I read once, that the primary difference between a published author and an unpublished writer is not talent or some X factor; the published author simply didn't give up.

I think there's a lot of truth in this! That, and a huge dollop of luck.

Besy of luck with your endeavours, Saturday, and welcome to WW.

Rosy

Darran, thanks. I've probably said this before, but you're a real pleasure to work with. I think you do two things which are important for any of us to do: get on with the changes needed while holding fast to your central vision.

Now, apologies in advance for a long post, but this thread has touched on the issue of helping writers with their work, which is something I've very much been puzzling over recently, and would greatly appreciate people's views on. What also got me thinking about it were three things which happened recently.

First, there was a thank-you email sent from a manuscript agency to its readers, mainly informing them about clients' successes, providing a list of those who had been referred to agents. Now to me, this was a little odd, in that it appeared to be giving the readers the message that the sign of doing a good job is passing a client on to an agent. I think there are two things wrong with that: 1) the reader (and the agency) has no control over the quality of the work that is sent to them; and, more importantly, 2) the reader should not be under pressure to do anything but help clients improve their writing.

Second, someone contacted me the other day about working on his manuscript. I gave him details of the services I offer then he asked what successes I'd had (in terms of clients getting their work published). Now, I was in two minds about this. I've always told potential clients that I can help them with their writing, but can give no promises about publication. But, maybe having been affected by the agency email, for the first time, I made a list of people I've referred to agents, or who've gone on to get a book published that I helped them with, then gave him the information (not specific names, obviously).

Third, I was talking to a friend who is a successful TV writer and also a very good teacher. She takes an MA course; gives lots of courses on TV writing; is a mentor/coach, etc. I mentioned this issue of 'success', and she said she is unequivocal about this, always telling clients, "I won't get you published".

I thought of a parallel situation where, say, someone wants to paint but they've had no formal training. One thing they could do is enrol in an evening class at a college. But it's very unlikely that before doing so, they'd ask the art teacher how many of their students had gone on to hold their own exhibitions. Their ambitions would, rightly, be focussed more on simply learning good technique, like how to translate a scene into meaning or even how to hold a brush properly.

Yet people do contact freelance editors or manuscript agencies expecting to get published as a result of having someone work with them on their book. Often, this is the first thing they've written and, in most cases, they have never before worked with someone who has experience of technique and craft.

On the one hand, I understand how such a difference in expectation levels between new writers and, say, new artists can happen. Writers work in isolation for a long time before, usually, anyone looks at their work. Which means they can have built all kinds of unreasonable views as to its quality (and will be reluctant, perhaps, to have to re-do it). Also, society pays little attention to the process of writing, and the media in particular loves to tell stories of poor, single, mothers writing in cafes with no help, then suddenly producing a world-beating blockbuster. By contrast, if you want to be an artist, you will at an early stage have your work sitting alongside lots of other artists, in a life-drawing class, say. When it will be obvious to everyone what stage your ability is at.

On the other, I do feel that new writers sometimes have unreasonable expectations. There is a lot of complaining, for instance, about how callous the industry is, about its ill-informed rejections, etc; and the general tenor tends to be that the fault lies with the industry for not recognising the talent of the author. This may well be the case, but I can't help feeling that what perhaps should be more prevalent is the attitude which recognises that there is a lot to learn, many efforts to be made, and that being a writer is a life journey, whether or not one gets published along the way.

Like to hear your views. At the moment, I'm leaning strongly to sticking to my friend's line regarding client's 'successes'.

Terry

Hello everyone, the range of different opinions and advice continues to be fascinating.

At the moment I feel I have done the right thing by getting involved in this site, not least because I have always wanted to talk to published writers (as much as anything to convince myself that they are actually 'real' people and not just scions of glossy media-related clans).

I was also interested to read the Snowbooks rejection letter. A rejection letter is always going to be a stomach-pummeller, but at its most basic it was good to see a letter that had obviously taken time and effort to write. Some letters are so cursory they leave me feeling like an ageing little match girl who is impertinent even to press my nose against the window of the publishing world.

