfect. Ulgh. (And even if you use the option to substitute past for past perfect once you've established that you're talking about something in past perfect, how do you specify where specifically you return to strict past instead of past perfect?)
More lately, I've written a short story in 2nd person POV that got a revision request letter (and the revisions requested were not related to the POV, actually, though it did bring comments of surprise from the editors). It's out on submission now. :)
So what I ask is, why must a novice master third person, past tense before experimenting? What if he's naturally a present tense writer?
I never willingly read a novel in present tense.
When I pick up a book and find it's in the present tense, I put it back. I do the same with dialogue that isn't in quotations. Sorry. It's a total turnoff. It's distracting and it takes me out of the story. I am constantly aware of the writing and the writer.
I will never forget reading the book set in pre-protestant Europe written in 3rd person present tense omnicient. GAH!!! If this is historical fiction, it should not be written in the present tense.
sticking with a tense is most important. Honestly, most present tense work, especially in first person, reads like the minutes of a bad D&D game.
First person can make me forget, as long as that author is completely in the character's head. Charlaine Harris does a good job of not head-jumping. Still, I prefer vastly 3rd person past tense work. I've never even attempted to write fiction in any other way, since I know it takes a master to do it. I'm not there yet. Heck, I still have trouble keeping to limited and not omnicient.
While it is important that a writer grow and learn, pissing off the reader is not a good way to do so.
Thank you Jessica! With this post, (and your wonderful readers' comments, too) you freed me from two months of bang-the-head-on-the-laptop frustration over issues related to both tesne and POV! Now, on the third rewrite of my fourth draft, I think I've finally figured it out. All it took was changing tense and a slight change of POV to create a more effective, efficient and possibly even more shocking narration technique!! Thank you again - Perfect timing.
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: agent preferences, good writing, Add a tag
I currently have a manuscript under submission with an agent. After reviewing the manuscript the first time, the agent had good things to say about my writing and my main character but ultimately felt it would do better with a female protagonist in the YA genre. So, I asked if she would be interested in reading it again once I made those changes and she said she would. It's been over two months now since I sent in the revisions and I'm just wondering if I'm close but not close enough. At this point, is there anything I can do to improve my book? I read constantly and I've been reading more YA books than usual. I know good writing when I read it, but how can you tell if your own writing is good enough? I've started outlining book #3, perhaps that's what you do :)
I don’t think you can tell anything about your own writing and that’s the tricky thing in this business. There is no ruler to compare your writing or your ideas to. Ultimately it either catches fire or it doesn’t. Good writing, like a good story, is somewhat subjective. Sure, we can all look at great authors and say that person was a great writer, but it’s just as easy to argue that someone else was or wasn’t great depending on your own opinion. My advice is to move on to your next book (making sure it’s not the next book in series) and keep writing. With each book your writing improves and you learn more about yourself and your craft and that’s the smartest thing a writer can do.
How close are you? There’s no saying. One thing I do want to make sure of though is that you aren’t making changes because of one agent’s suggestion, and instead you’re making changes because it feels like the right path for you to be taking as an author. Agents are all different. We come from different backgrounds and different experiences and all of that can affect our opinions on books in the same way that as readers you bring your own experiences to each book you read. While one agent might say this book is better as YA, another might easily say it’s perfect the way it is.
It sounds like you’re building a relationship with an agent and that’s a great start.
Jessica
There is no criteria for writing.Writing is a way to express feelings, so no rules can be apply.
There are a number of agents that will make these requests -- sometimes for huge revisions, which the writer completes and resubmits. Then the agent will pass with almost no clue of why they are passing (because they don't know). It's happened to me before -- twice -- and now I'm much more reluctant to revise for an agent.
It would be different if the revisions made the mss stronger, but in my case, they didn't make it stronger, only different. If an agent doesn't see the potential enough to sign me and THEN discuss revisions, they aren't passionate enough to be my agent. To be honest, there are a lot of agents out there that don't have a clue what they want, and think by rearranging your ms like furniture, it'll help them figure it out. It usually doesn't.
Just make a back up!
I'd like to add some advice I was given by veteran published authors when my first revise-and-resubmit request came in.
*Keep a copy of your original manuscript.*
Opinions, tastes, preceptions of trends, and so on are all subjective and ever-changing. For all you know, it's the original draft which might sell and go on to the New York Times Bestsellers' List.
Something you said really struck a chord for me. "My advice is to move on to your next book (making sure it’s not the next book in series) and keep writing." I am writing the next book in a series, and I think that's not working for me. I'm halfway through and am enjoying it, but I keep feeling I'm supposed to be writing something else. I'm going to take your advice and move on to that next book outside of the series. The key is to be joyful while writing, not writing because it's a "should." Thanks for showing me what I knew, but wasn't able to articulate.
I also think that's good advice. If you continue with the same series, you're putting too many eggs in one basket. Every writer has their own methods, but I find it helps when I switch to a different genre. I think differently when I'm working on a contemporary romance than when I'm writing romantic suspense or paranormal, so I find I write and plot them a little differently.
It's so easy to get caught up in revisions for a particular WIP -- especially if you are getting good responses but you're not sure if you have it right yet. I think that makes us more susceptible to requests for changes.
It's the same with contests -- when I first started entering, I took the judge's advice as gospel and, in doing so, made revisions I shouldn't have. I did get some excellent advice; the trick is separating the wheat from the chaff. Now I try to focus only on the changes that are true to the story.
Since I'm full of doubt and angst, I gave my ms to a few select friends and my dad, with instructions to give me their honest evaluation, with no sugar coating. Some other friends didn't get it, because I knew they'd be unable to tell me the book sucked, if that's how they honestly felt.
Only after my dad and friend N., both big mystery readers, told me I'd hit a home run did I stop describing the book to others as "90,000 words, possibly 90,000 words of crap."
Having trusted readers evaluate your work before you send it out is very valuable. The key is finding people who will be honest with you, even if it means telling you to find another line of work.
www.thebiglitowski.blogspot.com
I love this post!
Thanks for acknowledging, Jessica, that it's incredibly hard to judge your own writing. Since writing is communication, it's almost impossible to know the other side of the 'conversation.' If you get enough feedback over time, you can start to get a sense of things, but even then....ultimately, you have to stay true to your vision and hope that it reaches people.
I believe you should still listen to and incorporate feedback, but only when if feels right to you instinctively. That includes feedback from agents. Writing is subjective on both sides of the book.
Researching agents, and making sure that their taste aligns with yours, and the books they represent are books that you admire - I think that can help you know whether this agent is one to listen to.
Honestly, changing the whole gender of the protagonist - that really made me sit up and take notice. I don't know the book, so maybe that was an excellent suggestion, but it made me alittle nervous to be honest.
There is no "I'm there", because writing is a constant learning experience. You keep writing, you keep learning. You can see how far you've come if you look at older works.
AI agree with keeping an original copy and only changing the ms if the change is right for the book. At the end of the day it's only your name that's going on the book.
I think what Jessica said makes sense. Make sure you aren't responding to only one opinion. Don't be in a hurry but put your work out to a few select people and see what the consensus is, then make changes.
