From manuscript to published book: Part 2

 How to keep an agent happy by doing her job for her -- The Query Toolbox Homework

As discussed in Part 1 of From manuscript to published book, the first step to traditional publication (after writing an amazing manuscript!) is to find an agent looking for that type of story. No matter our compelling our romantic comedy is, it's unlikely to catch the eye of an agent who's only interested in books about gardening. But how do we find agents who love rom-coms, or whatever else our heart is into?

Luckily, agents are more than happy to tell us where their hearts lie -- on their (or their agency's) websites, at sites such as Manuscript Wish List, MSWishlist, Twitter #MSWL, Query Manager, and Agent Query. I'll add, also check the acknowledgement section of books we love. The writers will often use it to thank their agents and editors. And don't overlook other social media sites -- Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. -- that are more frequently updated. And follow, follow, follow to get those updates.

To see what agents are selling to publishers right now, check out Publishers Marketplace, which is available by monthly subscription. (Agent Amy Collins suggested signing for a subscription, researching it like mad, and dropping it once we've picked all the fruit it has to offer. Not that she admits saying that!) There's also a shorter, totally free version, Publishers Lunch.

Now with our manuscript and a list of potentially interested agents, we're ready to do the hard work of assessing a book's market viability. This is the topic the agent will use to pique the interest of the person at the next level to publication -- a publishing house's acquisitions editor. For this, I'm using copyright-free material Amy Collins provided for attendees at her DFW Con workshop -- The Query Toolbox Homework.

Market viability has three components, all of which should be included in our queries to agents:

• Comp titles
• Readership
• Unique selling points

Our homework, Collins said, begins with a starter list of 12 comparable authors. Who writes the books we love to read, in our genre or a related one? And how much do other readers love them?

Her starting point is the free weekly bestseller list from USA Today. It's a list of sales searchable by genre and date of sale. (Please note, at this time the list is on hiatus, with most recent sales only listed as of December 1, 2022. I'll keep checking for updates.)

Another of Collins recommendations for author listings is What Should I Read Next. This is a subscription service, free for the first five days, and $39.95 a month thereafter. Again, as for Publishers Marketplace, consider researching the heck out of it during free, or initial subscription period.

Goodreads also lists books by authors we follow, and books similar to those we've read recently. Access to these requires a Goodreads account, but it's a free service.

Not mentioned by Collins, but also useful is Novelist, a searchable service free with many public library accounts. Check with your local library if you can't find it in your account. Or if you need to set up an account! 

We've got authors but what about those comparable titles?

Image by Davie Bicker from Pixabay

Having now compiled a list of 12 comparable authors -- who we're following, right? -- we only need to find three comp titles from their writings to titillate the agents we've chosen to query.

What exactly makes a previously published book "comparable" to our manuscript? How "comparable" does it have to be? According to Collins, the three comp titles should be similar in either voice, setting, or POV. No single comp title needs to be similar in all three. 

And they don't need to be similar in plot because, "who wants to read the same plot?" Collins asked.

However, comp titles must be books which have sold well in their categories recently. Collins recommended searching Amazon for titles from our authors that possess at least one of the necessary similarities to ours. If we're unsure of the genre of those titles (authors may write in more than one), Amazon also helpfully lists those in its sidebars. 

Now things get harder. Collins recommends only using as comp titles books that have garnered at least 5,000 reader reviews. This goes to the "readership" component of market viability. Books by best-selling authors are musts as comp titles for our own manuscript -- one of the reasons she recommended looking at best-seller lists.

On the other hand, those best-selling authors can't be too familiar. Not iconic, in Collins' words. Who's a best-selling author but not iconic? Collins' suggestion was to think Ken Follett as best-selling but not iconic. Lee Child, however, is iconic. My suggestion is, if the author is someone who's name you see on your grocery store's paperback rack, they're probably iconic.

Collins also turned thumbs-down to books made into movies or TV series. If it's just optioned but not yet released, she's still OK with using it as a possible comp. She's also OK with using the latest book in a series, provided it meets all the other criteria mentioned. Be warned, these are Amy Collins' recommendations. Other agents may differ. Again, check what your dream agents are saying.

