Dear Crabbit: My story gets going in Ch4, so 3 sample chapters don't work for me

On Twitter recently, a writer, Andy Barratt, said, "1st 3 chapters of my book are short & more like a prologue, the story kicks off in the 4th & so lost in a submission. Help? :("

Very reasonable question and definitely worth a blog post.

For those of you who don't know (and there can't be many): a normal submission contains the first three chapters, a pitch letter and the synopsis. Sometimes the publisher or agent's guidelines will ask for the first 10k words, or they'll say "Three chapters or 10k words". Obviously, chapters are all different lengths, so, if yours are really tiny, you might get away with sending four chapters. (Then you'd need to say, "I've included a fourth chapter because one is unusually short; the total length of these four chapters is under 10k words.") Publishers don't generally want more than 10k words, but if your chapters are very long, you are still supposed to send three chapters, unless they've said "no more than 10k" or "whichever is shorter". It sounds complicated but it really isn't. They are trying to show you how much they need to see in order to know if they want the rest. You just try to fit into those guidelines while wearing your sensible hat at all times.

I asked Andy how long his chapters were and he said, "Total 7,000 words for first three chapters which are labelled Autumn. Then Winter and the main story begins."

So, I can see why he's worried about the submission, because his three chapters are a pretty normal length and therefore there's no real leeway for sending a fourth. If the story doesn't kick off in the submission, that's by definition a weak submission.

Assuming that this is meant to be general/commercial fiction rather than a piece of high literary fiction, I'd say Andy has a problem, but it's a problem which is little to do with the rules of submissions and the restriction to three chapters. I'd say there's a problem with the story.

There's only one way that this won't be a problem: if the tension and writing in the first three chapters are so incredibly powerful that the reader is drawn relentlessly onwards even without much action having happened. But this is a huge risk and writers usually over-estimate the pulling power of their writing. Readers also don't react well to lots of increasingly irritating hints without some satisfaction occurring reasonably soon. (Think of the film Alien. Much of the film is taken up with suspense and us desperately wanting to see the creature. But this works because there has already been a very dramatic incident. Euuw. So, the story has already "got going". That's why you generally need big action/drama near the start.)

Forget the agent or publisher for a moment and forget the rules of submissions. Just think of the reader. Does the reader want to wait so long for the story to get going? Usually not. Yes, I know, there are well-known cases of books that don't get going for ages - Louis de Bernieres, I'm looking at you, you naughty man. But how many books are rejected because they don't? I have no idea about the answer to that but I'm guessing roughly eleventy million.

Do you really want to make it so difficult for a reader to get into your book? Do you really want to turn a load of readers off and make them put the book down? I will certainly put a book down (and not pick it up again or recommend it to someone else) if it doesn't grab me sooner than that.

So, I strongly suggest you look at how to make the beginning grip. Bearing in mind that I obviously haven't read the book and that not all these suggestions will be appropriate, here are the theoretical possibilities, which I offer for all writers facing this problem:

1. Drastically shorten and then amalgamate the first three chapters into one.
2. Alter the order of chapters so that the current C4 becomes C1, then re-fashion current C1-3 into a new timeframe, eg by the (careful) use of a flashback. I accept that your Autumn/Winter structure makes this impossible in this case, but it's commonly a way to do it. (Do be careful about flashbacks, though; they can detract from pace and tension and they can be irritating.)
3. Consider whether C1-3 are in fact necessary at all. Begin at C4. This is surprisingly often the solution.

Those are the usual three strategies. No 1 is the simplest, and probably the only one that will work in this case.

I'd add that almost* every single MS I've ever seen would benefit from a drastic cutting of the initial chapters anyway. (I only said "almost" because it seemed ridiculous and unbelievable otherwise; but I actually can't think of an MS that wouldn't have benefited from cutting.)

So, Andy, I do think you need to take action to make your beginning more gripping. If it's already very gripping despite lack of action, then you don't have a problem. But how confident are you that this is the case? If you are confident, and if you can't/won't shorten your 7k words into even two chapters, you could just add a fourth, with an explanation. But I'm pretty sure your book will be more likely to attract an agent or publisher if the story "gets going" far earlier than 7k words.

In fact, I recommend you make your story get going in the first 1-3 pages, somehow! Not just for the sake of the publisher or agent, but for the sake of the reader. You can still get a slow-starting book published, but the writing has got to be even better.