If the suggested changes make you feel excited, I think that is a good sign that you're on the right track.
An agent suggested some overall changes but it made me take a good, hard look @ the ms. and inspired me to make it even better. If your reaction is, Why didn't I think of that before? then you know the advice is worth taking.
Even if they pass, I feel confident that I'm making my book the best it can be. So yes, every little bit of helpful feedback is appreciated.
An agent made some suggestions on my ms--a few major issues including POV--and I did make the changes, but only because they made sense to me. She took the time to get on the phone with me and she's got a great track record, so I decided to trust her judgment. She asked for a short exclusive, which I granted, and although she ultimately passed, I do believe the ms is now better. I don't feel led astray, I feel very grateful for her advice.
Dear Agent,
If I make the changes you suggest will you represent me?
The question doesn't list how many agents the person has submitted to. If you like the manuscript, before you file it away consider sending to other agents. What one agent doesn't like someone else might. While you're shopping keep writing. Good luck!
As with everything in life, the publishing industry can be just plain unfair. You've probably read dozens of books with obvious flaws that you could write better. You've probably had works rejected that exist in even worse forms. That's the way it goes. It's subjective, like everything in life. But it sounds like you're determined to make it, and you're willing to take advice from the people with the power, which is really the most important thing you can do. I think too many writers think they're too important to take the advice of editors, and they lose out on the opportunity to have their book published altogether because they aren't willing to make a few minor changes.
Back to designer Bunk Beds ; I love to highlight these few designs that I saw, just look at spacify.com
It wasn't a deal breaker, but my agent also suggested I'd have a much better chance with my latest YA novel if the main character were female. Since this was not possible, the book is now going out with a male lead. Did I make a mistake?
What are the benefits of working on a different series while your first book is out on submission? It seems to me that if my first book gets published it would help me to have a leg-up on completing the second book--but maybe that doesn't account for all of the revisions that will be suggested?
Also I'd like to finish my trilogy-in-progress whether it's published or not, but maybe that is the wrong approach...?
Appreciate your thoughts Jessica and commenters. Great post--I always wondered if I was alone in thinking it's impossible to judge one's own writing.
-London
Why on earth would you advise against writing the next book in a series?
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: rules, good writing, Add a tag
I have a new rule on my blog and that’s that you can’t ask me any more about the rules. I don’t want to be asked questions like whether or not the hero’s story can be the opening scene in a romance or how many pages of action an action-adventure needs to have. I don’t want to be asked at what page a body needs to be discovered in a mystery or how many pints of blood is too much.
The only rule of writing you need to know is to throw out all of the dang rules. I can’t answer any of the above questions because it depends on your work. Typically, yes, a cozy mystery should have a body within the first three chapters. But, if your first three chapters feel like a mystery and are engaging, then throw that body into the fifth chapter. It’s not about the number of pages or exact rules, it’s about the flow of the story. Do the hero and heroine have to have sex by page 20 in an erotic romance? Not necessarily, it depends on your story.
So the rule is, write what works for you and your book. If someone is telling you the murder should happen earlier don’t look at their advice as a genre rule, look at it as it pertains to your book. What they are probably saying is that the opening pages drag and they want something to happen. They are mystery readers and want the mystery. When writers ask me for rules I get the feeling they’re asking because they are looking for the magical in to publishing, that knowing the rules will make it all easier. It won’t, it will only make your job more complicated because it will hinder your ability to just write the story.
Jessica
Once again, you provide wonderful and helpful advice. I've noticed people asking questions as though writing were a standard mathematical equation. People have been bashing Twilight quite a bit lately and I believe one of the reasons that it was an fantastic story was that Ms. Meyer didn't know all the rules. She wrote a story that she loved and many of us love it, too. Having access to answers about publishing is a blessing if used in moderation and a curse if it overwhelms the beauty of just simply telling the story you love.
I love your attitude! While rules are great and necessary in a lot of things, there is something to just writing a great story that keeps people hooked. Thanks for the advice :)
"The only rule of writing you need to know is to throw out all of the dang rules." SO true!
"Hang the rules. They're more like guidelines anyway." (Thanks for that gem, "Pirates of the Caribbean")
I look at it this way: there will always be something in any given novel that someone doesn't like. They will wish you cut something, added something, did it earlier, did it later, did it more, did it less...
This post was right on the money. As the writer, you have to be true to your story.
Thanks for reminding us, Jessica :D
This post made me grin from ear to ear. :D
Jessica, Tell me again when the hero should save the heroine - should that be on page 42 or 63? Once you tell me the answer to that, I'm golden.;-)
How many sentences should be in a paragraph? Kidding...my students always ask this (college level). I am starting to see many parallels between being a literary agent and being an English teacher. :-)
I actually get the feeling that when people go looking for rules, they're looking for things they shouldn't do. Not, "Oh, if I have a body in the first three chapters I'll magically get pubbed," but "Oh, I don't have a body in the first three chapters, that might be hurting me."
Does a definition question fall into this category? My question is when does an amateur sleuth mystery become a cozy? I want to write something with an amateur sleuth but without a craft hook.
In writing, the rules are general guidelines. What may work for one story won't work for another.
Thanks for the great blog entry!
I recently taught a writing workshop to a bunch of fourth graders---these are people who are being told there needs to be x number of sentences in a paragraph and that sort of thing.
The first thing I told the kids was to forget the rules for awhile and just see how the story unfolds. The kids had a blast.
I think it's time I follow my own advice. Thanks for the inspiration!
Love this post. Yes, sometimes it does appear that we aspiring writers focus way too much on the "rules" when we should just be writing the damn story lol.
Thanks for a great post.
I'm glad to hear you say that. I have been on another blog where they are critiquing beginning chapters, and really getting hung up on the rules. I was going crazy try to make sure my work followed them, only to realize I wasn't doing my MSS any favors.
PS I love Pirates of the Carribean; guess I should have listened to Captain Jack better.
I've said it before, I'll say it here; I even said it on my blog recently and I said it on DorothyL and was taken to task for it, which ended my days on DL.
The only rule of writing is:
Don't be boring.
FWIW, I wrote and submitted--and got rejected--for twenty years, until I decided to quit writing "by the rules" that "everyone" told me I had to follow. As soon as I broke every frickin' one, EXCEPT to write the story as I saw it, I (read: Jessica) got my first NY contract.
Please get smarter faster than I did!
(Eeuw...my word verification is loogie)
It's very easy to become trapped by the rules. I'm a big fan of learning them, then forgetting them so I can write the damn story. Thank you!
So...does this mean we can throw out the rules regarding grammar and punctuation, too?
Good advice again, Jessica. You really are a gift to writers with your posts on writing :)
I like to think of writing rules as a vacation itinerary. They give me the courage to begin the journey only to find out what fun it is to veer in another direction later on.
Informative post as always, Jessica. Thanks.
------Confucius says; man who sits on tack gets point!----
Carol: Throwing out punctuation works for Cormac McCarthy. It's pretty easy to tell the difference between someone who knows the rules and throws them out anyway and someone who just doesn't know what they're doing. So I would say...go for it, if it works!