And -- these 5,000+ reviewed comp titles should have been published within the past 18 months, tops, Collins said.

At this point, an audience member asked, what if your comparable author publishes a book no more frequently than every two years. Or so. What if your comparable author is, say, Jonatha Franzen? (OK, Collins said. For Franzen, two years. But don't push it any further!)

Now, looking back on the first two components of market viability -- comp titles and readership -- we can work that information into a query to an agent who we know from our research has shown interest in our genre. Examples include, "because I love your recently sold (comp title), I believe you'll love (my title)." Or "(My title) is great for people who just finished (comp title)." Note that reference to the agent's own sales can add extra credit. 

Having covered two of three tests for market viability, what's left is the selling point unique to our book. Think of what the twist would be. Collins noted that loglines are not the same as comp titles, but they can be helpful guides for capturing why our book is similar but different.

Is it "Pride and Prejudice" but in outer space? Or "Romeo and Juliet" but in the Old West? "The Three Musketeers" in modern warfare? (Caution -- all these titles are way too old to be actual comps!)

So, writers, there's the query toolbox -- comparable authors, comparable titles with extensive readership, plus our own secret sauce. 

Please note: this isn't the entire query. We also need to introduce ourselves to the agent, explain why we think they're a good fit to represent our book, give a brief overview of the plot (but not the end, unless the agent asks for it), and told the agent why we're the person to write this book. But we have done the hardest part -- next to writing the manuscript in the first place.

And for still more information about writing and publishing, note that the DFW Writers Conference 
returns this year, October 7-8. See the site for early-bird registration.

***

Next up: Tales from the North Texas Teen Book Festival

Tips direct from the lit conference trenches

 Here I am, in the middle of back-to-back virtual writing conferences with lots of tips from the trenches.  First up, from this past week's Historical Novel Society North America conference, is a discussion by agents Cate Hart and Melissa Danaczko from their master class on navigating past the publishing world's gatekeepers.

Although many smaller publishers are willing to consider unagented manuscripts "most major trade publishers don't have the bandwidth to sort through the tends of thousands of submissions they receive in a year," Danaczko said. Instead, those large publishers rely on gatekeepers -- literary agents -- to do the initial sorting.

I've lost track of the number of times I've heard fellow writers decry agents who reject a manuscript as "unsellable." But agents, legitimate ones at least, only get paid once their clients receive money. They're the ultimate commission sales force. And because of this, they need "a very clear path in our minds as to how we're going to sell the novel," Danaczko said.

Image: Pixabay

Among the questions they ask themselves when considering a manuscript, particularly historical novels, is where it fits in current culture and whether there are connections between the story's past and our present world.

Connection that can pique an agent's -- and a publisher's -- interest include narratives that have been overlooked in the past but are becoming relevant today. Other connections include reimaginings of works coming into the public domain once their copyrights have expired, or anniversaries of significant events.

However, Danaczko warned, "it can be tricky to jump on trends or even to try to predict future trends. And works relying on topics that have become extremely popular may encounter a glut of similar projects in the marketplace.

Cate Hart concurred. "It's hard to follow trends. . . Write what you love, then work with themes of today to see what fits."

Some things we writers have been taught to obsess about may seem surprisingly less important to agents. Among these are the writer's social media presence.

Hart pronounced social media "not a make or break." And as Danaczko noted, "an author's engagement with social media is something you need to think about but only to your (level of) comfort and enjoyment. It doesn't hurt to dip your toes in the the water," but for her, it's what's on the page that counts most in her decision about who to represent.

However, being a follower on social media can provide much needed information about what agents are interested in, what they love, things they notice in popular culture. And as always, check the agent's website.

Danaczko also noted that many pitching events on Twitter, such as the quarterly #PitMad, offer good practice for authors, helping them refine their pitches and drill down on what works.

So ow, say we writers have completed and polished our manuscripts, preferably with the help of beta readers. How do we put the information we've gleaned into our queries?

"Look at book descriptions" on the blurbs for published books and their online sales and review sites. "What is it about the description that entices you?" Danaczko asked. "I need to have a really good sense of what the book is about and what's at stake."

