I grew up as the youngest child, and, as my older sisters will tell you (and probably any older siblings would confirm about their youngest siblings), this means I got away with the most. This "most" behavior was never anything horrible; I wasn't a miscreant by any stretch of the imagination. It just means that I stayed out later and took my parents' car out more. No one blinked an eye when I dyed my hair or shaved my head (a story for another time) or decided that camouflage mini-skirts were my new favorite thing. In fact, the only hard and fast rule from my parents that I can remember about my appearance had to do with my confidence. If I looked uncomfortable--rutching my skirt down or slumping my shoulders or crossing my arms over my chest--my parents would suggest that I change my clothes. After all, what we see when we look at a person is, at first glance, his or her clothes, but the next thing that we see and the impression that we carry with us is the person's confidence.
Now, you've probably read a lot of agents complain about the queries from authors we get boasting, "This book is the next Harry Potter. The next Da Vinci Code. The next Twilight. The bestseller that will make your career." Most certainly, do not be that author. But don't be obsequious either. "I know you have better things to do than read my query. I grovel at the feet of your greatness. I'm sure this isn't up to your standards, but here's my query anyways."
You've worked hard on your manuscript and, presumably, you believe that it's publishable. (If you don't believe that, you need to go back and revise, revise again.) Present your manuscript without any apologies--"I know you're probably up to your ears in queries. Another vampire story, I know."--and let the agent draw his or her own conclusion. After all, you need an agent who values your work, and no one's going to value your work if you don't.
So, chin up. Before you query next time or pitch an agent at a conference, hold your mother's voice in your head (or my mother's, for that matter): "Watch your posture, dear." Or, if that doesn't do it for you, how about Leonard Bernstein's Jets? "Walk tall! We always walk tall! We're Jets! The greatest!"
Showing posts with label naomi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label naomi. Show all posts
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Thursday, December 23, 2010
A Look Back and Forward
As we come to the end of another year, it seems only natural to look both back and forward. 2010 has certainly been an interesting year in publishing. When publishers finally woke up to e-books, they did so in a big way. The variety of e-book readers has expanded. First there was Kindle, then Sony, now Nook, Kobo, iPads, and others galore. Even Google has launched its own cloud.
As the paradigm shifts, the tone of the conversation about these changes shifts as well. Whereas in past years these changes made some publishers, writers, agents, and readers portend doom and gloom, in 2010, these changes brought a renewed energy to these dynamic conversations. As publishers embrace e-books, so do readers, with sales of e-books beginning to exceed sales of print books in several important instances. For example, some statistics show that voracious readers, like those who love romance, are ones most likely to buy e-books. As agents and writers embrace new media and formats, there’s a renewed sense of collaboration in the partnership to find the best outlet for writers’ work. It’s all rather exciting to be here as the paradigm shifts.
What will 2011 have in store? Sadly our crystal ball needs polishing and our psychic abilities have taken their leave on this subject. But what we do know is that those of us who love books will continue to love them. We’ll read them, we’ll buy them, we’ll collect them. We’ll treasure them. Those who love storytelling will continue to spin their tales. They’ll push themselves to write better and better books that more imaginatively bring to life their stories for the rest of us to read. Competition does bring out the best.
Here at the agency we have a marvelous group of talented authors who write great books. For 2011 we renew our commitment to work hard on behalf of the authors we represent. We look forward to finding new authors who also have wonderful stories to tell. And as we enter the holidays, we urge everyone to take a moment to find a good book and enjoy.
Happy Holidays! Elaine & Naomi
As the paradigm shifts, the tone of the conversation about these changes shifts as well. Whereas in past years these changes made some publishers, writers, agents, and readers portend doom and gloom, in 2010, these changes brought a renewed energy to these dynamic conversations. As publishers embrace e-books, so do readers, with sales of e-books beginning to exceed sales of print books in several important instances. For example, some statistics show that voracious readers, like those who love romance, are ones most likely to buy e-books. As agents and writers embrace new media and formats, there’s a renewed sense of collaboration in the partnership to find the best outlet for writers’ work. It’s all rather exciting to be here as the paradigm shifts.
What will 2011 have in store? Sadly our crystal ball needs polishing and our psychic abilities have taken their leave on this subject. But what we do know is that those of us who love books will continue to love them. We’ll read them, we’ll buy them, we’ll collect them. We’ll treasure them. Those who love storytelling will continue to spin their tales. They’ll push themselves to write better and better books that more imaginatively bring to life their stories for the rest of us to read. Competition does bring out the best.
Here at the agency we have a marvelous group of talented authors who write great books. For 2011 we renew our commitment to work hard on behalf of the authors we represent. We look forward to finding new authors who also have wonderful stories to tell. And as we enter the holidays, we urge everyone to take a moment to find a good book and enjoy.
Happy Holidays! Elaine & Naomi
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
The What Ifs
Like many agents, the practice of using a rhetorical question to open a query letter rubs me the wrong way. I've never really been able to pinpoint why, but over the past month, I've heard ample pitches and read ample queries to allow me to figure this out a little better.
Many of the pitches I heard began with the rhetorical question that probably all authors ask themselves when they begin to write: "What if?" What if spaceships landed in the Himalayas and aliens infiltrated a Buddhist monk colony? What if a woman was charged with murder after the accidental death of her husband? What if Rachel Zoe was actually a zombie? What if The Breakfast Club took place on Antarctica? (In case you were wondering, these are not pitches that I heard.)
This question and the wonder that follows can be the root of inspiration for a story--the knot the author seeks to unravel; the beads the author worries into a plot. So the "What if?" can be a rhetorical question that the author asks herself. It doesn't bother me as part of a pitch. An in-person pitch has more room for conversation, after all, and rhetorical questions are often used in conversation. That being said...
