Happy New Year to you all, and here’s wishing you everything you wish yourselves in 2012.

Sorry for the long blog silence. Just before Christmas I went down with the worst cold I’ve had in years, which turned into bronchitis once I got back to London for the holidays. Incredibly annoying, as I felt too pathetic most of the time even to open my laptop, let alone come up with anything sensible and interesting to say. Thank goodness, I’m now feeling a lot more like myself again – all ready for a new year of work, starting tomorrow!

I flew back to the US on New Year’s Eve, so was comatose by the time New Year – Eastern Time – came around.  However, I’ve had a little think about resolutions for 2012. Or rather, the objectives that I want to drive us this coming year.

2011 was fabulous for Greenhouse on both sides of the Pond. Very successful in business terms, despite an intensely competitive marketplace, with more and more agents entering the fray. However, it’s always the human side of the business that delights us most, and both Julia and I found great satisfaction in launching a number of new authors into first deals, as well as seeing repeat deals coming through for existing clients. We did a lot of big deals, but never lost (and never will lose) our heart for, and delight in, the smaller ones too – they can be every bit as significant in changing a writer’s life, making their publishing dream come true. Equally exciting was the range and number of foreign deals (ie, in translation) done for us by our lovely colleagues at Rights People in 2011, as well as our first –ever TV option deal.

So, where is my personal North Star as I take a deep breath and enter 2012 with Greenhouse? Here are my thoughts; perhaps they will spark some of your own. The accompanying photos are all images associated with my Christmas - explained at the foot of this post.

So . . . .

I intend us to be smart, savvy, fast, gutsy and tough in business. Yet strive to be people who are full of heart, integrity and humanity.

I want us to keep our reputation for very close and warm contact with our clients. I never want any of our authors to sit there thinking ‘Why don’t they reply to me?’ And that means not overloading ourselves. Maintaining the right number of clients is a fine line, and to walk it we have to make quiet, careful decisions.

Social networking and maintaining ‘the face of the business’ is another very fine line. I want us to be ‘out there’, heard, present, interesting – yet knowing when to cut out the babble and just reflect privately and with dignity.

I want us to keep replying to all sensible and respectful queries, as we have done since Greenhouse began.  Can we continue to do this throughout the coming year? I hope so, I really do, and we’ll certainly do our best.

I want to continue to love this business passionately, adore my job, throw myself into it like a crazy woman, yet never forget that we are all more than just our jobs. What does this mean? For me, it means remembering that I am a family person, I love art and theatre, I love taking photographs, I love Edith Piaf and Mozart (and tons of other musicians), and I love putting on my walking boots and going for a hike. Hooray for normality and a sense of proportion!

I want to keep my real love for writers – for the struggle, the craft, the growth, the adventure of learning how to put thoughts, a story, down on paper or a screen. It is fantastically exciting to see writers develop and find success. Yes, it can be nerve-racking too (especially as we often get so involved in editorial), and there many incredibly roller-coaster moments. But would I swap this crazy business for any other form of employment? Not likely! Julia and I are like pigs searching for truffles, and when you’re ruled by your nose, there’s nothing more exciting than truffle-hunting.

I want to continue enjoying that personal contact with writers which we have at conferences around the US and UK. This year I’ll be speaking in New York, Texas, New Jersey and Nashville. Who will I meet? What will I discover? The thing is, you just never know! I guarantee there will be surprises, but WHAT surprises?

I intend to keep running and getting better at it. Before I got ill, I was running nearly 1.5 miles at a go – utterly unthinkable a few months ago when I realized I had legs like jelly. I like the way running makes you keep looking at the horizon, keep going, toughing it out. It’s a stonking great metaphor, it’s discipline for the mind – plus it’s good for the bod!  (Also, you can feel really, really smug when you run.)

Finally, I want to cook more and get better at French. And for those of you who’ve heard me speak (around the country) about my Great Uncle Wilfrid – the brother my grandmother wanted to marry, instead of the brother she DID marry . . . . Well, I’m off to find his grave in July. It is just south of Ypres, in what was Flanders, in a Commonwealth War Graves cemetery near where he died shot through the chest by a sniper in Fall 1917 having gone out at night to rescue wounded British soldiers in No Man’s Land. I will be the first member of my family ever to see Wilfrid’s grave, and I think that will be quite a moment.

Wow, as I write all this, I can feel the excitement starting to build. I already have a few manuscripts waiting for my urgent attention and I feel a bit like a racehorse waiting for the gate to open.  I also already have a shrewd idea of what January is going to bring, and I’m looking forward to it. Aha!

Welcome to you all. It’s great to be in touch with you, thanks for following us here and on Facebook (just search for The Greenhouse Literary Agency) and Twitter (@SarahGreenhouse). We can’t wait to share this great, challenging year of 2012 with you, and both Julia and I wish you all the very best of success in everything you do. Even more than that, we wish you the nerve and grace to accept triumph and adversity with equal aplomb, which is of course one of the things we also wish ourselves.

With love from

Sarah

Pix: 1) The Ibex, known as Auntie, which adorns my mother’s wall. Sadly, Auntie was shot by my grandfather early in the 20th century. I know, it’s horrible - but I can’t help it. So now we decorate her at Christmas. It’s really the least we can do.  2) Lucy, our older Dachsund, gets weary at Christmas. Here she is relaxing - with gift boxes.  3) This was my pre-Christmas getaway weekend to Baltimore. Here, I was at the fascinating Fort McHenry. These guns are actually from the Civil War rather than the War of 1812, but basically they sum up my combative and determined view of agenting and what 2012 will probably hold. Let’s just say that I want to win.

