Does anybody else here get a real lift from a request for a full manuscript? I know it's only a small step in the right direction, but it certainly makes a refreshing change from the constant stream of "thanks but no thanks" replies.

The request I've just received is from Flambard Press, which I understand is a well-regarded company.

It made me think about the pros and cons of submitting to small publishers as opposed to agents.

So far, I've sent sample material to about 30 literary agents – none have requested full manuscripts. Zip, zero, null. A tidal wave of indifference.

Of the four small publishers I've contacted (Long Barn, Snowbooks, Legend Press and Flambard Press), two have requested the full ms. Statistically, it seems that small publishers are a much better use of time, paper and postage costs.

We were talking about this at the HNS conference at the weekend. A few years ago a lot of independent publishers were being swallowed up by bigger companies who were closing the doors to unagented submissions. This put agents under a huge pressure, and they began saying they couldn’t accept unsolicited submissions. It began to like the publishers and agents were creating an unfathomable gulf between writers and readers. The result was an upsurge of new small indie publishers stepping in to bridge the gap. Many of them have fallen by the wayside, but those who have survived are strong and reasonably stable and providing a well-respected alternative to the biggies.

They don’t have the resources to employ lots of staff. Combine that with the fact that they’ve started fairly recently with a clean baseline, and they do seem more techno-savvy and more accepting of, for instance, email submissions.

Interestingly – I was browsing the submissions guidelines of one of London's biggest agencies recently, and their advice was to keep the top copy… !

Dee

Well done on the full request!

This issue is really interesting, and my experience has been similar to yours. I sent to 5 independent publishers, got 2 requests for fulls and was taken on by one of them. I'm not sure how many agents I sent to but it must have been about 20 - like you I had no full requests whatsoever, and only a few 'positive' rejections.

I don't know why this is - in theory it should be easier to get taken on by an agent as there is less risk for them. If an agent can't sell your book, she won't make any money from it - but if a small publisher can't sell it, they will actively lose their own money - and lots of it. I could imagine agents taking a punt on something and not being too worried if they have to give up on it - but a publisher can't afford to do that and must be absolutely convinced the book will sell. And yet we both got more attention from publishers - so I don't know the answer!

Caro

<Added>

Crossed with Dee - yes, the indies are way more up to date with email and the potential of the web. 'Top copy' - hee hee!

That's interesting. I haven't tried the small publishers because I assumed they must be virtually impossible to get into compared to getting an agent - just based on numbers.

Maybe I need a rethink.

<Added>

Congrats on the request for the full by the way - it feels like reassurance that your work isn't total drivel doesn't it? Not that yours is I'm sure, but I have deep and frequent doubts about my own and something like a request for a full, or even a nice rejection, provides such a lift. Hope you get the result you are looking for.

And yet we both got more attention from publishers - so I don't know the answer!

Could it be a matter of risk-aversion?

Small publishing company, wolf always at the door, perhaps people working for a company like that are more comfortable with taking risks?

Literary agents - wanting to pitch to the largest publishers possible, large companies by their nature tend to be risk-averse, and so agents become similarly risk-averse?

I don't know myself, perhaps people more knowledgeable about the industry could comment.

I suppose I'm trying to draw some conclusions from a relatively small sample.

Literary agents - wanting to pitch to the largest publishers possible

That's not always the case. A big advance is good and lines the agent's pocket, just like the author's, but agents also see the bigger picture, that it's worth more in the long run to have an author grow with a publisher and build up a collection of work. There is more chance of an author developing like this in a small, indie publisher than with the big boys, simply because the big boys will drop you if the sales figures for novel #1 don't meet expected returns - which is usually the case with first novels anyway.

Colin M

Hi Colin,

What you're saying makes sense to me. Maybe it's the luck of the draw with the first four small publishers I've contacted. Once I've been through about 30 or so of these companies I'll be able to make a better comparison with response from agents.

I'd be curious to know how many other people have found a similar trend.

I'd prefer to target my future submissions more intelligently if possible, which is why I'm trying to figure if, for some mysterious reason, my work is more attractive to small publishers than it is to agents.

Cheers,
Puzzled of Warrington

Maybe it's the luck of the draw with the first four small publishers

Oh, I wouldn't be hard on yourself. Getting a request for a full MSS is a big thing and something to sing and dance about, and it's often harder to get through the doors of a small publisher because they only put so many titles out per year. I was just pointing out that some agents don't always go for the big publishers, because the long term plan might lie better with an indie label.

So congrats on getting that response. As for agents not requesting it, who knows. Some agents work by trying to second guess what publishers want, basing it on market trends - probably because so much of big firm publishing is based on market trends - while the smaller houses can publish a novel just because they like it.

Colin M

I think Hopper may be right that most agents will want to punt to the bigger publishers who in turn want things they know they can sell. I recall my agent showing me the names of the publishers he intended to approach and they were all household names.
Some of this may be to do with the commercial nature of my work - it's very squarely in the crime genre and thus poses no difficulties in how to pitch.
Perhaps anything more challenging to quantify puts agents off? Obviously there will be some exceptions but I can imagine agents loving it when they can say - look at this chick lit novel, pure Helen Feilding - or here's the new James Patterson.
HB x

I think agents will start with the big publishers because a) that's where the money is (though even big publishers average £8000 or so for an advance for a debut novel, 15% of which ain't a hill of beans for the agent), and b) big publishers won't look at things that small publishers have turned down.

