These are a few thoughts about manuscript agencies which may be useful for new writers seeking to get their novel published.

I won't be mentioning any names, but I have become concerned about some of the practices and directions some of the agencies have been taking in the last year or so. Of course, these are just my views but they're born out of a lot of experience, including a period working for one of the big name agencies.

I'm not suggesting for a moment, by the way, that there are not good readers providing good reports in manuscript agencies. But something that doesn't perhaps get considered enough is the fact that agencies comprise a not always natural mix of well-intentioned readers working for owners/managers who are first and foremost business people. Of course, this dichotomy is often reflected in the publishing world at large too.

The nature of novel writing means it's very difficult to get useful feed-back at a stage that can save you a lot of time and heartache. By contrast, if I was a singer-songwriter, getting feed-back would be relatively simply, if not nerve-wracking. There are three pubs within a few hundred yards of my house that have weekly open music nights, so I could just write a song, trundle down to the pub the very same night, sing it and get instant feed-back as to whether or not I should quit the day job. Obviously, this is not so possible with novels; however, that isn't to say there needs to be such a huge gap between this kind of low-cost instant appraisal and the very expensive reports that many manuscript agency provide.

The first thing to bear in mind is that a manuscript agency - despite what it might claim to the contrary - is not a stepping stone between you and a publisher. Even agents aren't really stepping stones; essentially, an agent's job is to negotiate the writer's contract. But the way publishing has gone in the past 20 or so years means agents have made themselves a major gatekeeper between publisher and agent (but not exclusively, it has to be said). Also - and this is very important - an agent is working with a manuscript he or she believes is sellable. Manuscript agencies work with any manuscript they're sent (you should take any claim that they work 'mainly through referrals from agents and publishers' with a very large pinch of salt- 'referral' just means they have an arrangement with some publishers to receive their slush pile rejects).

The role of a manuscript agency is to help you improve your manuscript. Nothing else. So you should be wary when they talk up their successes in placing manuscripts with agents. Don't forget, they receive hundreds of manuscripts, so it stands to reason that in the course of a year they will see a few that may be suitable, or near to suitable, for publication. But this would be the case anyway: if your ms is good enough, then an agent or publisher will pick it up sooner or later. For a ms agency to put such a manuscript in front of an agent they happen to know is at absolutely no cost or risk to themselves. So, they aren't doing you any favours; and in fact they'll usually charge you for the privilege (more on this later).

Okay, now let's look at what an agency actually does for you.

The most common service is to write a report on your novel. This will normally be around 8 pages, going into areas such as plot, characterisation, setting, dialogue and so on. Typically, they will charge you around £5 per thousand words for this, i.e. a 100,000 word novel will cost you £500 for a report, although some add VAT which means you're pushing closer to £600.

A 'readers' writes the report; however, you don't get to choose your reader (although if you happen to know one who works for a particular agency, you can always request they do it for you). Does this matter? Oh, yes. Most readers at most agencies are writers, i.e. not editors (even though agencies often call their readers 'editors'. A writer is not necessarily an editor. Writers, for example, tend to produce just one type of fiction, whereas an editor will have experience in most if not all forms of fiction. Writing and editing are two very different skills. Lewis Hamilton is a great driver, for example, but you might think twice before hiring him to repair your engine.

Many writers who read for agencies have only published one or two books, and some have not published or even written any fiction in years. This is extraordinary, when you think about it: that someone with very little experience of a field is given the job of assessing new people who want to break into it. Also, the people who run agencies tend to have contacts mostly in a specific genre - one agency for example is packed with children's writers. Does this mean the agency will only take ms covering the area it has experience with? Of course not. They're businesses, so will take ms from absolutely anywhere.

Readers typically get paid only a third of the fee the agency charges you. This matters, because it has a debilitating effect on readers after a while. Couple that with the fact they're often having to read poorly written books in genres they're not familiar with and you can perhaps guess that their reports are not always as useful as they could be. Oh, they'll talk up the odd good book they come across and say how rewarding it is to work with the author - which is certainly the case - but they won't mention the excruciation of having to write a detailed report on a book that really needs to be scrapped and started again.

