Here's me talking about just that - um, on my agent's blog!

http://slushpilemountaineering.wordpress.com/

Great blog post. Interesting view on the reasons for an agent.

This is what it's all about really, isn't it?

it is the emotional support of an agent that tops the list of advantages

I think it's easy to forget this.

Thanks Sharley

Yes, Anna - i don't think that can be underrated. As much as anything, it's having someone to run to over the little things, and writerly paranoias.

That's why, as i say on the blog, imo it's crucial to get an agent you don't feel you need to tippy-toe around - someone who is approachable and 'gets' that occasionally, their clients might meander off the rational road!

To hoist up my usual wet blanket at all this agent luvvie stuff . . . I'm not sure I'd want to use for emotional support the person who's handling my business deals and taking a cut in the process. Besides, with my last agent, it was me who constantly offered her emotional support, through a serious illness, mental and emotional problems, drinking marathons, etc, and all it got me was a huge punch-up, threats of lawyers and final good-bye although not with anything good about it.

The problem with even the title of this thread is that you simply can't list every agent under the heading 'Agent'. They cover a huge range of skills, lack of skills, morals, lack of morals, etc. To make them a generic safety shoulder is to abdicate one's responsibility, basically. If you need an agent, fine; but make sure a) you know why you do (and sorry, but 'emotional support' is something I can get from Eric behind the bar in my local for free) and b) you find the right agent, not just the first who sniffs a potential profit in your work.

P.S. I'm lying about Eric, of course. He only pretends to understand.

Edited by Terry Edge at 11:29:00 on 12 November 2013


Edited by Terry Edge at 11:30:00 on 12 November 2013

Terry, i think your previous experience with agents, to some degree, explains your view.

By emotional support i mean, as i said in my post, that it is nice to have someone to run my writerly paranoias past, over the small things.

You may have an in-depth knowledge of publishing contracts - i don't and before I ( I repeat I) make any decisions about my career, i take on board my agent's advice, along with any other advice i have sought out, from other quarters. I do not abdicate responsibility.

Her input has been invaluable and i'm sorry you have had a bad experience in the past.

Nor am i speaking generically - i'd have thought most writers, certainly on a forum like this, would have the nouse to thoroughly research their agents as individuals.

We all have different needs as writers Terry.



Edited by SamanthaT at 19:03:00 on 12 November 2013


Edited by SamanthaT at 19:14:00 on 12 November 2013


Edited by SamanthaT at 19:32:00 on 12 November 2013

Samantha, I'm not so narrow in view to believe that my experience with my last one means that all agents are bad. And it may be true that writers on this forum would research agents before approaching them. Unfortunately, there does seem also to be a fair amount of desperation to get any agent amongst some writers at least. My first agent was fine, albeit she told me that she didn't actually like my writing!

There is a danger - and I've been there myself - of allowing the need to be looked after by an agent, whether in terms of dealing with contracts or in having someone to confide in - that it can back-wash into one's writing. For example, at FantasyCon last week, I bumped into an SF writer mate who told me his agent had just stopped sending out his first novel, having used up every publisher he believed might be interested. I could tell by his manner that he felt this was a serious blow to his career. Also, he said, he feels that the 20,000 words he's written of the sequel have been wasted. Thing is, I know that that 20,000 words is all he's written since he got his agent five years ago. Which works out to about 10 words a day. It's only my feeling, but I know the guy pretty well and I believe he fell into the trap of believing he'd 'made it' in getting an agent, then sat back and waited for it to happen. Not suggesting for a moment that this applies to anyone reading this post; just that the danger is there for all of us.

Also, as you know, the publishing world is changing. It could be argued that agents used to be good for the mid-list author, who was often very creative but not very business-like. But the mid-list is disappearing fast, and what's left of it doesn't offer much to agents (or authors come to that). Which means the dream is getting stretched to breaking point. It's harder than ever to get an agent and/or publisher, and with less demand for mid-list authors, the terms of their contracts are increasingly being skewed in publisher's and agents' favour.

Well, an experience like yours would have certainly put me off, Terry!