The debate on agents’ responses to submissions has roared even louder in recent months – or it has in the USA. We’ve seen agents changing their policies in various ways (only replying if interested/replying to some under various criteria/giving Twitter updates etc etc), and others contemplating doing so. Everyone has an opinion on what’s appropriate, and Lin Oliver and Steve Mooser’s open letter to the industry in the SCBWI Bulletin of Nov/Dec 2011 neatly and graciously summed up what we all know to be true – that it’s really helpful for authors to get a response to their query, even if it’s a No.

Like all agents, I have many thoughts on the subject and wanted to share them with you. As you will know, if you’re reading this via the Greenhouse website, we have responded to all queries since we opened in early 2008 and intend to continue that policy into 2012. There are only 2 exceptions to this. 1) If we think you are likely to shoot us (ie, we pick up a really scary vibe). 2) If you are rude. If you send us something we don’t represent, we may or may not reply, depending on how much time we have or how nice we’re feeling. It’s such a waste of time typing, ‘We are sorry but . . . .’ when our submission guidelines – details of what we rep - are so widely available.

There are some problems associated with replying to queries and, so you can better understand an agent’s perspective, here are the main ones:

1 Being constantly open to queries AND responding to all, especially in a market as huge as the US, is like being sprayed continuously with a power hose. The volume of submissions often feels intimidating and overwhelming. They come on Christmas Day, Thanksgiving, Sundays, birthdays, New Year’s Eve – in fact, every single day of the year. Julia and I receive 10,000-15,000 subs annually. On top of this, we likely each have 5-10 manuscripts (ie, where we’ve asked to read fulls) on our Kindles at any one time. By the time we’ve read one full manuscript, there’s often 150 more subs waiting for us.

2 To read and respond to this number means it is almost impossible ever to take a day off, let alone a weekend. Most agents will push their subs-reading into the weekend because there just isn’t time in the week, given the volume of client work. And we are committed legally and morally to give our clients the best of our time and efforts. All this means we must scrutinize queries with great focus and speed. We make a decision (yes – we want to read more; no – not for us) and then we have to move on fast. Opening, copying, pasting replies – or giving a truly individualized answer – really adds up. And that can mean most of Sunday gone – or the time needed to read a hot manuscript (which could be out with many other agents). And that hot manuscript just won’t wait. It can be very tough on families, who so often – OK, mostly - come second to the inbox.  Time, and decisions on how/where to spend it, are hugely important to agents. A great year or a dreadful year for the business? The difference often lies in the decisions we make about use of time, and we guard not only the hours but the minutes.

3 If you are reading this, you are almost certainly the kind of submitter we love. Here’s your profile: you are eager to learn writing craft and about the industry; you’re probably a member of SCBWI, with access to all the teaching which comes with that; you do your research, try your best, and are respectful and pleasant. You are very welcome! However – people like you make up a max of 50% of our subs inbox. The rest are not so welcome. They pepper us with spam, mass submit (ie, to lots of agencies on the same email), ignore our guidelines (either because they’ve not read them or because they want us to make them exceptions), and shower us with stuff we don’t represent. They send us attachments that we won’t open – like the man who attached three 110,000 word manuscripts to his email last week. Sometimes there’s no query at all. Often we’re addressed by wrong names (at least a third of those who submit to me spell my name wrong) or no name at all . . .  I could go on, but you get the picture. Grasping the significance of every email, what it contains, how to deal with it, whether it’s for Julia or me, takes a lot of time, but once an agent says they reply to queries, they are committed to replying to these people too – if we don’t, we are chased. Like the man who emailed me on Boxing Day (what Brits call the day after Christmas) to ask why I hadn’t replied to his sub sent a few days before. And of course all our stats – what words we use to reply and exactly how many days that takes us – are logged all over the internet. Anyone can complain about us, very publicly.

4 When we reply, even with the most courteously worded email, we get a lot of responses. Many simply pop back with a ‘thank you’. While there’s no need to do that (and it takes more moments to open that email), we always appreciate the courtesy and good wishes.  However, others respond less desirably. Some are downright rude, aggressive and disrespectful. Like the man who, in response to Julia’s very courteous rejection, shot back: ‘Kiddo, hold up a mirror and you’ll see you’re not even a professional.’ Or the woman whose questions I answered with two personal emails on a Sunday, who spat back two messages of outright snark.  Others ask more questions or for editorial follow-up, even when we’ve said in our turndown that we can’t give that. Now fewer agents reply to rejections, some writers come back with:  ‘Thanks SO much for replying. I appreciate that so much, you can be sure I’ll query you again soon with my other five manuscripts . . . .’

5 Rejection never makes people happy, however it is delivered. Researching online, I saw lots of blog comments from people saying they hate getting agent responses; they’d prefer to hear nothing rather than read yet another ‘Unfortunately . . .’ turndown. Many object to getting a ‘template’ response, however carefully worded. For lots of people, the only desirable thing is to be offered representation – and if not, then a full, individualized critique. Sorry, but that simply can’t happen.  Interestingly, it also seems that some writers would prefer an agency close completely to queries rather than fail to respond (I find this mystifying!). So how on earth do we make everyone happy?!