The rhetorical question doesn't work as well in the query letter. I think it's because, in writing, it comes across as a lazy device. This book--an entire manuscript, thousands of words(!)--has been written by you, the author, and has been plumbed from the depths and heights of your imagination. One of the reasons I love reading query letters is because they offer glimpses into that imagination. But using a rhetorical question to start a query letter takes the onus of imagination off of the author and places it on the reader/agent's shoulders. This is a risky practice. It takes an agent out of the query letter and away from your story, when your query is your one chance to showcase the writing and imagination that you poured into your story. You'll be hard-pressed to keep a rapt audience with rhetorical questions, and you need a rapt audience to get the attention your query letter deserves.
Many of the pitches I heard began with the rhetorical question that probably all authors ask themselves when they begin to write: "What if?" What if spaceships landed in the Himalayas and aliens infiltrated a Buddhist monk colony? What if a woman was charged with murder after the accidental death of her husband? What if Rachel Zoe was actually a zombie? What if The Breakfast Club took place on Antarctica? (In case you were wondering, these are not pitches that I heard.)
This question and the wonder that follows can be the root of inspiration for a story--the knot the author seeks to unravel; the beads the author worries into a plot. So the "What if?" can be a rhetorical question that the author asks herself. It doesn't bother me as part of a pitch. An in-person pitch has more room for conversation, after all, and rhetorical questions are often used in conversation. That being said...
The rhetorical question doesn't work as well in the query letter. I think it's because, in writing, it comes across as a lazy device. This book--an entire manuscript, thousands of words(!)--has been written by you, the author, and has been plumbed from the depths and heights of your imagination. One of the reasons I love reading query letters is because they offer glimpses into that imagination. But using a rhetorical question to start a query letter takes the onus of imagination off of the author and places it on the reader/agent's shoulders. This is a risky practice. It takes an agent out of the query letter and away from your story, when your query is your one chance to showcase the writing and imagination that you poured into your story. You'll be hard-pressed to keep a rapt audience with rhetorical questions, and you need a rapt audience to get the attention your query letter deserves.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Themes in Queries
I love a good, academic literature class. A class that dissects the thematic elements of a novel, its narrative and character arcs, or, better yet, a discussion that posits a novel's significance in a particular cultural or political landscape is more stimulating than a piece of dark chocolate. Seriously. (Ok, sometimes, at least.)
It's likely that many authors consider themes when writing their manuscripts, also. There are "issue" books in YA and middle grade--books that focus on divorce, drugs, peer pressure, etc., just like the infamous after-school special. But even outside of "issue" books, themes crop up when discussing and pitching all kinds of fiction: YA and adult; commercial and literary. I see the touchstones of these themes in query letters--words like "loss," "self-discovery," "grief," "journey into manhood," etc.
Now, if you were worried that I was going to add ONE MORE THING to your query checklist, have no fear. I don't think theme needs to be mentioned in a query at all. You can scratch it off your list. That being said, if you feel it's important to mention theme in your query, give your query letter a few extra double-checks before you send it out.
The best themes are subtle and incite conversation, maybe in class, over a post-dinner port, in book club, or with your critique partners/agent/editor while revising your manuscript. So be a little judicious in employing theme in the query letter. Otherwise, an agent might think that your manuscript has a didactic tone, not an engaging plot, and you might not get a chance to have the discussion about theme during revisions.
It's likely that many authors consider themes when writing their manuscripts, also. There are "issue" books in YA and middle grade--books that focus on divorce, drugs, peer pressure, etc., just like the infamous after-school special. But even outside of "issue" books, themes crop up when discussing and pitching all kinds of fiction: YA and adult; commercial and literary. I see the touchstones of these themes in query letters--words like "loss," "self-discovery," "grief," "journey into manhood," etc.
Now, if you were worried that I was going to add ONE MORE THING to your query checklist, have no fear. I don't think theme needs to be mentioned in a query at all. You can scratch it off your list. That being said, if you feel it's important to mention theme in your query, give your query letter a few extra double-checks before you send it out.
- Does your mention of theme add a unique element that you can't add through plot or character description/summary/pitch?
- Or does it rely on clichéd, broad tropes to do your dirty work instead of the fresh, specific language of your story, your plot and your characters?
The best themes are subtle and incite conversation, maybe in class, over a post-dinner port, in book club, or with your critique partners/agent/editor while revising your manuscript. So be a little judicious in employing theme in the query letter. Otherwise, an agent might think that your manuscript has a didactic tone, not an engaging plot, and you might not get a chance to have the discussion about theme during revisions.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
When to Say When: Querying New (& Old) Projects
There will be times during The Process when you feel like you've hit the wall with your manuscript. You've taken it out to your top 5 (or 50 or 500) agents, they've requested your partial, but then every single one turned you down. What exactly--besides whistling in the dark, of course--are you supposed to do now? Can you revisit these agents again?
Like so many topics, the answers to these questions will vary from agency to agency. I can only answer for us.
First, please don't query us with same project, even if you've revised and/or re-written the manuscript. If we're interested in seeing it again, we'll specifically tell you that when we respond to your partial or full manuscript (I think most agents would say the same thing). This can feel killer, especially if you've had several agents respond with similar comments and you feel like now you're equipped to make your manuscript even better, more polished, totally marketable, etc. However, it's a great argument for not sending your manuscript to every agent in the universe (or multiverses--that's just a side tidbit; I'm fascinated by this concept right now) at the same time. If you send your query and manuscript out in smaller batches and five agents respond with similar comments, you have the opportunity to take those comments back to your manuscript, revise (if you agree with the comments) to a stronger manuscript, and query a new batch of agents.
