In his profile, he says " I`m passionate about the need to encourage and develop new writers". I'd certainly like to hear more because we keep getting the same story here, that in order to get an agent we need to be ready-developed to such a high degree that the work is almost ready to go to print, which is the emotional equivalent of having your arm twisted round your back and being frog-marched to editorial services. Are writers ever taken on who are "very nearly there" but still need the help of a good editor, or are those days numbered?

Colin M

As aspiring writers we tend to feel that getting an agent and then a deal is the end of the process, but that's a bit like assuming that getting a BA/BSc is the furthest anyone goes in an academic career.

But when agents talk of developing young writers, sometimes they mean their second/third/fourth published novels. I know that however far I've travelled already, I've got a lot to learn and a lot of growing to do as a writer, and that's something I need my agent and my editors for. It's also why I've elected to start a PhD in Creative Writing, even though a lot of people have wondered why I'm bothering.

I think the best use of editorial services is to allow what a writer can do to sparkle more brightly: some writers need that more than others, and some agents are better at seeing the diamond in the rough than others. I know the Annette Green Agency do work with writers whose books are 'nearly there'. Maria McCann, the author of 'As Meat Loves Salt' wrote it on the Glamorgan MPhil that I did more recently, but still worked on it more with Annette Green before they got her a pretty spectacular deal.

Having said that, Annette Green turned down an early version of what wasn't then call 'The Mathematics of Love', on the perfectly reasonable grounds that she doesn't like parallel narratives, so wouldn't be the right person to represent me. Which just goes to show what a personal business agenting is, and how no amount of trying to second-guess how agents make decisions, or developing theories of How to Get an Agent, can ensure that you actually get one.

In my grumpiest moments, I feel that the answer to 'How do I get an agent' is 'write a better book'.

But as I say, only in my grumpiest moments.

Emma

Grumpiness aside,

'How do I get an agent' is 'write a better book'.

is probably very honest advice.

Colin M

Thanks for all the words of welcome (even the lukewarm one or two!). I'll certainly visit as often as I can. I'm very new to the site so I'll have to learn my way around, but I hope I'll soon be able to make some useful contributions. If you have any specific questions about the role of the agent or the publisher, or anything relating to your work in the commercial rather than strictly aesthetic dimension then feel free to ask them.

Best wishes
David Smith

Colin M needs to distinguish between the accepted roles of editors and agents. I'm afraid it's true that editors generally will only take on an author whose novel is 'nearly there'. Logistics have dictated it. Editors now spend so much time in editorial and acquisition meetings, in marketing planning meetings, at sales conferences etc, that they simply don't have the time to do extensive editorial work on scripts. No matter how much potential they see in something, if it's only 80% 'perfect' they will stand aside and wait until something comes along that is 95% 'perfect'. Which is why, increasingly, a good agent who has the vision to spot the potential will be prepared to put in a lot more work to try to bring the book to publishable standard. This is obviously very labour intensive work and can take a lot of time, so no agent can offer to do it unelss he or she is passionately committed to a book. What you need is an agent prepared to do this. We are - partly because as an agency that was founded entirely on new talent it's in our professional genes, if you like. And yes, we're passionate about the need to find new authors, because there is no substitute for newness. As excited as anyone might get about the new novel by a favourite author, there's something invigorating about that first acquaintance.

EmmaD is right, I think. But how do you define 'a better book'? No one knows for sure - certainly not the publishers who think they've got a sure-fire winner which then sinks without trace. There's so much luck involved, because of the subjective nature of editors' responses. But then there's also the terribly difficult business of trying to match yourself to 'the market'. For example, write chick-lit now and you're probably doomed. Write mum-lit now and you might be OK, but write it in a year's time and you'll probably have missed the boat.

Publishers and agents alike are on the look out for the diamond in the rough. I think the difference is that agents are not so self-restricting. Publishers are heavily influenced by the conservatism of the bookshops, which drip-feeds back into the publishing houses via the weary sales and marketing people, who have learned that what the bookshops want is a repeat of an existing success, just so long as it remains in vogue, and something with an easy hook to sell it (an approximation of the devalued Hollywood notion of the High Concept, really). Agents are fully aware of this caution, but I think the best agents will resist the temptation to fall in step with this, and will be prepared to try something out because they think it's fantastic, even if it is apparently unfashionable.

A word on split narratives - neither I nor Annette dislike them in principle (a novel we sold to Hodder was told in ten chapters by ten different narrators) but they are incredibly hard to pull off effectively. The main pitfalls are these: a failure sufficiently to differentiate the voices, and the danger that one of the narrative voices is going to be more compelling than the other(s)which means that a commissioning editor reading the novel is going to get impatient when reading the other voices(s) and want to get back to the one that works best. I can't think of many multiple-narrative novels that couldn't have been told in third person. Those that demand it, and work, are superbly done - but it's very very hard to do.

David, I'd be interested to know your views on professional editing services. I’m seeing a trend towards them acting as a filter for agents.

Now that the slush piles have moved from publishers to agents, is there a need for this extra level? And should authors be prepared to pay a hefty sum of money to give their work that extra polish and, hopefully, have it recommended to an agent.

I estimate it would cost me around £450-£550 to have my finished novel professionally edited. I would consider this money well spent indeed if it resulted eventually in publication or being taken on by an agent. Does it sway an agent’s attitude towards a manuscript? Would it be seen as a measure of the writer’s commitment… or sheer bloody desperation?

Dee

Hi Dave,

Welcome to WW. You're amongst friends. WW has everything you desire, all the creativity, imagination, and strangeness that escapes the marketing department. Don't let your bosses know you're here. They'll bust a cummerbund.

So break out, Dave. Excel isn't always right. This is where there are no restrictions, and I guess after Cambridge, law, advertising, and publishing, anybody would want a few less restrictions.

Sure, the industry obsession with youth, educational background, celebrity, and markets gets you down, but don't let it. Log onto WW, sit back, and enjoy writers using their real names, with complete artistic control.

Welcome, Dave.

Ian Duncan Smith

Just bumping this thread up to say- read the WW interview with agent David Smith here and find out what he's looking for in a writer and why.

For a minute I thought I was having a deja-vu moment. But no. I thought I'd read this interview before, so why is it being plugged as a new interview? And, without wishing to seem ungrateful, what is the point of having David Smith as a site expert when he doesn't seem to have made any contribution other than this interview? There are many contributors to WW who value the comments of site experts. Surely, if you're given that responsibility you should make an effort to comment on people's work.

Gulliver - this interview hasn't been on site before. David actually did the interview some time ago but it got lost in our system for a while. David has apparently been answering some members queries via wwmail. We have asked him to also make some 'visible' comments on the site, and he has promised to do so in the near future. Inevitably agents are busy people, so I guess patience is a virtue...

DB, I understand it could be difficult for an agent to make comments on members’ work. However, there have been several interesting threads in the forums recently about agents and getting published, where David’s expert knowledge would have been invaluable.

Dee