I also liked the fact that it tried to give the aspiring writer a glimpse into the publishing process. I understand the business constraints which mean that a publisher is judging the book on offer as a potential product, not the writer, but I thought an agent would have a longer view. I run a business myself so the juggling of longer term ideals and the short-term facts of the bottom line are all too familiar, but naively I believed that agents would take a slightly longer term view which would encompass potential as well as current achievements - God knows why I would think that, it sounds extraordinarily naive even as I type it.

I'm also feeling quite lost when it comes to understanding the difference between commercial and literary fiction (and as for 'crossover' fiction …).

At the extremes of the axis I can see the difference, some chick lit for example is terribly formulaic - oops there goes my boyfriend, never mind I'll go shoe shopping (the mum lit version is oops there goes my husband, never mind I'll take up salsa dancing and get my life/work balance into kilter), but some of it is well-observed, involving and entertaining. Similarly, some literary fiction is so self-consciously clever and densely written that I haven’t a clue what’s going on half the time. Neither is it immune to fashion and can be equally formulaic - I have to say I'm getting bored with the dark adventures of 11-year-old idiots savant. Again though, some literary fiction is wonderfully simple, the brilliance is related to the reader’s response (when you are tingling with envy because you would love to be able to write like that) rather than because the writing wears its cleverness on its sleeve.

So if it’s not just about style, is the definition related to content? Some people seem to condemn anything female and related to home/ family/ relationships into a box which at best is labelled ‘women’s fiction’ and at worst is condemned as unambitious chick/mum-lit. From what I can see the same standard doesn’t appear to apply to men, there are a number of eminent writers who appear to have made a career writing about the mishaps of the troubled libido.

Yoiks I’m going on a bit aren’t I, it’s just that I am trying to make sense of the industry and of course where my kind of writing would sit within it (if it is ever to have a place beyond my desk drawer).

I write about small, domestic things and about the kind of people you wouldn’t look at twice in the supermarket. I’m interested in the spaces between the big events in people’s lives, the births and marriages and deaths are important of course but I tend to focus on the echoes during the days and years in between. The subject matter therefore takes it into mum-lit territory (and probably also my writing style which is quite colloquial) but it is driven by personality and introspection rather than events, which means it is probably not what someone is looking for when they want a fun read. That’s what I meant when I said I was probably in the middle somewhere.

Obviously I need to do something practical or my head may explode. On a practical level I have applied for a list of this year’s Arvon courses. I am also considering spending some money (how much is needed?) on editing. How does one find a sympathetic editor (I don’t mean one who says nice things, but one who is likely to be on the same wave-length)? Any recommendations anyone?

Also, does anyone have any tips about the best way to put work on this site for feedback? Is it best to start with the first chapter of a novel or just select bits at random? What is the ideal length? Is it best to put stuff on the general pages or to join a group? If so, what is the difference between the groups (e.g. fiction 1, 2 or 3 and between the fiction group and the novel group?

Thank-you again for all your help and advice.

Saturday's child.

Terry, these are very good points and I am sure will provoke a lot of debate.
Being a painter as well as a writer, it was of particular interest. Certainly, I have never attended any kind of course (art college or adult ed.) where the tutor suggested they could refer me to a gallery. However, this is (i) because the tutors tend to be struggling artists themselves (most artists are struggling ones, just as writers are!) and (ii) there is no equivalent body in the art world (to my knowledge) to that of the 'book doctor' or consultancy. A literary consultant has a very specific role, which only seems to exist in this field. However, an offshoot of attending such a course - at least, a BA Fine Art or an MA - is that galleries come to the final shows and see your work. So, there are similarities. But if one attended art college (or went to a literary consultancy) with the main aim of interesting galleries or agents, the only way of achieving this would be by sheer bloody hard work in both cases. Perfecting the craft, technique, widening the mind to new possibilities etc. I see no harm in literary consultancies referring clients to agents, providing the emphasis lies with improving the book to the point where it's publishable. Of course it's a great 'carrot' and, used immorally, could be very, very misleading. But surely the only mutual aim between a good consultant and client can be to improve the work in hand? And if the client is not willing to do this, then the whole agent referral thing is empty of meaning.
Susiex