"Ok, fine, so I won't re-query with the same (or revised) project," you say, "but what about querying new manuscripts?" Querying a new/different manuscript after receiving a rejection on a full or partial is fine for us. Ideally, you'd probably wait a bit (at least a few weeks) before querying again. If we've provided comments with a rejection on your full or partial, consider those in relation to your new manuscript. Do you see any themes, constructions, etc. that might crop up as similar problems in the new manuscript?
When you do query a new project, a brief, polite mention that we previously considered a different manuscript of yours is a good note to include. I always appreciate an acknowledgment that we've had previous correspondence, plus it gives me an opportunity to check back through notes or records on your earlier manuscript if I want.
One note to consider: If we've requested, reviewed and rejected a couple of your manuscripts, you would probably be best served to query other agencies. It's best to end up with an agent who loves your work, your style and your themes, and if we've rejected multiple manuscripts, it's likely that our tastes just don't mesh with yours.
Also, while we're on the topic, here's a reminder to only query one project at a time. Sending us paragraph summaries for 15 unrelated books and asking us to pick which one we want to read is likely to result in an almost InstaReject. We wouldn't pitch your books like that to editors; please don't pitch them that way to us.
Like so many topics, the answers to these questions will vary from agency to agency. I can only answer for us.
First, please don't query us with same project, even if you've revised and/or re-written the manuscript. If we're interested in seeing it again, we'll specifically tell you that when we respond to your partial or full manuscript (I think most agents would say the same thing). This can feel killer, especially if you've had several agents respond with similar comments and you feel like now you're equipped to make your manuscript even better, more polished, totally marketable, etc. However, it's a great argument for not sending your manuscript to every agent in the universe (or multiverses--that's just a side tidbit; I'm fascinated by this concept right now) at the same time. If you send your query and manuscript out in smaller batches and five agents respond with similar comments, you have the opportunity to take those comments back to your manuscript, revise (if you agree with the comments) to a stronger manuscript, and query a new batch of agents.
"Ok, fine, so I won't re-query with the same (or revised) project," you say, "but what about querying new manuscripts?" Querying a new/different manuscript after receiving a rejection on a full or partial is fine for us. Ideally, you'd probably wait a bit (at least a few weeks) before querying again. If we've provided comments with a rejection on your full or partial, consider those in relation to your new manuscript. Do you see any themes, constructions, etc. that might crop up as similar problems in the new manuscript?
When you do query a new project, a brief, polite mention that we previously considered a different manuscript of yours is a good note to include. I always appreciate an acknowledgment that we've had previous correspondence, plus it gives me an opportunity to check back through notes or records on your earlier manuscript if I want.
One note to consider: If we've requested, reviewed and rejected a couple of your manuscripts, you would probably be best served to query other agencies. It's best to end up with an agent who loves your work, your style and your themes, and if we've rejected multiple manuscripts, it's likely that our tastes just don't mesh with yours.
Also, while we're on the topic, here's a reminder to only query one project at a time. Sending us paragraph summaries for 15 unrelated books and asking us to pick which one we want to read is likely to result in an almost InstaReject. We wouldn't pitch your books like that to editors; please don't pitch them that way to us.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Writer Appreciation: a Brief Note
I just looked at the blog and realized that I haven't blogged since January. January! It is a good thing, Authors, that my job is not to be a writer. The tenacity and stick-to-itiveness that it takes to sit your butt in a chair and write something every single day (or at least on the semi-regular basis [more often than every two months] that it takes to write a manuscript) is admirable, possibly miraculous (at least from my view) and deserves a standing ovation. (Pause while she stands at her desk with her arms shaped in an "O" above her head.) The good news is that we're busy with other things behind the scenes here, including reading those manuscripts that you're writing. So keep writing, keep submitting (YA manuscripts to me now and other manuscripts to Elaine soon [stay tuned to the blog and website for notice on when adult fiction queries should resume]), and I'll blog again sooner than two months from now. Deal? Deal.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Heart and Soul
Those of you who read this blog are probably the choir to whom we (blogging agents) preach. You probably carefully track what agents have which rules and submit your queries accordingly. You probably use blogs as a way to find out what agents are looking for which hot genre and what agents have which hobbies and passions and could make a home for your book baby. And, in your writerly quest to follow the rules set forth so clearly/contradictorally and to attend conferences, workshops, etc. with agents and editors, I bet you've heard the phrase: "I know it when I see it." Yes? It's probably close to the most frustrating phrase an unpublished writer could hear. After all, what exactly is the it that the agent/editor will recognize when s/he sees it? I'm not exactly positive (I'll know it when I see it, ok?), but I'm pretty sure it has something to do with heart & soul.
It sounds simultaneously a little trite and a little vast, I'll admit. It's only one step up from Chopsticks on the piano and often indefinable in our emotional lives. But when an author manages to bring heart and soul into a book in a genuine way--one that mirrors the little nuanced ways that we change and are changed by others' hearts and souls--the author transforms something ethereal into a tangible force. Rebecca Stead's When You Reach Me is just such a book (and obviously the Newberry committee thinks so too). Miranda's interior life and her understanding of her relationships with her family and friends expand throughout the book, all working in tandem to shape the nature and course of time. The book is touching and true, and it resonates long after it's finished. Sounds like heart & soul to me.
There are more "I know it when I see it" answers than that, of course, and heart and soul wouldn't be an appropriate answer for every "I know it when I see it" question. But it's definitely one of the answers for me, and something I'm constantly looking for when reading queries & submissions.