-------------------

Don't forget, everything you need to know about creating the perfect submission is in my ebooks Dear Agent and Write a Great Synopsis. Both are available most cheaply and flexibly (all formats, for all devices, including computers) from my own online shop. For your info, buying ebooks from my own shop means that 100% of your payment goes direct to me, which is lovely for me and makes me like you even more, because I'm easily bought... AND you are allowed to print them out for your own use, using the pdf version. The advice is also in Write to be Published, in less detail, and that's available as print version (from my shop and elsewhere) and ebook (not in my shop).

DEAR AGENT - Extract 4

Here is your 4th free extract from Dear Agent, to be published on August 10th. By the way, any agent or any commissioning editor in a trade publishing house can ask for a free copy.

Also, you're all invited to the launch party on Twitter on Friday evening! Yes, one of those Crabbit party event thangs where you either need to kick your shoes off and join in, or batten down the hatches and steer well clear. But I have a game for you so please come... More details here on Friday morning - PUBLICATION DAY!

DEAR AGENT - Extract 3

The third free extract from Dear Agent - to be published on Amazon on August 10th - cheaper-than-chips for the first weekend only. (NB I have been saying it will be 50p but I just discovered that's actually not possible: Amazon doesn't allow me to make it less than 75p, so 75p it will be. Sorry. *cross face*)

Here's yer extract. It's pre-proof-reading, btw.

A few less reassuring but equally important points
Although the agent wants your work to be wonderful, she does not expect it to be. That’s because most submissions are awful. Yours won’t be awful, because you’re going to listen to what I tell you.

DEAR AGENT - Extract 2

The second free extract from Dear Agent, to whet your appetite for publication on August 10th. But first, a wonderful piece of feedback from a very important personage who has consistently supported my advice for writers. He's Merric Davidson, former high-powered and highly respected agent and now publisher and editor of The New Writer Magazine. He said:

Worth reading for the author’s “Twenty Tips To Get You Started” alone – but that’s just for starters. These nuggets should be plastered to the wall in front of everyone who’s reached the “lets try it out on an agent” stage. But don’t stop there, for if you do you will miss the wisdom of one who knows.

This is a tightly written, easy to follow, essential volume which cuts through all the nonsense and mystique about what you should/should not do when approaching agencies. In fact, this book explains that, hey, agents are really just people, not godheads!


And always remember Morgan’s Hierarchy of Obedience which "puts the agent at least a three-inch heel above you, until you’ve got a six-book deal, at which point you get to wield the heels." So true.

Merric Davidson, Publisher, The New Writer magazine

I know, you've never heard of Morgan's Hierarchy, have you? Well, read the extract that follows:

DEAR AGENT - Extract 1

I'm delighted to announce the 10-day countdown to publication of Dear Agent - Write the Letter That Sells Your Book! Dear Agent is my nifty, comprehensive ebook about that tricksy thing: the letter pitching your book and yourself to agent or publisher. Dear Agent will make a matching pair with Write a Great Synopsis - An Expert Guide, and once you've read them both, there will be no excuse for anything less than a splendiferous, stressfree, stylish submission.

Dear Agent will be published on August 10th and will be stupid cheap for that weekend only, so don't delay. I've had terrific feedback already. *dances*

Leading up to that, and up until August 17th, I'm giving you free extracts on this blog, and offering lots of giveaways here, on my Facebook page and on Twitter up till August 10th. Keep your eyes open! In fact, if you read to the end of this post, there's a PICK ME opportunity - two chances (and three more on my FB page) of winning a free copy of Dear Agent. Hurry, before I change my mind.

NB The extracts are all taken before final proof-reading.

DEAR CRABBIT: Can I pitch an unfinished book to an agent?

Thanks for your questions for Dear Crabbit so far. Keep them coming! For guidelines, see the Dear Crabbit page above.

You asked:

"I have read your book (AKA my bible) Write to be Published and I have one small query:
I understand why it is wrong to send a publisher an unfinished book (i.e. you are offering them a product, which may never get off the drawing board and therefore potentially wasting everyone's time.) 

"However, you say - in your book - that it's also 'against the rules' to do so with an agent (although you yourself did it, then didn't write the rest of that particular book).  