But all the agents I know basically want to get the book published, and they'll work their way well down the list before they give up. If they eschew the real tiddlers it may be because they feel (rightly or wrongly) that, if the book's been turned down so thoroughly already, the writer's long-term career will be better served by trying again with a new book, than by accepting a contract with a tiny publisher who may only sell a handful of copies - may even not survive (think Friday Project). These days, with Neilsen BookData, there's no hiding your sales figures. This is where you may be better off with an editing agent who can help you to improve your work, than the sort who can do a shit-hot deal, but only with a completely oven-ready book.

It's certainly easier to pitch a book where it's obvious what it is, and because in big publishers many more people have to approve a book before it's bought, there's less scope for one person's mad off-beat book to be backed by one mad off-beat one-man-band of a publisher. But they're all - agents, big publishers, little publishers - looking for the Next Big Thing that no one can predict - think Bridget Jones, or Longitude, and hoping they'll be the one to spot it and back it. Publishing is a form of gambling. Sometimes it goes horribly wrong, which these days is called the Londonstani effect, but like all gamblers know that you have to speculate to accumulate, and then do your best to cope with whatever then happens.

Emma

Emma, that's really well put.

It's certainly easier to pitch a book where it's obvious what it is

I've encountered this first hand. Apparently, crossover novels for a debut author are not really a wise idea. I think I've learnt this the hard way. The closer you can bring something to one specific genre - literally, summing it up in a word - the better, or so I am told.

I'm lucky to have seen both sides of the coin. My first novel was entirely dealt with by publishers, and smallish ones at that, whereas the second is going down the agent route. So far, I've yet to see any real difference, but that's probably because I'm still in the writing phase.

We did touch upon this last week. When you have a small publisher and no agent, it is very hard to find an audience - at least an audience who will pay you much for your efforts. Audience appears to be what it's all about. There is so much competition anyway, and commercial offerings seem to drown out the small presses, at least in terms of publicity, availability and therefore financial reward. That's my musings on it anyway, though I'm still pretty new at this endeavour, so I can only say what I think, rather than know.

Shivering at the thought of the 'Londonstani' effect!

JB

<Added>

Well done on the request by the way!

When you have a small publisher and no agent, it is very hard to find an audience

Do you think that's an obstacle that a tech-savvy small publisher (and author) can overcome by using the Internet to level the playing field a little?

I've just ordered a first novel called Janeology by an American author Karen Harrington. All resulting from a random contact through MySpace, following the author's blog as publication day approached and reading some sample pages. How many sales such an online presence can generate I've no idea. There's a 'Top copy' reference in a post above that makes me wonder if many established agents are clinging to a pre-Internet past.

Having just been disappointed by two major novelists that I've read for the first time (Ian McEwan's Enduring Love and Pat Barker's Double Vision) I'm beginning to like the idea of stumbling on new writers via MySpace and Facebook. Of course, that could just be me - I always listened to John Peel as a teenager to find obscure groups none of my friends knew about.

Andy

Apparently, crossover novels for a debut author are not really a wise idea. I think I've learnt this the hard way. The closer you can bring something to one specific genre - literally, summing it up in a word - the better, or so I am told.

Well, it's easier to sell, but it's always going to be a duller book if it doesn't come naturally, but consists of nibbling away anything you want to write but which doesn't fit the formula. I'm a crossover person by nature, and it's hopeless trying to be something else: TMOL crosses over at least three different so-called genre boundaries. The point being that it is harder to pitch, but if you can get past that problem, a) it's clearly more original and exciting for everyone and b) you've got more than one market to sell into.

Unless someone's paid you £480,000 for a novel that's sold 15,000 in three years, you're not suffering from the Londonstani effect, nor are any of us. As someone said, if they'd paid £10,000, it would be considered a really nice debut literary sucess.

When you have a small publisher and no agent,

Nothing to stop you getting an agent after you've landed the small publisher. There would be agents who'd be happy to then look over your contract, and take your second novel on board to sell to someone bigger.

Emma

Emma, I think you manage the crossover perfectly. I'm not just saying that. In my case, I think I held back from writing the book I really wanted to, and that was recognised, and a swift clip round the ear, a kick up the backside, found me back at the drawing board and actually enjoying what I was doing more than anything!

My main push in terms of short stories has been fantasy/horror. I think the agent just thought I should follow that up with a dark fantasy novel, rather than a psuedo-Christian post-modern satire that had some people scratching their heads.

Hopper - I think the internet is an invaluable tool to the small press author, and yes, just because something get drowned out or buried by commerical fiction, doesn't mean it isn't brilliant. I've read some leading authors who I really don't think deserve that status, and some unknowns who certainly do.

If somebody paid me £480,000 for a book I wrote, I'd be too busy sunning myself in Hawaii to worry too much about poor sales! I guess that's the side-effect of the Londonstani effect?

£10,000 would see me right though!

JB

Thank you, JB, that's sweet of you.

If somebody paid me £480,000 for a book I wrote, I'd be too busy sunning myself in Hawaii to worry too much about poor sales!

Until you tried to sell your next novel, that is...
Most unfairly, that's a black mark the book trade will hold against your work. As I think I said on a different thread, it's not about absolute sales, it's all about whether it did(or didn't) fulfill expectations.

In my case, I think I held back from writing the book I really wanted to, and that was recognised, and a swift clip round the ear, a kick up the backside, found me back at the drawing board and actually enjoying what I was doing more than anything

For all we fulminate against the genre-mindedness that seems to pervade the booktrade, I do think that sometimes 'crossover' is simply the writer trying to do too many things at once, and a good agent may be right in saying, 'It needs to be either one thing or the other' not because they're being genre-minded, but because as it stands it isn't working. As always, when you're faced with something that doesn't work in writing, the choice is to do something else, or do that thing better, and only the writer can make that choice.

And the further you go towards the literary end of things, the more leeway you've got on genre, though it's still difficult to pull off...

Emma