It sounds simultaneously a little trite and a little vast, I'll admit. It's only one step up from Chopsticks on the piano and often indefinable in our emotional lives. But when an author manages to bring heart and soul into a book in a genuine way--one that mirrors the little nuanced ways that we change and are changed by others' hearts and souls--the author transforms something ethereal into a tangible force. Rebecca Stead's When You Reach Me is just such a book (and obviously the Newberry committee thinks so too). Miranda's interior life and her understanding of her relationships with her family and friends expand throughout the book, all working in tandem to shape the nature and course of time. The book is touching and true, and it resonates long after it's finished. Sounds like heart & soul to me.
There are more "I know it when I see it" answers than that, of course, and heart and soul wouldn't be an appropriate answer for every "I know it when I see it" question. But it's definitely one of the answers for me, and something I'm constantly looking for when reading queries & submissions.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Character in Queries
I know that it probably seems like we demand a lot from queries. Take your xx(x),000 word novel, synthesize it into a few paragraphs, add a little marketing/pitch overtone, highlight your hook (if you've got one), and just send it right off. No problem, right? Eh-heh. The good news is that the query system--while not perfect--does actually work really well. The bad news is that I've got another item to add to your query checklist: character.
It's easy to make your query all about plot: When a shipment of dynamite falls from a B-757 over the city of Chicago, igniting a massive explosion that demolishes the city and spreads into a Midwestern apocalypse, it's up to Jimmy Smith to stop the chaos before the world ends. Sounds like possible blockbuster foil for the movies, but how does it fare as a one-sentence query? If demolition, dynamite, 757s, and apocalypses are your thing, not bad, I guess (if we ignore the leap of faith that takes us from the Midwestern apocalypse to the end of the world and the implicit assumption that the reader is fascinated by the end of the world). But this query would be a lot stronger if we knew more about Jimmy Smith. Why is he the one who has to stop the impending destruction of the world? Who made him Atlas? Is he a reluctant or eager hero? What's his personal motivation to stop the end of the world? What are his stakes?
Those are more questions to answer than you'll likely have room for in your query. However, they're all designed to make the query reader care about your protagonist. If your protagonist goes through the worst tribulations the world can offer, it's all for naught if the reader doesn't empathize with her. So, give us a clue in the query letter as to why s/he's special and why the plot is unique to her/him.
It's easy to make your query all about plot: When a shipment of dynamite falls from a B-757 over the city of Chicago, igniting a massive explosion that demolishes the city and spreads into a Midwestern apocalypse, it's up to Jimmy Smith to stop the chaos before the world ends. Sounds like possible blockbuster foil for the movies, but how does it fare as a one-sentence query? If demolition, dynamite, 757s, and apocalypses are your thing, not bad, I guess (if we ignore the leap of faith that takes us from the Midwestern apocalypse to the end of the world and the implicit assumption that the reader is fascinated by the end of the world). But this query would be a lot stronger if we knew more about Jimmy Smith. Why is he the one who has to stop the impending destruction of the world? Who made him Atlas? Is he a reluctant or eager hero? What's his personal motivation to stop the end of the world? What are his stakes?
Those are more questions to answer than you'll likely have room for in your query. However, they're all designed to make the query reader care about your protagonist. If your protagonist goes through the worst tribulations the world can offer, it's all for naught if the reader doesn't empathize with her. So, give us a clue in the query letter as to why s/he's special and why the plot is unique to her/him.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Revving the NaNo Engines
I love this time of year. Leaves are changing. The air is cooling (but not too quickly, please, and not too rainy, please). Everything smells beautifully fresh and old. There's a buzz in the air that's building and will (very) soon become the unmistakable clackety-clack of thousands of writers doing NaNoWriMo. Whether or not you use NaNo in your own writing, you have to admit, it's a pretty glorious thing. The tight timeframe requires shelving self-doubt and vanquishing writer's block and wrecklessly embracing the cause of writing a complete novel in a month. You can do it!
Good luck & happy writing! (& happy Halloween, too!)
Good luck & happy writing! (& happy Halloween, too!)
Thursday, October 22, 2009
On Titles
I have to admit, I'm a cover girl. Let me clarify. Not a beauty queen, fashion model, Halle Berry, ANTM kind of Cover Girl™. Rather, a "'kə-vər 'gərl: n. a female who is a sucker for killer book covers" kind of cover girl. Maybe you can't judge a book by its cover, but when browsing, a sharp, snappy cover will get a book into my hands for at least two minutes--long enough to read the back cover copy and maybe the first few pages, and more importantly, long enough to make a decision on purchasing aforementioned book with the sharp, snappy cover. Prior to publication, of course, you don't have the luxury of a professionally designed cover to help would-be buyers (agents, editors, etc.) make a "purchase" decision. However, you have something even better: your title.
"Wait," you may say to yourself. "But isn't the point of the query and submission process to prove the quality of my plot and writing--not that I can string together one to five pithy/profound/intriguing words for a title?" Yes--of course. When I'm reading query letters, I'm reading first and foremost for the substantive goods: plot, voice, characters, writing style. If a query matches up with what I'm seeking in those categories, I'll request to see more ASAP. But sometimes, I might be on the fence after reading a query letter. Maybe the plot sounds intriguing, but the writing's a little off. Or maybe the plot sounds a bit generic, but the protagonist sounds compelling. It's then that a title might tip the scales in your favor. If the title piques my curiosity, I'm much more likely to request material at that point.
Finding the right title can be a difficult process. It's worth spending a bit of time brainstorming to make sure that your title fits your work well. But don't stress too much. A title will certainly never break whether or not I request to see a partial manuscript after readng a query. However, it just may make it.