6 One solution would be to farm out sub reading/responding. I have lots of young people longing to intern for me. Do you want a college-leaver reading your submission? You might get a personal response, but it wouldn’t be from me. I think not.

Again, I come back to the fact that yes, we do reply. And yes, Julia and I personally look at all submissions. So WHY do we stick with this policy?

1 We are friendly, open people trying to behaving decently in a brutal business. That’s not to say that equally friendly, open people can’t make different decisions on this. But we are famed for working with debut writers, we nurture our Greenhouse seedlings, and we have a genuine interest in the development of new authors. At the moment, it still feels right to demonstrate that by responding. We were raised to have good manners!

2 Many of our clients arrived via a simple query email. They didn’t meet us at conferences, they weren’t referred, they weren’t already published. They just queried us. There’s a purity, a simplicity, to that basic opportunity which is democratically given, and we have respect for that.

3 We enjoy the interaction with real people, learning the craft. We like seeing what you’re writing. Many friendships have been made – even with writers we’ve turned down – and it’s always a pleasure to meet you at conferences.

4 We know that many of the biggest books of the next few years are lurking among the tens of thousands. This encourages us to maintain our professionalism in dealing with subs.

5 It really annoys me that the opportunists, the haters, the sloppy, the cynical, should spoil things for everyone else by their inundation. So far, they haven’t.

6 We’ve signed several authors because they came back to us with their new manuscripts as a result of our courteous turndowns first time around. And we do often add personal notes if we feel a query has merit but isn’t quite there yet.

7 In short, we reply because it still feels personally and professionally right. It reflects our values.

I won’t lie. Julia and I discuss our subs policy every few months, and after an uptick in disrespectful writer-responses, we’ve been sorely tempted to change our policy.  We are very busy and our response policy costs us dearly in time and personal life.  If you value it, there are ways in which YOU can help us to maintain it:

1 Always do your research before you submit to an agency. Take your time, even if it means submitting to only a couple in one day. Treat the process like a job interview; every submission matters, so get it as right as you can.

2 Remember that agents are human beings, not robots. Agents need to cook dinner and sleep, like everyone else.  And we’re running businesses, not dream factories.

3 Don’t pepper us with multiple queries. If you send us 5 queries in two weeks, you are taking an opportunity from someone else.  If you want to re-query with another manuscript, wait a while.

4 If you have writer friends who are about to query, pass on these tips.

5 If you see disrespectful, mean comments in posts about agents, consider sharing in the self-policing of the writing community. We are an exceptionally open, approachable lot, but professionalism means agents can rarely answer back in their own defence; as a fellow writer it’s a lot easier. Just remember, whatever their response policy, most agents work their butts off.

So to all of you careful, friendly queriers – we warmly welcome you! And we look forward to seeing more of your work in 2012.

Good wishes from us both.

Sarah and Julia

Pix:  1) Neptune Statue, Florence, Italy 2) and 3) Fort McHenry barracks,Baltimore, Maryland. Where Americans pounded the Brits out in the Chesapeake Bay, having been attacked in the 1812 war.

What happens once you’ve signed with an agent? I thought I might talk you through the next bit. Thanks to Lara on Twitter for suggesting this subject.

Agents value themselves by the books they sell. If it’s been a month since I got in something good, I get the foot tap. And if it’s been a couple of months, I get the death mask. When that happens I will send a sniveling email to Sarah saying ‘Where are they? :-(’. And when a book comes in that’s fabulous as it is, and I can send out that week, my goodness, it’s the best spike in the world.

But it doesn’t happen very often. In most cases my submissions are debuts, and inevitably there will be some shaping to do. Maybe there’s a tendency to overwrite or to enter scenes really early and leave too late. Perhaps the concept has some potential but after a bit of refining it would become incredibly exciting. Maybe the story loses its way. Often in a debut manuscript, there’s too much going on and not enough focus on the thing that matters.

A voice might call out, even though the story isn’t there yet. So we help develop: we ask questions, point out issues, suggest solutions. That process may be collaborative and involve close work on the ms, or it may be it a cup of tea and chat about where the arrow should point.

The development process is where we add value – it can be great fun, a real learning curve for both agent and author, and it’s very satisfying when you get the big deal.

When the book is ready the selling begins. At Greenhouse, I sell into the UK, Sarah sells into the US, and our rights team sells our translation rights. While some territories are shrinking, others are booming, and we share knowledge constantly. In a tough market it’s not easy to get the deal that you want in terms of money, rights and territories. For example, the UK trade is facing challenges so UK publishers are keen to spread their risk by buying world rights. But if I’m fairly sure that a US deal – or a Brazilian deal plus a German deal – will equal a world rights offer from a UK publisher, that supports my decision-making and the advice I give my author. Why sell the whole farm? It’s a big world, and sometimes the six-figure world rights deal isn’t the right offer to take in the long term.

So with a view to how other territories may value my book, I go into the UK. I’ll write my submission list with the zeal of an eleven-year-old composing birthday invites to the afternoon disco. And I ask myself who is right for this book and author – and who isn’t? 

Once I’ve signed up an author I’ll start talking about the book. This might be socially, when I’m having a drink with an editor or formally, at a book fair with a more refined and stylized pitch. Sarah and I don’t quite practice our pitches in the mirror but… well, actually we do. So publishers will have a sense of what’s upcoming from us. I took on an author on Monday, have talked about his book at a couple of parties, and already editors are emailing me about it. Cool, eh?

