"Personal" question(s) to John Jarrold

[lin robinson]

That only stands to reason.
What you would be saying is: I sent you inferior work before and your rejection caused me to do the work on it I should have done in the first place, so can I keep trying to get you to spend more time reading it?

Would you go for that?

 

[Troo]

Well that depends. What you might be saying is "Thank you a great deal for all your feedback. Due to it I have become a better writer, and have learned many valuable lessons. I am also showing that I handle criticism like a mature, professional adult, which means that I can work well with you."

Some agents and publishers choose to work with an okay writer who is easy to work with over an okay writer who is a total prima donna.

Brilliant writers can often get away with being asshats

 

[anthorn]

Quick question.

If the Publisher wants to see my first three chapters. What do i do if Chapter one is 4 pages chapter 2 8 pages and chapter 3 1 page? Send in chapter 4?

 

[rosearche]

Quick question.

If the Publisher wants to see my first three chapters. What do i do if Chapter one is 4 pages chapter 2 8 pages and chapter 3 1 page? Send in chapter 4?

I've just had this with my novel which isn't written in chapters but in four days. The advice was to send in what might equate to three chapters, so I chose a suitable point to end on and sent in about fifty pages.

 

[lin robinson]

Makes sense. They don't have to read it all.

Re-subbing rejected work is not a compliment to an agent, publisher, editor or anybody. It's a pain in the neck.

 

[Troo]

Quick question.

If the Publisher wants to see my first three chapters. What do i do if Chapter one is 4 pages chapter 2 8 pages and chapter 3 1 page? Send in chapter 4?

You answered your own question. If the Publisher says "Show me the first three chapters," you send them the first three chapters. Sending in four chapters says "I won't listen to what you say to me throughout whatever relationship we build, so drop me right away please"

 

[Havlen]

Sounds like some absolutes being tossed around when reality would probably show that things tend to vary on a case by case basis.

One absolute I agree with, though: If an agent does not specifically ask for you to rewrite and resubmit, then don't resubmit. You are likely just going to burn a bridge.

As for sending in more than three chapters. If you feel it'd be better to send in more, considering the circumstances, I don't see that it would be a huge deal. They aren't testing whether or not people will follow strict instructions, they want to see some of the writing. Just explain in the return letter that chapter three was only one page so you have included chapter four.

Of course, John might disagree with that, and I'd go with whatever he says, but I'd be surprised at any editor/agent/publisher thinking its that big of a deal. In the end, either they think the ms. is good and sellable, or they don't.

 

[John Jarrold]

Hi John,

I asked this question in a new thread under publishing and folks suggested I ask it here. Following peoples' answers I've modified it a bit

I write both SF and Fantasy and quite a few years ago was told, by an agent to whom I'd sent synopses of my work, that I should concentrate on either fantasy or SF and to write both was a mistake as it would make me far harder to sell. (This was part of a rejection explanation.)

In the other thread folks suggested that the correct answer here is that when listing other books I have written (to avoid looking like a one book wonder) only to mention novels which are close in genre to the one I am pitching. Also, does this apply equally to agents and publishers, or with agents should you give an idea of the breadth of what you work on?

The other thought that came out of the thread was - you submit say a Fantasy book to a publisher (and it is rejected) is there any harm in then sending in an SF book?
In a more positive framework, if they say we like your writing, but not this SF book, do you then offer them a Fantasy book?

Certainly show an agent or publisher the breadth of your work, but any professional will tell you to concentrate on one genre or the other and ask yourself this: which do I enjoy writing more? And if a publisher rejects you on the basis you mention, it can be worth mentioning the alternative, but I would really decide now which you want to write - SF or Fantasy.

 

[John Jarrold]

John will probably give more details on this, but as far as I'm aware, if an agent or publisher rejects your MS without saying "I'd like to see this again" or "Please provide a rewrite", they won't read the same one again, no matter if it is revised (even if they've told you what they thought was wrong with it). If they think the problems are minor enough to be sorted with an edit (and they like the MS enough to help work on it before publication), they'll give a provisional acceptance.

That said, I suppose it depends on the agent in question.

-D

This is absolutely correct. Once it's turned down by a specific agent or publisher, that's it. Look elsewhere. They receive maybe thirty typescripts every week. They have to move on, so do you.

 

[John Jarrold]

I've just had this with my novel which isn't written in chapters but in four days. The advice was to send in what might equate to three chapters, so I chose a suitable point to end on and sent in about fifty pages.

In this case, certainly ask the question, explaining why, but in most cases three chapters means what it says.

 

[John Jarrold]

Apologies for cluttering up the forum, but some of you in the UK may find this interesting:

John Jarrold will be interviewing bestselling author Iain Banks at the annual Lincoln Book Festival at 8 p.m. on Monday May 12 in the Lincoln Drill Hall. The interview will be followed by a Q&A session.

‘I was lucky enough to be Iain’s SF editor in the late eighties and early nineties,’ said Jarrold. ‘And we’ve been friends since 1986, so I have plenty of background when putting together questions! We also worked together on RAW SPIRIT, his book on malt whisky, which he has said is the nearest thing to an autobiography he is ever likely to write, and it offers rich pickings regarding his life.’