"Wait," you may say to yourself. "But isn't the point of the query and submission process to prove the quality of my plot and writing--not that I can string together one to five pithy/profound/intriguing words for a title?" Yes--of course. When I'm reading query letters, I'm reading first and foremost for the substantive goods: plot, voice, characters, writing style. If a query matches up with what I'm seeking in those categories, I'll request to see more ASAP. But sometimes, I might be on the fence after reading a query letter. Maybe the plot sounds intriguing, but the writing's a little off. Or maybe the plot sounds a bit generic, but the protagonist sounds compelling. It's then that a title might tip the scales in your favor. If the title piques my curiosity, I'm much more likely to request material at that point.
Finding the right title can be a difficult process. It's worth spending a bit of time brainstorming to make sure that your title fits your work well. But don't stress too much. A title will certainly never break whether or not I request to see a partial manuscript after readng a query. However, it just may make it.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Fairy Tales
I had forgotten how much I enjoy retellings of fairy tales until I recently read Ash by Malinda Lo. Ideally, any story that I read will take me down new paths and around unexpected corners. However, for the unexpected to be revealed in the retelling of a fairy tale is something entirely different. Fairy tales are one of the final communal vestiges of a story tradition that most people carry with them from childhood: maybe from an elementary school librarian's reading circle, a parent's bedtime story, maybe from the Bros. Grimm or Hans Christian Anderson or from Disney. Regardless of the source, many of these stories stand as touchstones in our understanding of stories and understanding of the world. Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Little Red Riding Hood all conjure the same basic plot lines and images. But instead of churning out the tropes and clichés that could accompany a hundreds-of-years-old story, Lo's imagery, narrative, and protagonist make the story of Cinderella brand-new and magical. And, better than anything, it makes me believe in love forever-after.
This book also reminded me of Robin McKinley's books--especially Beauty. Any other good fairy tale retellings out there?
This book also reminded me of Robin McKinley's books--especially Beauty. Any other good fairy tale retellings out there?
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Buzz Words: Tension
My Firefox homepage is set to Yahoo!, so in addition to the biggest of the real news headlines, I also see a variety of other headlines, such as: "10 Best Cities for the Young & Rich," "6 Ways to Know Your Man is Cheating," "Eat This Food to Lose 25 Pounds and Live Forever," etc. (Maybe these aren't exact titles, but close enough for you to get the picture.) I click through occasionally, most recently to an article about overused office buzz words. You know the ones--"synergy," "out of the box," "sea change." The words that defined a corporate culture for six months and then transferred to the rest of the world as business touchstones and shorthand for years after that. The point of the article was to advise readers to avoid these buzz words and to opt instead for phrases and words that delivered new meaning, because as we all know, when words get overused, they lose their impact (click here for a great send-up of Dan Brown's cliché usage). While the advice is relevant in the office and in your writing, I have to admit that office buzz words sometimes serve a purpose--or maybe I just have to admit that buzz words serve a purpose to me.
Right now, my buzz word is tension. In every manuscript that I read, I'm looking for tension, tension, tension. This encompasses a variety of elements. For starters, as a given, tension necessitates that the manuscript contains some sort of drama (this is as true for comic writing and light fiction as it is for thrillers and dramatic plots; conflict = drama).
Next, tension relies on well-paced exposition (you already know how I feel about pacing). This is as important in the meat of a story as it is in a story's prologue; even scene-setting should build tension by foreshadowing drama and conflict. Also, it requires a stern editing eye to pare down step-by-step mundanity of everyday life and foreground only the important plot elements. (E.g. Your protagonist botches things at work and loses the company's biggest client. That night, she comes home, cooks dinner, sets the table, eats, clears the dishes, watches TV, goes to bed, wakes up the next morning, gets dressed, goes to work, gets fired by her boss. Major plot drama exists in those two sentences, but the tension is totally diluted if all of that mundane filler is included.)
Finally, consider the stakes for your characters and their world. Tension exists (and can be executed beautifully and flawlessly) in the small scale of daily life, but it can also be vaulted beyond that if the conflict holds consequences beyond the scope of your protagonists. Bottom line? Synergize your plot elements out of the box to create a tension sea change in your manuscript. :)
Right now, my buzz word is tension. In every manuscript that I read, I'm looking for tension, tension, tension. This encompasses a variety of elements. For starters, as a given, tension necessitates that the manuscript contains some sort of drama (this is as true for comic writing and light fiction as it is for thrillers and dramatic plots; conflict = drama).
Next, tension relies on well-paced exposition (you already know how I feel about pacing). This is as important in the meat of a story as it is in a story's prologue; even scene-setting should build tension by foreshadowing drama and conflict. Also, it requires a stern editing eye to pare down step-by-step mundanity of everyday life and foreground only the important plot elements. (E.g. Your protagonist botches things at work and loses the company's biggest client. That night, she comes home, cooks dinner, sets the table, eats, clears the dishes, watches TV, goes to bed, wakes up the next morning, gets dressed, goes to work, gets fired by her boss. Major plot drama exists in those two sentences, but the tension is totally diluted if all of that mundane filler is included.)
Finally, consider the stakes for your characters and their world. Tension exists (and can be executed beautifully and flawlessly) in the small scale of daily life, but it can also be vaulted beyond that if the conflict holds consequences beyond the scope of your protagonists. Bottom line? Synergize your plot elements out of the box to create a tension sea change in your manuscript. :)
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Now Also Representing: Young Adult Fiction
I’m thrilled to announce officially that our agency is expanding to include representation of YA titles! It’s a natural expansion—the commercial market and romance aesthetic dovetail with a lot of young adult titles well. Plus, I ♥ YA.
