Novel What will make your book stand out from the crowd?

An author hoping that they will make it big by ignoring the market would be better served by betting on getting struck by lightning.
As for writers not writing to the market, it seems to me that this thread is the OP expressing frustration about not getting published in the traditional market. Writers who don't care to be published are a different breed.

 

I couldn't resist...

 

I once knew a guy who had been struck multiple times and, also, been in several plane crashes. He looked and acted kinda like

 

I think there are a few sliding scales here that are being treated like they're absolutes. Like, "hoping they will make it big" is one end of a spectrum, "don't care to be published" are the other end. I mean, I guess most of the authors in the middle might "hope" to make it big, but it's not necessarily a real goal they're working toward.

Similarly, there's been talk of "catering to the market" and good 'ol "pandering", which seems like one extreme of market awareness, and "ignoring the market" as the other extreme. I don't think most writers stick to one extreme or the other. There's plenty of room in the middle!

 

I'm not sure "make it big" and "writing a great book" are synonymous. Some of us are striving for the latter, not necessarily the former. It's a different set of values that motivates one to write.

I wrote the OP and I wasn't expressing frustration about not getting published by a traditional publisher. While I plan to try, I won't be the least bit bothered should I end up self publishing.

Getting back to the values, the reasons we are all writing, (and I don't begrudge anyone's motives just because they are not my motives), I'm close to retiring. I've already had a great career as a nurse then a nurse practitioner. I'm not writing to become famous or rich or to make a living.

I'm writing because I want to tell a story. I want to bring these characters to life. I hope people are still reading my books a couple decades from now. That is not the same goal or value of "making it big".

And I'm wondering why the concept of writing because one wants to write seems so foreign to you, or that you think it's less common than writers writing to make it big or make a living? Because I think wanting to write is more common than wanting to make it big. Wanting to make a living writing, on the other hand, goes with either.

 

I think that they are. Twilight, Fifty Shades of Grey, etc. may be popular for a few years, but compare that to Carrie (which was written over forty years ago). Twilight and Fifty Shades will never be big like Carrie is.

 

How are you defining "big"? Just longevity, or magnitude as well?

I mean, the 50 Shades trilogy has sold over 100 million copies to date. Carrie has sold in the millions, for sure, but I don't think it's got anywhere near the numbers of 50 Shades.

And, honestly, I'm not sure I'd call Carrie a great book. I'd give it "good", no problem. But great?

 

Carrie was his first novel. I wanted to compare apples to apples (first novel to first novel). I suspect that if you translated Carrie's millions into the present value of the dollar, it would beat Fifty Shades financially speaking. But, I think you have to look at financial returns and longevity. Harry Potter might remain big for a good long while, but I just don't see Twilight or Fifty Shades having any longevity.

 

Well, we're comparing books sold, not money made - I assume the money per book would be relatively static, adjusted for inflation? So if 50 Shades sold way more copies than Carrie, I assume it also made way more money?

But now I'm not really sure what we're talking about, if it's somehow important that these books were the debut novels for the authors?

 

So, from what I read 50 Shades has sold something like 70 million copies worldwide. Carrie sold a few million copies in the initial years after its publication. If you're looking at it only in terms of a first novel, it is way behind 50 Shades. However, if you add in King's subsequent fame and all the people who have gone back and back and bought Carrie over the years, then it may be a different story.

 

NOTE:

Most recent data I could find was that King has published 54 novels and sold over 350 million books. That sales data is ten years old, but unless something has changed drastically in the last decade I'd be surprised if Carrie alone has sold more than 70 million copies.

 

I find it funny because my stories always have those elements in them. And some may say that is a result of pandering to an audience. To some extent I agree, but at the same time I don't want to sacrifice any artistic integrity.

I have a story I want to tell... and no it doesn't have zombie pirates! But... maybe I can add a zombie pirate or two, I guess... And you better damn appreciate it! Cuz this story was just fine without a zombie pirate. And if I'm adding a zombie pirate I'll make sure to make it the best damn zombie pirate anyone has ever seen! It'll make Black Beard look like a sock puppet. I'll tie him perfectly into the plot because that is part of my job, part of my accomplishment. Anything I do, related to writing, has that kind weight behind it. And that overshadows a lot of the problems you guys keep talking about, like writing could ever be so restrictive. I like writing because you can challenge yourself however you want. It is puzzle of your own design and liking, for your own personal goals. It's can be a statement, as much as it is can be a soul quest, as much as it can be your opportunity for fame and fortune, as much as it can be a combination of all three! Their are no limits or restrictions, only imagined ones.

