This is one of my rants so beware.
I have been extremely frustrated lately with the new attitude of just not getting back to people. I know we are all busy, but the silent treatment just doesn't work for me. We all have email, phones, twitter, and yes, even snail mail. Use it! Respond to people when they talk to you.
I see this everywhere. When something happens around the house and I need a contractor, I will frequently call several. I don't just do this to check on the price, although that is a factor. I do this because I know 90% of the time, people just don't call me back. When we were painting our house, several years ago, I called 8 painters. Only one called back and guess who got the job. Now frankly, I have no idea how people stay in business with this approach.
As writers, I understand how frustrated you get when you send out a submission and hear nothing back. You send post cards to remind them, and yet, you hear nothing. There is simply no excuse for not getting a response of some sort (and no, I don't want to hear I'm busy). I am talking about a real response.
As an agent, this is something I try REALLY hard to do. If I have missed some of you, when you have emailed and asked, I try to remedy the situation. I am calling for all the editors and agents out there to do the same thing.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
Liking your characters
We have to like your characters. It is as simple as that. If the reader doesn't like the characters from the beginning of the story, even if they are the bad guys, we have no "buy in" to the story. This is especially true with the romances. We need to want to see the two characters get together by the end of the book. Knowing it is a romance, we understand that they will, but there is still the tension of wondering when it will happen.
I bring this up, because I have seen a lot of books lately that are well written, but because the characters had major issues at the beginning, or the situations the characters were in were awful, I had a hard time buying into the story. Needless to say, I rejected the story. Let me highlight a few of them.
Adultry - This is a big one with me (and the publishers). Yes, we know this happens in the real world and yes, we know there are stories out there that make it to the shelves with this in it, but I have to say, this is a big issue in terms of liking the characters. I don't care if there is a "good reason" to cheat (of course that alone sounds strange), but the point is, the character is cheating. This makes that character now fall at the same level with the villain. You don't want this. Easy solution. Get them out of the marriage fast and then move on with the relationship.
Sure, the cheating may add some dimension to the character and the conflict. They have all of this conflicting feelings running through their heads, should I stay, should I go, and the like. But frankly, this makes us question the ethics of the person.
Lying Cheating and Stealing - Sure the characters can be tough, but again, if the lying, cheating and stealing is not a part of their profession, it makes us question the character. Along the same lines, if the reader doesn't know this from the beginning, then we start to question the character. Here's an example. I just read a story where the hero was supposed to be spying for the king and he was to be running around the city being a jerk about it to people.. O.K. that's fine, but the problem is that I didn't see it until at least chapter 3 or 4. This means that during the opening scenes when I really wanted to see the first glimpses of the two main characters, all I saw was a person that I wanted gone. Not a good thing.
Being a jerk - He's a rake. He's supposed to do that. Well, sort of, but I always say, that I don't care how bad the guy is, I still want to see him as a mama's boy. The reader needs to see the softer side of the characters at some point. The other characters might not see it, but we need to.
Look, there are things you can do to increase the power of your story, but creating characters we don't like just doesn't work.
Scott
I bring this up, because I have seen a lot of books lately that are well written, but because the characters had major issues at the beginning, or the situations the characters were in were awful, I had a hard time buying into the story. Needless to say, I rejected the story. Let me highlight a few of them.
Adultry - This is a big one with me (and the publishers). Yes, we know this happens in the real world and yes, we know there are stories out there that make it to the shelves with this in it, but I have to say, this is a big issue in terms of liking the characters. I don't care if there is a "good reason" to cheat (of course that alone sounds strange), but the point is, the character is cheating. This makes that character now fall at the same level with the villain. You don't want this. Easy solution. Get them out of the marriage fast and then move on with the relationship.
Sure, the cheating may add some dimension to the character and the conflict. They have all of this conflicting feelings running through their heads, should I stay, should I go, and the like. But frankly, this makes us question the ethics of the person.
Lying Cheating and Stealing - Sure the characters can be tough, but again, if the lying, cheating and stealing is not a part of their profession, it makes us question the character. Along the same lines, if the reader doesn't know this from the beginning, then we start to question the character. Here's an example. I just read a story where the hero was supposed to be spying for the king and he was to be running around the city being a jerk about it to people.. O.K. that's fine, but the problem is that I didn't see it until at least chapter 3 or 4. This means that during the opening scenes when I really wanted to see the first glimpses of the two main characters, all I saw was a person that I wanted gone. Not a good thing.
Being a jerk - He's a rake. He's supposed to do that. Well, sort of, but I always say, that I don't care how bad the guy is, I still want to see him as a mama's boy. The reader needs to see the softer side of the characters at some point. The other characters might not see it, but we need to.
Look, there are things you can do to increase the power of your story, but creating characters we don't like just doesn't work.
Scott
Friday, April 3, 2009
Lacking Depth
This is a comment that I am frequently having to put in rejection letters to writers. The story is simply lacking depth.
What do I mean by this? The idea is rather simple. In many ways, it relates back to the idea of telling vs. showing. In other words, the writer has left out a lot of critical information that would round out the story and give it a bit more of a three dimensional feel to it. At this point, it would read more like a summary.
Think about your synopses. These lack depth, but they are supposed to. In other words, you are simply providing the plot to the story and giving the reader an idea of where things are going to. Within your story, we want to know more than simply what is going on. We want to see all that is going on around the story and the characters.