"In the case of an agent, though, if they are, as you say, interested in 'you the writer' as well as 'you the book,' are there ever grounds for making overtures towards a possible agent, ahead of completing the MS? 

DEAR CRABBIT: how long till I can follow up a query?

Hooray! The very first Dear Crabbit post! (If you don't know what I'm talking about, see this post from last week, in which I announced a change of direction for this blog.) From now on, most posts here will answer YOUR questions, in an agony auntish sort of way.

So, to kick off, you asked:

"I find it so frustrating when submitting work that it takes so long for people to get back to me - if indeed they get back at all. I know agents and editors are really busy people and have lots of manuscripts to consider, but what I would like to know is whether it is acceptable to follow up a submission when you haven't heard for months, and if so, what is the best way of doing it and after what length of time."

Let me first tackle the "I know agents and editors are really busy people and have lots of manuscripts to consider" bit, although I do realise you weren't asking that! I just want to make it absolutely clear.

It's not just that they are really busy and have lots of MSS to consider. It's also that considering an MS takes a long time; giving the feedback for a rejection takes a long time (which is why they usually don't do that) and can be fraught with problems. They may also have to consult someone else - an editor, for example, no longer makes the decision herself; she has to consult with other editors and then, if they all think it's a good idea, take it forward to an acquisitions meeting.

Only a small fraction of an agent or editor's time can be taken up on reading submissions.

But, back to the important questions. First, "whether it is acceptable to follow up a submission when you haven't heard for months" - absolutely.

Second, "after what length of time." It is acceptable to follow up after 4-6 weeks. I'd opt for six. (Unless the submission guidelines for that agent/publisher specifically specify another length of time.) Sometimes, an agency will say "If you haven't heard from us in eight weeks, assume it's a No." I think this is a little unfair because it IS possible that the thing went missing, whether posted or emailed, so I still think it's legitimate to follow up, politely, briefly, and making it very easy for the agent to reply and to know that you will not start being irritating.

Third, "what is the best way of doing it"?

An email, which needs to have the following info: your name, the date you submitted your work, the title of the work, whether you submitted by email or post.

If you submitted by email, I strongly suggest you have your original email below the reminder, so that the agent can easily scroll down and doesn't have to go searching.

An acceptable wording might be, "Sorry to bother you but I'm just checking that you received the synopsis and first three chapters of my YA historical novel, FLESHMARKET, which I emailed on June 3rd. I also know how busy agents are and I realise that it can take longer than six weeks but I just wondered what the situation was. I very much hope that you are interested but if you aren't, I would like to be able to try elsewhere."

It isn't annoying or pushy. It's perfectly reasonable. I also know that the "checking you've received" thing is a bit disingenuous, but it's very human! And emails do go missing.

There are many similar forms of wording that would work. Basically, you're just giving a little nudge without pressurising.

I think it's very important for writers to realise that agents and editors are not ogres or unreasonable. They know how much you want to be published; they know how stressful it is. There is no way that they will think less of you for sending a polite, professional and friendly email.

___________

I have quite a few Dear Crabbit questions from you guys already. Keep them coming! See the Dear Crabbit page above.

A non-fiction pitch - Deep Country

Not exactly a pitch paragraph today, but a pitch letter - the covering letter that you'd normally send with your synopsis and sample chapters if fiction, or your proposal+synopsis+sample if non-fiction.

A reminder of why toffee is not a way to get published

This has remained one of the most popular posts in the three years of this blog's life, so I thought I'd let you see it again. Although it's fun to read, there's a very serious point to it. Take note!

Seven steps to publication

The other day I did a one and a half hour event, during which I gave as much information as I think anyone possibly could on how to become published. At the end, the final question came from a gentleman who asked (after telling us that I'd given a really good talk and that he'd written a really good book), "How can I get my book published?"

So, for anyone else who simply doesn't hear the words I spend so much effort speaking, or who has missed all the info in this blog and my books, here are my Seven Steps to Publication.

1. Write the book. It must be a book that has a market. Write it as well as you can and then make it better.

2. Research publishers or agents (or both) who handle that sort of book. Make sure they know what they are doing, by checking to see that at least some of the books they handle are at least moderately successful, appearing in shops, receiving mainstream reviews, etc. Make sure they are proper publishers, not printers. Any "publisher" which says on its website, "For all your printing needs", is a printer, not a publisher.