What kinds of YA are we representing? Almost all kinds: contemporary, fantasy, dystopias, boy and girl protagonists, commercial, paranormal, literary, multicultural, coming of age, and maybe even a dash of historical. In all of these genres, as always, we’re looking for great narrative voices, believable characters and strong writing.
As a sampling of my interests, I have a soft spot for the classic authors I grew up with: Lois Lowry, Madeleine L’Engle, L.M. Montgomery, etc. I love contemporary YA (John Green, Sarah Dessen and Walter Dean Myers stand out, along with Sherman Alexie’s The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian and Stephen Chbosky’s The Perks of Being a Wallflower) and stories about dystopias (The Giver still warrants a periodic re-read; Scott Westerfeld’s Uglies trilogy is fantastic). Fantasy feels like home to me—I grew up reading The Chronicles of Narnia and Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials trilogy—and I like paranormal too (vampires [of course], but also unexpected angles, unique twists and new worlds [for example, I’m really enjoying Rachel Vincent’s My Soul to Lose right now]).
Elaine’s tastes run toward the more straight-forward contemporary stories. She has had ongoing success with Celeste Norfleet’s YA titles, Pushing Pause and Fast Forward—even before we officially branched out into YA. We also have great relationships with YA editors at all of the major publishers.
I’ll be the primary contact for YA. I’ve been helping Elaine with her projects and selling foreign rights for the agency for over a year now, but this will be my first opportunity to develop my own projects. Elaine, of course, will continue to supervise and be a resource, and we’ll likely work on some YA projects together, but I’m eager, dedicated and thrilled to have the opportunity to jump into the mix with YA. So, we’re ready for your query letters. You can mail them in or e-mail them directly to me at naomi@elaineenglish.com. Bring on the YA!
What kinds of YA are we representing? Almost all kinds: contemporary, fantasy, dystopias, boy and girl protagonists, commercial, paranormal, literary, multicultural, coming of age, and maybe even a dash of historical. In all of these genres, as always, we’re looking for great narrative voices, believable characters and strong writing.
As a sampling of my interests, I have a soft spot for the classic authors I grew up with: Lois Lowry, Madeleine L’Engle, L.M. Montgomery, etc. I love contemporary YA (John Green, Sarah Dessen and Walter Dean Myers stand out, along with Sherman Alexie’s The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian and Stephen Chbosky’s The Perks of Being a Wallflower) and stories about dystopias (The Giver still warrants a periodic re-read; Scott Westerfeld’s Uglies trilogy is fantastic). Fantasy feels like home to me—I grew up reading The Chronicles of Narnia and Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials trilogy—and I like paranormal too (vampires [of course], but also unexpected angles, unique twists and new worlds [for example, I’m really enjoying Rachel Vincent’s My Soul to Lose right now]).
Elaine’s tastes run toward the more straight-forward contemporary stories. She has had ongoing success with Celeste Norfleet’s YA titles, Pushing Pause and Fast Forward—even before we officially branched out into YA. We also have great relationships with YA editors at all of the major publishers.
I’ll be the primary contact for YA. I’ve been helping Elaine with her projects and selling foreign rights for the agency for over a year now, but this will be my first opportunity to develop my own projects. Elaine, of course, will continue to supervise and be a resource, and we’ll likely work on some YA projects together, but I’m eager, dedicated and thrilled to have the opportunity to jump into the mix with YA. So, we’re ready for your query letters. You can mail them in or e-mail them directly to me at naomi@elaineenglish.com. Bring on the YA!
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
RWA is Coming!
RWA is almost upon us, and the air is electric! The excitement is palpable! I can almost taste it! (Although, the latter may be because it's lunchtime here.) I can't think of any more cliches to throw into the mix, but believe me, they're all true. This is my first RWA, and I can't wait to partake in it all. More to follow on the other side.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Pacing
I'm leaving town later this week to go to Maine for a wedding, so I had some errands to run and shopping to do this past weekend to get ready: a wedding present, a dress, a new book for the plane, etc. In the midst of all that, I went to see The Proposal--the new romantic comedy starring Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds--and I started to read American Gods by Neil Gaiman. Two totally different genres and formats, but both got me to thinking about pacing.
In American Gods, the first chapter sets up the drama and tension of the book. Shadow, the protagonist, is about to get out of jail--free to go home to his wife, the one woman who feels like home to him, and the job that's waiting for him from his best friend. He's vowed to live clean and straight; he never wants to return to prison. Shadow is released from jail a few days early when he finds out his wife has been killed in a car accident. On the flight home, he meets a stranger who tells him that his job is not waiting for him--his best friend was killed, as well--and who offers him a job (with sketchy and unknown moral implications).
At this point, all the plot points of the novel are not revealed; in fact, we don't even necessarily know what the main plot will be. However, the story already includes conflict, tension and drama: three key elements to pacing, and ultimately to plot execution.
Similarly, The Proposal sets out the conflict swiftly. Sandra Bullock's character is a cutthroat editor-in-chief for a book publisher. When she finds out that she is about to be deported back to Canada, she announces that she is engaged to the overburdened executive assistant who lives in fear of her--Ryan Reynolds's character. An INS agent threatens to uncover their engagement for the sham that it is, and before we know it (within the first 15-20 minutes of the movie), Sandra & Ryan are Alaska-bound to meet his family. The resolution of the plot takes us to the very end of the movie; and, really, would we have it any other way? Even though the audience knows how the movie will end (presumably), we would all be bored if we reached the resolution of the plot and had to sit in our seats for 30 more minutes.
Pacing is just as important as any other element when we're considering submissions. I recently read a manuscript where the crucial conflict of the plot was resolved 200 pages before the end of the manuscript (leaving only a secondary plot to meander to the end). I also read a manuscript where the true conflict didn't come into play until more than halfway into the ms.; everything before that was set-up. Conversely, I read another manuscript recently that was tightly woven until the end, leaving me anxiously turning each page to find out what happened next.