Or as Hart put it, in a formula she loves, the query needs to have a "hook, a book, and a cook." 

The hook is the elevator pitch such as "X meets Y." (And yes, she loved "Pride and Prejudice with zombies"!)

The book part of the formula is two or three paragraphs, including the inciting incident, highlighting major plot points (but not the ending), and what's at stake if the main character does -- or does not -- accomplish their goal.

This is also where the often-dreaded topic of "comp" (comparative) titles appears.

Although Danaczko admitted sometimes requesting manuscripts even if the query listed no comp titles, these can be a useful shorthand for the book's themes, plot or characters. It's best to avoid mentioning as comps books that either not sell well or, conversely, were massive best sellers.

She suggested such formulas as "for readers of X type of book" or "with the feel of Y book."

"Comp titles work better for high concept/commercial books," Hart said. "But if your book is quieter, comps are less helpful." And although writers are often advised to use only the most current books as comps, "sometimes something older works, if it's culturally on people's minds."

The cook is us, the authors, the reason why we're the one destined to write this story. We often fret if we have no previous publishing experience but both Hart and Danaczko say not to worry. Everybody is unpublished at sometime. Instead, consider whether there are relevant family connections or research specialties, but stay as relevant as possible. 

Surprisingly to me, another often-touted must have -- professional editing -- was less important to the agents. Both Hart and Danaczko noted that although editors can be helpful, too much reliance on external help can be a sign that the writer's own toolbox of techniques may be skimpy. The manuscript should be as polished as the author can make it but "editors are not going to guarantee representation down the line. Take it as far as you can on your own."

After all that, did they have any major turnoffs about queries?

For Danaczko:

• When I can't locate quickly what the book is about
• Queries that promise things nobody can guarantee, such as sales comparisons
• Verbatim repeating of the agent's bio in the query

All of the above, Hart said, adding:

• Pasting parts of the book in the query -- "I still don't know what the book is about" 
• Not a genre I represent
• When requesting a synopsis, "I get two paragraphs when what I need is a beat by beat version"

    ***

 Still to come: what to ask an agent who offers representation? How to know if they're right for you? And what the heck do they actually do?

Giving literary agents our best pitch

 (Updated 10:59 a.m. May 26, 2021, to add NoveList Plus information)

Which is scarier – writing a novel or pitching it to a literary agent? I would rather write 400 pages than a one-page query letter. Or, worse still, spend ten minutes talking to an agent about the project. The sensible thing would be to spend the rest of my life hiding under a rock. Instead, I signed up to make multiple pitches to agents at conferences this coming summer, knowing that some of them may (gulp!) ask me to send a written query.

Image by David Mark for Pixabay

It was enough to make me riffle through everything I’ve ever posted about pitches and query letters. I’ve sat with some of the best of the pitchers and queriers and know I can’t do better than to share their words, beginning with writer/organizer supreme, Adriane (Tex) Thompson, from her stint at last year’s WORDfest.

***

Tex organized query elements into: openings (1-2 sentences); hook (or as Tex noted helpfully, the “movie trailer” and story overview, 8-20 sentences); book data (title in capital letters, word count, genre and comp titles – 1-2 sentences); relevant author qualifications (1-2 sentences of  “what makes me uniquely qualified to write this”); and closing (thanks for consideration, etc., 1-2 sentences).

On comp (comparative) titles, “Show you know what’s happening in your genre,” Tex said. Don’t list more than two titles, at least one of which should be a book, published within the last five years. (Hint: unsure what titles to compare to? Ask your beta readers. Or see the second part of this post for more suggestions.) 

On the question of relevant author qualifications, Tex’s litmus test was to ask, “does this make me uniquely qualified to write this?” Things that are relevant include membership in professional organizations and even a local writing group, “which shows that a person is serious.” (Hint: be sure the group’s online site will make it – and you – look good for being a member.) But if writers feel they truly have nothing, Tex assured, “It’s OK to skip this part. It’s better to go too little than too much.” 

