Stephen King's advice on seeking an agent

Torgo

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
7,632
Reaction score
1,204
Location
London, UK
Website
torgoblog.blogspot.com
I don’t know Kasey and Chaos. Look at your own books. How they are packaged, the artwork, the catchy series titles. An argument can certainly be made that your publishers are duming down your work.

And actually, on this note: I don't see how you make that out. Are you saying Kasey and ChaosTitan's books look 'dumb'? In what way? Catchy series titles... does that mean catchy titles only appeal to dumb people?

Are we saying that, by contrast, 'smart' people only go for things that aren't too appealing and accessible? Because that sounds like 'smart' is actually a working definition of 'snob'.
 

AP7

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
264
Reaction score
22
Of course I'm judging their books by their covers, which is exactly the publisher's objective.

I'm not saying their books "look dumb." I'm saying it appears that the publishers are trying to market them as "less than intellectual."

And sure, it sounds snobby and pretentious and I'm sorry to pick on them. I read their posts all the time and they seem like nice people. These are just observations and opinions.
 

Snappy

A new year, a new avatar
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
2,136
Reaction score
1,259
Why does "sexy" and "catchy" equate to "less than intellectual"? If you mean they're not "literary", then yes you are correct. They are commercial fiction. I consider myself an intelligent person, but I don't understand this argument.
 

justme

Well butter my biscuit!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
470
Reaction score
1,228
Location
Kentucky
Wow, I've read Kasey's book and ChaosTitan's and loved them. So I guess I'm dumb? Their books are exactly what I want to read.
 

AP7

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
264
Reaction score
22
I'm certainly no lit snob. I love popular fiction. And again, I hate to sound like I'm trolling for a fight. But I can't help rolling my eyes and feeling like the publisher is patronizing the reader by sticking a generic picture of a hot chick on the cover and coming up with a catchy title and expectecting the audience to keep buying.
 

AP7

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
264
Reaction score
22
Wow, I've read Kasey's book and ChaosTitan's and loved them. So I guess I'm dumb? Their books are exactly what I want to read.

I said I think the publisher thinks you're dumb. This isnt about two authors. This is done in every genre.
 

Torgo

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
7,632
Reaction score
1,204
Location
London, UK
Website
torgoblog.blogspot.com
Are we supposed to actively discourage people from picking up the book so that only the truly dedicated actually do so? I am kind of confused.
 

Calla Lily

On hiatus
Staff member
Super Moderator
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
39,307
Reaction score
17,490
Location
Non carborundum illegitimi
Website
www.aliceloweecey.net
I don’t know Kasey and Chaos. Look at your own books. How they are packaged, the artwork, the catchy series titles. An argument can certainly be made that your publishers are duming down your work. I wouldn’t dare say you don’t have talent, or you don’t respect your target readers. I’m quite sure you do. But does your publisher? They must think they can sell more books by packaging them with sex appeal and branding the titles. They aren’t marketing the talent of the author, the quality of the writing or even the content of the story. They’re pushing a contrived formula. A lot of people think formula fiction by definition is crap. I’d go so far as to say it appears your publisher agrees with Nick Blaze.

Are you kidding me?

Publishers have marketing departments that keep tabs on what kind of cover best fits each particular genre. I used to do back-end sales analysis like that. All this analyzed data is given to the publisher, which translates into the art dept. designing covers that blend in with the trend, which translates to marketing and sales giving the bookstores product that has a history of selling. the bookstore then shelves it and rings up sale after sale for the product.

However, no amount of cool cover design will work if the writing isn't professional. That's why publishers only offer contracts to writers on whom they are willing to outlay design and marketing money.

It's called success. Sales success translates into authors getting more book deals.

When the current trend of (for example) YA book covers that prominently feature a close-up of teenage face starts to wane, publishers will re-analyze the back-end data and their art departments will try something new. And then a different trend will begin.

But no trend will be successful without excellent writing.

And your outright insults to successful AWers are cheap and uncalled-for.