The written pitch takes time, and is probably a whole other blog post. It needs to convey a clear idea of concept, setting, character and goal. As well as making the book sound incredible. If you go to the books page of our website, most of the book blurbs are the pitches we sent out. It’s gratifying to see the pitch that we laboured over used right through to publication – on amazon, on the back cover, on promotional material. When that happens you know you wrote a really good one.

Then the book goes out and I’ll brief the author on what to expect – which is probably not very much for a few weeks. I’ll get reactions to the pitch and early noises – maybe an overnight read or two. Perhaps one editor will come back with the ‘LOVE’ word. That’s very exciting. Maybe I’ll get a few early rejections. And then, after perhaps two weeks, the first email telling me that the whole team adore it and it’s going to acquisitions. Sometimes this all takes much longer. I’ll be tying up a deal this week for a book that went out last week, but it can take months to get to that point.

We tend not to update authors on every piece of news. When I sent out A DOG CALLED HOMELESS I got a rejection within a day. Had I told the author it would have rattled her, like it rattled me. As it turned out, that publisher was the only one who didn’t offer on it, and it went to a seven publisher auction.

Selling a book can get messy and confusing. There’s such clamour, especially if you’ve got a lot of interested parties. Once I have an offer, I set rules so every publisher knows what to do and to expect.  I’ll call deadlines, set the terms I’m looking for, voice any concerns about details of the offers and let publishers know if I need anything more from them.

At this point I’ll probably be updating the author every day or so, or whenever they check in, to let them know where we are and what the next stage is. It can be a charged time for author – and indeed publisher – so the agent makes sure everyone knows what the order of play is. Although it’s exciting, it shouldn’t feel stressful.

Once we’ve got final offers, the last part of this stage is the weigh-up: which is the best house and what is the best offer? The number of variables can be mind-boggling (and great fun to talk through). We could probably pull out a hundred pros and cons at this stage if we wanted to over-think it, but don’t worry, it’s always easier than that!

The agent will have a view on who is best and why. We will know which publisher tends to have a longer term view towards its authors. That this publisher always delivers on ‘package look’, and this publisher has been incredibly strong on its positioning in the big chains over the last year. What editions do they propose – hardback or paperback? What about marketing? Are there exciting promises? Maybe the editor is about to leave; that’s not ideal. Perhaps this publisher is offering a bestseller bonus, but is jointly accounting its books? Or this publisher has a greater international profile, so the deal would position the book well for foreign rights. One publisher might be offering much more on the advance, but lesser royalties and high discounts. Some of these are just nuances, and some of them are very serious. Every deal is different, which keeps us on our toes.

There is so much more to write about what comes next, but I’ll leave that for another post.

Pictures are from Guy Fawkes Night in Lewes, which is a strange and loud event. See this wiki link if you’re not from the UK. And also the obligatory photo of Philos. He looks happy and relaxed so Brits will know these photos weren’t taken the same night.

I made one of my regular pilgrimages to New York last week. Two Greenhouse authors were in town too, seeing their publishers – Jeyn Roberts/DARK INSIDE (S&S;) and Erica Scheidt/USES FOR BOYS (St Martin’s Press) – so it was great to be able to spend time with them both, as well as hear all about the promotional plans in place for their books.

However, most of my time was spent seeing editors – lots of them, at a variety of publishing houses. As well as catching up on news of particular shared authors, meetings like this are a vital way in which agents stay current with the marketplace and who is looking for what and why.  Editors are constantly in touch with the major retailers – what’s moving off the shelf and what’s not; which jackets are working and which aren’t etc. But they also have a huge number of manuscripts passing across their desks and have the best overview of Submissions Land. While I keep a very close eye on what’s actually selling in deals, I inevitably only get to make my choices from what’s coming in to me from writers like you. Editors get to see what’s coming from an enormous range of agents.

So what did I learn?

There’s always a big surge in manuscript submissions to editors post Labor Day (lots of agents don’t submit during August). This year the surge has been a bit disappointing, lots of editors saying they’re seeing the same old, same old. Paranormal. Dystopian. Rather dull contemporary YA. Not much great MG, which is a pain as YA is getting so saturated.

Basically, editors want to see Something They’ve Never Seen Before. Easy, right!?

Haha, can you hear my hollow laugh? You have to write it, and I have to find it, so it’s far from easy all round. Let’s have a shot at extrapolating what they might mean.

YA

Contemporary (ie, realistic): Editors were mixed about this. Some said it was a really tough sell, some would like to see more. General consensus is that it needs a fab hook, whether it’s dark or light. If the former it needs to be edgy and intriguing. If the latter, it needs a voice that pops with charm, humour, and that special something that makes us love the characters. There’s a ton of admiration around for our very own Lindsey Leavitt who has just the right touch in both MG and YA. We also had a lot of houses bidding for Donna Cooner’s SKINNY, which has all the above qualities in spades. The other book repeatedly mentioned is ANNA AND THE FRENCH KISS by Stephanie Perkins. Real-world romance – deliciously, delightfully unfolding as part of a gripping contemporary story – is really hard to find, but we’re all seeking it.

