Hi All,

Is it necessary to have an agent to submit a manuscript or could you just as easily do it yourself? I would prefer not to have an agent but does that mean it's harder to get published?

Thanks in advance for any help.

Janine

I suspect most people who reply to this will tell you that you must have an agent; that there's no point in submitting direct to publishers. So, just to offer a bit of balance, take a read of these two blogs (with Dean's, it's Parts One and Two of Life After Agents):

http://www.yorkwriters.com/2009/06/announcing-really-bad-literary-agency.html

http://deanwesleysmith.com/index.php/2009/06/

My experience is that, as with everything, the publishing industry is what it is so that it can deal with the staggering amount of slush that gets sent its way. Your job as a serious writer is to find ways round it.

Terry

No you don't have to have an agent, and can submit directly to publishers, especially the smaller ones which don't pay an advance, like snowbooks and Macmillan New Writing (assuming your novel fits their list).
However, a number of the larger publishers do not accept unsolicited manuscripts, also you will not have the benefit of someone to cast an eye over the mss first and bring it up to publishable standard, so you might consider sending it to an editorial agency first (although that will cost several hundred pounds). Also you will need to write a pitch letter, rather than the standard cover letter, to include with your submission.
It is a steep learning curve. You will need to do your homework first before submitting.


- NsomiM

<Added>


Just to add, Non-fiction is usually submitted direct to publishers rather than via an agent.

<Added>

You could also upload your opening chapters on Authonomy, a website run by publishers Harper Collins as an alternative to their postal slush pile.

<Added>

When submitting to publishers you will need to find details of the commissioning editor dealing with the genre of your novel, for each publishing house, and send your submission to them.

<Added>

Why do you want to avoid agents?
If you think it's because they form a barrier to publication, then that is not true.
If you are the sort of writer who doesn't want an agent suggesting changes to a mss, then you simply won't get published.
If it's because you don't want to share your advance and royalties, then you are also short changing yourself on their editoral and industry expertise.

To repeat, publishers deliberately put obstacles in the way of any but the most enthusiastic, committed and determined writers. If you're one of those then you'll find ways around the slush. Best advice I can give at this stage is to find people who've done that and are willing to tell you how; but you'll have to search hard and be willing to pay, both in time and money, not to mention demonstrating the tenacity that shows you're open to actually hearing what they say. Remember, a person's perception about what is possible is totally governed by their experience in succeeding at it, which is governed in turn by how much they actually want it. Those who've broken through have completely different perceptions of what's possible.

Terry

If you are the sort of writer who doesn't want an agent suggesting changes to a mss, then you simply won't get published.

First of all, this isn't true. Many writers, myself included, have sold most if not all of their novels direct to publishers, i.e. without agents having any input to the manuscript.

Second, while there is of course nothing wrong with listening to an agent's view, you need to be very wary of making changes according to it. The editor is the person to listen to, partly because her company is paying you and partly because she's an editor. Although it's true that some agents used to be editors, an agent's role is not to edit. It's to help you sell your book, get you a better contract, and so on. I know plenty of writers who've spent months if not years making changes their agents have suggested - insisted in many cases - only to find the agent can't sell the book in question because it's now even further away from attracting an editor (because it's become a compromise between two different views, one from a party who isn't a writer or an agent).

Terry


<Added>

Sorry, that should be 'who isn't a writer or an editor'. Obviously.

I'm intrigued, Terry, as to how you did it? By networking and then getting a name to send to?

I've been given specific names in the past at publishing houses by an agent friend but still never had even a standard email back. That could, of course, be because they were in no way interested in my book, but - talking about the big publishers here - i'd be amazed to get anywhere by cold-calling on them.

There's no one answer. It's a case of doing multiple things; of stepping up one's output, efforts, enthusiasm; doing things you might not particularly want to do, and so on. For instance, a couple of years back, I decided to start fresh, in Science Fiction/Fantasy (moving from Children's, although I'm still doing some projects in that area). I knew that publishing had changed since the time I first got a book accepted. So, I decided that I'd do everything I could, that a starting writer needs to do (of course I was also going to use past credentials wherever I could; that's just good sense). I went to loads of conventions, I applied for and got into the 6-week Odyssey workshop in New Hampshire; I did the 15-day Oregon workshop last year; and the Milford Workshop; I did some teaching too and sat on panels; made myself be more social than I normally am; met agents, editors, other writers. I also decided to write short fiction as well as novels, because that's a route that helps you build a name in SF/Fantasy. So I've got 35 stories out there at the moment; have sold some - nine out or coming out this year so far; which of course means you need a fantastically thick skin and unlimited optimism, because there are far more rejections than acceptances. No single one of these things is a magic wand in itself; but together, I believe they build a kind of buzz of professional passion around one's efforts. And it's that buzz, rather than following the right advice for a cover letter say, that attracts an editor.