I've broken oodles of rules (sold my very first book (an ebook) with 3 chapters and no synopsis, for example). Interestingly, I had a mystery author friend say you should introduce the murderer before chapter 3, which is a rule I've tried to "follow" many times--because its fun to try to do it without being obvious. The best part of rules, sometimes, is the challenge to adhere to them while still being original, or (in a mystery), while still pulling the wool over a reader's eyes.
But readers are captivated by a good story. And Jessica's point is hugely important--that a reader advising about rules may be instinctively pointing out something else is wrong!
Just write the dang story and let the narrative fall where it may.
I find mad-libs to be a perfect place to write creatively with very stringent rules.
You do have to know your parts of speech, though.
Yee-haw!
Great post! It's so easy for us writers to obsess about the "rules of writing" because they're more or less clear-cut. We can quantify them. This genre has these elements, this type of story ends this way, and on and on it goes.
We forget that once we know the basics, then we have to learn to let them go. I'm a perfectionist, so I need reminding of that all the time! So, thanks for the reminder :-)
Great advice, Jessica. Thanks!
It's nice to think there are no rules, but that's not quite true. Rules of grammar and punctuation, as already mentioned, are just some that should be followed in most instances. But asking agents for the rules is silly. Take a class. Buy a book or two on writing. when you know what the rules are, you can break them.
The important thing is writing an understandable, engaging story, whether you follow the rules or not.
The advantage I seem to have over most is not knowing any rules. Of course that seems to help me regarding the writing thingy. But sorta screws me up on the getting published part. Oh well... at least I'm enoying the writing part.
I love your take on it, and not only because it's been mine for ages :D
It's really hard to actually WRITE something when you're spending so much time messing around, worrying about a rule. Get it written. Maybe mess around with it after. But get it written first, get it out.
I don’t think I could have written what I have with someone telling me that I should follow a set formula or that I should make my book into a mystery because mystery sells. So glad that no one asked me to add vampires or sorcerers! I venture to say … that just wouldn’t be me. A story has to come from your heart, it can’t be forced. Oh dear, what am I going to write about next?
That's all well and good, but it's a catch 22. You can say there are no rules - and I can understand your being sick of answering rule questions - but the fact is there are generic conventions, not to mention submission rules, and if they can't be articulated, those of us trying to figure it out have that much farther to go.
I understand but I still think people need to ask.
Jessica,
So WONDERFUL to hear someone insist on writers not fretting so much abt the "rules" of writing and concentrate on writing the best dang story possible!!
Thanks you!
What happened to: "You've got to know the rules before you can break them?" I'm sure lots of editors out there won't be very happy with this advice...
I, for one, need good punctuation and grammar and proper spelling to read a story--otherwise I'm too distracted trying to edit while I read. LOL
Still, I do think it's freeing to let yourself go while you write.
I think good spelling, punctuation and grammar goes without saying.
:-)
I was going to think it depends which rules you mean, but I remember reading a brilliant book (no idea of the name or author now) when I was in college - deliberately weird spelling and grammar, written from the point of view of a nuclear holocaust survivor. So yeah, it all depends on the book you're writing, but if you're breaking rules, maybe you need to know it and know why.
I very much agree with Sheila.
The key to throwing out the rules, is knowing you are throwing out the rules. It's about making a conscious choice. You can't throw out the rules if you don't know there are rules in the first place.
Was it Toni Morrison who wrote her books in lower case without standard puntuaction? I tried so hard to get into her books but just couldn't get past the lack of punctuation. It was like reading one long, endless e-mail and I gave up before I finished one chapter.
Guess it's the editor in me!
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: queries, good writing, erotica, Add a tag
I received a question from a writer of women’s fiction asking if she needed to tell agents up front, in the query, that she has a few explicit sex scenes in her book. She had a couple of concerns: one was what was the line between “hot” and “explicit,” and the other was that her readers/critique partners said she needed to be up front about this.
I don’t think so. I don’t think you need to tell readers in your query letter or cover copy that your book might have explicit sex, violence, or anything else. Unlike movies, books aren’t yet rated (although give it time), and do you really want an agent judging your book by what might be rather than what it is? Like readers, agents have different tolerances for different things. I represent erotic romance, so clearly my tolerance and what I might deem “hot” versus “explicit” is probably very different from the agent who not only doesn’t represent erotic romance, but focuses her list primarily to the Christian market.
I don’t think you should ever feel that you need to warn readers (whether they are book buyers, agents, or editors) about your book. Let the book speak for itself. Write a strong query that entices, intrigues, and grabs our attention and then let us judge the book on its merits, not on our own fears or preconceived notions.
But I’m curious how readers feel about this. Have you ever picked up a book only to become upset because it was too explicit for your tastes? Did you wish you had been warned? And if you had, then do you support a rating system for books much like the movies?
Jessica
I have no problem with explicit sex as long as it has a context in the book. If it's shoved in because someone (either author or editor) believed that a certain number of sex scenes was required, it usually shows (and you can skip right over it). At the same time, I don't think the writer has to detail each and every move.
But I can't write one without giggling.
I've never become upset by a book because it was too explicit, though I have been surprised by some scenes. I've recently started reading books that are a little more, um, racy than what I'm used to reading. I was still fine with it. I might even admit to liking it. ;-) I did, however, just finish reading a book in a series that almost took the sex too far. And it really wasn't even the sex part - it was the other person/icky creature thing the protag was considering getting into bed with. She didn't, thank God, but that was the first time I ever thought about not reading the rest of a series based upon the erotic-ishness of a scene. If the rest of the book hadn't been great, I would have ditched it.
Can't say I have. Not a fan of the rating system. with a half naked woman and man on the front cover (typically in some embrace), do we really need an "R for sexual content" slapped on the side? I know not ALL books have such showy covers, but in the information age when prices of everything are incresing, I don't see a need to pay someone to decide a universal grading system on books.
I have heard it's better to write hot when in doubt (so long as you're comfortable with it) because it's so easy for the editor to turn it down.
I'm with Sheila Connolly. As long as the explicit scenes are in context, I don't have a problem with them. I still skip over most of them, but that's my choice - I want to get back to the plot. The only time I have a problem is when they seem like they're thrown in for effect, or worse shock value.
And I'm against rating books. Usually doing a little research before you buy can keep you from spending money on books that are too racy for you.
I don't mind explicit sex, as long as it, and the relationship as a whole, make sense.
I started reading a book recently where it seemed like every man and woman spent 95% of the time thinking about banging the opposite gender. And no, this wasn't an erotic or romance novel. It was a standard sword & sorcery fantasy. When two of the main characters started kissing each other out of the blue, I hurled the book across the room and stopped reading, because it just seemed that unrealistic. I dunno, maybe I didn't reach the part of the book where the author revealed the air in his world contained traces of ecstasy and viagra.
I agree that explicit sex in romance novels doesn't bother me unless it's written just to add sex. There needs to be meaning behind it and a change in relationship/emotions because of it.