Paranormal: I’m still seeing lots of vampire/demons/angels submissions. While it would be stupid to say NEVER EVER to these themes (in this business all rules can be broken), by and large that ship has sailed.  There are just too many stories out there already in which girls fall for demons/dark angels. One editor told me she actually ‘feels sick’ when she sees another one! The big exception to this is if you can combine paranormal with another genre – eg, paranormal meets historical; paranormal meets sci-fi etc. If you can surprise us with a combination of elements we’ve not seen before, you could be right on the button. Lots of editors went for Jessica Spotswood’s BORN WICKED, which does this.

Dystopian: Ditto. So many houses are already bought up in this area and have a lot of exposure in advances – often on books still to publish in 2012, or with sequels. Can they all work commercially? I have a feeling we’ll be seeing the sheep sorted from the goats – some titles pushing through to success, others lagging. I’m still seeing a fair number of subs featuring things like divided societies, haves and have-nots, viruses, dome cities etc. Again, if you’re going to break in and persuade a publisher to part with dollars, you’ve got to bring something really fresh to the dystopian table.

So where do I think there IS a niche to be filled in YA?

Thrillers: Quite a few editors said they’d love to find an edgy, dark, clever thriller with a clear and strong hook. Which is great, because I love stories like that too and Greenhouse has done some strong deals in this area. Megan Miranda’s FRACTURE yesterday received a fantastic starred review in PW. SLIDE by Jill Hathaway pubs in March 2012 and is a thrill ride of a read – and a major lead for Balzer & Bray. If you can come up with pacy, clever, zigzag plotting with false trails and drama aplenty, then thrillers have legs right now, internationally as well as domestically.

Sci-Fi: I’m starting to see a steady trickle of sci-fi stories in my inbox and I’m actually just signing a new client whose debut novel falls in this area and has a unique premise. I feel sci-fi should have red warning lights attached to it because it is DIFFICULT! As Anica Rissi of Simon Pulse said, ‘It must be more FI than SCI.’ ie, Don’t overload it with gadgets and gizmos, and keep the human drama central. Setting your story off-planet is just a way of finding a new backdrop for a story encompassing recognizable ingredients – love, betrayal, intrigue etc. And it must have really high stakes.  The ones to beat are ACROSS THE UNIVERSE and GLOW.

Historical: Most historical fiction we see is dry and stiff.  But I do think there’s a new wave coming and that was echoed by many editors. I call it ‘sexy historical’ and for me it’s all about those high stakes and lush settings. We saw it with THE LUXE, I believe we’ll see it with Katherine Longshore’s GILT, and I’m excited to hear that Philippa Gregory has just agreed a four-book deal with S&S;.  I would LOVE to find something in this area, but I’m not talking about little drummer boys in the Revolutionary War; I’m talking about a protagonist (female) who speaks with a strong contemporary voice, yet set against an authentic backdrop of another time. I want rustling silk, corsets, bad boys, lost reputations, forbidden love across social divides, gorgeously lavish houses that conceal secrets . . . . The French Revolution would be a great setting to mine as would World War I.

Why is this so difficult to write? Because you must have a very strong grasp of the period you’re writing about – strong enough to use exactly the right amount of detail – yet mix that with a character who feels very fresh and NOW. It’s a fine line between stiff/historic language and a voice that is accessible/fresh, yet never anachronistic.

Horror: Yes, definitely – if the relationships are kept central. (Sorry, I keep banging that drum.) You can’t just create a gore-fest, it’s got to have charm and individuality. The one making news is ANNA DRESSED IN BLOOD by Kendare Blake, which has wit, a tremendous ghost, as well as a lot of blood.

Unique perspectives: Editors are strongly seeking stories that are told in fresh and intriguing ways. My NYC trip persuaded me that we could have sold Blythe Woolston’s BLACK HELICOPTERS (preempted by Candlewick in the US and Walker in the UK) about 15 times over. Not only is it a unique psychological thriller with teeth, but it’s also told in a non-sequential way, which means the reader has to piece together what happened to the protagonist before she arrived at Page 1 of the book.  It’s clever, it’s painful, but the story unfolds in an unexpected way – which makes it really HOT right now.

Big and small worlds:  Some editors are naturally drawn to epic worlds (dystopian, sci-fi, heaven/hell etc), but others like very small worlds portraying fractured, finely drawn characters. Erica Scheidt’s USES FOR BOYS turned a lot of editorial heads when it went on sub.  Spare, devastating, so finely drawn there’s a lot of white space on the page, it tells the story of a fractured life and makes few concessions to the reader, who is left to judge and decide what they think of Anna, the protagonist, for themselves. It’s not a verse novel, but it has the punch of one because of its short word count and memorable lines. While the edgy content was tricky for some, editors really responded to the uniqueness of the voice and approach. Yes, there’s definitely room for the small scale as well as the large!

Middle Grade

MG is typically a ‘slower burn’ than YA in terms of sales, but everyone’s looking for it to re-balance their lists a bit. What would make a great MG project right now?

I have a new author’s debut manuscript on sub at the moment and it’s getting a lot of early interest. While I can’t tell you the plot, I can say that it weaves elements together in a surprising and fresh new way, the writing is crisp and funny, and the characters strong. It delivers adventure, humour and heart – and that is the MG motherlode.

We’re very excited about Sarwat Chadda’s THE SAVAGE PALACE (ASH MISTRY AND THE SAVAGE PALACE in the UK) which pubs in 2012, the first in a new series blending adventure with Indian mythology. Great action, strong characters, unique angle. Again, it delivers in a big way, plus it’s going to hook both boys and girls, which is an added plus as it broadens the potential market. There are many editors out there seeking MG for boys - funny or exciting and preferably both.