There are some things that just never get old. Is it that big a deal that my book has a war which is so common in fantasy? Magic and Diverse Races and Slaves? I think it is. I think that a war like any other, in some evil vs good showdown of armies wouldn't stick out from the many times that has been done before. In fact, I'm sure it won't be enough to stick out. And so then what exactly is pandering then? Id' say it is nothing more than a tactic to get somebody to listen to you. Like using your smooth voice on the ladies. This pandering for an audience is the way the world works, and as unfortunate as that is, we have to be the ones to deal with it. Just like we have to deal with social interaction on a day to day basis. The director of the Metal Gear Solid series, Hideo Kojima, understood this pain all too well.

And that is exactly what I'm doing. If the audience I am writing for wants blood. I'll give them blood. If they want idealistic heroes they can admire? Then I'll give them that too.(At least I'll make them think they have it... for a while) They want a happy ending? Well, I'll give it to them for the first few books... Then they won't have a choice when I give them the ending my story deserves. it will be too late to deny me then. Muahahahaha HAHAHAHA!!! See! I'm dealing with it.

If you have some time,(a bit of time) you might be surprised by how artistically creative a video game series can be:
Metal Gear Solid 2 (Critical Close-Up Review)


Metal Gear Solid: Snake Eater (Critical Close-Up Review)

 

Come on man, lets be honest here.

You don't need magic, pirate zombies, romance, mythical creatures or I don't want to sacrifice any artistic integrity.

When you're rocking a soundtrack like this





SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE!

 

Joking of course in the above post but I couldn't resist posting the Snake Eater song at the mention of Metal Gear

 

I think I got us off topic because I'm splitting my attention amongst a couple of tasks. Regardless, I think I'm gonna have to relent in the face of several posters' comments. I'm wrong. But, I'm gonna spend some more time cogitating on this and see if I can make a better argument.

 

I don't fault anyone for their story choices, nor do I judge negatively a writer who wants to make it big or pander to some market. There are more than a few stories with mythical creatures and magical powers that I very much like. Big battles and wars, not so much, it depends on the rest of the story though.

 

I would have thought the answer to this question was obvious. My book is going to stand out from the rest because it is genius. It's sharp, lewd, and boasts massive balls.

If you don't believe in your own god damn novel, (and assuming you are not some
savvy businessman) why are you even writing?

 

Also to answer the question of this thread.

What will make your book stand out from the crowd?

Simple.

I'm the best in the world at what I do and what I do is write stuff in the way only I can.

A dangerously insane statement.

 

Thataboy!

You need to be confident in your work up to the point of receiving criticism, and always confident in its potential.

 

LEMME TELL YA SOMETHING BROTHA!

Kingtypemania is running wild here on the WWF (World Writing Federation) and the Publishing company’s won’t be able to hold back all the little Typesters chanting his name!

What are you gonna do publishing companies? WHEN 50,000 WORDS RUN WILD ON YOU!!!!



---

That's gonna be my gimmick as a commercial writer

I'm gonna cut wrestling promos.

 

Though in all seriousness and fairness.

A cool cover and a good summary on the back also helps.

I'd assume

 

Sorry, @Mckk - I was just being grumpy! Of course there are many great books out there. In fact I just bought one this morning, by Ursula Le Guin. I didn't mean to imply that all books that get traditionally published are crap. Some good ones do slip through the net, for sure. And again, I would never try to discourage somebody from attempting to get traditionally published if that's what they want.

I think my point was that if you write a book that is NOT short, genre-related, or 'niche literary,' you will have a hard time getting any publisher to even take a look at it. And my point was not that it's worthless to try, but that it is likely to eat up a huge part of your life and energy trying. It's sensible to think about that aspect of the whole issue. You need to decide whether or not you have the skills and tenacity to sell your book—which has nothing to do with writing it. You also need to consider whether you have time to faff around getting agents who, as we are told, are 'looking for a reason to reject your MS' to bother with you at all.

Maybe if you are pushing 30, you have that time. Those of us who are pushing 70 may not.

Just an example of what I mean ...to start the 'find an agent' process you are encouraged to approach an agent by name, and tie your book in to one they have just successfully agented. Okay, this is a skoosh, if you write genre or niche books that resemble other books out there. But if your book is NOT like any other you can find, what do you do? I have spent YEARS reading all the books I can find which I suspect have similar themes and storylines to mine. And guess what? I haven't found any yet. So I'm stumped immediately. How much more time and money do I want to invest chasing other books in the hopes that I find one similar to mine so I can approach their agent and start the process? Answer ...no more.

 

I guess I'm of the personality type of "give it a go, even if it seems impossible" (heck, I imagine that's most of us on here seeing as most of us are probably writing to publish). Even if it seems like 99.9% sure the agent would reject my book, ah well what's the harm in sending an email? The query doesn't take that long to craft and once you have it, the only thing you change each time is the agent's name and some intro details.