I always like to use the idea of multiple camera angles using cameras with high quality lenses with this. If you are thinking of a movie with depth, the cinematographer has been able to show the audience the small details of everything going on around the characters. Although the characters take the center stage, your eye is getting a full picture of the world the characters live in. I love watching the scenes in the Kiera Knightly version of Pride and Prejudice when you follow the camera as if you are a person right there in the movie with the characters. The first is in the opening scene but I personally think the party scene is the best. As you move through the ball room, you listen into snippets of conversation, watch actions of people and get everything. This is depth.
Now, where many writers fail in this is what they add to the stories. When we say depth, we don't need more scenes. Granted, adding more of the same makes the story longer, but we still don't have the depth we were looking for. What we want is more with the existing scenes.
To do this, go back to your senses. Use all of your senses to give the reader a 3-dimensional image. Along the same lines, go back to the GMC in your story. We need to really know what drives those characters but please don't just tell us. Show us. Finally, use that narration and introspection to let us into the minds of the characters.
Best of luck!
Scott
What do I mean by this? The idea is rather simple. In many ways, it relates back to the idea of telling vs. showing. In other words, the writer has left out a lot of critical information that would round out the story and give it a bit more of a three dimensional feel to it. At this point, it would read more like a summary.
Think about your synopses. These lack depth, but they are supposed to. In other words, you are simply providing the plot to the story and giving the reader an idea of where things are going to. Within your story, we want to know more than simply what is going on. We want to see all that is going on around the story and the characters.
I always like to use the idea of multiple camera angles using cameras with high quality lenses with this. If you are thinking of a movie with depth, the cinematographer has been able to show the audience the small details of everything going on around the characters. Although the characters take the center stage, your eye is getting a full picture of the world the characters live in. I love watching the scenes in the Kiera Knightly version of Pride and Prejudice when you follow the camera as if you are a person right there in the movie with the characters. The first is in the opening scene but I personally think the party scene is the best. As you move through the ball room, you listen into snippets of conversation, watch actions of people and get everything. This is depth.
Now, where many writers fail in this is what they add to the stories. When we say depth, we don't need more scenes. Granted, adding more of the same makes the story longer, but we still don't have the depth we were looking for. What we want is more with the existing scenes.
To do this, go back to your senses. Use all of your senses to give the reader a 3-dimensional image. Along the same lines, go back to the GMC in your story. We need to really know what drives those characters but please don't just tell us. Show us. Finally, use that narration and introspection to let us into the minds of the characters.
Best of luck!
Scott
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Submitting to other editors within a house
So, you got a rejection from one editor. Can you send it to another editor within the same house?
Nope!
And the same holds true with agents. Let me explain.
If a publisher has reviewed your manuscript, you have to know that, in all likelyhood, that editor has discussed the idea with the other editors. Along the same lines, that editor is representing the company when he or she reads your project. When that person says no to a project, it is not the single editor but the publishing company in general.
Now, is there a chance you submitted to the wrong editor? Sure. But again that goes back to the same thing I have talked about before. Take the time to review and research the people you are submitting to before you mail that package off.
As I also said, the agents work the same way. In this case, these agents have talked to each other. When a project comes in, if that agent doesn't think he or she will be able to represent it, for what ever reason, the project will be passed around. Sometimes this is done simply because one agent might have a full plate already. Again, the rule still applies. The agency said no.
I should also note that just changing the title isn't enough. Even though we receive a ton of submissions, we do remember and many of us keep extensive data bases about your projects. You won't be able to slip an old manuscript though the cracks to us without us catching it.
Sorry, but again, there isn't a way around this one.
Scott
Nope!
And the same holds true with agents. Let me explain.
If a publisher has reviewed your manuscript, you have to know that, in all likelyhood, that editor has discussed the idea with the other editors. Along the same lines, that editor is representing the company when he or she reads your project. When that person says no to a project, it is not the single editor but the publishing company in general.
Now, is there a chance you submitted to the wrong editor? Sure. But again that goes back to the same thing I have talked about before. Take the time to review and research the people you are submitting to before you mail that package off.
As I also said, the agents work the same way. In this case, these agents have talked to each other. When a project comes in, if that agent doesn't think he or she will be able to represent it, for what ever reason, the project will be passed around. Sometimes this is done simply because one agent might have a full plate already. Again, the rule still applies. The agency said no.
I should also note that just changing the title isn't enough. Even though we receive a ton of submissions, we do remember and many of us keep extensive data bases about your projects. You won't be able to slip an old manuscript though the cracks to us without us catching it.
Sorry, but again, there isn't a way around this one.
Scott
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Marketing Your Fiction Novel Class
Next class begins on April 15th. Contact www.pierce.ctc.edu and click on the Continuing Education Link to get registration information.
Greyhaus Announces Deal
Greyhaus Literary Agency announces a new deal. During the month of April, I will be giving out 30 free contracts to writers that send in a full manuscript and synopsis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
APRIL FOOLS!!!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Does this sound too good? You better believe it and if you even think of sending those submissions you will be on my "bad list."
I was thinking about this lately after listening to an NPR broadcast about people taking desperate measures in this tough climate. Are things tough? Yes! Heck, even my established writers are talking about finding "new approaches," but this does not mean that you should jump at deals that sound too good to be true. I have said this before and I will say it again.
There is no easy way in publishing.
Scott
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
APRIL FOOLS!!!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Does this sound too good? You better believe it and if you even think of sending those submissions you will be on my "bad list."
I was thinking about this lately after listening to an NPR broadcast about people taking desperate measures in this tough climate. Are things tough? Yes! Heck, even my established writers are talking about finding "new approaches," but this does not mean that you should jump at deals that sound too good to be true. I have said this before and I will say it again.
There is no easy way in publishing.
Scott
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)