The thought that strikes me is that he's an author, not an agent. Was he at a conference? Where did you see him speak? Good for you for attending conferences -- that already puts you ahead of the game. Agents like finding writers at conferences because it shows that they're serious.
He said it during his creative writing class. He teaches at Brigham Young University. He allowed one of his students to film his class and put the videos on YouTube for all. Here is the link if it interests you: http://www.writeaboutdragons.com/home/brandon_w2012/
Hi, Mammamaia. For some reason most of the e-mails I received recently get sent to the spam folder (Yahoo suck!), yours include, and by force of habit I foolishly emptied the folder. I read and downloaded some of what you sent but didn't manage to replay... I am now going over, again, on my MS and instead of finding what to cut to make it shorter, I just seem to edit some and add new words to the count that actually make the story sound better to me... Is it really worth doing what looks like "hurting the story" by making it shorter just because most agents won't accept a long MS from an unknown writer?
I listen to Brandon Sanderson's writing excuses podcast. In my opinion, he's full of really great ideas. I'm not sure if I like this iPad idea specifically, but I like that it's unconventional. But there are other, less-expensive and less-odd ways to get an agent's attention. At a conference I went to, a panel of agents were recommending sticking out like this. One person made a diorama of one of their scenes, another person wrote a song that was their pitch. They said anything to have you stick out of their mind is a good thing. (Note: this is for in-person meetings, like at a conference, not emails. You want email queries to be very conventional).
"Writing Excuses" is really good! So is Pat Rothfuss's "Story Board." Though for some reason there is no new episode this month. And yeah, just to make it clear to everyone: I was strictly talking about making an impression in-person at conventions. They meet hundreds of people a day, so it only makes sense.
i'll resend my email... look for its arrival and check your spam folder if it's not in your inbox... first of all, accept the fact that cutting it down to a marketable size won't 'hurt the story' if all you do is cut out unnecessary description detail and simplify overworded sentences... and consider doing without a frivolous subplot that won't really affect the main plot enough to be problem, if it's cut... ask yourself what good it will do you to have your overblown ms intact, if it never gets published... or else start considering self- or e-publishing, instead of aiming at making more money and being what the literary world considers a 'published author' with a paying publisher...
I can almost guarantee you can lose a few thousand words by making your work more concise--without losing anything story-wise. I learned this the hard way.
Jhunter, mammamaia, I'll look over what you say again. I'm still not sure what I can cut but I'll do my bet looking for it. Question: If the manuscript was of a well known author, then the word count would not have mattered?
Until you've been published, you need to follow extra "rules" to convince agents and publishers that you are ready to be published. Your manuscript length being roughly 80-100k is one of them.
Probably not, but there are sound commercial reasons why it matters in the case of debut authors. For example, the greater the number of words, the more it costs to produce the book. Publishers are taking a risk on any new author. Why should they increase that risk by laying out more money than necessary? Also, the greater the word count the greater the room a book takes up on a shelf. Therefore, booksellers are less likely to order books by unproven authors. These issues are not arbitrary, but are dictated by publishing and marketing issues, and by sound business sense. That's something everyone needs to accept if they want to be published. Established authors sometimes get away with all manner of unorthodox things in addition to inflating their manuscripts, but I'm prepared to bet that they get published despite, not because of them. Getting published, let alone becoming an established author with a consistently high enough level of sales to be able to call the shots, is difficult enough. Why make it even more difficult--if not downright impossible--for yourself?
They also are screening for writers who can read instructions (i.e. submission guidelines), and aren't so arrogant they think they are above such petty considerations. After all, the publisher has to work with the writer, and doesn't want it to be like wrestling alligators,
The agents I've spoken to have all advised against doing anything unconventional. It's their job to decide what they pay attention to. That's how they make their living. They read a lot and pick the best. The best thing you can do is make it easy for them to read your work by making your approach in the same, accepted way as everyone else. If I was a busy agent novelty manuscripts, expensive gifts, weird formats, flattery or promotional stunts would all only serve to turn me off a particular writer. I would, for example, feel really awkward (and a little bit stalked) if someone gave me an iPad.
Did they give that advice regarding email queries or in-person queries? I've heard agents say they like a unique presentation in face-to-face queries (for example, at a conference), though I agree that you shouldn't do anything out of the ordinary for email queries. Even in person, though, you don't want anything out of the ordinary for your actual manuscript.
One alternative is stop chasing agents and instead achieve literary success by winning a prestigious and respected writing competition or award. That's how two authors I read Patrick Rothfuss and Trudi Canavan got their start. Both tried for over years pitching their books to different agents with no success then they both went on to enter and win prestigious short story competitions and then an agent approached them. The other advice I read was to make sure your first page is good enough to sell the whole book. Since most agents will only read a small percentage of submissions beyond the first page. If you don't grab them immediately then they are likely to just move on to the next submissions in their overflowing in box.
do you think the odds of winning a 'prestigious and respected writing comp/award' are any better than for snagging an agent?
It depends on your writing ability and style. If you are a great writer who can't write a decent query letter or who has written a novel that is less marketable then a traditional first novel then winning an a major award is probably your best shot at an agent and publishing deal. Especially if you are trying to break into a saturated market. If on the other hand your a good or mediocre writer but know how to write a highly marketable and easy to sell novel then finding agent will definitely be easier. Writing is a highly competitive business and you need every edge and advantage you can get. If your first novel isn't selling then you should move on to your next idea will you shop it around.
A teacher of mine wrote a letter to a big-time TV producer here, in the voice of a character from his TV idea, signed with the character's name and all. He wouldn't tell us how much he sold the show for, but it was enough for him to buy a house in a fairly decent suburb. Mind you, occurrences like this are rare, but if you're willing to take a risk, go for the agents you expect to get rejected from.
