Hi

I've written a novel and paid for a critique. On the basis of the critique, I rewrote the novel. I resubmitted the revised version and was then told the revised manuscript was one of the best she had read. Also, the plot was great, a real page-turner - but the early chapters were too long.

I then amended the early chapters and submitted the first three chapters to someone else - along with my synopsis. I felt I needed a fresh eye on the early chapters.

I was told I could write - but my characters weren't likeable and the plot was an issue. I was surprised with some of the suggestions as I couldn't see how they could work - but I can accept that I need to make changes.

My query is - how do I know which person is correct? Both were authors - but both wrote completely different genres to my novel.

Thanks

Sharley



<Added>

Sorry - typing too quickly. Both 'write' different genres to my novel. Therefore I can't say one would have a greater understanding of the type of book I have written than the other.

Hi, Sharley and welcome

Probably both are right, and likewise, both are wrong.
You can't expect everyone to like the novel. It sounds as though the first one liked it (ie, 'got' it), but the second one didn't. It doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it. Or, it may mean it will only appeal to a small readership.

Assuming you are aiming at publication, the only opinion that really matters is the agent's. Personally, I would not change anything at this point in time, simply to keep one reader happy - you may find the changes mean it no-longer appeals to readers like the first author.
Instead I would start submitting it to agents and hopefully you will get some useful feedback on how to make it more commercial - if that is what's needed. If they come back to you and say the main characters need to be more likable, then you know the second author was correct.

You are welcome to upload a synopsis or plot outline in the Synopsis & Outline group if you would like feedback on the plot.



- NaomiM

Hi Sharley, and welcome to WW.

I agree with Naomi: you've obviously done lots of work, and if the report on the full revised version was happy with it, I'd agree that it's probably a case of 'stop there.' There are lots of things - especially with plot - which are very difficult to tell from the first three chapters, so I'd always approach a report like that with caution. If you start tinkering with bits and pieces on that basis, the risk is that things no longer hang together and make sense as part of the bigger picture.

Very best of luck with it when you do send it out.

Emma

Hi

Thank you both for your replies. They were both really helpful - but led to one further question.

You both mentioned sending to an agent. However, the author who commented on my three chapters and synopsis specifically told that, even when my manuscript is ready, she wouldn't recommend sending it to agencies at present. She explained that it was a waste of time as even pre-published authors are having a hard time getting their new novels published.

I note you both believe it is still worthwhile sending the manuscript to an agent - but do you agree there is any basis in the idea that it could be counter-productive to do so?

Thanks

Sharley

Well things are very gloomy at the moment but, effectively, if you don't send it to an agent you're not going to get it published by a mainstream publisher, since most of them don't take unagented manuscripts, and those that do find it even harder to get to their slushpiles than agents do. The small and independent publishers aren't finding it any easier.

Agents are finding it very tough to sell things, not just in the last few months, but in the last year or five, and so they're being very, very tough about what they take on. But that isn't a situation that's going to change any time soon, and they do nonetheless need new authors (existing authors die, give up, stop selling...) so I can't see any particular point in just sitting on the thing for a year - or two - or three. If it's rejected by everyone - which most people's first novels are - then you'll need to think about revisions...

Emma

I'm going to give you a slightly different take on this. It's not a popular view on this site, I'll warn you now. So just bag the bits that help and disregard the rest.

It's imperative that the writer is in control of her writing. Believe it or not, the writer is the most important element in the publishing pyramid. Everyone else in it, including agents, are support mechanisms. Having said that, part of the writer's job is not to assume this means publishers should publish anything she decides to write; she has to shape her work so that it also fits with their requirements. Is that a paradox? Only for someone who can't think professionally.

However, what a writer definitely shouldn't do is abdicate her professionalism and creative instincts to any third parties other than the editor who is paying for her work.

With that in mind, such a writer's use of agents and manuscript agencies will be different from the often subservient position writers take today. For instance, any report writer who told me my characters 'weren't likeable' would be sacked straight away. Now, if my trusted personal reader told me this, fine: but then we have an understanding, based on mutual liking of each others' work, that makes such an observation valid. For it to be made by someone you don't know, it's nothing more than personal opinion.