Also, it's very important to bear in mind that most agencies keep separate the readers and the authors they write reports for. You can probably guess some of the reasons for this, but the main one is to do with the agency protecting itself, keeping control of its output and any possible trouble over a report. But it's not a satisfactory relationship for a new writer, who will benefit from direct contact with the person who wrote their report. Some readers talk up the fact that they have spoken personally to the author concerned, but this is actually rare with agencies who on the whole prefer not to take the risk. Divide and rule, in effect.

In essence, I would say the agencies are very close to a scam in charging £500 and upwards for a ms that simply does not require such a detailed report - and from my experience, this applies to most of the manuscripts they receive. It's like taking your self-built car into a garage and the mechanic says, "Well, you don't have an engine in here, but I'm going to charge you for a full service and tune-up anyway." The proper, and moral, service agencies should offer to the majority of manuscripts they receive is along these lines: to have a reader look closely at the first couple of chapters and synopsis and then make a decision about whether or not the book needs a full report. If, as is often the case, they can see there are major things that need doing first - e.g. no plot to speak of at present - they will offer the writer a service that entails a short report based on the reader speed-reading the rest of the ms. The fee for this would normally be about a third of their normal fee for a report. How do I know? Because this is exactly the service I offer writers. Why don't the agencies offer it? Well, I'm sure you can make your own guess . . .

It may be getting worse . . . Recently, I saw an agency offering an additional 'service' which I thought was a disgrace. It may even be in breach of trading laws. In essence, they offered to look at your first three chapters and synopsis to see if it was fit to submit to an agent. There would be no report on your work, but if they thought the ms was good, they'd submit it to one of their agent contacts. If the book sold, they'd take 10%. Which on the surface may seem like a good deal. But think about it: there's no cost to them - it takes only seconds to tell if a submission is worth reading. Then, if they pass it on, there's no loss to them if the agent doesn't take it. But there could be a big gain. One writer, for example, sold her ms after going through an agency, with an advance of £100,000. Which means the agency would have got £10,000 (and the agent £15,000, making a cost to the author of £25,000). This is for doing nothing, basically.

Okay, the agent takes a fee but she has to work for it: find a publisher, work on the contract, help promote you, etc; not to mention risk her reputation. All this agency is doing is introducing yet another layer between the writer and the publisher - which is the only relationship that really counts. Also, they only know a few agents, so there's no guarantee your ms will get to the right one anyway. You could find more appropriate agents yourself. Besides, while publishers take seriously a ms that comes through an agent, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest an agent takes a ms seriously that comes through an ms agency. Okay, they may just read it before others in the slush pile but they will only ever take on an author they believe they can sell. And if they believe you can sell, they'll take you on anyway - meaning you could have submitted to them direct. In effect, you're paying this agency for something you could do better yourself. It's win/win for the agency and lose/lose for you, basically. You lose if they place you (10%), and you lose if they don't, i.e. your confidence takes a bashing and you've wasted time that could have been employed submitting direct to an agent or publisher, while you wait for the agency to get round to telling you they haven't passed on your ms after all.

To put agencies in perspective, I recently attended a two week writing class in Oregon. I met a man there who had been a top New York editor for 30 years. I asked him what he was doing now. He said he was a book doctor (a name some ms agencies use) but that I wouldn't find his details anywhere. Writers come to him - published writers with specific problems they know he'll be able to help with. By contrast, with a ms agency, you'll be paying a high fee, most of which doesn't go to the person writing a report on your book; you don't know who'll be assigned to the book; the chances are they don't understand your genre; they've been given no training in editing by the agency; they're probably someone who's only written a book or two; they will be directed by the agency to be positive (always the chance of repeat fees and last thing they want is to be known for writing honest/negative reports); and they're often providing a much more detailed service than you actually need.

In summary, good agencies will tell you that they can only help you improve your manuscript, and won't charge for work you don't need; the questionable ones basically play on writers' dreams, bigging up their successes in placing books with agents and even charging you for your success which would have happened without them anyway.

I'm sure there are people who are going to respond to these comments by saying they had a very useful report from X or Y agency. As said earlier, of course there are good readers who provide good reports. But whether or not you get one, and whether or not he or she is right for your book, is something of a lottery.