3. Become informed about the process of submission and all the mistakes that can be made. How? Read this blog, read Write to be Published, read other blogs on my blogroll to the right of this page, read From Pitch to Publication by Carole Blake, become switched on to all the fabulous advice out there, which is often freely given. There is no excuse for ignorance of this process - the info is not hidden. Carole and I can both be a little bit crabbit about the fact that we've written these books, which have received fab feedback, and yet there are still some aspiring writers who haven't read them. I mean, really.

4. Prepare your submission carefully - bearing in mind that the covering letter will be slightly different for each approach to an individual agent / publisher and that their synopsis requirements may differ. Begin with getting your sample chapters right. If you don't know what "right" is, the info is in Write to be Published and many other places, including this blog post here.

5. Make sure your synopsis (or proposal, for non-fiction) suits the specific requirements of the agent / publisher. Other than this. Write a Great Synopsis will tell you ALL you need to know about the perfect synopsis. It will even make it seem easy!

6. Make your covering letter sing. The two important parts are the paragraph where you sell your book and the one where you sell yourself. There are MANY mistakes to be made in both. See here for some of them and read Write to be Published and From Pitch to Publication for many more and much positive guidance, too. (I'm writing a book on this, called Dear Agent, but the earliest this will be available is August.)

7. SEND IT! Yes, polish, polish, polish, but at some point stop polishing because you can't make it more shiny than shiny, so, let it go. Send it to 2-4 agencies or publishers at once, usually. And when 2-3 have come back as rejections, adjust / revise and send to more.

That's it. This blog, plus Write to be Published and Write a Great Synopsis really do contain what you need. Please read them before asking me, "How do I get my book published?" I have no more time to spend than I already do. *gently lets head collapse on desk*

Oh, and don't send toffees or naked photos or confetti, or anything. But you know that, don't you?

Are authors supposed to notice their own errors?

What if your book has a few clunky sentences and/or punctuation errors when you send the sample chapters to a publisher or agent? Does this matter? After all, isn't that what publishers' editors are for?

Yes, it does matter. And your book may well never reach a publisher's editor if your manuscript, covering letter and synopsis have the marks of a writer who doesn't have full control of language. Of course, a typo is a typo and not a sign of bad writing. I'm prone to typos in blog posts and emails myself. But lots of typos in what is supposed to be your best effort at writing are the sign of a writer who doesn't know or care.

If you doubt me, read this agent's answer to the question. And it's Query Shark and Query Shark KNOWS.

Obstacles to being published

Characteristically sensible post here from Rachelle Gardner. There's nothing I haven't said myself, but it's all succinctly phrased and, especially if you are new to the approaching-publishers-and-agents lark, useful.

There are two points that I thought I'd elaborate on:


Pitching several books in different genres. Why not? Because although you can have a wide writing career later, you need to be launched with one book and create the expectation for your readers that if they liked your first book they will like your second. It is simply easier (at first) to sell you as a writer of a particular sort of book than a writer whose next book could be entirely different and for entirely different readers. Therefore the agent (and, even more, publisher) wants to know the one book which is best to launch you with. Don't muddy the waters; don't seem too undecided.

Not being able to name a genre for your book. (Even if that "genre" is literary fiction.) It's the selling thing again, damn it. It is, quite simply, easier to sell a book which fits a genre properly. Put it another way, you need to be able to know which readers are most likely to like your book. Also, readers like to know what they are getting, odd people that they aren't. Humans like patterns, familiarity, expectations. Help them out; humour them. You make life very much easier for yourself if you work with the world as it is, not as you wish it was. Of course, the latter approach is very commendable, but only in the same way that it was highly commendable of the cavalry at Balaclava to charge straight towards the cannons.

As Rachelle says, none of these things mean you can't get an agent or publisher. But they are obstacles. Either remove them or jump higher.

QUERY LETTERS DISSECTED

Food for thought from Query Shark here. And then from Lynn Price here. Both American viewpoints but little they say is different over here. For "query letter" read "covering letter" - it's just that a US query letter is scarier to write because it has to sell your book and you on its own, without the recipient seeing your sample chapters at that stage.