Let me know how those sour grapes, taste, okay?
 

timp67

Guinea pig in the laboratory of God
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
789
Reaction score
1,019
Location
California
I think it takes just as much mental ability to effectively translate intellectual meaning onto a page as it does a sense of fun. :)
 

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
6,449
Reaction score
1,321
Are we supposed to actively discourage people from picking up the book so that only the truly dedicated actually do so? I am kind of confused.

Apparently so. All books should have a generic black-and-white cover and be called something like A Series of Events Which Occurred in a Fictional City Populated by Made-Up People.

Yes, clearly "catchy titles" are all about publishers dumbing down books! It's not like any of the classics have catchy titles, after all, like Sense and Sensibility or Pride and Prejudice or War and Peace or A Tale of Two Cities...
 

Calla Lily

On hiatus
Staff member
Super Moderator
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
39,307
Reaction score
17,490
Location
Non carborundum illegitimi
Website
www.aliceloweecey.net
Apparently so. All books should have a generic black-and-white cover and be called something like A Series of Events Which Occurred in a Fictional City Populated by Made-Up People.

:roll: Suitably altered for historical fiction, of course:

A Series of Events Which Occurred in a Real City Populated by Real People, Slightly Altered for the Purposes of This Tale.
 

Tasmin21

They will come from below...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
4,558
Reaction score
3,859
Location
Elysia
Dang. I was just gonna call mine 1 and then when the sequel comes out, call it 2.

Or is that too catchy?
 

SteveCordero

Pit Livin' & Purgatory Dreamin'
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 26, 2007
Messages
2,872
Reaction score
2,332
Location
NYC
Website
www.stevencordero.com
:roll: Suitably altered for historical fiction, of course:

A Series of Events Which Occurred in a Real City Populated by Real People, Slightly Altered for the Purposes of This Tale.

Or ASOEWOIARCPBRPSAFTPOTT

It will look great on the black & white cover.
 

Vandal

In the Center of things
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
1,279
Reaction score
1,042
Age
64
Location
The Outer Limits
generic-book-3274756.png
 

AP7

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
264
Reaction score
22
:roll: Suitably altered for historical fiction, of course:

A Series of Events Which Occurred in a Real City Populated by Real People, Slightly Altered for the Purposes of This Tale.


You guys are gonna have to dumb down your ridicule so I can get it!
 

AP7

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
264
Reaction score
22
Are you kidding me?

And your outright insults to successful AWers are cheap and uncalled-for.


Let me know how those sour grapes, taste, okay?


I certainly am a bit sour on the industry, but I didn't intend to outright insult anyone.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
It's hard to know where to start. You say so many things.
But sales =/= talent. The more money you make off of something, the more talented you are is a very, very naive concept.
Very few people believe that. But almost as naive is the idea that if an artist appeals to a large number of people, then by definition he or she must therefore not be talented -- because the vast majority of people cannot appreciate talent, and don't like it.

That's what I hear every day from writers and bands who haven't managed to hit the big time. There are people with talent who appeal to a wide audience, and people with talent who only appeal to a narrow range. I'm a jazz musician. There are artists I revere who most people have never heard of, and wouldn't much care for if they did. That doesn't mean that the most popular band of all time, The Beatles, has no talent.

But people don't really like talent. I've seen them go crazy over the guitar work by Led Zepplin, and think Gorguts - Obscura is terrible, which absolutely baffles me. I personally know a nine year old, a thirteen year old, and a 10 ten year old who can nearly flawlessly cover Zepplin, but I also know guitarists who have trained for 10 years+ who can't cover a single riff by Gorguts.

And yes, technicality alone does not make good music, I know.
This seems more like personal taste than recognition of talent. Imo, Gorguts is a technically proficient band, whose appeal is specific, and relatively limited. I don't particularly care for them myself. It's a matter of taste. Led Zepplin was an immensely talented band who also gained great commercial success. There's a reason they did, and it's not because people are stupid and don't recognize true talent when they hear it.

