"Personal" question(s) to John Jarrold

[Havlen]

A synopsis might tell an agent whether or not the overall book idea has a market or fits with what they are interested in representing.

 

[Giovanna Clairval]

A pitch does it, too.

But the synopsis being a (very) difficult exercice, it may show if the writer can boil down a plot (and subplots) to a one page synthesis. Some aspiring authors may not know what they have written...

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Some aspiring authors may not know what they have written...

Exactly. Which could make for some scattered plotting and characterization. And I suspect that agents who ask for a synopsis want to be assured that the author does know what his or her book is actually about (as opposed to what happens, which is not always the same thing), as well as a general idea of plot structure.

I also suspect that every agent (including John) has his or her own criteria for separating the "maybes" from the "absolutely nots" -- otherwise, the workload would be ridiculous. For some, the first test will be whether the writer can craft an effective synopsis, for others it may be some particular quality (or lack of that quality) harder to define, the presence or absence of which they expect to recognize in the sample chapters.

 

[John Jarrold]

(About the percentage) I know, I know.

But we can imagine that the number of your clients won't increase forever.

Are you thinking about developing your literary agency, taking in other fellow agents, or are you perfectly happy with it as it is?

I'm happy as it is, and only looking to take on REALLY SPECIAL authors - maybe only one or two a year now. I like to be able to keep the personal touch with my clients - as I did as an editor with the authors I published for fifteen years. E-mail makes this a great deal easier, of course!

 

[John Jarrold]

Exactly.
I also suspect that every agent (including John) has his or her own criteria for separating the "maybes" from the "absolutely nots" -- otherwise, the workload would be ridiculous. For some, the first test will be whether the writer can craft an effective synopsis, for others it may be some particular quality (or lack of that quality) harder to define, the presence or absence of which they expect to recognize in the sample chapters.

Exactly! One point I've made regularly is that publishing is subjective - there is no absolute template to follow which wil definitely lead to publication, and because publishers and agents are individuals they each have their own thoughts about how they judge new writers. For me, 90% show on the first few pages that they cannot write well enough and it's pointless reading a synopsis, since without smooth, attention-grabbing prose, nothing else will make the book publishable. But others want to read a synopsis and be grounded in the author's ideas before they read.

 

[Troo]

It's also important not to get too hung up about the oft-mentioned statistic that 99% of all new submissions to any agent or publisher get rejected. There are a great many factors influencing that figure, including:
- At least 75% of submissions are from people who just cannot bloody write. You're automatically head and shoulders above them, aren't you? You've bothered learning your craft, familiarising yourself with your tools, and honing your skill before sending off pitches, synopses and sample chapters, haven't you?
- Surprisingly, a good number of submissions (and there's a lot of overlap with the previous lot) come from people who don't find out what the publisher publishes before sending them something. I've heard of people sending Science Fiction to Gardening magazines, or writers sending poetry to short fiction publishers. It takes a quick Google or phone call to find out whether or not the person you're about to send your work to will be the right person. The scattershot approach wastes time and racks up that rejection statistic.
- The remainder who are good and who have targeted the right recipient have to then hit a recipient who likes the submission. Your agent or editor will have to work with you on your novel for months on end. If s/he doesn't like it right away, s/he's going to be sick of the sight of it this time next year, so s/he's better off rejecting it so that his/her energies can be dedicated to books s/he does like. Would you want an editor who hates your book going over it and suggesting changes?
- Finally, you hit the recipient's workload. S/he may love it to bits, but have already signed their two take-ons for this year.

Forget about the statistic. Just concentrate on doing your job, which is producing stellar writing and finding an audience for it.

 

[anthorn]

Another one. This one is about book length. Say i'm writing on an 160 A4 pad, on single sides. As my first draft, then on the computer in Manuscript form. Ok? And i write in Arial. size 12. And its a good manuscript, the editor loves it. The only problem is that it comes to about 260 pages. Would the editor. A) Reject it, B) Accept it but make it longer by Increasing the Font size?

And would the Editor, if they also liked the script, ignore the bad punctuation, expecially if i tell them that i have Autism/Aspergers/Dyspraxia and slight Dylexia, would they exuse that and fix it if i had a legitimit medical reason and i could prove it? cAUSE I'm worried by punctuation will be my downfall.

 

[John Jarrold]

It's word length you need to think about. 100,000 words on up is fine, but not, for instance, 70,000 words. The market is for longer books - most of the SF novels I published after 1990 were over 100,000 words. Most of the fantasy was over 130,000...

If an editor LOVES your book, both personally and professionally, then they will talk to you about other matters. Do mention your medical condition in the covering letter - otherwise, they might just think it's unprofessionally presented.

 

[anthorn]

Thank you. So would they ask for proof, i.e Doctors notes, and would it be advisable just to say proof on request.
And i've hear that when they ask for a manuscript, they want a table of contents. Is this just so they can see how many chapters there is, and if you're including thanks, or Maps. And if i'm including maps, do i need to send them with the manuscript?

 

[Troo]

As far as I'm aware it's actually illegal in the UK for a potential employer to ask you for more detail on any medical condition than you've already offered them. Whether or not selling novels falls into the usual employer / employee relationship and legal wrangles I cannot say. John?

 

[Dean F. Wilson]

Yeah, I think it would be rude for an agent or publisher to ask for proof of a medical condition. I think merely stating it in the cover letter (without offering potential proof) should be enough.

As for a table of contents, I'm interested in that myself. I'd say it's possibly a personal thing, so what's your take on this, John? I also have a map, so would providing a link to it hosted on my website be a good idea for the agent?