I particularly draw your attention to Lynn's point about the pointlessness of saying "I chose your company because..." This habit has come about because of writers' genuine and well-intentioned efforts to prove that this is an individual query and the product of great research. However, think about it:

a) as Lynn says, it really doesn't matter why you chose them
b) it's a tad cocky, because there is a flavour of "how lucky you are that I chose YOU"
c) what if this is not the first agency you've tried? Or even the fourth? What you're hiding is, "I chose your agency because although you weren't top of my list of agents, you were at least on the list of agents who might in a million years consider my sort of book."

While searching for Lynn's link, I found this post of hers, containing more query letter noes. The woman is good. When she's not being bad.

The lesson from both Janet and Lynn's posts is: put yourself in the shoes of the recipient and read between your own lines. Hear your own subtext.

 _________________

COVERING LETTERS, SYNOPSES AND LEGS

You worry too much about covering letters and synopses, you know. If most unpublished writers took a quarter of the effort they spend researching the perfect templates for covering letters and synopses and devoted it instead to their actual book, they might be published by now.

Let me tell you some simple truths about covering letters and synopses:

There is no perfect template.

If either or both are complete and utter shite, I agree: you won't be published. Because, if either or both are utter shite, it's because you can't write.

But if you're a good enough writer to have written a good book, your covering letter and synopsis won't be complete and utter shite. They just won't be.

So, you might not write the best covering letter or synopsis in the whole wide world and yes, it might even have the odd fugly bit in it, but, if you use your common sense and all the advice you've already read, you will be able to write a half decent one. If your writing is good enough, it will shine above any fugly bits.

If you write a half decent but imperfect covering letter and synopsis, and a GREAT book, it's most likely to be published.

If you write a splendiferously gorgeous covering letter and synopsis and a shite book, it won't be published.

Because, it's all about the writing**.

So, go and make sure your book is great, yes?

** Oh, and having sexy legs, of course. Duh.

COVERING LETTER SPOTLIGHT 1

A very good writer I know, with poems and short stories to her credit, has sent me a covering letter for your comment. I know she's been working really hard on this, and she's got it honed down to something very lean and neat. But has she got it right? What do we all think?

Please note that this is for a UK submission, not a US-style query.

 ___________________________________________

Dear Ms./Mr. AGENT,

I enclose the synopsis and first three chapters of my 54,000-word literary novel, Little Dead Boys.

Little Dead Boys is a suburban fairytale about a couple on the verge of breakup who each become obsessed with their own family mysteries. Kit goes to her mother's house in the suburbs to sort out her relationship with her girlfriend Gretchen and her art project, but there she gets tangled up in the mystery of a decades-old child killer. Gretchen needs to figure out what she’s doing with music school, her girlfriend, and her lover – but all she cares about is the mother she never met.

Last year I graduated with Distinction from Glasgow University's Creative Writing MLitt, after which I won a New Writers' Award from the Scottish Book Trust and the Gillian Purvis Award. I have also been awarded a writing retreat at West Dean College. I have around 80 short stories, poems and personal essays in print.

My writing has been compared to your client AUTHOR'S NAME due to its quirky fantasy elements/fairy-tale tone/LGBT appeal (DELETE AS APPROPRIATE). I very much hope that you will like what you read and that you will want to see the rest of Little Dead Boys. I have enclosed an SASE for your reply, or you are welcome to email.

Yours sincerely,

*******

QUERIES, SORTED

There are so many fantastic pieces of advice in this post by Ann Crispin on Writer Beware, and all of them are ones I mention in my talks. So, I can do no better than send you over there. Take every one of them to heart.

By the way, a query letter is a US term, quickly coming over here. It is so similar to the UK "covering letter"  that you can follow all the advice in this article for UK and US submissions. The only relevant difference is that the UK one will be accompanied by a separate synopsis, on top of the elevator pitch in the letter.

I would add one thing, though. Ann mentions two sorts of query letter - the standard, recommended one and the one that is "weird, quirky, but so irresistible and creative that it will capture the attention of an agent even though it's far outside the "accepted" model. This kind of query letter springs from true talent and writing genius, and really can't be taught. I've seen some of them, and they leave me in awe -- and they immediately captured the interest of the agent(s) they were sent to."

I cannot emphasise enough how rare it is for someone to be able to pull off this latter type of query. Many of us think we've written something brilliantly quirky, when in fact it's just plain weird. Ann is not recommending the plain weird, the weird-for-the-sake-of-it. She is talking about genius. So, your better bet is the "normal" query letter.