Again, I don't believe in waiting forever either. I self-pubbed No One to Save Her after 2 months of sending queries. I hardly waited at all. But I simply see no harm in trying.

I guess even if I think I know the answer will be a rejection, I don't want to believe it until I see the rejection (or a lack of response within the space of 2 weeks).

I also know I'm no businesswoman. As you say, marketing etc is a skill in its own right. One that I don't possess, and nor am I interested in learning if I'm honest. My own hope is to traditionally publish one day, cus I know I need the marketing the publisher can give me. But until then, I'm also quite happy to simply have my book 'out there'

You're right though that our thinking and mentality might be quite different due to age. My parents are nearly 60 and they say similar things as you - to pursue what makes them happy but not get too worked up over it, not to stress over things that seem too difficult. Why bother with things that seem impossible? They don't have that sorta time. Just enjoy your last few years.

Gah. Writing that makes me feel like I ought to move back to England!!

 

Moving back to England would make you feel more like your parents' generation? Umm ...maybe better stay where you are!

I think, judging from your self-published book, you probably didn't have any trouble finding the kinds of publishers who would be interested in your fantasy-YA story. And yet, you still experienced a fair number of rejections. Imagine if there were NO agents out there interested in fantasy YA. Who would you approach?

I think that's my main problem. I've written a long book, set in a historical setting, but it's not about historical people or events at all. It's just my choice of setting—which I chose because I liked that time period and place, and thought it fitted my story pretty well. It's not a Romance (which also has a Western niche ...urgh...) although there is a love story that develops during the book. My male protagonist starts with a childhood trauma and spends the next 6+ years coming to terms with what he can and can't do to make his past come 'right.' It's not a 'Western' with guns at dawn. I've discovered that the minute people realise the main setting is a ranch in 1886, they start assuming it's a traditional western. Nor is it a 'trials and tribulations of early settlers' kind of thing, which also has a niche—and is usually very bleak and uncompromisingly gritty. Nor is it about anybody famous. It's a human story, with a human dilemma at the centre of it. Am I my brother's keeper? To what extent am I responsible for what somebody else does? Do I deserve to move on and be happy, even if I've hurt other people in the past and owe them recompense? My main struggle is with who to pitch this to. So far, I've come up with ...nada.

If I had written this 30 years ago, I would have less trouble selling it. Longer books were in fashion. Everything from the potboilers written by the likes of Jacqueline Susann to the calm, rational James Michener novels—all well over the 200,000 word mark. There were other stories out there, human-interest stories set in the West like "Snowblind Moon" that I could have hooked my own story on to. But these are old-fashioned now. I've written an old-fashioned book. That doesn't mean it's no good or that nobody would want to read it ...it's just that it's not the fashion right now. I feel there is no point in wasting time chasing traditional publishing. I haven't found a single agent or publishing house that I could approach without lying through my teeth to them about what I've written—starting with the length.

 

Again, @jannert, I'm not trying to persuade you to change your decision, but I can't support some of the assumptions you're making.

The first one I disagree with is definitely the "agents are looking for reasons to reject manuscripts" idea. I think that's a rationalization that a lot of authors have come up with after having trouble getting agents, but it doesn't really make sense. Firstly because all of the agents I've ever spoken to have seemed like really nice people who genuinely love books and reading. I've had phone calls with top agents who were practically giddy with enthusiasm over the books they represent. And this makes sense because of my secondly, which is: they make their money from selling books. They want to sign authors who have books they can sell, so they can make money. That's the nature of the business. They have to be selective, sure, but they want to accept your books. Seriously.

I also disagree with the idea that it takes a huge commitment of time and energy to send out queries. If I were looking for where to start, I'd send something to the agents who represent the three books listed in my previous posts - you know they won't balk at the length. I'd also stop worrying so much about finding an agent who's looking for exactly what you've written and send queries to everyone who takes historical fiction, or whatever seems closest to your book. I'd say it takes about ten minutes to pull an agent's name off querytracker, check them on AW's B&BC and Writer Beware, check their website to see what format they want, and click "send" on the e-mail. I mean, you'll have to spend a couple hours getting set up for querying, writing your summary and whatever, but after that? An hour a week and you'll have gone through all the likely agents in a couple months. Again, I'm not suggesting that you do that, but other authors in similar situations? Why not give it a try?

And finally, in response to your "they don't want long novels" idea, I'd present a line from the second paragraph of the NYT article I linked to in an earlier post, which mentions The Goldfinch, The Luminaries, and now this new City on Fire MS as "even more evidence that the long novel is experiencing a resurgence."

So, again, I'm not trying to change your mind. But I don't agree with some of the arguments behind your decision.