<Added>

Oooh, crossed with you, Saturday! What an interesting thread you've begun! Lots more to think about now, will come back later.
Sx

but naively I believed that agents would take a slightly longer term view

That used to be the case in days-gone-by, where an agent would sign up someone who had obvious talent and the potential to write well with a bit of mentoring. It still happens, but rarely. More likely you risk getting an Agent who will sign up someone who can write well, but is not writing commercial fiction. Then it becomes a choice for the writer between writing what the Agent wants (maybe romantic fiction), and be published, or writing what you want (maybe literary fiction) which may be not be publishable but at least you are happy with what you are writing.

- NaomiM

Saturday, any of the big editorial agencies could help you if you think that's what you need - Writers' Workshop (now the biggest, who I work for), The Literary Consultancy, Hilary Johnson, Cornerstones. You can ring them and talk through what you want, to make sure you'll get the sort of report that's most useful to you. And there are independent people: a personal recommendation is great, though in the nature of things without that it's a bit more hit and miss.

Agents do think longer term than editors, but they do, basically, have to start with a book they can sell, because until it does sell, you're costing them money.

And I agree that while it's perfectly reasonable for an editorial agency to be pleased when a book gets taken up, it is wrong to sell it as 'come to us and we'll get you published.' (I even know of MAs which advertise along these lines, which makes me really angry.). When I write reports I'm always trying to help improve the book, but always in terms of what makes for better writing in the broader way. If there's something in the book which I think will make it really hard to sell (incest in commercial fiction comes to mind) I'll mention it, but the 'Where and how could it sell?' is quite a minor part - not least because the usual answer, much more tactfully put, is 'Almost certainly nowhere, and never'.

I don't know how other agencies do it, but I know if I think a novel is ready to go (and in a year and a half I've never yet had one anywhere near that standard) the MD of the agency reads it as well. He may send it, for free, to our most distinguished editor, who's an ex-very-grand-Penguin, for another opinion and going-over. And only then, if he agrees, does the client get told that it would be worth sending out. And then, all for free, he leaves no stone or agent unturned to get it taken on, on the principle that if he's said it should get an agent, then it's up to him to back up his assertion by making it happen.

The problem is, of course, that clients want to know, and think we're being coy to hide what they'd see as failure, while we see it as not the point. The majority of clients find when they get our reports that they're satisfied: they got the thing they wanted to write down on paper, they've been heard - my 3-4,000 words-plus-phone-calls is probably the most talking anyone's ever done about their work - and when they look at how much work is needed (I'm never coy about that) they realise they've got the whole thing out of their system, and the can go away and get a life.

I've said it before on WW, that I wish there were other affirmations, other focuses, other ways of being heard, for writers than publication. It's as if your paintings could never be seen unless one of the big West End galleries, or one of a handful of regional ones, took you on. Where's the equivalent of the little recital you give in your local church, the café you can hang your photos in and sell a few and have them seen, the Sunday paintings hung on the park railings? Even the short fiction and poetry competitions and slams and open mikes can provide that kind of affirmation, even though these forms are frustratingly difficult to get published beyond that. With writing novels we're reliant on a series of commercial organisation deciding that they'll make commercial money from our work. That's a very high, and sometimes very narrow, bar indeed, but it's that, or nothing. Lulu and other forms of PoD help, of course - your nearest and dearest are more likely to read it in that form than as a pile of MS. But it's still not the same, and I don't know what the answer to it is.