I'll admit I'm not a huge fan of erotica, but it's not because of the explicit sex. It seems in these books the focus is on sex and the plot may be limited or interrupted to keep that focus.
Suffering a Miss Manners attack of the vapors here:
I have no problem with explicit sex as long as it has a context in the book. If it's shoved in... Sorry, dears, I stopped reading right there! :)
Seriously, though... Long before I even met her, The Missus had acquired a set of those Beauty books by Anne Rice/"A. N. Roquelaure" (The Claiming of Sleeping Beauty etc.). I picked one of them up once and flipped through it. Mostly it struck me as... weird.
Emphatic NO on rating systems.
I think the only time I'd become 'upset' if a book was more explicit than expected is if it was in a children's (probably YA) book -- or a book that's clearly marketed to YA. Even then, however, I generally read fast enough that I can keep ahead of my kiddos (they're years from being teens), so hopefully I'll find out early enough to either have a nice discussion about it or hide the book away for a couple of years.
Like others around here, I don't mind explicit sex scenes if they have a place in the story. And on the other side of the debate, if a sex scene is intrinsic to the plot and the writer leaves it out because she feels uncomfortable writing it, that can harm a story just as much as having a sex scene when one doesn't need to be there.
I agree about not mentioning these scenes in the query. In a query, you want to come across as confident. If you mention these scenes as something you feel on-the-fence about, I think that makes you look less self-assured about your work.
Not upset but, like Jes, I was caught a bit off guard by Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty series...though, the fact that I read all three may be telling, ha.
No, no, no rating system, no.
Explicit content is the main reason I started the Enduring Romance book review blog. A lot of the readers I knew were annoyed with buying a book thinking they were getting one thing, only to find out it was something else. It seems to me, and them, that Romance novels have become more explicit since the boom of Erotica. Not all readers like that and for a variety of reasons, many of which have nothing to do with morality. The major problem with this is these readers leave the New Releases for books they know will not shock or gross them out, and sometimes they never come back from the used bookstore or library. Since authors earn their money by the sale of new books, this cannot be a good thing for the publishing industry. I am of the opinion that anything which reassures a reader is a good thing. I'd support a rating system for Romance novels. Anything to draw the disenchanted readers back into the fold, I say. This is why we rate novels by Heat Level at Enduring Romance.
However, I do not think Heat Level should be included in a query letter. It really is irrelevent at that stage, unless it's being pitched to an Erotica, Christian, or Young Adult publisher. Heat Level can be modified to suit the market any agent or editor feels the story is most suitable for.
P.S. We're throwing a Cyber-Launch Party to celebrate the release of SHADES OF DARK by Linnea Sinclair all day tomorrow (August 7th) at the Enduring Romance blog. Hope to see you all there!
;)
Not a fan of rating books but I have picked up, started, and put down books that are too explicit for me. Usually because the book was recommended to me or because the author previously wrote less explicit books that I enjoyed and I mistakenly thought the new release would be in the same vein.
It would be nice to have some way to tell. A "hot-meter" of sorts. But as with films, it would only shift over time. What was considered R-rated twenty or thirty years ago is now simply G.
Only one book upset me because it was explicit, but not because it was too explicit for my tastes. The book was part of a series I enjoyed and it came a a shock.
I wouldn't necessarily agree with a rating system, but I would have read this book with a different mind set if I purchased it from the erotic section.
Jenny Crusie taught me that sex scenes are action scenes. That means the emotional conflict has to increase after one of these scenes. If it doesn't, if nothing changes, it isn't needed because it isn't advancing the story.
It does annoy me to have gratuitous sex scenes in both books and movies. And you can always spot them. While there are ratings for movies, I do think rating books on sexual content would be difficult to achieve.
Erotica doesn't appeal to me so I don't buy it. A lot of my friends write it and that's fine, it's just not for me. I still think some of the most memorable books, the hottest I've ever read, focused on sexual tension and the emotional journey of both the hero and heroine, rather than sexual gymnastics.
I believe that you need to foreshadow the graphic level of your scene at some point. A linguistically graphic scene coming when nobody in the book has ever once had a sexual thought or used a word stronger than "darn" doesn't work. But if body parts are heating up at various stages through the book, we as readers are forewarned that there will be sex.
Body parts are like guns: you shouldn't take them out if you don't plan to use them at some point, but you can't just have one appear without letting us know they're there either. :-)
No, I've never been upset by something being too explicit. I just wanted to ask, do you really think that books might be someday rated?
These days I would never reject a book simply because it was racier than I expected. But when I was about 13, I ran into a book that turned out to be a pretty explicit erotic version of the King Arthur stories, which I found scandalous at the time. In cases like that, there should be SOME hint on the cover that it's an erotic story instead of a knights-adventuring story. But these days it seems boring to me to choose a book based on whether or not there's sex, and how explicit the sex is. If I'm hooked after the first chapter, the writer can take me anywhere they want.
I don't like explicit sex scenes mainly because they seem to take away from the story. I skim them to get to the good parts, the plot. But I will read them if they're written well, though it seems very, very few authors have the ability to write an engaging sex scene without it being melodramatic and over-written. It's like getting Jujubees stuck in my teeth. Gah!
As a writer of detective thrillers the issue has come up with me as well. I've deliberately toned down some sex scenes because I feared they may be too explicit. I didn't want an agent thinking I was writing pornography. But perhaps I'm being overly cautious here? I've tried to use comparable authors as a guidepost, i.e. Michael Connelly, Lee Child, Dennis Lehane, etc. Some of their passages can be extremely graphic, but mostly they seem to write sex scenes in a fairly innocuous presentation. So I'm thinking for my genre, explicit sex should be a minimum....
Perhaps it's a genre-related call. Some genres are more open to explicit sexual descriptions while others are less so.
I love to read mystery and I have run into many books with explicit, disturbing violence that has taken me by surprise. I do wish there was some sort of warning for things like that, just because I don't like to have those really awful images in my head.
I don't like explicit sex, excessive cussing, gratuitous sex or violence, or predictable plot lines. Which means I have trouble finding books of any genre to read these days. That's why I started my Genre Review blog, to rate books along those lines so that others don't have to buy a book blind.
I don't really know what I think about a book rating system on a larger scale, but my first thought is it might encourage authors to write for a particular rating instead of what is correct for the story.
As for telling agents: it sounds like her story isn't just "standard romance with an explicit sex scene" but might be categorized differently because of those scenes. If she isn't sure if a certain agent accepts romances of that type, it might be a good idea for her to say something so that no one wastes their time. I'd probably put that information at the end of the query, though, so that the agent can get a feel for what the story is about before that.
Just my 2 cents.
This is a great subject. As a reader, I don't require a rating system. I have only once been offended by a book and felt there should have been a "warning" of some sort, because there were explicit rape scenes, written like erotic sex scenes, told from the POV of the rapist. The book was marketed as erotic romance, and needless to say I was squicked. However, I like my romance hot.
As a writer, I've had one reader complain that a book was "too hot." She rated it a 1/5, and said she wouldn't have read it at all if she'd known it was erotic romance; she liked the characters and the story, but gave it a low rating for the sex level.