Talent, to me, refers to technical skill.

Those are two different things, imo. Technical skill is the tool one uses to free one's innate talent. Without talent, the best you can hope for is competence. (Although it's true that minor talent plus a lot of hard work can produce better work that great talent residing in a lazy personalty.)

Anyone can become technically competent -- although technical brilliance is a gift. But not everyone can produce top level music or books, no matter their technical skills. One also needs talent.

Looking at it from a percentage standpoint, I'd wager 1.5% (this is an actual calculation approximately 125 of music aficionados came up with) of musicians are truly talented and try to further their skill with every album and song.
That may be, (though I doubt it) but I'm pretty sure I could come up with 125 aficionados, including myself, who would have entirely different assessments as to which musicians are truly talented. You really seem to be conflating your own personal tastes with an objective assessment of talent -- which is a fool's errand in the first place.

And to return to King, he has some real technical ability, regardless of what one thinks of his work. For example, It. A long novel written from multiple viewpoints, told through the lens of multiple characters at different points in their lives, both as children and adults, bouncing back and forth between past and present.

To be able to even make such a book comprehensible, let alone readable, is an impressive technical achievement. I've published six novels, and I couldn't pull something like that off -- I wouldn't even try.

That fact that so many people love his work is a testament to a different sort of talent, the ability to engage a reader. It's not because people are dumb and he's dumbed down his writing to appeal to them.
 

quicklime

all out of fucks to give
Banned
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
8,967
Reaction score
2,074
Location
wisconsin
Well, maybe so, but he never actually does, does he? He tends to put his name to excellently crafted 1,000 page novels.

I'm sort of split on the advice actually. You do need an agent to look after your interests, but if I were starting out as a novelist I'd send my work directly to publishers whenever possible. If and when I got an offer of publication, I would then seek representation.


This is a very popular approach in the essays on representation I've seen at HWA also.

That said, it doesn't reflect things now, so much as things a decade or two ago, it appears:

Many houses no longer take unagented subs

Slush piles are even longer

People are, if anything, less patient



Do you NEED an agent? No. But they can get you to the right people, in a timely fashion. they can not only open more doors, they have a better idea which doors to bother with in the first place. And they can open them a hell of a lot faster.
 

quicklime

all out of fucks to give
Banned
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
8,967
Reaction score
2,074
Location
wisconsin
I insulted their publisher's marketing and art departments.


the entire issue of insulting them or not aside, the marketing and art departments that actually keep track of what sells and study things like cover art religiously, and which you are far more knowledgeable than?

I gotta say the end goal is to sell as many books as you can, and if that includes "hot chicks" that doesn't reflect on "dumbing down" anything; the reason there isn't a bikini girl on the cover of The Road isn't that Mccarthy decided he needed something more intellectually stimulating and fought the marketing department tooth and nail, it is because the girl would have had nothing to do with the book, which would have actively hurt sales.

These books featured, I believe, strong and sexual female protagonists....hence the covers. They also sold to a large female audience, many of whom were not lesbians, I assume, so it wasn't a cheap sex-play. The notion the books or their covers were "dumbed down" comes off, intended or not, as incredibly pretentious both for the way you judge the book and your assumption the folks actually schooled and trained to market these things must be complete buffoons for disagreeing with you
 

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
I insulted their publisher's marketing and art departments.


So if you were an intelligent marketing and art department wanting to attract intelligent readers for urban fantasy and science fiction, what sort of titles and covers would you issue?

Maybe some of these?

Or these?

Or these?

I'm not a big fan of the tramp-stamped hottie genre myself, but come on now, you're being sillier than Nick "Stephen King sucks because he's popular" Blaze.
 

Chris P

Likes metaphors mixed, not stirred
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
22,617
Reaction score
7,298
Location
Wash., D.C. area
Of course I would love to keep the agent's 15% to myself by going without an agent, but I simply don't know who's who in the industry like a (good) agent would. A better deal for me will cover the agent's share.