On very different lines, Shawn Stout’s PENELOPE CRUMB speaks to young girl readers, with a gorgeous, funny voice and so much charm. Philomel are really excited about this new girl character. Authors who delight in terms of voice are always in demand, but in this young fic area a strong voice is mandatory. The same applies to Sarah Lean’s A DOG CALLED HOMELESS – again, one I think we could have sold to many houses if it hadn’t been preempted by Katherine Tegen at Harper. Poignant, beautifully crafted and featuring a fabulous dog, it made me cry and it made me smile. It’s a delight!

That’s all I’ve got time for now, but do hope it’s useful. If you think you’ve got something answering to the descriptions on my Wanted list, please do query me!

There is a sorry complaint that affects way too many manuscripts – even some of the best debuts that we see. Like Dutch Elm Disease or Athlete’s Foot this malady can overcome something great (a tree, a foot, a story!) and turn it somewhat rotten at the core.  It can sap your potential, spoil your chances, and leave you with a heck of a lot of sorting out to do.

The complaint in question? I call it the Saggy-Baggies, and it’s defined in my Medical Dictionary of Literary Boo-Boo’s as ‘an unfortunate loss of pace, a collapse into mushiness, a slow sprawl in a bog of treacle’. 

The saddest thing about the Saggy-Baggies?  It can affect stories that start out with great potential, where I’m on the edge of my seat thinking I’ve found a nugget . . . . only to run into a swamp further on in the manuscript. If the story doesn’t start out strongly I don’t get far enough to experience the sag, and that’s why it’s so important to look more deeply at the causes of the disease - with Doctor Sarah at your side.

The most dangerous aspect of the Saggy-Baggies is that your reader will suddenly experience an urgent need to make a cup of tea, water the plants, visit the bathroom or walk the dogs – instead of persevering with your manuscript. Why? Because going through their mind is, ‘Where is this story going and do I really care?’ We feel we’re losing our way in scenes and dialogue that don’t seem to contribute much to the forward momentum of the story. We may even start feeling downright confused.

What are the causes of this malaise?

I speak at a lot of conferences around the country. In both my 2010 speech ‘How to write a breakout novel’ and my 2011 ‘From Ordinary to extraordinary: the art of creating a great saleable story and the craft of teasing out its full potential’, I have banged on endlessly about the importance of two things. The first is CONCEPT. The second is HIGH STAKES.

In other words, the first thing you need for your novel is the foundation stone of a really great idea – something original and twisty that hasn’t been done before. Without that central idea and a strong notion of how you’re going to plot it on the page, you’re going to be writing in an uncharted wasteland where your typing fingers potentially run away with you. Of course, setting off with no route map may yield unexpected diversionary treasures – but there’s a strong likelihood that lack of pre-planning will also ultimately run you into a swamp.

You know the Iditarod – that formidable dog-sled race through Alaska? Would you set out without a good set of dogs, moose-slaying weapons, or food to get you through a blizzard? Of course not, and the same kind of planning needs to be brought to bear on your writing journey. Know where you’re trying to go and roughly how you aim to get there.

High stakes – what does this mean? It means that your protagonist needs to have something they want to achieve, they MUST achieve, more than anything else in the world.  That thing must matter hugely to them – and it must also come to matter hugely to the reader. In fact, your main character themselves must ALSO rapidly come to matter to the reader. If they don’t, we will be bored and feel we don’t care if they achieve their goal or not.  In fact, we will soon lay down the manuscript, shrug our shoulders and discover an urgent need to clean out the cooker, which we’ve been meaning to do for months.

So, your goal is to keep your reader with you at all costs. If you can do that, and we really care about your protagonist’s deepest desire (their ‘high stakes’), we will experience the thwarting of that desire (which is basically what needs to happen as your plot unfolds) as both tense and exciting. We will become invested in the outcome, desperate to see the character succeed in overcoming all odds in the end. Will they defeat the demons (whether real or inner)? Will they get the hot guy? Will they find their place in the world? There are lots of possible high stakes, both physical and mental, and your job as puppet-master is to make sure we stay enthralled till the end of the show.

It sounds so simple - so why is it easy to lose your way? One big reason is the temptation to put in too much. ie, Lots of stuff going on or being discussed, but which doesn’t do enough to answer the three big questions: 1) What does the character want more than anything else?  2) Why do they want to achieve that? And 3) How are they going to do it?  What you put in MUST play a part in unfolding/revealing the answers to those questions. If you lose sight of the high stakes, those key questions, your story is likely to get the Saggy-Baggies.

When you get a cold you get some nasty symptoms – a runny nose, sore throat and maybe a fever.  If your manuscript has the Saggy-Baggies there are a couple of indicators you may spot.

Firstly, keep an eye on length. While I agree there are in theory no ‘rules’ about word count, my experience suggests that very long manuscripts are likely to be saggy-baggy. As an agent I’ve never yet met a YA novel over c. 90,000 words that wouldn’t have been improved by cutting and tightening. I’m not saying long manuscripts can’t be sold, but the greater the word count the more I’m looking to see if the pace is maintained.

Secondly, take a long, hard look at your pitch (I recommend writing the pitch before you start writing the story). Is your concept strong and clear? Does the pitch have a neat and crystalline shape to it – or is it a splurge of disconnected ideas? At Greenhouse we look at pitches every day and the best ones stand out a mile because they are so ‘clean’ – clear, interesting and tight.