A lot of smaller presses have implemented a rating system, and I wouldn't be surprised to see one set into place with the larger publishers eventually.
Yes, several in the "thriller" genre. I put them aside, mostly because they were poorly written, but also because the sexy bits fit poorly with the rest of the story.
I would hope that by researching your agent and what he/she has represented, as well as the standards for the genre, would hint at whether a prospective agent would be offended/put off/not interested in your work due to the level of sex. If the agent has only repped squeaky-clean projects and hasn't indicated an interest of getting out of that mold, he/she is probably not interested in anything too erotic.
As a reader, I don't require ratings. Sometimes I think it might be nice to know if a book has something that wouldn't be expected for the genre (e.g. a graphic rape, perhaps), but I'm fine doing my own research beforehand.
I'm not a fan of the hotter books in romance. I will put a book down if it becomes too explicit for me. In truth, that is rarely the only problem a book has though. I realize that this isn't 100% true, but I've noticed that in an awful lot of the books I've read lately, the bigger the sex, the lower the quality of the rest of the book.
However, I don't feel a need for a rating system. Covers say a lot. Does it have naked people in it? People losing their clothing? Lots of skin? Guess what... It's probably going to be high on the hotness scale and not something that would interest me.
Same thing with the back blurb. If the story is about 'wild passion' etc., etc., then I put it back.
What does upset me is when a book cover/blurb don't give an accurate portrayal of the story inside. And in truth, that is a greater problem than just the sex.
I only have a problem with sex scenes if they're: A.) gratuitous, since no scene should ever be gratuitous, B.) poorly done, because there's nothing worse than a bad sex scene, C.) obviously there to fill a quota [must have 5 sex scenes per novel], or D.) violent- and I don't mean lost in the throes of passion.
I have been caught off guard by explicit stuff in books. I don't think I'd go for a rating system per se, but I would like to see some language in the back cover copy, for example, that would give an idea of what one is getting into. (This doesn't apply to the category romance lines, where I suppose the name of the line alone pretty much tells you what to expect.)
I ran into a graphic sex scene in a sci fi which through me off. I wasn't expecting it from the genre, and while the sex was expected, there was little lead up to how explicit the description would be.
Rather than a rating system I'd want more information. I can't tell anymore from the cover or the blurbs whether "hot" means explicit or erotic. And I HATE it when the cover doesn't have anything to do with the story.
I'm for less is more. If the stage is set for sexual tension, your own mind fills in details according to what you find attractive -- someone's hand going up somone's thigh can be much more exciting than giving a play by play of what happens next. Too explicit details take you out of that, sometimes, I think.
But I write YA, so maybe I should let the romance writers answer this one...
I'm with the consensus that the language of the book should warn the reader on some level. In my very first crit group, there was an author that wrote historical western romances. Each time she was in the hero's POV, she always had him curse a time or two in his dialogue. She told our group that this indicated to the reader early on that the book would be racier in other ways as well, i.e. sex scenes. Also, the scene must be necessary and must change the dynamics of the hero/heroine's relationship from that point on.
As to what is too explicit? That's tough, because it is so subjective. But personally, I don't think you can go wrong so long as you follow your characters and be true to them. THEY will tell you how hot the scenes will be between them in the bedroom, according to their pasts, their personalities, their needs. It only feels forced and explicit if you stray out of character.
Stephen King said in his autobiography that the only way to wrong a reader is to lie to them. As fiction writers, that's sort of our job ... so it seems like a catch 22. But, I think what he meant was don't let your CHARACTERS lie to the readers. So long as the heroes/heroines are true to themselves and the world they live in, the reader will never feel slighted or deceived ... or violated, for that matter.
If I pick up a romance novel and it gets a bit hotter than I usually read I don't mind, I may skip, but I don't mind as long as the scene fits and isn't filler.
I do mind having an erotic scene in a book where I'm not expecting it. If I picked up a fantasy or sci-fi book where the back said it was a hard-boiled detective novel (or something similar) and I find erotica I'm not happy. I like some fair warning.
As for ratings.... as a reader I'd probably ignore them, but as a parent I'd kind of like to have some rating system for novels. When we're at the bookstore I don't necassarily have the resources to read the reviews and find out if a book my daughter wants has content that we need to talk about ahead of time or that as a family we've agreed don't meet our standards. I know teens get into all sorts of things, but when you have children reading ahead of their age level the maturity isn't always there to balance out things. A sticker on the shelf saying "mature YA" or something would be nice.
Oddly, I get a lot of comments from readers who wish I was MORE explicit...
I don't imagine there will be a mandatory, age-restricting rating system for books unless something widely offensive happens like it did with movies with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.
Even so, since readers generally have some kind of taste and expectation in play when they pick up a book, having a clear indication of what they're getting would only benefit sales, I think.
Though perhaps people reading on the train to work would rather not have the "SUPER HOT SEX" indicator displayed on the spine... :)
This is where recommendations and book blogging can be so helpful. I don't favor a rating system, but it can be impossible to know. I"m a Christian and while I read just about everything, I know some people who want to stay away from certain stuff. Explicit sex scenes or a lot of language being the main things. So for some readers, it is important to know up front, and they will not buy books if they aren't sure.
As far as sex and profanity go, nothing offends me. I have a harder time with extreme violence, but I wouldn't expect to be warned about it via a ratings system. Chances are I won't be caught off guard because the violence will fit in the story and I will be prepared for it by I've read so far. If it doesn't fit in the story, I'll put down the book not because I'm offended, but because the story is obviously not well written.
Book rating system = boo. It would only lead to restrictions on who could access which books, and frankly I'm sick of unnecessary restrictions.
Really, the only thing in a book that would offend me is if an author's bigotry is showing. And there mustn't be a ratings system for that, either. It would result in the worst kind of labeling and pettiness.
I don't think I'm too explicit in my writing. In fact, I think I might be a bit too tame compared to some of the really hot authors out there.
I stick to my comfort level, which may rise and fall according to the story. If an agent or editor asks for more or less heat, I'll comply to the best of my ability.
When I was younger, I often raided my parents' library and stumbled across some really explicit stuff. I knew it was taboo, but didn't shy away from it. I like to think I learned a thing or two!
I agree that a rating system might create more problems than it solves. But readers do need some kind of hint about what may be coming.
John Ringo's Ghost series (military/techno thrillers) shocked his Sci Fi readers with its graphic and often violent sexuality. But he did an excellent job of setting the tone early so that we had some clue of what we were getting into. I can't remember all the intros, but Chapter 1 (not the prologue) of Unto the Breach begins with the main character saying, "F*** me." Two for the price of one, and if the reader can deal with that intro, they can probably survive everything else Ringo throws at them.
Readers will forgive surprises but not disappointment. Well-executed first paragraphs are the only rating system we need.
I'm definitely with the "no ratings" crowd. You really can't put an objective label on something subjective like "hotness" anyway.
And I agree with those saying poor plotting and writing are a bigger turn off than explicit scenes. I've never put down a book because it was too sexy or violent, but I've quit when the sex or violence made no sense to the story.