Finally, there is the question of validation. It's an unwise and expensive move to make, to go to a ms agency looking for someone to tell you you're great. However, there are even published writers who for some reason send their latest book to an agency, maybe because their agent has said negative things about it. They're then very pleased when the agency gives them a positive report - even though the agency has no power to publish their book and has a vested interest in telling you how good it is. In fact, this can be a downward spiral into total lack of self-confidence. Because the only opinion that really counts is the one belonging to the person who can publish your book. If your agent doesn't like your book, work out why and if you don't agree, sack your agent. To go looking for validation from another writer being paid by an agency which is primarily interested in making money from writers who are at the start of their careers and who may in fact never have one, is to say the least nuts.

Apologies for a long post, but hopefully it will at least promote some discussion about organisations that, in some cases, are becoming increasingly assertive about their perceived role in helping writers get published.

Terry

<Added>

Apologies for all the typos!

What a thought-provoking post, Terry. This is clearly something that has been niggling you and you have raised a few points i had not considered.

But let me share with you my experience. I got a report done from one of these agencies, for several hundred pounds, and found it positive, encouraging with lots of pointers as to where i was going wrong and ideas on how to solve this. I rewrote the book and on the back of that got a request for the full. The book got nowhere, i got no other requests for the full but my confidence was buoyed enough to believe in myself and carry on writing.

Then i sent a later version of this book to an organisation who read the book for a much smaller fee (a reputable reader reads it). This report seemed damning to me at the time although I knew straightaway that the points made were valid. But the lack of encouragement (as i saw it) sent my confidence spiralling.

What i'm saying is, sometimes i think writers need reports that don't dismiss their work out of hand. All beginners need help, to be pointed in the right direction and given the tools to improve, even if the reader knows that that particular book will get nowhere. Maybe i'm alone, but i never sent my book to an editorial agency expecting to write a publishable book as a result. I just wanted to know where i was going wrong and how i could improve.

So, I suppose it's all down to knowing what you want from a report and maybe editorial agencies need to clarify that their reports will help you improve but won't guarantee anything else.

Interesting though, Terry. Wonder what other people think...

x

Casey,

Glad you found it thought-provoking. My intention was to focus on some practices/attitudes I've seen in some agencies that I'd say are questionable. I'm not for a moment suggesting that the readers at those agencies aren't anything but sincere in the work they do. I'm also not suggesting that people have not benefited from agency reports. When I worked for an agency, I always gave reports my best work and I've got lots of positive feed-back from writers pleased with the results. I just feel that some practices by some agencies are taking advantage of what are understandably fragile dreams writers have - understandable because it is so hard to get feed-back.

I see why you may have inferred it, but I definitely wasn't implying that readers should dismiss manuscripts or damn them. What I meant was that some new writers need an initial view of bigger picture issues they might think about working on, before they go for a more detailed and more focussed report.

Terry

Oh.

If, as is often the case, they can see there are major things that need doing first - e.g. no plot to speak of at present - they will offer the writer a service that entails a short report based on the reader speed-reading the rest of the ms. The fee for this would normally be about a third of their normal fee for a report. How do I know? Because this is exactly the service I offer writers. Why don't the agencies offer it? Well, I'm sure you can make your own guess . . .

Right. So what you're really saying is... Well, I'm sure we can make our own guess.

I paid £400 for a professional critique from an agency. When the reader had read it, she refunded the fee, passed the ms to a publisher, and two weeks later, an offer came in.

I think if you research the organsiation properly - which I'm sure most people are intelligent enough to do (I say this based on a potentially deluded belief of mine that stupid people don't write books) - then there really is nothing to worry about.

Very interesting, Terry.
I should say that I've never used an agency - far too mean - and to be honest I always took the view that it's still only one person's opinion, however much expertise that person may have.
I do see though among new writers that it is almost considered something you just do before the agent stage...as if not doing it is somehow missing out part of the process.
HB x

Right. So what you're really saying is... Well, I'm sure we can make our own guess.

Well, you don't have to guess. I told you up-front. Realise I can be a bit literal at times, but this is my point here: that some agencies don't in fact offer you a range of approaches which mean you don't pay a lot of money for something you don't actually need.

Terry

Many writers who read for agencies have only published one or two books, and some have not published or even written any fiction in years. This is extraordinary, when you think about it: that someone with very little experience of a field is given the job of assessing new people who want to break into it.

And lets not forget the interns who read through the slush piles, rather than the Uber Agent themselves. Shocking!

So would you class yourself as an editor, Terry?