Things she urged us not to include: bio fluff (kids, pets, hometown); value judgements (“groundbreaking,” “thrilling,” etc.); your mailing address or phone number (it’s email, remember); the agent’s mailing address or phone number; and any unnecessary white space. Don’t make the agent scroll any more than she has to. 

Tex’s six-point guide to the body of the query – the story overview was:

·       Status quo (ordinary world)

·       Disruption (inciting incident)

·       1^st big choice/solution

·       Consequences/fallout

·       2^nd big choice/solution

·       Stakes/ “or else” (But don’t give away the ending!) 

Keeping these elements in mind, Tex said, will also help when the time comes to write back cover blurbs. In fact, she recommends writing (but not send) queries even before the book is completed, to be sure the story is meeting all the needed elements. “It’s never too early to encapsulate the story!” 

***

 Even before hearing Tex’s presentation, I had dipped into the editors’ posts from a Revise & Resub #10Queries competition. And though it sometimes seemed as if, for every 10 editors in a room there were 20 answers on how to write a perfect query, some issues in the submitted query letters appeared often enough to generate consensus. 

Issues such as: conflict – whether it’s a fistfight or a galactic war. And stakes – what will be gained or lost by the conflict. Conflict and stakes are the heart of stories, but one editor after another posted comments like: “conflict is unclear. What’s at stake?” Or, “motivation and stakes for the main character need to be upped. What are the personal stakes if they don’t succeed?” Or, “focus on conflict and stakes and what makes them unique.” 

But can’t a writer just narrate to the reader – agent or editor – what happens in the novel? Won’t that cover the issues of conflict and stakes? 

Sorry, as any reader of this blog – or attendee at the Dallas-Fort Worth Writers Conference infamous query gong shows knows -- spending significant query real estate on plot still may not make clear why the characters are running around like Energizer bunnies. 

#10Queries editors weren’t as brutal as agents at the gong show contest about saying that what they read was sometimes too darn long. They used more diplomatic language such as “heavy on setup and introducing characters but. . .” And “too many details about the story but at the same time is too vague on the important points.” Or, “feels more like narrative than tight, concise query.” Or the just plain, “simplify.” 

So far, it may sound as if the editors were focused on the what than the who of authors’ queries. Not so. Remember those “personal stakes” mentioned earlier? So, editors also included such comments as, “give us more of (the main characters’) motivation,” and “tell us why they care about the particular event in the query.” Or, “Clear goals but no motive. . . goals are nothing if the character doesn’t have a reason for the goal.” 

Editors also wanted to meet the characters who have those goals right away. (To fit this into Tex Thompson’s formula mentioned earlier, name the characters in the opening first or second sentence, or even in the hook.) One editor gave a “hm” to a writer who didn’t mention the main character until the second paragraph (but recovered with sharp voice and wit). 

And on the issue of the unlikable character one editor noted, “the woe-is-me character right from the get-go makes him a bit unlikable. . . I want an emotional connection before I can agree that him dying would be a bad idea.” 

One editor also posted a “random thought” about two issues that have always bothered me – “the importance of hooks and comp titles.” 

Obviously, a hook is something that will immediately catch a reader’s attention, but what does it take to do that? As someone who’s tried starting with action only to receive a “meh” response, I dug further and found this answer (of a sort) at the site  Literary Devices: “. . . not all hooks are based in action. They can also present a character, or group of characters with interesting traits, a thematic opening statement, or a mysterious and intriguing setting.” 

Beware though – in a query letter, that hook had better be short! 

And comp – that is, comparison – titles? Editors at #10Queries could say that a writer’s comps were “amazing!” as well as note that they were “a bit unfamiliar.” 

Probably like most writers, I feel that my stories are unique. What can we possibly find to compare them to? Reedsy – among other resources – makes suggestions, including dos and don’ts for comp titles. 

My personal suggestions are to check Goodreads followups of the “you finished X, now what” variety, and Amazon listings of books bought by those who read the books we loved to read. And then, of course, to actually look at the suggested books.
 

And then there’s the easy stuff – sometimes easy to forget. Don’t make the query, as one editor noted, “difficult on the eye,” with small fonts and chunks of italics. And don’t forget to include – early on – the age of the target readers, the book’s genre, word count and title – the last in all capitals.