When Kensington Publishing launched Aphrodisia, they knew they were coming out with very sexy books that some readers might find offensive, so they opted for a warning. On the back of each book is a small notice: "WARNING This is a really hot book. (Sexually Explicit)" We still get Amazon.com reader reviews that complain there's too much sex in the books!
As far as putting a warning in the query letter, I would say absolutely not. It's so subjective--everyone's squick threshold is different and it's better to let editors decide for themselves whether or not the material is too graphic.
I've never been upset by a book, never felt it to be too explicit. I've been bored by books, disappointed by them, disgusted by them, but never shocked, not really.
I think if we start rating books on content, we need to start rating thoughts and conversations. Maybe we should have designated 'explicit' zones where people can be graphic or gruesome freely, and other 'safe' zones where the innocent and naive can play...
Sorry, that was a bit cynical, but I get that way when it comes to ratings.
No. Absolutely not. :/ One of the major weaknesses of fanfic as a community is that not only does custom require all stories to carry movie-style ratings, but anything that might make anyone blink, much less go "Ick!" or "Eww!" is warned up, down and sideways, even to the point of spoiling a plot twist. I find it frustrating and annoying, and would hate to see commercial fiction go the same way.
Angie
I was reading fantasy and sci-fi from the adult section of the library when I was 11 or so, and so I ran into sex scenes at an age when perhaps I shouldn't have. It didn't bother me, on the whole, but on two occasions I still remember I found myself reading rape scenes, and as a young girl, it was not so great.
While I really hate the idea of a rating system, I also hate the idea of strictly confining voracious young readers to the YA section... some kind of notification of sexual violence--very subtle--might be a good thing. Particularly in cases when an author writes some books that are more or less YA-appropriate and others that are not. One of the rape scenes I accidentally read was in a book by an author who also writes a series that, while in the adult section, has many young fans... I think in that case at least there should be a warning.
(By the way, I've just found your blog, so this is my first comment. Hi! I look forward to reading more! :)
I would like Jessica to post a few of the novels she feels are good examples of erotica.
No rating system. Big Brother's watching too many of our private activities as it is.
Like many others explicit sex doesn't bother me. I prefer it be in the mix of a great story. If I start to feel like its just sex-for-sex sake then I start skimming until I find the story again. No biggie.
I'm not sure about the rating thing. I know many review sites provide a rating and that's great for readers who may not want something so hot.
I think that's the great thing about our genre. There are so many heat levels. So many themes, genres, subgenres. There's something for everyone.
I'd be leery of a ratings system, for fear that the book-banning crowd would jump on it, wanting to ban R-rated books from libraries and things like that.
That said, this is one area where I think fanfic is ahead of profic. Fanfic includes in its header a warning line for any potentially disturbing content. The interesting thing is that while this very helpfully steers me away from stories I don't want to read (for example, stories involving physical abuse of heroine by hero), the warning line also acts as a hook sometimes! When reading fanfic, I often check the warning line before the plot summary, because it's there I'm most likely to be hooked!
About a year ago, I read a very popular book that I was under the impression was a sweet time-travel romance. Then I came to a scene where the hero beat the heroine for disobeying him, and that was followed by numerous torture and rape (or near-rape) scenes. I really felt blindsided. I would not have read the book if I'd known that content was in there.
Ironically, I've read more disturbing content than that in fanfic, but in those cases I knew what I was getting into because I'd read the warning line. I thought, "Well, I don't care for X, but maybe I'll just take a look...?" And in those cases I wasn't bothered by the content--at least I wasn't blindsided--because I'd made an informed choice to expose myself to it.
I agree with colettegarmer: If Jessica (or any of you readers) could list a couple examples of "good" or well-written erotica, and maybe a book or two from different ends of the explicit scale, that would be super helpful.
I'll admit that this was my question that I sent in, and although I'm pretty set on NOT mention the explicit scenes in my query, I'm still confused. Several people mentioned "standards of the genre" but I haven't been able to find any clear cut standards. I'm not writing a romance like the ones on the shelves with the Fabio-like men on the covers. I'm pretty firm in my idea to market it as women's fiction. I think some of my readers have concerns because the book starts when the MC is only 17, though by the second half (where most of the explicit scenes take place) she's in her 20's. I'm certainly not afraid of writing an erotica novel (indeed, that's one of my next ideas lol) but this one isn't it. It's not a YA novel either, but I guess there will always be readers who are uncomfortable with more than a closed-mouth kiss from anyone under 18. :-)
Sorry to steal the thread haha. But if anyone could point me toward some clear genre standards, or toward some good examples that I can read, I'd be super appreciative!
Lea -- my very favorite erotic romance right now is Bad Case of Loving You by Laney Cairo. Every time I read it, I'm startled all over again by just how much sex there is in it, because it doesn't feel like it when I think about the book.
I don't like pointless sex in stories, and when I run into it I skim through it. If I do too much skimming I feel cheated by the book. None of the sex in Bad Case is pointless, though; it's very explicit and gets into one or two kinks which one doesn't usually see in the mainstream romances, but it all works -- it reveals character and develops the relationship and furthers the plot, and just generally pulls its weight through the story. (Aside from being wonderfully well written and hot.) This is the best example I can think of of how to get a lot of explicit sex into a book without going over the line into "Too Much" either in quantity or explicitness.
Angie
I was frequently squicked by explicit sex from the time of twelve when I really Did Not Get It. And I am still annoyed by explicit sex scenes and books that focus on sexual relationships; if I wanted to read porn, I'd read porn.
If it were me, I'd like a warning the query letter. Whether it's 'a dark and disturbing tale' and 'without mercy' or 'hot' 'sexy'. That should be enough of a clue for me to know whether I want to read it.
Worst book I read? First volume had a bit of fighting and death. Second volume described, step by step, the killing and dismemberment of a child. By the good guy. The victim was his own nephew whom he had befriended.
Now I could just have lived with that if it had been perpetrated by a villain... but by the guy I'm supposed to cheer for? Only reason I wasn't physically sick was that I read it on the morning of a sunny day. Would I have wanted a warning?
You bet.
Blog: BookEnds, LLC - A Literary Agency (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: good writing, dialogue, writing style, Add a tag
I received an interesting question from a reader recently, interesting because it’s something that I’m sure is often discussed in writers' groups, but not anything I’ve ever really thought of. . . .
I've had an ongoing discussion with some writer friends about adverbs and dialog tags other than "said," and I'd like a professional agent's opinion.
I've read just about every book on writing, and if they address the topic, they say not to use adverbs ever, and that "said" or "asked" is sufficient (no shouted, yelled, whispered, groaned, commanded, etc.). But I also read published books that have their characters "whispering" and "grunting" and "saying questioningly" with abandon. A lot of published books use mostly said and asked, but an equal number do not.
So here's my question: Is there a real "rule" in the publishing world against descriptive dialog tags, or is that just something authors of writing books tell writers to get us to buy more books on how to make our writing more descriptive using nouns and strong verbs? Has an editor ever told you they liked a book, but they were passing because there were too many adverbs?