This doesn't mean book doctors and manuscript agencies should necessarily be avoided. But if you do use them, it's best to approach them as you would your decorator, i.e. you know what the house needs to look like, what colours the walls, what sheen on the gloss, etc. You need them to advise you on these and these technical points: not criticise your themes, visions and characteristics.

Same with agents, but probably best not to re-ignite that particular debate at this stage.

In short, the writer needs to always have control over her work. Don't take anyone's editorial suggestions on board unless they're the person who's paying you (one of Heinlein's rules). If you pay for other editorial input, make sure it's from someone who understands what you're trying to do, who won't just bury you with personal views.

Oh, one caveat to all this: what I'm saying applies to someone who's been writing seriously for a while. If you're a complete beginner, then there's possibly more of a case for, say, trying a manuscript agency cold. But even then, I think the gist of what I'm saying can help you not get too ping-ponged around by people who are actually not really qualified to editorially comment anyway (because most readers at agencies are writers, not editors).

Terry

If it's finsihed, there's no point leaving it languishing in the proverbial bottom drawer, or constantly tinkering with it in the hope of making it 'better'.
The only thing to do is to send it round the agents and see if any of them will bite. Just because they are finding it hard to sell on to the publishers, doesn't mean they won't snap up an author whose work looks as though it may be a commercial success when the market picks up (at least, that's the 'cup is half full' view of the current situation).
You may find that an Agent doesn't sign you up, but gives you some good pointers as to how to make your mss more commercial/publishable.

Yes, Terry has one point of view about agents; it's fine to stick to your guns, as the author, but, if you want a chance at being published, ultimately it's the Agent's or Editor's call. Admittedly, even they sometimes make mistakes - trying to make a novel into what it is not; they may be like your second reader who suggests changes, and you make them despite your better judgement, and despite all the work it still doesn't pan out. (Always keep your earlier versions of the mss, just in case). But at least you took the chance, and, by putting the work in, it will show the agent that you are willing to take their suggestions on board; you are someone they can work with and not a primadonna author ranting on about artistic integrity. And in such cases they would probably be happy to look at your next mss.

Even if it doesn't pan out - even if all you accrue are standard rejection slips - you will certainly learn a lot from the expericence. And there's nothing to stop you from resubmitting the mss again in a year or so's time when the market picks up again.

Thank you for taking the time to respond and offering different perspectives.

I will upload the plot synopsis and see what other people feel about it. I am generally pleased about the plot itself - which is why I was so confused about the comments given by the reviewer.

I did find that some of the technical criticism given were useful - so I'll concentrate on improving my scene description, etc.

Once again, thanks for your comments. They have been really helpful.

Sharley

Nothing much to add, other than to wish you luck. As everyone says, no-one's going to come knocking on your door asking if you have any unpublished manuscripts, so the only way you will know if it is publishable is to get it out there. In terms of whether or not it's ready - what do your instincts say?

Yes, Terry has one point of view about agents; it's fine to stick to your guns, as the author, but, if you want a chance at being published, ultimately it's the Agent's or Editor's call.

I disagree that your chances of getting published are necessarily the agent's call. I know plenty of writers (me included) whose agents have not sold their fiction; the author's sold it and their agents have worked on the contracts. Also, most editors do not any longer have the power to make the lone call on publishing a book. They can push it at their editorial and sales committees but it won't be their decision alone.

The point I'm trying to help along here is that it's all too easy for a writer to become too passive in the face of a constant stream of fixed but not necessarily experience-based views about how to get published; that and the ever increasing deification of the agents' role. A valid path still to publication is to lead with one's vision and work. Don't forget that the ultimate end process in publishing is the direct linking of the reader and the author - everyone else in-between is just the mechanics of bringing this mutually rewarding relationship about.

Terry

Terry, I just meant about if and what changes to make to the mss to make it a more commercial proposition.

If you show it to one reader they are going to have one view on how to make it more appealing to them. If you show it to someone else they are liable to have a different view. What you are aiming for - from readers at least - is a concensus of opinion, before you start changing things.

An Agent, on the other hand, will have a lot more experience and so their sole opinion carries more weight than a handful of readers.