I think what's difficult to see for a new writer, is that editors, by the very fact they see endless manuscripts come through their doors, have a heightened perception towards professionalism and to its opposite. Which means it's vital for a writer to learn how to come across as professional. And one of the surest routes to that is to do more - both in terms of writing and supporting stuff. But also - and here's the trick - to love what you do the more you do it, not see it as a horrible grind that's necessary until you 'make it'.

Terry

<Added>

Basically, you have to happily accept that the publishing industry owes you nothing, and settle to what could be a long process of throwing much spaghetti at the wall before any of it sticks.

I simply mean that if you are the sort of writer who thinks their work is perfect and won't change anything when asked to by an agent or publisher then no-one in the industry will want to sign you up and you won't get published.

As always, Terry, you swing between making me feel inspired and wholly inadequate to the task!

Largely inspired, though. Thanks for that.

I know a couple of authors who got their book deals without an agent - so it can be done.And an editor told me recently she got some books from authonomy.
From my perspective though, it hasn't just been getting the deals in the uk where my agent has been invaluable, it has been the deals abroad, the audio deals, the large print deals etc. I wouldn't have known where to start - or been able to speak/email in the requiste language. Nor, frankly, would I have had the time. You may be better equipped.
I also like my agent to play bad cop when my publishers and I are having any spats...I'm just not good at that sort of thing.
Good luck whichever route you choose.
HB x

Thank you for all your replies.

The reason I would rather not have an agent is that I wouldn't want them making changes before it's even seen by a publisher. If the publisher wanted to make changes to my ms then I would agree to that.

I'm not against making changes but I really would like it to be read at least by the publisher's own editors first.

Of course, I could change my mind if I found a well respected and experienced agent that had a good success rate with publishers.

The problem, Janstar, is that in this day and age most publishers want 'oven ready' manuscripts. Most editors in publishing houses are overworked and short staffed and simply don't have the time to bring a debut author's mss up to scratch. Agents, however, do have the time and the inclination - although it has to be said that not all of them have the ability - to work with the writer to turn the mss into a commercial propostion.


- NaomiM

<Added>

Have you had any feedback on your mss? You could upload your opening chapter or synopsis on WW for feedback, or there are some very good SF forums/communities with experienced writers who could offer advice on it before you submit.

The reason I would rather not have an agent is that I wouldn't want them making changes before it's even seen by a publisher. If the publisher wanted to make changes to my ms then I would agree to that.

This is a good attitude to have. Agents can do a lot for your career but they are not editors, even if that was a job they did in a previous life. We've talked about them before, but really you can't beat Heinlein's rules:

1) You must write.
2) You must finish what you write.
3) You must not rewrite unless to editorial demand.
4) You must mail your story to an editor who will pay you money.
5) You must keep it in the mail until someone buys it.

I started listening to an SF writers' podcast a while back, where the panel was discussing these rules, one by one. In each case, they said, "Yes but . . ." going on to find all sorts of reasons why each rule doesn't quite apply in this and this case, and in today's world, etc. It maybe goes without saying that these were all writers yet to be published . . .

Terry



<Added>

For an excellent commentary on Heinlein's rules, I'd point you in the direction of Dean Wesley Smith once more:

http://deanwesleysmith.com/index.php/2008/09/06/heinleins-rules-revisted/

That is a very simplistic list, Terry.

<Added>

Reminds me of those 'Rules of Writing' lists that get put about every so often, and I'm sure even you would agree that to each point on such a list you would say 'yes, but...'

It's very simplistic, Naomi, because it's distilled from many years of publishing success. Heinlein wrote and published dozens of novels and hundreds of short stories; he won umpteen awards and is generally recognised as one of the greatest SF writers ever.

I might well say, "Yes, but . . . " or even a straight "No!" to whatever rules of writing you're referring to, but Heinlein's rules hit the nail right on the head for me. If you don't think much of them, what do you use instead and how much success has it got you?

Terry