The advice is all there - no excuses for not taking it on board. If nothing else, it gives you a great insight into the mind of the agent or publisher receiving your submission.

SYNOPSIS SPOTLIGHT

Remember when I used to do those Submission Spotlights? When brave blog-readers would offer part of a submission for public scrutiny and comment? As you may remember, I stopped doing them when I decided to help people more directly by setting up Pen2Publication.

Well, the other day I was contacted by a newish blog-reader, Siena, who was having problems writing a synopsis. Pen2Publication is fully booked at the moment so I couldn't suggest she use my services there but it struck me that since this is "only" a synopsis and since she said nice things to me, I could, with her permission, put the synopsis up here and hand her over to you good people for your reactions. So, I have.

Now, this is not a game, but someone's writing life we have here, so there are some rules:

• Please respect Siena's work by making only genuine and constructive remarks.
• Respect her copyright.
• Siena is not presenting this as a finished draft: the whole point is that she doesn't know what is right or wrong about it. So, bear this in mind.
• Remember that this would form part of a standard UK submission, so it would be accompanied by a covering letter and the first three chapters as a sample.
• In your comment, please say something to indicate your experience, if any. For example, if you are an editor or a published author with some experience of the genre, please say so. If you have no special knowledge but are offering more amateur (but still very welcome) advice, say so. Just something that allows Siena to know where you are coming from, so that if, some of the remarks conflict, she can judge how to respond.

Oh, and I asked her to write me a little "pitch" - the sort of thing that would form part of the covering letter. This is so that we can get a sense of the book's style and theme, which a synopsis doesn't always indicate.

Here's her pitch. She is not asking for comments on the pitch but if you have a startlingly useful comment, I see no reason not to give it. But do remember that it would be within a covering letter and, of course, Siena will have said what genre it is... (YA, btw.)

The Phantom Prince is about being young, famous and miserable – teenagers discovering themselves in the public eye, excess, escape an impossible love across the divide of the new ‘celebrity’ class.

Since Sophie’s sister made it as an actress, her world has been divided. At home, she is responsible for paying the bills and chasing down her father’s rent check, yet in another world her sister has been casted as the lead in The Phantom Prince alongside latest poster-boy Blake Edwards; star of the ‘Moonlight Saga’ films. The worlds cross when Sophie begins a summer placement at Pinewood Studios and falls for Blake, but her sister – not one to be outshone – is not happy and when her partying grows out of control, rumours on set threaten her career. Sophie must make a choice between family and love, and decide if that love is worth the sacrifice of her anonymity for ever.

And here's the synopsis, which is what she's asking you about. It fits easily onto two sides of A4, by the way.

At 17, Sophie Heaton’s most notable achievement is being the sister of Lydia Lowe - a bona-fide A list actress and her biggest worry is how to pay the bills; having a famous sister doesn’t mean that normal problems just end. When Sophie goes to see her sister at Pinewood Studios, it isn’t to get a taste of celebrity life (though she is intrigued by her sister’s world secret world); her father’s rent cheque is weeks later, and her mother - who had never got over the divorce, spends a good part of her day in bed- aided by her bottle of sleeping pills.

It wasn’t like she expected Lydia to make everything better, empathy wasn’t exactly her forte (not when it wasn’t scripted anyway) and Sophie was used to taking care of things on her own. Her sister had moved on, moved out of the family home, even changed her last name! So when she is met with her utter indifference, it doesn’t come as a surprise. Despite this, her journey isn’t wasted. Sophie is captivated by the world of film, and in particular Blake Edwards- a mysterious actor and star of the ‘Moonlight Saga’.

Blake has had little time to get used to fame, the press say he is the latest heartthrob, battalions of teenage fans think he is their dream guy, and the director considers him the best new acting talent since Johnny Depp; but alone in his luxurious Mayfair suite, he can’t remember what normal life feels like.

For Sophie, the situation at home reaches breaking point when her father admits that there will be no more cheques. She has no other option but to go back to Pinewood and beg her sister’s help. Lydia is more than forthcoming in offering it, and taking advantage of her sister’s good spirits, Sophie asks if she can stay and help out on set.