I'd have to put my tuppence ha'penny behind the school which says that if you don't send work out to an agent once it's ready, then you have very little hope of getting into a major publishing house. Yes, some indies will still look at unagented submissions, but it's very hard. And signing with an agent means going along (by and large, and with room for two-way discussion and dialogue as you begin to work together on your text) with his or her suggestions for revisions. He or she is the industry expert, and to an extent you have to trust him/her.

Having said that, I think finding an agent who 'gets' your work is important. If I felt completely out of sympathy with the first set of comments/revisions an agent put to me, I don't think I would wat to get on baord with him/her. When mine told me the things he thought I should change with my first novel, many of them were 'Oh yes, of course' moments. It meant I trusted his judgment and trusted him to know what I was aiming for.

Editorial agencies, agents, readers, won't all agree about the various aspects of your work. The skill, in the early stages, is to listen and learn and take from it all the things you do agre with, and have the confidence, ultimately, to ignore those you think are wrong. The point of editorial reports is to be frank and give an honest opinion, and I can't agree at all with Terry that they shouldn't tell you your charaacters are unlikeable unless they 'know you' (???). If that's their response to the text, you need to be told that. I doesn't mean other readers will all have the same response, but you still need honesty - you need to be told, and it's their job. Then you think about it, and decide if you agree.

Once you are signed up and in a working relationship with an agent or editor, it's slightly dfifferent - you have to listen to all of it very seriously, especially with an editor - though even there I believe ideally there shoud be dialogue and a cetain amount of 'wiggle room', especially about the particular solutions the author finds to the problems identified.

When your reader told you not to submit your ms to agents, I woud ask him/her what was meant. It could mean simply that they think it needs more work before it's ready to submit. Or it might mean they advise waiting six to twelve months because of the market. I'd be very surprised if they meant that agents, generally, weren't the way to go.

Best of luck with your book, Sharley.

Rosy

Well, I am largely a novice with regards to publishing and agents, but I am fairly sure I know a good plot when I see it. Sharley's outline on the Synopsis group had me glued and involved and in a nervous state, and that's only the outline.

Obviously, probably need to upload first chapters too, on another group, and see what the comments there are, but I'd be inclined to stick pretty much with it, Sharley, and to get it out to agents after that.

Not saying, however good it is, it will immediately be accepted by an agent, but could well be the first steps to the start of a promising relationship.

Thanks again for the comments.

Rosy - the second reader meant it was not ready yet (which is fair enough) but that even once ready, I shouldn't submit to an agency, as it would be a waste of time due to the economic climate.

I'll take comments on board and submit - once I have made some of her better suggestions ref technical changes (more description of characters, etc.)

Thanks for all other comments - and Issy's kind remarks about the plot outline. I can see the novel won't be to everyone's taste, but my mind is at rest about undertaking some of the plot suggestions.

Best wishes

Sharley

<Added>

Should have said 'I'll take your comments on board submit to agencies'.

Agents do of course have influence. But agents also vary considerably in terms of experience, approach, ability and editing skills, not to mention integrity.

I don't get so involved in this site these days so perhaps see it more with an outsider's view. And what concerns me is a certain degree of kow-towing to third parties, especially agents, that is sometimes advocated or at least implied. That and the prescriptive advice given by, in some cases, people that have not actually had much or anything at all published.

All of which can induce in a writer a kind of timid acceptance of what they believe is their fate, which seems to be the endless pursuit of an agent - any agent - who will miraculously launch and then maintain their careers.

The fact is, there is an awful lot a writer can do for herself. It involves getting out there, forging links, finding out about new approaches, methods and technology. Then transferring that enthusiasm into one's projects, leading with one's passion. Which is kind of different to the cap in hand approach some people on this site seem to believe is appropriate.

As for editorial agencies, the problem with reports written by authors instead of editors is that authors tend to fall back too easily on personal opinion rather than struggle as editors do to explain why something doesn't work technically. It's similar in football, where top players rarely make the best coaches, because they're used to just doing it, rather than looking to see how it's done, and to how that knowledge can be transferred to someone else. Okay, I haven't seen Sharley's report and it may well be that her reader went on to explain why exactly her characters aren't likeable, within the aims, tone and vision of the book. But if it was just left at 'not likeable', it's probably a writer simply expressing a personal view which, let's face it, you don't need to pay a lot of money to hear.

Terry