My simple answer is “no,” there’s no real rule about dialogue tags. At least no rule I’ve heard of. I suspect that the concern about dialogue tags isn’t so much about there being a rule but about how writers could easily use dialogue tags as a cop-out. For example, by saying that your character “grunted” you don’t need to show the character actually doing the labor or feeling the pain. It’s a lot easier to use one word than it is to write an entire paragraph describing why the character might grunt later.
I think dialogue tags could actually add a lot to the story if used carefully and properly. They should never interrupt the flow of the story or become a distraction to the reader and they should never be used in place of showing versus telling the story. If your character is going to whisper we need to see very clearly why she is whispering before it even happens.
Jessica
I think dialogue tags could actually add a lot to the story if used carefully and properly. They should never interrupt the flow of the story or become a distraction to the reader
This is the main thing to consider when choosing dialogue tags, in my opinion. Writing books tell us "said" is usually the best choice because other words can interrupt the flow of the story and become distracting. I've critiqued work where the author bent over backward to avoid using the word "said," and it was definitely distracting. "He spoke out," "She stated," "He articulated".... If the word "said" will suffice, why not use it? It's only when other dialogue tags don't fit in with the writing that it become an issue in my mind.
Just my two cents.
I'm a strong believer in said and said alone. In fact, I never even used asked; the question mark is all that's needed, IMHO, to indicate a question is being asked.
For me, the major issue is not interruption of flow; rather, I think ornate dialog tags are used to mask lazy writing.
I agree with anonymous...the only other tag I might use sparingly would be 'whispered.' If it was very important to what was going on in the book.
But I truly despise books that use the 'adverb + fancy dialog tag' combo. So distracting. Takes me right out of the book as I try to imagine how someone could "beg imploringly" or "command triumphantly." UGH.
To me, it is lazy writing.
I'm a big believer in the Power of Said as well, but...I think often novice writers use extravagant dialogue tags because they think (I emphasize: think) it's good writing. Only with experience and feedback does one learn that in the case of he said/she said -- that it's enough. So I don't believe it's lazy writing - I think it's uniformed writing.
I'll often use excessive adverbs when quickly drafting a scene or chapter. That way, it's an indicator of where I want to go back and flesh things out.
Every word has its place - and use - imo!
I am a truly beginner writer and I struggle to keep it to only said or asked. Not sure where I ever "heard" the rule, but it's stuck with me. It is very difficult for a new writer because it sounds so repetitive and on the flip side, too easy. I think that's why ornate dialogue tags are sometimes rampant in novice writings. Not that the writing is necessarily lazy, but more of a geniuine attempt to embellish in some way.
Amy, I just picked up a fabulous tip from you---use of excessive adverbs when quickly drafting a scene or chapter and use them as "markers" later!. Thx.
This is a great topic and all, but now I have Lolly, Lolly, Lolly, Get Your Adverbs Here! stuck in my head. *snort*
Well, misery loves company...
Lolly, lolly, lolly, get your adverbs here
Father, son, and lolly selling adverbs here
Got a lot of lolly, jolly adverbs here
You're going to need
If you write or read,
Or even think about it.
An adverb is a word
(That's all it is! And there's a lot of them)
That modifies a verb,
(Sometimes a verb and sometimes)
It modifies an adjective, or else another adverb
And so you see that it's positively, very, very necessary...
I try not to use dialogue tags of any kind, including said. Character actions and facial expressions are usually enough to indicate who's talking. I strip out most tags during the editing stage of a draft.
Like anything else in writing, I think good tags can be used sparingly. If every tag is out-of-the-way creative, it becomes very noticeable and distracting. But once in a while, when it adds to the mood or describes perfectly how something is said, it isn't distracting.
Similes are the same. As are adverbs. Done sparingly, in the right place, they are fine. Even Stephen King, who rails loudly against adverbs, admits there are some he just can't bear to cut.
Alcohol. Desserts. Adverbs. Tags. It's all about the moderation.
I hate the word said being overused in a book. Like all words, it's good, but if you use it to much it becomes annoyingly repetitive. I hate looking at a page and seeing a long string of "saids"
Rather than overuse "said" or DL tags I prefer when an author uses few DL tags and fills in spaces between the DL with actions, feelings, or internal thoughts. Unless the character isn't moving at all during the conversation (very rare) there should be some movement associated with the comment that would serve better than "he said/she said"
I interviewed Elmore Leonard for an article a few years ago, and out of all the things talked about -- during his general lecture and my interview itself -- this particular topic sticks with me most.
He was adamant about using ONLY the word "said" when writing dialogue, and repeated the rule (for him, anyway) several times.
Just one man's opinion, but very interesting...especially when you consider the source.
- Dennis
Dialogue tags don't usually faze me except for "she hissed". I always, always stop reading and look back to see if the dialogue had enough 's's to warrant a hissing sound. I hate it when there's not an 's' in the dialogue.
Okay. Rant over.
WandaV
Thank you very much, Jessica! I've often wondered about this "rule" myself, and I'm glad to hear an agency's opinion. :)
Jenny Crusie uses tags and they don't inturrupt the flow, matter of fact, I think they KEEP the flow. But she is who she is, and they're a part of her voice. I think in her case they add-but she's one of the only writers who I like tags from. And she uses Said more.
I vote for a mix of nothing at all (especially when the dialogue is fairly quick and back-and-forth), "said," and (as just_me said) dialogue interleaved with action.
Somebody mentioned how obsessed they become by many appearances of the word "said" on the page. I'm with them, too. OTOH I think these kinds of obsessions are transient and a little bit, umm, twitchy.
Hey, I blogged on this not long ago about dialog tags and then about writing accents and stuttering -- I agree that there's no hard and fast rule, there's just a lot of good advice you have to apply to the situation how you see fit.
I do what Karen does. In fact, when I'm writing a brand new section of dialouge, all my characters are either nodding or shrugging--I see them as little bobble head dolls.
I rarely use he said/he asked. When I come across them in a story, nothing rips me out faster than some great line ended with the plain and boring, "she said".
What I'm curious about is using tags BEFORE the dialouge. I think it's irritating, but am wondering if it's just me. I'll come across something like this:
He whispered, "Are we eating squirrel or frog legs?"
I think it's amazing how strident opinions can be over "the rules". Not using dialogue tags can be just as annoying as repeatedly using said or none at all. It depends on what words are used and how they complement the story.
There are no hard and fast rules in writing, so the books go for the middle ground, their writers aiming to correct the maximum number of mistakes at a single sweep.
Thus you see "never use an adverb," "eliminate all instances of the verb to be" and "there's no need for the word that."
All too often writers, afraid to have no dialog tags or afraid of overusing "said," will go for something that just doesn't work.
Someone mentioned "hissed" if the words involved don't have S-sounds. My least favorite is "laughed." You're laughing or speaking, but you're not speaking in full sentences and laughing at the same time. (Here I refer to constructions like "these words," he laughed, "can't be spoken because I am laughing." That construction is very different from: "These words can't be spoken." He laughed at the very idea of their pronunciation.