You CAN avoid the Saggy-Baggies! Know what your story is and how you want to tell it.  Identify your high stakes – the driving need and desire of your protagonist. Make sure everything you include serves to push the story forward with tension and pace.

And when you’ve finished writing? Put your manuscript away in a drawer for a while. Come back to it fresh and with (as far as possible) the eye of someone who’s never seen it before. Read it carefully, asking yourself tough questions. Does it really keep your interest? Do you think it is unputdownable? Do some scenes or conversations or chunks of description feel redundant? Does it sag and bag – even a little? Perhaps you have a critique buddy who can ask the same questions.

The good news is, it’s never too late to get out your medical kit – the scalpel, the scissors, the Band-Aids. The Saggy-Baggies is a nasty ailment to be sure – but it doesn’t need to be terminal.

Best wishes for healthy writing,

Doc Sarah

++++++

Pix: All the images are of pursuits where Saggy-Bagginess must be avoided at all costs. 1) One of the biggest lighthouses in France 2) Flying formation with the Red Arrows over Cornwall 3) Smacking a ping-pong ball.

We asked our facebook and twitter friends if they had any questions about the business of writing for children. Some great ones here. Thank you! And for a treat, some photos of Philos, Julia’s Friday dog.

Do you feel happy endings are important in YA and children’s fiction? And would you consider something like this before sending to editors?

Sarah: I think hope is very important in children’s/YA fiction, even if that is only reached through pain and change (and it usually is!). I enjoy endings that are thought-provoking - not neatly tied up with ribbons - but I do think a strong character arc will tend to leave us knowing that the protagonist has changed, grown, come through some rite of passage. And that is probably going to feel positive. Above all, I want to submit manuscripts that are well structured and satisfying, and a strong ending - whatever unique form it takes - will be part of that.

Julia: One of my favourite childhood books was CHARLOTTE’S WEB. My god, she dies :-(. But she had babies! And they keep Wilbur company! But none of them could replace Charlotte. *Sobs*. It would have been a lighter, lesser book if the spider hadn’t died. Are happy endings important? Not as a rule, but I do think a book needs to leave the reader with something heartfelt.

Do you think there is an editor/agent bias against gay characters in YA?

Julia: For a bit of background, last week two YA authors blogged about how an agent had asked them to ‘straighten out’ the gay characters in their book before offering representation. My first reaction was curiosity. If true, who was this agent and how were they managing to sell books which must be so compromised and focus-grouped? Is there a bias? Thankfully, not that I’ve come up against. I think the editors we work with feel it’s crucial that there are books that speak for and to every child and young adult in the world.

Sarah: While I really don’t want to comment on the specifics of the debate Julia outlined, it raises an interesting question. I have a novel on submission right now that happens to have a lesbian couple in it; it never occurred to me to question that - whether it was a good or bad thing. It was simply part of the author’s vision of the story and as far as I’m concerned, it works - in the context of that particular story. And that’s my criteria for all writing, all characters, all concepts: does it work? Look, we’re seeking manuscripts that thrill and delight us, whatever the orientation of the characters. I haven’t encountered editor (or rather, publisher) bias against gay characters, but of course not all houses feel they can sell all stories - for a whole host of reasons.

How explicit do you think violence and gore can be in MG? More if the book’s funny?

Julia: It’s up to you - and where your ‘ick-ometer’ takes you. There was an article in the New Scientist a couple of years ago about the ‘ick factor’, specifically about growing animal protein in labs and how it would soon be possible - and economical - to take death out of the human food chain. The big problem with this idea was that to a lot of people ‘it just didn’t feel right’. And how about genetically engineering livestock to have a much higher pain threshold or almost no brain, so they don’t feel infections or get stressed on their way to the slaughterhouse? Where is that on the ‘ick factor’ spectrum? Sometimes we see submissions with the ‘ick factor’. I suspect we have quite a high threshold for ‘ick’, we also know where our lines are and where ‘it just doesn’t feel right’.

Sarah: I don’t think there can be rules on this, really - it’s about instinctive response. Where I set my ‘ick-ometer’ may be different to another agent. And I’ve certainly met editors with very differing sensibilities. Fair enough, I pass, that editor passes, and someone else takes on the book who feels differently. But I do think that beyond a question of taste, there tends to be general consensus if violence is gratuitous or has crossed a line into something troubling. I think that as an agent, editor or writer, one should take note of a niggling sense of unease.

Where are the children in the decision-making process? How do you know what children want to read?

Sarah: Good question, and we all hope we’re getting that right. Of course we can partly see from sales trends what is actually working with kids themselves and their families. If something isn’t working, doesn’t sell (despite marketing efforts), then maybe we haven’t quite hit that commercial sweet spot (though there are other factors too, like retail issues/competition/luck). However, the publishing industry and process is inevitably run by adults, and the gatekeepers to the shelves - whether booksellers or librarians - are also adults, as are many of the buying public (ie, parents and other adults purchasing for children). As agents we obviously try to keep in touch with kids themselves (many of us have our own), and it’s a combination of this and a trained, experienced judgement + instinct that makes us pick up one manuscript over another and put it forward for consideration. However, it’s those at the sharp end - sales/marketing teams and retail buyers - who have the closest interface with the buying public, which is why they have so much power in the process. But hey - haven’t we all had the experience of putting a great book into a child’s hands and watching them read, engrossed? That’s what motivates us and why we all agonize so long and hard over ‘getting it right’.