***

Why do I always find this stuff AFTER I post a blog? The absolutely, no contest, hands down, best locator for comparative (comp) titles for literary queries -- NoveList Plus. Customizable "appeal" search with multiple options. And it's free with your library card (at least at Dallas Public Library). Go to your account, click on Database Descriptions and Links. Limit by readership age, fiction/nonfiction, genre, character, publication date. . . and more!

What can we learn from #10Queries feedback?

Why is hearing takes on other writers’ queries so much less painful than writing our own? Thank dog the editors’ posts from Revise & Resub’s recent #10Queries Twitter competition were anonymous! And though it sometimes seemed as if, for every 10 editors in a room there were 20 answers on how to write a perfect query, some issues in the submitted query letters appeared often enough to generate consensus.  

Issues such as: conflict – whether it’s a fistfight or a galactic war. And stakes – what will be gained or lost by the conflict. Conflict and stakes are the heart of stories, but one editor after another posted comments like: “conflict is unclear. What’s at stake?” Or, “motivation and stakes for the main character need to be upped. What are the personal stakes if they don’t succeed?” Or, “focus on conflict and stakes and what makes them unique.” 

But can’t a writer just narrate to the reader – agent or editor – what happens in the novel? Won’t that cover the issues of conflict and stakes?

Sorry, as any reader of this blog – or attendee at the Dallas-Fort Worth Writers Conference’s  infamous query gong shows knows -- spending significant query real estate on plot still may not make clear why the characters are running around like Energizer bunnies.

Gerd Altmann for Pixabay

#10Queries editors weren’t as brutal as agents at the gong show contest about saying that what they read was sometimes too darn long. Instead, they used more diplomatic language such as “heavy on setup and introducing characters but. . .” And “too many details about the story but at the same time is too vague on the important points.” Or, “feels more like narrative than tight, concise query.” Or the just plain, “simplify.” 

So far, it may sound as if the editors were focused on the what than the who of authors’ queries. Not so. Remember those “personal stakes” mentioned earlier? So, editors also included such comments as, “give us more of (the main characters’) motivation,” and “tell us why they care about the particular event in the query.” Or, “Clear goals but no motive. . . goals are nothing if the character doesn’t have a reason for the goal.”

Editors also wanted to meet the characters who have those goals right away. One gave a “hm” to a writer who didn’t mention the main character until the second paragraph (but recovered with sharp voice and wit). 

And while editors loved characters who “feel so authentic,” they could also say, “make it clearer who the main character is.”

And on the issue of the unlikable character one editor noted, “the woe-is-me character right from the get-go makes him a bit unlikable. . . I want an emotional connection before I can agree that him dying would be a bad idea.”

One editor also posted a “random thought” about two issues that have always bothered me – “the importance of hooks and comp titles.”

Obviously, a hook is something that will immediately catch a reader’s attention, but what does it take to do that? As someone who’s tried starting with action only to receive a “meh” response, I dug further and found this answer (of a sort) at the site Literary Devices: “. . . not all hooks are based in action. They can also present a character, or group of characters with interesting traits, a thematic opening statement, or a mysterious and intriguing setting.”

Beware though – in a query letter, that hook had better be short!

And comp – that is, comparative – titles? Editors at #10Queries could say that a writer’s comps were “amazing!” as well as note that they were “a bit unfamiliar.” 

Probably like most writers, I feel that my stories are unique. What can we possibly find to compare them to? The Reedsy blogs – among other resources – make suggestions, including dos and don’ts for comp titles. 

My personal suggestions are to check our Goodreads followups of the “you finished X, now what” variety, and Amazon’s listing of books also bought by those who read the books we loved to read. And then, to actually look at the suggested books.

I’ll close with the easy stuff from the #10Queries editors, but not so easy that I didn’t have fails in this area. Remember that it’s the writing that counts, not the clothes it wears. Don’t make the query, as one editor noted, “difficult on the eye,” with small fonts and chunks of italics. Don’t forget to include age group, genre, word count and title – the last in all capitals.