I think that desperation to get an agent that you talk of will change, now that dynamic, credible imprints are springing up that don't ask for agented submissions - like the one that has published me.

It will be fascinating to see how the role of the agent changes over the next 5-10 years, and whether authors do seriously begin to see themselves more as businesses and savvy-up regarding the legal side, so that they can deal efficiently with publishers on their own.

I'm very happy having an agent for reasons i've explained, but who knows, perhaps in the future my opinion will be a minority one.

It's going to be very interesting to see!

Besides, with my last agent, it was me who constantly offered her emotional support, through a serious illness, mental and emotional problems, drinking marathons, etc, and all it got me was a huge punch-up, threats of lawyers and final good-bye although not with anything good about it.

Sounds like she was in love with you, Terry. And you spurned her.

The devil hath no fury, and all that.

Good grief, Alan, you may be right! It would explain a lot. If I'd manned up and done the, um, right thing, I could be a best-selling author by now . . .

If I'd manned up and done the, um, right thing, I could be a best-selling author by now . . .

Yes, you should have scratched her back.

Never mind - put it down to experience.

All Terry's points are valid, particularly the one about assuming you've got it made once you've bagged an agent. I'll put my hand up to this, even though I'd read enough examples on here for me to have known better.

But I'm still very, very pleased to have my agent - she has expertise where I don't, she knows potential markets better than I could hope to, and if she wants to make any money out of me, it's in her best interests to try her best to get me published!

It's still a very new relationship, but what clinched it for me was that she 'got' (and was genuinely enthusiastic about) my novel, and ninety percent of the changes she suggested made perfect sense to me. We seem to think similarly, she's keen to help me build a career, and so far, I'm absolutely chuffed with how things are going.

I haven't been writing that long, though, and I understand that people who've been in the game longer will have more experience and different perspectives.

There's a very good, long, interview with Hugh Howey in this month's Locus. He talks about how he's always written what he wanted to write, even though feed-back on early submissions to agents/publishers was that it was too 'old-fashioned' (he writes SF largely). He didn't read what's 'in' - not even Harry Potter. He decided to do it himself; paid for a good editor and cover, took his time. Did no promotion whatsoever; nothing much happened. He put out 10 books, then, slowly at first, but gathering momentum, people started to discover his books; people who liked 'old-fashioned' writing (which of course, doesn't mean it's bad; often, quite the opposite).

Listening to him, to me at least, it's clear he has a different attitude and approach to a lot of writers who are maybe still chasing the traditional dream. He mentions, for instance, the fact that there are now a lot of writers selling a lot more books than traditionally published writers but they never get nominated for awards, of invited to sit on the panels at Cons.

So, maybe it's a case of what is your dream? Is it to write great books that people will find eventually and for no other reason than they recognise the quality? Or is to 'make it' in the traditional world, where what you write in the first place will be subject to the latest idea of what's marketable, and even after you find a publisher will be constantly adjusted by people who think they know better than you what should be in your stories?

So, maybe it's a case of what is your dream? Is it to write great books that people will find eventually and for no other reason than they recognise the quality? Or is to 'make it' in the traditional world, where what you write in the first place will be subject to the latest idea of what's marketable, and even after you find a publisher will be constantly adjusted by people who think they know better than you what should be in your stories?

You see, I wish I could write great books, but I know that I don't have that kind of talent. I think I can write good stuff with interesting characters and a decent plot, but I also know that I do need guidance, and that my agent will have a better idea...not of what should be in my stories, but how they should be shaped.

With experience, maybe this will change,of course, but right now I'm happy to be advised by her.

I really think it's a shame you believe you don't have the talent to write great books. I'm sure it's not true. The fact you have an agent says you can write well enough to put yourself ahead of 90% of people who want to be writers. So, you do have the talent. It's just a case of finding the courage, persistence and inspiration to improve it. And for that, I'd always be wary of relying on an agent. If they have a proven track record as a writer, fine. Or if they have a proven track record as a coach, fine. But this is rarely the case. Which means you're relying on someone who simply doesn't understand what it takes to be a writer. They may understand contracts - in fact, they should do - and they may understand about the nature of writers. But this is not the same as understanding what it takes to become a better writer.