WSJ:
rather than empowering unknown artists, the Web is often considered by talent-seeking executives to be an unnavigable morass
That's probably because the web is an unnavigable morass. Where does WSJ think talent-seeking execs should go on the web to find unknown artists? Do they all hang out on one website, or are they instead scattered around the ether?
WSJ:
It does create an incredibly difficult Catch-22 on both sides, particularly for new writers wanting to get their work seen," says Hannah Minghella, president of production for Sony Pictures Animation
Have those new writers tried contacting an agent?
WSJ:
As writers try to find an agent—a feat harder than ever to accomplish in the wake of agency consolidations and layoffs
Eh? There may be more manuscripts being submitted to agencies because of the recession (with people seeing writing as a fast way of making a buck), but agency consolidations and layoffs does not automatically mean that fewer new manuscripts are being seen. So far as I'm aware, the only limit as to the number of authors an agent can take on is the maximum they feel they can devote sufficient time and attention to.
WSJ:
At William Morris Endeavor Entertainment, Adriana Alberghetti only reads scripts sent to her by producers, managers and lawyers whose taste she knows and trusts. The agent says she receives 30 unsolicited e-mails a day from writers and people she doesn't know who are pushing unknown writers, and she hits "delete" without opening. These days, she is taking on few "baby writers," she says, adding that risks she would have taken five years ago she won't today. "I'll take very few shots on a new voice. It's tough out there right now," she says.
That's one agent at one agency. It therefore cannot be taken as representative of the industry. Plenty of agencies are open to queries from new writers and you don't need a recommendation first.
WSJ: (BOLDING MINE)
A primary aim of the slush pile used to be to discover unpublished voices. But today, writing talent isn't necessarily enough. It helps to have a big-media affiliation, or be effective on TV.
It's always helped to have a big media affiliation or be effective on TV (or better yet, have your own show on TV). However those people are few and far between and agents and publishers recognise that a good book is a good book, regardless of whether it's produced by a telegenic supermodel or John Merrick's clone.
WSJ:
"These days, you need to deliver not just the manuscript but the audience," says Mr. Levine. "More and more, the mantra in publishing is 'Ask not what your publisher can do for you, ask what you can do for your publisher.'"
For non-fiction, yes - it helps. But fiction has established markets and established audiences.
WSJ:
The first, "The Reaper," came out in July and sold moderately well. Last November, the publisher released another Authonomy offering, a young adult book called "Fairytale of New York," which has sold over 100,000 copies and is a best seller in Britain. HarperCollins also launched a similar platform for teen writers called "InkPop."
Fairtale of New York is not a YA book - it's chicklit and it was released through AVON, not Harper Collins main imprint. If WFS can't get the genre right, I'd question the sales figures.
WSJ:
One slush stalwart—the Paris Review— has college interns and graduate students in the magazine's Tribeca loft-office read the 1,000 unsolicited works submitted each month.
Most magazines take unsolicited stories. It's how they secure their content.
WSJ:
In 1958, Mr. Roth was an unknown who had barely been published when a short story called "The Conversion of the Jews" was plucked out of a heap at the Paris Review—by Rose Styron, wife of William. The next year it was published as part of "Goodbye, Columbus."
Wow. There's nothing like using a recent example of someone plucked from a publisher's slushpile who went on to achieve glory. Unfortunately, this is not that example.
MM