Julia: Children can’t work for big corporations in highly skilled jobs. And adults do this stuff better.

Is there a book category for 10-14 year olds? Young YA? Usually, in bookshops you see 8-12 and YA.

Sarah: It’s tricky. What you’re referring to is ‘tween’ fiction - or it is in the USA; usually we use that term for girl-oriented fiction that deals with pre-teen issues and a growing sense of selfhood. And yes, it can be problematic as there’s no section called tween. A judgment call therefore has to be made as to whether the book is MG or YA. Usually the tone, the concept and the characters’ ages will dictate the shelf-placement decision, but it’s worth considering your potential audience carefully when you write for this age group.

Julia: If it’s 10+ you’d be more likely to find it in the 8-12 section. In order to help signpost to buyers, retailers tend to categorise into picture books, young fiction, 8-12 (middle grade in the US) and YA - but inevitably within those bands there’s a lot of fluidity and stretch.

Julia, what’s the state of the UK YA market? Are editors actively looking for British authors or mainly acquiring from the US? And Sarah, what about the US?

Julia: It’s looking OK. Over the last 18 months I think I’ve sold every UK debut I’ve sent out. Saying that out loud gives me lockjaw and I write this sitting on a wooden windowsill with a foxglove wreath around my neck. Seriously though, there is a real hunger for home-grown talent. The Americans have been doing YA so well for so long, and I think we’re starting to catch up.

Sarah: My mantra is fast becoming ‘It’s all about quality!’ And that’s quite true - it doesn’t matter where the author is domiciled, if the book is a cracker. We’ve sold a number of British-based authors in the US, and vice versa. For example, we’ve recently sold American Donna Cooner’s debut YA SKINNY in the UK (to Egmont), and Bloomsbury US just pre-empted on Brit Helen Douglas’s EDEN.

Generally, I’d say that despite all sorts of publishing challenges, the US YA market feels buoyant - there’s a lot of acquisition, and big deals, going on. A number of editors have told me recently that they ‘have money to spend’. Which makes us rub our hands with glee!

What makes a good 5-8 series?

Sarah: A great voice. Time and again, voice is the cruncher. It’s got to be authentic and pitch perfect. Also, of course, you need a really great central character and a fun but very original concept. It’s a tough area as so dominated by established and big-selling series, in the US at least.

Julia: Voice and a sense of fun.

What are editors looking for at the moment for middle grade readers, both boys & girls.

Julia: This will sound odd, but we tend not to focus too much on what publishers are looking for. As they tell us, they just want wonderful new authors to publish.

Sarah: Julia’s right, but I’d love to find another brilliantly written action/adventure novel or series, with charm, good characters and originality. I say ‘another’ because Sarwat Chadda’s Indian epic ASH MISTRY AND THE SAVAGE FORTRESS (HarperCollins UK and Scholastic US/March and Fall 2012 respectively) is a great example of that. I’d also love to find more gorgeously crafted classic middle grade - like Tricia Springstubb’s WHAT HAPPENED ON FOX STREET and MO WREN: LOST AND FOUND (Balzer & Bray) and Tami Lewis Brown’s THE MAP OF ME (FSG).

Julia: I can’t resist the opportunity to cosmic order. Something that makes me laugh as much as WIMPY KID would be super.

Why is there such a long gap between a book getting bought by publishers and being pubbed? (Some are swifter than others, it seems. But I already see deals posted for way off in 2013.) Seems amazing, since the rest of life moves at such speed.

Julia: Publishers sell in their books to retailers 6-9 months before publication and at that point they will aim to have covers, bound proofs and an idea of marketing vision. So already, long before publication, a helluva lot of work needs to happen. Leah Thaxton, Publisher at Egmont UK, told me she went through more than fifty cover looks, to get Michael Grant’s GONE spot on. Fifty!

Also publishers need to keep an eye on their own lists. If they’re launching two big YA thrillers, they won’t want to put them on the same spot and watch them eat each other.

Sarah: Julia’s right! There are a lot of parts to the process, many of which are unseen by the general public who just see the final result on the shelf - as if it appeared by magic!

Do you work on every book you send out?

Julia: Only if we have to.

Sarah: Often, but never gratuitously. We want to give every author we take on the best possible chance of getting a deal. For many new clients it’s their first novel and they’re aware it’s not quite ‘there’ yet. If we can help them add what could be that all-important polish or extra shaping, then we will.

How can I catch an agent’s attention when I feel that the initial chapters requested don’t really showcase my book.

Julia: Short answer. Your initial chapters/pages should showcase your book. Longer answer. Something to keep in mind. Agents want to find great books. There’s nothing more exciting than spotting new talent and most agents come at their submissions with a very positive and hopeful energy - and not looking for perfection. If we think something looks interesting, we’ll ask to see more. Still, the first chapter of a really great submission will contain clarity and a sense of purpose. We’ll be able to see a concept, a voice, a character and even a story in those first pages. Certainly an idea of where the book is pointing.

Sarah: What do you do if you start a new book and the first few chapters don’t grab you? Invariably, you give up and move on to another. That’s how people read, and certainly how children read, so your book has to ‘sing’ from the start, even if some aspects aren’t quite in place when you submit it to an agent. Believe me, we can pick up a sense of voice, pace and originality very quickly, and I’ve been known to ask for a full manuscript on the strength of just three lines!