Finally, her life begins – sure, there are coffee runs and a lot of standing around, but she’s actually at Pinewood, there are no more bills to worry about and she’s found a friend!  Amelia Brightside is the daughter of Kurt Brightside (deceased rock-star), Lilly Brightside who last she heard was still in rehab and step-daughter to the director. It is no wonder that at the end of a long week, Sophie finds herself at a loss with what to do on her day off. And OK, it isn’t exactly a co-incidence that she bumps into Blake Edwards at the National Portrait’s ‘Live Fast Die Young’ exhibition (she did kind of steal the flyer from his trailer, which might technically be kind of creepy, but its Blake Edwards for God’s sake!)

It is the simplest of boy-meets-girl stories. They got on, they had a lot in common and...Yes she was smitten but that’s normal, right? When you meet a boy you like? And with the filming moving from Pinewood to location in Dorset in a matter of days, she doesn’t have long. Sophie’s fantasy begins to unravel when she learns just how far removed their two worlds are at a cast party. She knew Blake was famous, but the press and the screaming fans were more than she’s been expecting. More worrying is the Issue of Lydia whose excess has begun to draw attention. As Amelia explains, everyone does drugs, it’s fine as long as no one knows, but people were beginning to talk. Then, her last hopes for happiness are shattered as Blake is snapped leaving the party with her sister. A phone-call from Blake the next morning explains the situation, but Sophie has little time to be relieved. Lydia is in trouble, Blake found her five sheets to the wind and whisked her away before tongues began to wag. He forces Sophie to face up to Lydia’s problem and the sisters talk frankly for the first time in years. Her head full of other worries, Sophie is surprised when she is asked to go to Dorset with the cast...to actually accompany Blake, as his assistant. It is obvious to both her and Amelia that the request could only have come from one person.

A long drive north brings them together and feelings are re-kindled as Sophie enjoys Blake’s growing attentions; but he is confusing and indecisive, suspecting that Sophie has fallen for the public image, rather than the real him. He pushed her away, and Sophie- used to being the plain sister - believes herself unworthy, something which isn’t helped by her discovery that it was Lydia and not Blake who requested her presence in Dorset.

The loss of Sophie- the only person in his who does not judge him, and his only link to the real world – effects Blake more than he expected and when he makes his feelings clear, it looks like Sophie can finally be happy, but Lydia has other plans. Her condition deteriorates and she finds herself at the same time reliant on her sister and envious of the attention she receives. Lydia convinces Blake that it would be in Sophie’s best interest to be kept away from the media attention, and agreeing with her, Blake leaves Sophie with little more than a note explaining that he is returning to London, alone.

Heartbroken, Sophie tries to piece her life back together, but when your first love is Blake Edwards, getting away isn’t easy. She takes to her bed, and when Lydia finds her with a handful of their mother’s pills, she finally begins to take responsibility for the situation she has brought about. With Lydia in charge, the mother is sent away to get better and Sophie takes comfort in a world of credit cards and designer dresses, but Lydia continues to party and rumours of her breakdown finally begin to affect her career.

The Phantom Prince is premiering in the West End and Lydia asks her sister to go as her date. She is  confident that the new designer- clad Sophie is over Blake and sees no threat in the meeting, but she has underestimated the connection. Blake’s  is confused when he sees Sophie in front of the cameras, he confronts her and she learns of Lydia’s part in the break-up.  The lovers make a run for it, leaving the celebrity circus behind. Their exit down the red carpet is captured by a shower of flashing lights and no one notices that Lydia has stumbled out of the screening, determined to find her sister and explain. She finds a row of parked black cars, waiting to take the guests to the after-party. One of the cars is empty, keys still in the ignition and Lydia falls behind the wheel ; drunk. When Blake’s Porsche pulls up outside the Heaton house, Sophie immediately knows something is wrong, there isn’t usually that much traffic, and the police cars could mean anything, but she knows before she sees the wreck , that her sister is inside.

It has been almost a year since the accident. Sophie has moved to California with her mother to start a degree at UCLA. She hasn’t seen Blake since that night, well, aside from on TV. Sophie understands- she told him she needed to be alone and she thought he seemed relieved; being associated with the accident could bring negative PR. She’d caused him enough trouble. Amelia comes to visit, and Sophie arrives at the restaurant excited to see her friend. What she wasn’t expecting was Blake to be there too, his feelings for her, unchanged.  Sophie and Blake decides to give it another go, a new start in a new city, but being on the arm of the hottest actor in town will undoubtedly bring new problems.