- NaomiM

I paid £400 for a professional critique from an agency. When the reader had read it, she refunded the fee, passed the ms to a publisher, and two weeks later, an offer came in. I think if you research the organsiation properly - which I'm sure most people are intelligent enough to do (I say this based on a potentially deluded belief of mine that stupid people don't write books) - then there really is nothing to worry about.

As I said a couple of times, I'm not suggesting you can't get a good report from a good reader.

I'm not questioning anyone's intelligence. What I'm trying to do is provide some thoughts, based on knowledge and experience, which might help some writers to use their intelligence to make a decision. And at one level, no, there isn't anything wrong with an agency bigging up manuscripts it puts in front of an agent. But if a writer doesn't have the experience to counter-balance their claims, it's possible those claims will play on his or her dreams of getting published. Which in turn, instead of the paid for report constituting useful advice for someone's early first steps, it leaves them feeling rejected when the agency doesn't pass it to an agent.

Terry

And lets not forget the interns who read through the slush piles, rather than the Uber Agent themselves. Shocking! So would you class yourself as an editor, Terry?

Except that slush pile readers are not providing an expert, paid for, report to the writer. They're searching through submissions for anything that might interest the agent. The agent in turn is not charging for a written report either.

I class myself as an editor, in that I've edited for publishing houses and freelance for many years both in business writing and fiction writing. At the time I wrote my first report for a manuscript agency, I'd had eight books published as a writer, taught creative writing for colleges for around 20 years, edited several books for publishers, and more.

Terry

I'll make sure I use you for my next book, then, Terry.

I'll make sure I use you for my next book, then, Terry.

If you're being serious, fine, drop me a line when you're ready. If you're being sarcastic, would you mind explaining why?

Very interesting, Terry, and I'm glad you are raising these points. I think you can divide this into two areas: 1) psychological validation and useful feedback and 2) feeding on the vulnerability of writers and making money out of them. I've had four reports: two 'informal' ones - one from a tutor and one from a competition where I won a free report - and two 'formal' ones. All of these were based on the first chapters of my novel and the synopsis. Why did I choose to have them? Firstly, because I longed for someone to read my work and respond to it. Secondly, because I needed an 'objective eye' to read my work and show me what I'd missed/needed to improve on. They have given me some very valuable feedback, much of which I knew in my heart but was ignoring: an overly downbeat opening, a cardboard baddie, etc. All good so far.
On the other hand, a whole plethora of 'businesses' has sprung up which, in one way or another, purport to fast-track writers' work to publishers or agents. Some involve writer-participation (voting for other writers' work in order to get into a top-five list, networking, etc.) All very exciting when they begin, but it quickly becomes obvious that the amount of energy required to participate is far more than the benefits received (this is of course a personal view). And though money isn't being asked for, time and commitment is - time and commitment which I think would be better put to use writing.
Then there are the 'offers' such as the one you mention above, and which I'd best not comment on since I've submitted to it.
We are a vulnerable lot, us writers. We long for readers. We long for validation. We long for, well, publication. And the longer we go on without those things, the more likely we are to go down one of the above routes. But basically I think what we all want is to learn, to improve, to grow as writers. Which is why I shall be looking for one-to-one mentoring (and yes, paying for it) in order to help me raise my writing to the next level, if I can't place my novel in the next few months.
Susiex

Susie,

We are a vulnerable lot, us writers. We long for readers. We long for validation. We long for, well, publication. And the longer we go on without those things, the more likely we are to go down one of the above routes. But basically I think what we all want is to learn, to improve, to grow as writers.

This is so true. I once wrote a fantasy novel that my publisher turned down, and then my agent couldn't sell. I heard about a POD publisher who was aiming to close the gap between conventional publishing and online publishing. So I sent them my book and they were very enthusiastic, which was great at one level, but deep down I was suspicious: shades of Groucho Marx not wanting to join any club that would have him as a member. But my ego was flattered and I signed up, although I didn't go with them in the end - which isn't to say there's anything wrong with POD publishing; I just didn't think the book was ready to be published.

One of the best ways to get feed-back is by reciprocation. Find a reader who likes your work and you like theirs, and arrange to swap. Works best if they first read your book for enjoyment, then comment on things they think don't quite work or could be improved.

It's so important to stay positive and keep writing. If the quality is there, it will find a way out eventually.

As for mentoring, have you thought of asking a well established writer in your field?

Terry