Emma

So agree, Emma, with what you say about painting/writing. Painters have so many opportunities to show their work and get it seen. Even if it doesn't sell, just having eyes on it and responses to it makes such a difference. Whereas novelists rarely get that opportunity, unless they pay for it. We began a novelist's group a year ago, four of us meeting every two weeks and gradually working through each other's novels. Of course we are not editors, but we can offer our responses, both as readers and writers, and it helps provide an impetus to keep going. As Julia Cameron said, writing without anyone reading it can be like dropping pennies down an empty well.
Susiex

Also, does anyone have any tips about the best way to put work on this site for feedback? Is it best to start with the first chapter of a novel or just select bits at random? What is the ideal length? Is it best to put stuff on the general pages or to join a group? If so, what is the difference between the groups (e.g. fiction 1, 2 or 3 and between the fiction group and the novel group?

Before you take the plunge and get send the ms off to an editorial agency, I would recommend uploading excerpts on WW for feedback. Several pages of critique from an agency (compared to a handful of comments or half a page of feedback on WW) can be pretty overwhelming, and the good things they pick out can get lost in the suggestions for corrections.
You can also get a lot out of giving feedback on other people's work, and applying those tips to your own work - often it is a lot easier to see the mistakes in others' work, than spot those same mistakes in one's own work.
Critiquing is a skill that takes practice, and WW relies on reciprocation: ie. you read my work, I'll read yours.
As far as joining a group is concerned, you are after a concensus of opinion on your work not just one or two critiques, so it is best to join an active group - where members are actively uploading their work and commenting.
You can always move to another group if & when you want to.
As for size of upload, I would say 1500 words is a comfortable figure. First chapters are a good start. Don't feel you need to upload a complete chapter of several thousand words - That takes a long time to read and comment on so odds are it won't get read right to the end, if at all.
If you know what sort of feedback you are looking for, then mention it in the introduction to the excerpt. Some people just want to know if a first draft works before the commit themselves to months of graft, others are more interested in an indepth opinion - typos, grammar, and everything - if they have gone as far as they can with it, to see it it is ready to be sent round the Agents.


- NaomiM

I think that's very sound advice: you'll find not only do you get good advice and critting, but also that you learn what kind of feedback suits you and is most constructive for you. Then when you go outside - course, MA, editorial service - you know what you're looking for and can ask for.

Emma

naively I believed that agents would take a slightly longer term view which would encompass potential as well as current achievements

Believe me, Saturday, such (old fashioned?) agents do exist. OK, maybe they won't take someone on unless they not only like the writing but also have a hunch there is commercial potential there - they won't waste time trying to sell the unsaleable. But my agent certainly puts the maximisation of my writing abilities above short-term financial gain - and tries to advise me about the long view.

It's as easy to knock agents as it is to knock those who work in editorial agencies - and we've had plenty of arguments on here about both!!

Rosy

<Added>

I agree with Terry that pointing to anecdotal success stories of 'those I have edited' doesn't seem the best measure of the worth of a literary consultant. I wouldn't measure the skills of my fellow law lecturers (or my own) by how many of their students have gone on to be high court judges or law professors. Nor of my GP by how many of her patients have got better and how many have pegged it. But you can't teach law in a university without a good law degree yourself, plus research experience - and I like to see a certificate or two on my doctor's wall. The problem is that anyone can set up a literary consultancy (or a lit agency), without any qualifications (unlike those who teach art classes, I suspect, Terry?) So there are almost certainly good ones and bad ones, and measurement of worth is difficult. You can check Predators and Editors to rule out some of the worst - but finding the best? Word of mouth is probably the only way.

Agents certainly do think about long-term potential: with the average advance for a two-book deal £12,000 (Total. Payable in up to eight chunks. Source The Society of Authors) there's no way your first book is going to make much difference to their profitability. So they need to have faith that your work will go on getting deals and gaining readers.

But they do still need to sell that first book, and how capable they are of seeing the diamond through the roughness, and how capable of helping you to cut and polish it, and how willing to spend the time, will vary hugely from agent to agent. Specially with the younger generation of agents who aren't coming from an editorial background as is traditional, but straight from the publishing courses.

The other thing that makes asking an editorial service about its 'success' rate a bit pointless is that not only can you not easily find a true measure of success, but that sometimes the ultimately best projects and best writers take a long time to mature. It took my agent two years to sell a book by an unknown author about an autistic teenager investigating a crime...