Physical actions can often substitute for dialog tags, though you have to be careful they don't clutter the scene too much.
Every author has a voice, and part of that voice is the rhythm of scenes and dialog. To achieve the correct rhythm, you're going to want to do more than just have blocks of text. (With some exceptions, naturally--often you'll find scenes in thrillers, for example, where the dialogue is terse, bitten off, and there are no tags. This technique can wear on readers after a while, and also confuse them as to the identities of the speakers, so you need to use it with care.)
But, of course, everything you see in these comments comes with a caveat...there's a reason for what those books and writing teachers say. The vast majority of people overuse attribution tags, dragging readers out of the story. Since it's such a common fault, it behooves writers--all of us--to study every tag with care, to deliberate on its inclusion, and to question its necessity.
And then, if it belongs, leave it alone.
This debate was settled for me once and for all when my favorite author, Neil Gaiman, came down on the "Said" side. He's one of the best living writers there is to me and if he doesn't dig on the dialogue tags, well, I'll follow his lead.
Now I try to avoid tags if I don't think it's confusing to the reader to go without. I also really like tagging with action. Why throw said in there at all if you don't need to?
I am a novice writer and am struggling a bit with this issue. However, I read a lot, and I hate it when I get lost on who is actually doing the talking. I like tags and said is probably my favorite. I hardly notice it when reading, but I always know who is doing the talking. I don't mind asked, whispered or any other identifier that helps paint the picture with what is actually going on.
In my opinion under use of tags is much worse than over use.
I do whatever makes my writing the best. Which means no rules. I want it to read and flow well. To me, when I read, I can always pick out writers who are adhering to those 'rules' so stringently. Adverbs, dialogue tags, said, they were all created to be used. It's just how you use 'em.
I've never thought about it before...hmm,but it's never been an issue with anyone who's edited my work, including my agent......
Great post. This subject has come up in every writer's group I've ever visited.
You will need to use some sort of tags, especially when you have a three-way or group conversation. If not, life gets too confusing.
I think this post and the comments show that we all have little pet peeves about what bugs us about books.
The words he said or she said can often be used as a little pause. They give the mind a split second break in dialogue and can thus slow down rapid fire pacing.
"I love you."
"Me too."
Is pretty darn quick. A verbal fight or fast dialogue often won't have any tags.
"I love you," she said.
"Me too," he replied.
Big difference in pacing. There is just a bit more of a pause that the tags allow. You can space it out even more:
"I love you." She chewed on her lower lip as she waited for him to reply. It felt like eternity before he said, "Me too."
Tags and attributions create very subconscious pauses for the reader. Read your dialogue aloud to help you see if you need a tag or not.
Michele
As a reader, I get tired of said, said, said over and over again. I want some variety in the speaker tags. An occasional adverb or "stronger verb" other than said helps to break things up, and convey nuances of story.
So I tend to write the kind of stuff I like to read.
DAT
I add enough tags so people know easily who is talking. I use said most of the time, but I vary it also. In one critique someone pointed out I used an adverb. My gut reaction was to say, "Yes, it is an adverb."
I get rather tired of the die hards who obsess about no tags, no tags other than said, no adverbs, no passive verbs, no whatever.
It all depends on how it's used and moderation seems to be a good rule if writers absolutely insist on rules.
Michele, good point (and underappreciated) on dialog tags' effect on pacing. Related point: where you place the DT (before, splitting, or after) the dialog makes a big difference in timing.
IMHO, Robert Parker is the master of varying pace with DT placement. In particular, he uses this tool to create perfect scene and chapter closers.
What gets me is when people start making lists of all the dialogue tags they can come up to replace said and proudly display it as if it's a major accomplishment. Seems like there are better things to do than make lists of dialogue tags (like write the book).
For me, I just use whatever comes to mind first when I'm writing the dialogue. It's not a big list--think I could count it on one hand.
Thanks for addressing my question on your blog, Jessica--and for shortening my email!
I've been in the said-only camp for a very long time, but I can't help but notice that a lot of published books use adverbs along with other dialog tags. A random sample of current bestsellers on Amazon (The Shack by William P. Young, The Host by Stephanie Myer, The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot Díaz) show lots of highly descriptive dialog tags along with adverbs.
A single page of Anne Perry's The Shifting Tide published in 2005 shows: "she said raspingly," "Flo retorted" (Flo retorts on the next page, too), "Ruth said icily," and "Hester raised her voice sharply." These make a lot of writers (me included) roll our eyes, but that's not stopping Anne Perry from selling a bazillion books a year.
Do we cringe because they're bad or is it because we've been conditioned to hate them? And if they're so bad, why isn't it stopping agents from shopping and publishers from publishing?
I probably debate this subject while I'm writing more than any other aspect. Do I need a tag? Beginning, middle, or end of the dialogue? Is there expression going on that really needs to be shown here to convey some emotion? Admittedly, a lot of the time, it's really just to make sure the reader knows who is speaking if it isn't clear. If it is clear and the emotion or point of the dialogue can be conveyed in words only, then why use a tag? It's difficult. I have certainly been told countless times to limit tags, to use 'said' more often than not. For me though, as pointed out by several others here, pacing/flow is the biggest thing. I reread a lot as I go along, and edit out or in the tags I think benefit how the dialogue reads. Like all things in writing, it really just depends.
JDuncan
Only use said, no adverbs…blah! Campy romance novels may be responsible for purple prose and overwrought, “he snarled angrily” style writing, but I swear Elmore Leonard’s 10 Rules created droves of paint-by-numbers, bland writers. Not using tags or adverbs is a style, not writing canon.
IMO, adverbs and dialogue tags are the seasoning in the soup; too much and the soup is inedible, too little and it’s tasteless and unappetizing. Everything in moderation works BOTH ways.
In opposition to those who commented otherwise, my main peeve is using said to tag a question.
"What is the sense in that?", Richard asked.
Otherwise, the tags should be unobtrusive.
There's some great advice in this post. I read everything I can get my hands on, from my genre to outside my genre. There are many books I don't enjoy, but I know that reading them will make me a better writer.
I agree genre is forever changing. In acquisitions often times I find myself excited over the premise that's been offered in the synopsis or query only to be let down with the actual ms. It's usually not the grammar or technical problems it's the voice, pacing and characters.As if the ideas are the writers greatest strength and the follow through just isn't there.
This a great post! Ah to be a fly on the wall at a meeting. I would love to see what is discussed.
It might help to take somewhat of a writer's approach as well and dissect books in the targeted genre that work well, as well as books that don't, and see if you can identify the elements that lead to success or failure. Once you can articulate them, they will be easier to recognize.
(And I totally agree with Martha. I would love to sit in on one of those meetings!
As the 'agenting' and 'publishing' culture is rapidly changing to meet the demands of the Cyber Age, it's a challenge for literary agents to be up-to-date and change their traditional 'behavior'!
"I really think that if it's a real struggle to understand a genre, it's probably just not the genre you should be focusing on."
I agree. I love bios and memoirs to the point where I devour them. Autobiographies, too, if they are honest and not too contrived.