Such is the nature of message boards, but it's easy to be confused by all this. There's two issues in this thread that bother me (in addition to the sniping that has me surprised this thread isn't locked down). First, in some parts of AW, you'll be told that ignoring the submission instructions is a one-way ticket to a rejection, but several posts here hint that you can ignore the "agented material only" instruction.

The second is that if you get an offer from a publisher and then get an agent to represent you, aren't you then obligated to go with that publisher? (I'm fumbling for words on this next part) Are you saying that you get a pub offer, then get an agent who subs the same MS to the "agented-only" markets? Seems bad mojo to me, as well as being restricted to those markets that take unagented work.

I'm sure the reality is that getting a deal happens in every way you can imagine, but as a writer I need to focus on what has the highest potential for success. Ignoring submission instructions just seems to be a bad way to go about this.
 

Kasey Mackenzie

One Hit Wonder?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,231
Reaction score
755
Location
St. Louis, Missouri
Website
www.kaseymackenzie.com
Such is the nature of message boards, but it's easy to be confused by all this. There's two issues in this thread that bother me (in addition to the sniping that has me surprised this thread isn't locked down).

Well, there's a reason I have bitten down on my tongue--okay fingers--and refrained from responding to some of the comments that struck home personally but _are_ off topic to this thread. I truly don't want to hijack the OP's thread for personal sniping.

First, in some parts of AW, you'll be told that ignoring the submission instructions is a one-way ticket to a rejection, but several posts here hint that you can ignore the "agented material only" instruction.

I think most people advocate following the submission instructions because _most_ agents and editors have so many submissions that it's easy to winnow out those who don't follow instructions from those who do. BUT of course there will be exceptions to this. The right submission seen by the right person at just the right time is going to get them to overlook their own preferences. But why lower your (general your) chances for success and risk that you'll be the one in a thousand (or whatever number) if you don't absolutely have to?

The second is that if you get an offer from a publisher and then get an agent to represent you, aren't you then obligated to go with that publisher? (I'm fumbling for words on this next part) Are you saying that you get a pub offer, then get an agent who subs the same MS to the "agented-only" markets? Seems bad mojo to me, as well as being restricted to those markets that take unagented work.

You're never obligated to go with a publisher until you sign the contract. Of course, though, it would be EXTREMELY unprofessional to verbally accept the deal, sign with an agent, and THEN say, "Oh sorry we're going to shop this elsewhere now." It's NOT considered unprofessional to tell the publisher, "I need time to think about your offer. I'll have my agent contact you later." Even if you don't yet HAVE an agent. There is a fine but big distinction there: You didn't ACCEPT the publisher's offer before going to an agent with your offer in hand and signing with the agent.

Sure, there are some publishers who will be exceptionally miffed if you DO sign with an agent who then wants to shop the book around, but my general impression is that as long as it's a decent deal with a reputable publisher, the agent isn't going to pooh pooh that deal. Rather, they'll do the best they can to negotiate the terms of the deal to be as favorable as possible to you. Though if they think the publisher is trying to take advantage of you, they'd no doubt advise you not to take the deal and THEN shop the manuscript elsewhere.

It's important to note though that even when you have a publishing deal in hand, the agent is only going to take you on as a client if they connect with the manuscript. Very, very few agents (I'm sure there are SOME out there even though I've never encountered this) are just going to take you on since you have a contract pending so they can make an "easy" commission off you (again, general you).
 

Chris P

Likes metaphors mixed, not stirred
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
22,617
Reaction score
7,298
Location
Wash., D.C. area
Though if they think the publisher is trying to take advantage of you, they'd no doubt advise you not to take the deal and THEN shop the manuscript elsewhere.

So I can get an offer from PA and the agent will take me on to save me from it? :D

It's important to note though that even when you have a publishing deal in hand, the agent is only going to take you on as a client if they connect with the manuscript.
Awww, shucks! :)

Thanks for the info. Just when I think I'm learning how this bid-ness works I learn something new.