As you're thinking about pacing in relation to your manuscript, it may be helpful to map out the plot points of your story. Take note of each point that moves your plot forward. Next, look at where these plot points occur geographically in your manuscript: pp. 10, 267, & 400? pp. 100, 150, 200? If these are the mountains in your manuscript, take a look at what's going on in the valleys. Is it exposition? Is it character development? Is it interesting? Is it summary? Is it necessary? Does the writing propel the reader to the next mountain? Could you cut anything to make the pacing tighter?
So many questions with no one right answer, as always. *sigh* But know that we're all rooting for you while we're reading!
In American Gods, the first chapter sets up the drama and tension of the book. Shadow, the protagonist, is about to get out of jail--free to go home to his wife, the one woman who feels like home to him, and the job that's waiting for him from his best friend. He's vowed to live clean and straight; he never wants to return to prison. Shadow is released from jail a few days early when he finds out his wife has been killed in a car accident. On the flight home, he meets a stranger who tells him that his job is not waiting for him--his best friend was killed, as well--and who offers him a job (with sketchy and unknown moral implications).
At this point, all the plot points of the novel are not revealed; in fact, we don't even necessarily know what the main plot will be. However, the story already includes conflict, tension and drama: three key elements to pacing, and ultimately to plot execution.
Similarly, The Proposal sets out the conflict swiftly. Sandra Bullock's character is a cutthroat editor-in-chief for a book publisher. When she finds out that she is about to be deported back to Canada, she announces that she is engaged to the overburdened executive assistant who lives in fear of her--Ryan Reynolds's character. An INS agent threatens to uncover their engagement for the sham that it is, and before we know it (within the first 15-20 minutes of the movie), Sandra & Ryan are Alaska-bound to meet his family. The resolution of the plot takes us to the very end of the movie; and, really, would we have it any other way? Even though the audience knows how the movie will end (presumably), we would all be bored if we reached the resolution of the plot and had to sit in our seats for 30 more minutes.
Pacing is just as important as any other element when we're considering submissions. I recently read a manuscript where the crucial conflict of the plot was resolved 200 pages before the end of the manuscript (leaving only a secondary plot to meander to the end). I also read a manuscript where the true conflict didn't come into play until more than halfway into the ms.; everything before that was set-up. Conversely, I read another manuscript recently that was tightly woven until the end, leaving me anxiously turning each page to find out what happened next.
As you're thinking about pacing in relation to your manuscript, it may be helpful to map out the plot points of your story. Take note of each point that moves your plot forward. Next, look at where these plot points occur geographically in your manuscript: pp. 10, 267, & 400? pp. 100, 150, 200? If these are the mountains in your manuscript, take a look at what's going on in the valleys. Is it exposition? Is it character development? Is it interesting? Is it summary? Is it necessary? Does the writing propel the reader to the next mountain? Could you cut anything to make the pacing tighter?
So many questions with no one right answer, as always. *sigh* But know that we're all rooting for you while we're reading!
Friday, June 5, 2009
The Heart of a Woman
Harlequin is celebrating its 60th anniversity with an exhibit at Open Gallery in SoHo entitled "Heart of a Woman: Harlequin Cover Art 1949 - 2009." I wish I had known while I was in NYC over the weekend; the exhibit looks amazing. It will be on display until June 12th, but if you won't be in New York before then, check out the Flickr album from RT Book Reviews.
Also to celebrate its 60th anniversary, Harlequin is giving away 16 free (free!) e-titles. Check them out here.
Also to celebrate its 60th anniversary, Harlequin is giving away 16 free (free!) e-titles. Check them out here.
Monday, June 1, 2009
BEA
I'm back from BEA (and a bit more rested than I was yesterday), and I think it was all it promised to be. Yes, it was more scaled-back, but everyone knew that would be the case before the show opened. Attendance-wise, it wasn't even that much smaller: according to the statistics I read, attendance was up 30% from last year's LA show, but down 11% from the 2007 NYC show. Instead, the main tightening of the belt buckles seemed to be on the exhibition floor: fewer exhibitors, smaller booth spaces for even the largest publishers, less physical galleys and more e-galleys. In an industry whose business model has arguably tended a bit toward gluttony (more on that later), maybe a leaner BEA isn't a bad thing.
And, even with the smaller show, there was still tons to see. In the arena of pure spectacle, there was the Javits Center itself--a gorgeous place for an industry trade show; Clifford the Big Red Dog in huge, inflatable attendance; the new Cool-er e-Reader being shilled by dancing women in sequined bikinis and headresses being followed by a trio of men with drums. In the arena of galleys, there were still plenty to pick up from well-known authors: Mitch Albom, James Patterson, et al; celebrities & celebrity brands: Serena Williams, a Top Chef team; as well as those from small presses and debut authors. Elaine practically advised me to only pick up the galleys I was interested in reading. I thought I was judicious in my selections, and my shoulder still ached at the end of the day.
Last, but nowhere close to least, it was a great and interesting day for business. I got to meet some foreign co-agents with whom I had only ever exchanged e-mails. I met some new editors. I got to meet some authors. I also attended several interesting seminars and panel discussions. One session focused on foreign rights and trends in Italy. (During the session, one publisher asked about Italy's market for erotica, and, after the presenter shook her head no, an audience member piped up to explain, "We have the Pope.")