Emma

Saturday: Several of you mentioned Arvon courses, has anyone been on one and if so what would you say are their strengths & weaknesses?

I did an Arvon course last year and would have absolutely no hesitation in recommending them (and in fact, I'm such a fan that I'm going to do another one this year). The tutors are experienced, supportive and give you first class advice and whilst they will tell you what they think, there's nothing harsh or unfriendly or mean about it.

The benefit of doing the course is that you're getting the advice of people who have actually been published. It's a massive confidence booster if a published writer tells you they like what you're doing, but even if they don't, they'll explain to you why and make suggestions on what to do about it (which you can take or not take as the case may be). You're also with like-minded people who are serious about writing, so you can encourage and bounce ideas off each other. Plus you're in a location where there is literally nothing to do except write - there's no tv, radio, internet or other distractions.

The course I did was structured so that you had group classes in the morning until lunch and the afternoons were free. Each person got two one-on-one tutorials (one with each of the two tutors), who do read what you've written and let you know what they think.

In terms of disadvantages, I personally didn't experience any and came away with tonnes of enthusiasm. However, there were some people on my course who told me of negative experiences on other Arvon courses (specifically, these seem to have related to either not getting on with the tutor or having personal issues with one of the other attendees). A friend of mine did a course last year where apparently one person had a major snit-fit because the tutor didn't think their manuscript was completely perfect.

Arvon courses are expensive (although it does include board and all your meals). They offer financial assistance to some people (travel bursuries and other bursuries I think), which I know a couple of people have been able to obtain.

If an Arvon course isn't right for you, then you could see if your local college offers evening classes in creative writing and try those out. My local college does courses lasting between 5 and 20 weeks on a range of subjects and not horrifically expensive. I've done a couple of them and found them to be useful as well.

what is the difference between the groups (e.g. fiction 1, 2 or 3 and between the fiction group and the novel group?

You’ll get more concentrated feedback if you join a group, but set your work so that it’s visible to all WW members to widen the range. Don’t leave it on the default setting of ‘Everyone’, otherwise it will be visible to search engines… unless you want that, of course.

There’s no real difference between the groups – fiction 2 is an overspill from fiction 1, and 3 overspilled from 2, and so on. This is to keep the groups at a reasonable size, otherwise there would be too much to read and comment on. The fiction groups cover all aspects of fiction - novels, short stories, whereas the novel groups are for novels only.

Dee

This was all very inspiring, and I'm still a bit awed after reading through all three pages worth of insights. I can only say, Saturday, that I hope you join WW. It's very good to have a community in which you can talk about this sort of thing with other people who are in the same boat.
Thank you all for those insights.
Robin

Rosy, I agree, it's difficult to tell which are the good and which the bad literary consultancies, and that word of mouth probably is the best guide; then again, I probably would say that since most of my clients come by that route. I guess my credentials are that for the past twenty years I've been a creative writing tutor for various local authorities, tutor with the Open College of the Arts, publisher's editor, freelance editor, editor/mentor with a consultancy, and now editor/coach/mentor working for myself. None of which is 'official', but then there aren't any official qualifications in this field, and I'm not sure how you could draw them up anyway.

Another thing perhaps people need to bear in mind about consultancies is that they often charge a finder's fee if they place a writer with an agent. This can be a fee to the writer or to the agent. I seem to recall, for example, that the Writers' Workshop charges agents a finder's fee. There's nothing wrong with this necessarily, but I think the author needs to bear in mind (or have it pointed out to him) that this does reduce the number of agents who will see his work to those who will pay the fee, and exclude him from those who won't.

If I was going to Arvon, or Ty Newydd, I'd look for editors taking the course, before writers. The meat of any decent writing course is about editing, after all, and not all writers can teach editing well. If there are no editors, look for experienced writers. And if any children's writers out there are thinking of doing a course at Ty Newydd, I've just heard that Mary Hoffman has signed up. Mary has massive experience of publishing, and is a natural teacher, as well as being very funny.

Terry