For further information, contact Sara Bullimore, Lincoln Council’s Arts & Cultural Sector Officer, by e-mail on: Sara.Bullimore@lincoln.gov.uk

 

[The Alamo Avenger]

Apologies for cluttering up the forum, but some of you in the UK may find this interesting:

John Jarrold will be interviewing bestselling author Iain Banks at the annual Lincoln Book Festival at 8 p.m. on Monday May 12 in the Lincoln Drill Hall. The interview will be followed by a Q&A session.

‘I was lucky enough to be Iain’s SF editor in the late eighties and early nineties,’ said Jarrold. ‘And we’ve been friends since 1986, so I have plenty of background when putting together questions! We also worked together on RAW SPIRIT, his book on malt whisky, which he has said is the nearest thing to an autobiography he is ever likely to write, and it offers rich pickings regarding his life.’

For further information, contact Sara Bullimore, Lincoln Council’s Arts & Cultural Sector Officer,

Pretty cool. The Algebrist is next in my stack to read.

 

[John Jarrold]

Hope you enjoy it! I'm expecting his new SF novel in the post this week!

 

[Coolhand]

Cool! Will there be any way to access the interview online, for those of us that can't make it to the festival?

 

[Ian Whates]

Cool! Will there be any way to access the interview online, for those of us that can't make it to the festival?

If you miss Iain here, you can always catch him in the Autumn, along with Ken MacLeod, Storm Constantine, Paul Cornell, Ian Watson, Geoff Ryman and others, at NewCon 4: www.newcon4.com

(Sorry for momentarily hi-jacking the thread for a blatant plug, John. )

 

[John Jarrold]

Cool! Will there be any way to access the interview online, for those of us that can't make it to the festival?

I'll check if it's going to be recorded and let you know...

 

[Montero]

Hi John,

In the thread I started about getting published in both sci-fi and fantasy, you said

Although you should be aware that no publisher will be in the least interested in publishing you under a pseudonym until you've had a number of very successful novels published under your own name, and it's obvious that you can write two books a year to the same very high standard and in equally commercial areas.

So that is a book a year per name in use.

Just made me wonder, pure curiosity, so

1. Does a reliable book every year keep the reader on board, make sales more guaranteed (providing the author keeps up the standard).

2. Authors who don't deliver a book a year - are they more likely to be dropped by a publisher than ones who do deliver regularly? (Assuming the writer is keeping up the standard of writing.)

3. Authors who can produce more than one good book a year (in their own name) - would the publisher want to put out more than one per year?

 

[John Jarrold]

Hi John,

In the thread I started about getting published in both sci-fi and fantasy, you said


So that is a book a year per name in use.

Just made me wonder, pure curiosity, so

1. Does a reliable book every year keep the reader on board, make sales more guaranteed (providing the author keeps up the standard). YES, IT'S ALSO WHAT THE BOOK TRADE WANTS FOR CONTINUING PRODUCT RECOGNITION

2. Authors who don't deliver a book a year - are they more likely to be dropped by a publisher than ones who do deliver regularly? (Assuming the writer is keeping up the standard of writing.) DEPENDS HOW WELL THEY SELL. AND ABOUT 15 MONTHS BETWEEN BOOKS IS DOABLE, BUT A BOOK EVERY TWO YEARS - IN MOST CASES - ISN'T. THERE ARE, AS ALWAYS, EXCEPTIONS, BUT THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE. A NEW WRITER CANNOT POINT AT THEM AND SAY "BUT HE/SHE ONLY PUBLISHES THIS OFTEN."

3. Authors who can produce more than one good book a year (in their own name) - would the publisher want to put out more than one per year? AGAIN, IT WILL DEPEND ON THE AUTHOR AND THE PUBLISHER. PUBLISHERS ARE HUMAN BEINGS (BELIEVE IT OR NOT!) AND HAVE THEIR PERSONAL THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT. AND NOT 'A GOOD BOOK'. THAT IS NOWHERE NEAR GOOD ENOUGH. EDITORS ARE LOOKING FOR NEW AUTHORS TO PRODUCE SOMETHING EXTREMELY SPECIAL, WHICH THEY CAN LAUD TO THEIR COLLEAGUES AND THE BOOK TRADE. REMEMBER, EACH EDITOR IN THE UK SEES AROUND THIRTY BOOKS EVERY WEEK, AND MIGHT TAKE ON TWO DEBUTS OVER AN ENTIRE YEAR.

The bottom line is that there is no 100% template. There aren't rules that say "If I do that, that and that, I will be published. And I will be published exactly this often, and not that often, and I will be able to write books under a pseudonym if I do this." But there are parameters.

And the most important thing of all, for a new novelist, is to write one book well enough, brilliantly enough, to get published. Most cannot do that, and everything else becomes moot.

 

[Dean F. Wilson]

Most authors don't get two books written, rewritten, edited, submitted to agent, submitted to publisher, re-edited, proofread, etc. in the space of a year. Some authors don't even get two books done in two years.

That said, Terry Pratchett is well known for churning out high-quality books at an incredible pace (often twice a year), so I wouldn't say the publisher will be averse to that, except that when you're a new author they may want to push your first book/s before investing more in a second/third/etc. book before you've proven in sales, etc.

-D

 

[John Jarrold]

Exactly. This really is going to be an academic conversation for the huge majority. In the UK, only one major genre author writes other adult genre books under a pseudonym, and that person had been published for fifteen years before that happened. Pratchett and David Gemmell used to write two books a year, but slowed down.