One featured Chinese author and publisher Lu Jinbo--a pioneer in the internet literature phenomenon in China. Lu Jinbo's company publishes 200,000 online titles per year (yes, that's two hundred THOUSAND), and authors retain 2/3 of the profit. Some tips and business models that have helped make it such a success: online usage practices instead of the printed book are the point of departure; content is serialized (users pay about 3 cents per 1,000 characters); and users can use their mobile phones to pay for the content (they enter their cell # for the transaction and it is included on their cell phone bill). The numbers and scale in this venture are pretty astounding.
One of the most interesting panel discussions that I saw was at the end of the day on Saturday, Stupid Things Booksellers & Publishers Do. It was a discussion that was, at times, heated--although more with passion than alacrity.
One suggestion floated from an audience member involved reducing first print runs, to create heightened demand for first editions of books. If, for example, a first print run for prolific author & Guinness record-setter, James Patterson, well exceeds all wildest or even reasonable expectations of sales, why would a reader buy the book in its first-run, hardcover edition--knowing that the value will only depreciate? Why not wait, or check it out of the library? One might resist talking about books in such stark terms of capitalism, but it seems likely that bibliophiles (even the mildest bibliophiles) are the ones who will keep the print industry alive in some manifestation. Those of us who, when asked why we like books, start talking about the way new ink smells and a hardcover book spine cracks on first open, and the weight of a book in our hands when we're reading, and the world that grows with each turn of the page, are often the ones who are interested in investing in first editions or hardcovers of books. If the excessive supply is decreased, will the bibliophilic demand for books increase?
Another audience member (in response to panelist Dominique Raccah, CEO of Sourcebooks) jokingly suggested putting Espresso Book Machines in every bookstore. The idea was not roundly scorned by panelists, which raises the questions: What do we get out of books? Out of reading? Out of reading communities? How are local bookstores conduits for local communities? How are those communities expanded in bookstores, and is that community dependent on the selling of books? How are those communities recreated online?
This forum, as everywhere in BEA this year, was rife with questioning: of business models, purposes, etc. But in every conversation, participants were obviously committed to the business of books (as we know them now or may know them in the future) and, therefore, committed to the written word. Needless to say, it was an exciting time.
And, even with the smaller show, there was still tons to see. In the arena of pure spectacle, there was the Javits Center itself--a gorgeous place for an industry trade show; Clifford the Big Red Dog in huge, inflatable attendance; the new Cool-er e-Reader being shilled by dancing women in sequined bikinis and headresses being followed by a trio of men with drums. In the arena of galleys, there were still plenty to pick up from well-known authors: Mitch Albom, James Patterson, et al; celebrities & celebrity brands: Serena Williams, a Top Chef team; as well as those from small presses and debut authors. Elaine practically advised me to only pick up the galleys I was interested in reading. I thought I was judicious in my selections, and my shoulder still ached at the end of the day.
Last, but nowhere close to least, it was a great and interesting day for business. I got to meet some foreign co-agents with whom I had only ever exchanged e-mails. I met some new editors. I got to meet some authors. I also attended several interesting seminars and panel discussions. One session focused on foreign rights and trends in Italy. (During the session, one publisher asked about Italy's market for erotica, and, after the presenter shook her head no, an audience member piped up to explain, "We have the Pope.")
One featured Chinese author and publisher Lu Jinbo--a pioneer in the internet literature phenomenon in China. Lu Jinbo's company publishes 200,000 online titles per year (yes, that's two hundred THOUSAND), and authors retain 2/3 of the profit. Some tips and business models that have helped make it such a success: online usage practices instead of the printed book are the point of departure; content is serialized (users pay about 3 cents per 1,000 characters); and users can use their mobile phones to pay for the content (they enter their cell # for the transaction and it is included on their cell phone bill). The numbers and scale in this venture are pretty astounding.
One of the most interesting panel discussions that I saw was at the end of the day on Saturday, Stupid Things Booksellers & Publishers Do. It was a discussion that was, at times, heated--although more with passion than alacrity.
One suggestion floated from an audience member involved reducing first print runs, to create heightened demand for first editions of books. If, for example, a first print run for prolific author & Guinness record-setter, James Patterson, well exceeds all wildest or even reasonable expectations of sales, why would a reader buy the book in its first-run, hardcover edition--knowing that the value will only depreciate? Why not wait, or check it out of the library? One might resist talking about books in such stark terms of capitalism, but it seems likely that bibliophiles (even the mildest bibliophiles) are the ones who will keep the print industry alive in some manifestation. Those of us who, when asked why we like books, start talking about the way new ink smells and a hardcover book spine cracks on first open, and the weight of a book in our hands when we're reading, and the world that grows with each turn of the page, are often the ones who are interested in investing in first editions or hardcovers of books. If the excessive supply is decreased, will the bibliophilic demand for books increase?
Another audience member (in response to panelist Dominique Raccah, CEO of Sourcebooks) jokingly suggested putting Espresso Book Machines in every bookstore. The idea was not roundly scorned by panelists, which raises the questions: What do we get out of books? Out of reading? Out of reading communities? How are local bookstores conduits for local communities? How are those communities expanded in bookstores, and is that community dependent on the selling of books? How are those communities recreated online?
This forum, as everywhere in BEA this year, was rife with questioning: of business models, purposes, etc. But in every conversation, participants were obviously committed to the business of books (as we know them now or may know them in the future) and, therefore, committed to the written word. Needless to say, it was an exciting time.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Off to BEA
My first year working for Elaine, and I get to go to BookExpo America! I'm beyond thrilled. Everyone keeps talking about scaling back BEA, but somehow I'm sure I'll still feel a bit like Dorothy in Oz: seminars, foreign agents & galleys, oh my!
I'll be back next week with a full report. In the meantime, enjoy the weekend.
I'll be back next week with a full report. In the meantime, enjoy the weekend.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