-D

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I've never heard a fiction editor ask for a table of contents, but I have a vague and ancient memory that it's a good idea to include one when submitting a work of non-fiction.

(And novels these days rarely have chapter titles, so a table of contents would be fairly useless, not to mention boring.)

 

[Havlen]

Personally, I wouldn't bother sending a map with a query or even mentioning it. In the end, its the writing that will sell the work. I doubt anyone is going to say "hey, this story was so-so, but this map is awesome so I'm going to sign them on!"

 

[Dean F. Wilson]

Well, I'd never imagine that any agent or publisher would consider the map in their decision (afterall, if a map is really required and the author doesn't have one, an artist can be hired). My question was not "Would that get me published?" but "Would the agent appreciate it?" (some people like maps, some don't - some skip them entirely, while others pour over them for hours before reading the book itself).

In truth, my writing's better than my carthography, so I'd rather a decision be made on my book and not the map

-D

 

[Havlen]

My philosophy with querying agents/publishers is if it can't help you and isn't required then it is best left out because at that point the only thing it can do is harm you.

 

[Susan Boulton]

Your submission will stand or fall on the standard of your writing, and if, in the agents/publishers opinion, said writing is publishable. John has said it a number of times in this thread.

Be professional and polite in your approach.

Make sure your writing is a polished as can be.

Don't whine and moan too much when you get a rejection. This is a business and in a sense you are applying for a job. You will fail far more times than being asked for sample pages, or if luck is on your side, a whole manuscript.

Once the submissions have been sent out, get on with life, write another story or not, just don't sit waiting for the letter/email to arrive with the rejection

 

[John Jarrold]

Thank you. So would they ask for proof, i.e Doctors notes, and would it be advisable just to say proof on request.
And i've hear that when they ask for a manuscript, they want a table of contents. Is this just so they can see how many chapters there is, and if you're including thanks, or Maps. And if i'm including maps, do i need to send them with the manuscript?

I have never heard of anyone requesting doctor's certificates, in the twenty years I've been involved in publishing!

Don't get side-tracked by detail. The book is what matters, the words on the page. Publishers' and agents' websites should tell you what they want to see. Don't send anything else.

 

[Peter Graham]

As far as I'm aware it's actually illegal in the UK for a potential employer to ask you for more detail on any medical condition than you've already offered them. Whether or not selling novels falls into the usual employer / employee relationship and legal wrangles I cannot say. John?

Hi Troo,

(Coughs gently, adjusts pince-nez spectacles and takes down huge, dusty tome entitled "The Law and How To Do It")

Selling novels wouldn't give rise to an employment relationship between the author and the agent/publisher, as at law a contract to provide books would usually be regarded as a contract for services (a.k.a self-employment), rather than one of services (a.k.a. employment). The legal test for employment would not be met unless there were clear indications to the contrary. Otherwise, authors are like plumbers, gardeners or solicitors - you contract for their services only as and when you need them.

However, the Disability Discrimination Act doesn't just cover employment relationships. It was extended a couple of years back. It is now unlawful for service providers to differentiate between disabled and non-disabled service users in the way in which they offer access to their services. An agent or publisher might be regarded as a service provider (if their services are provided to the general public), which means that they would be under a legal duty to make "reasonable adjustments" to ensure that disabled people had the same rights of access to those services.

"Reasonable adjustments" is a loosely defined concept. The easier and cheaper the adjustment, the more reasonable it will usually be to make it. Regard is had to the size and resources of the service provider - a one-man accountancy firm operating on the top floor of a wheezy old Victorian building with spiders in the rafters and alarming patches of wet rot under the floorboards would not be expected to put in a lift to allow wheelchair users access to the office, but might be expected to offer home visits to those clients and potential clients who couldn't manage the stairs.

The test for disability is not that difficult to satisfy - up to eight million people in the UK probably count and disability covers mental as well as physical conditions. Whether an individual with anthorn's conditions is disabled would depend on a case by case basis, but even if they were, I don't think that an agent or publisher would be expected (at their own expense) to re-write significant tranches of grammar, punctuation, sentence structure etc for that author, as to do so would basically involve re-writing the whole book and would not therefore be "reasonable".

I'd agree that no-one should ask too many questions from employees/prospective service users about medical conditions, but from anthorn's perspective, I'd seriously suggest that you do whatever you can to make your work as professional as possible before you send it off. I'd say that anyone who struggles with grammar/spelling/sentence construction (for whatever reason) would be much better off spending a few quid and having their work professionally tidied up before submission than sending it as it is and asking the agent/publisher to take account of the errors. It shows that you are serious, and that has to be a good thing!

(Places book on lap, removes spectacles and nods off contentedly)

Regards,

Peter


PS: Interesting thread, by the way. I've not been down this way before.

 

[John Jarrold]

Yes, it boils down to the fact that no agent or publisher will take you on unless they LOVE your writing, personally and professionally, and they will not view a dyslexic or anyone else in a different manner from usual. If the book ain't WONDERFUL (and produced to a totally professional standard), it won't be taken on.

One of the novelists I worked with for a number of years in publishing is dyslexic. They delivered probably the best, cleanest typescripts I've seen.

I'll say it again: if the words aren't right, nothing else matters.

 

[Ian Whates]

Picking up on what John says, one of the top current British SF writers is dislexic -- an individual who also works in other capacities within the publishing field (quite possibly the same person John's referring to). So such a disability definitely does not prohibit becoming a successful writer.