Over to you - be kind! I hope to comment myself soon, but, as some of you know from Twitter, the mother of all house moves has begun...

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR

An awesome post over on Editorial Ass the other day had me cheering in my seat, somewhat inappropriately as I was on a train at the time. She (I always assume Ed Ass is a she) makes some essential points about the panic and stress that sets in while authors are submitting their work, warning that this panic and stress can cause poor decisions and end in inferior publication.

EA says:

"It's better not to be published at all than to get published in an inferior way. Doors begin to close if you try to take shortcuts. Instead, take your time to do things right. Accept no compromises. You will be much unhappier with a published book that has gone awry than with an unpublished book that still has potential."

Thing is, the zen which EA asks us to conjure up is nigh on possible, and she acknowledges that it is at least very difficult. As writers desperate to get our writing out there, we desire publication and we desire it NOW. Or sooner if at all possible.

But every bit of her advice is absolutely right. Difficult or impossible though it is, we must put that burning desire aside in favour of another burning desire: to get the right book published in the right way. Successful publishing is not just about this one book: it's about you as a writer, and you will carry your first book with you for the rest of your writing life. Yes, if you go on to be stunningly successful, you may not mind too much, but a poor first book nowadays can make it difficult to go forward, partly because poor sales figures can no longer be hidden. Thanks, Nielsen Bookbloodyscan.

EA says, crucially:

"Book publication is affected by many factors. A book may deserve to get published, but the market may be wrong. A book idea may be wonderful, but the execution may not be really up to snuff and need more work. The author may be a fantastic writer, but maybe this particular manuscript isn't the best book on its own, or maybe it's a good book but not a good debut. In all of these cases, if the author pushes, pushes, pushes for publication no matter what, they will damage both their future career as a writer and their relationship with their art."

Those are the very good reasons why your very good work may not have achieved publication. Yes, it's maddeningly, teeth-gnashingly, finger-chewingly, gut-wrenchingly horrible when we can't get published for these reasons. (Remember that I have been there: 21 years of anger and desperation gnawed at me while I failed to be published but somehow succeeded in smiling at the world and pretending nothing was wrong.)

The problem nowadays, more than ever, is that it's actually easier than ever to get published - if we include being published badly. What do we mean by "published badly"? There are two main ways:

• when a genuine publisher doesn't know what it's doing. Anyone can set up a publishing company and it's a very laudable thing to do, but it's a case of Author Beware. If it's brand new, what relevant background and back-up does the publisher have? How do they plan to get your book into shops? If it's not brand new, what sales figures, reviews and exposure did they achieve for previous publications? How aggressive are they in the industry? (They need to be. An example of a good small and newish publisher - about five years old now, I think - is Strident Publishing. Strident by name and strident by nature! I know Keith Charters well and he's tireless in selling his authors' books and has a business background behind him, as well as being an author himself.) Crucially, ask about copy-editing, proof-reading and design processes - does your proposed publisher outsource and pay properly for this?
• when a company masquerading as a publisher is actually part of the self-pubbing industry - there's nothing wrong with decent self-pubbing, as long as it isn't masquerading as something else. (Google the name of the company plus the word "self-publishing"; and, just in case, with the word "scam"...) Too many authors don't know the difference and then laud their "publishing deal" as though something more had happened than that they'd paid for a service. Note: if you pay anything for publication or have to sell your own books rather than receiving a % on each book sold by the company, you have not "been published"; you have paid for publication. This is not just a matter of semantics - I explain below why you should be careful.

But does this matter? Can't my first published book just be a toe-in-the-water thing, an experiment, a stepping-stone to future success? After all, it will show publishers that I'm serious, won't it?

Only if the book is a success. And I cannot tell you how unlikely this is. Have you any idea how hard the book-selling process is? It is hard enough for big publishers with their sales forces and marketing departments to achieve good sales, and often they fail. But it is far harder for anyone else. On the rare occasions when you hear of a runaway success from self-publishing or from a publisher who doesn't know what he's doing, there's always something untold in the story: for example, the author may have put many thousands of his own money, or at the very least had huge chutzpah, annoyed the hell out of every bookseller and librarian on the planet and had no time for writing or living. Or the author already had a background in sales / marketing and was perfectly willing to spend time and money using it. And certainly the author had some way of engineering many events to sell the book. Runaway success like this is enormously rare, which is why you hear the same-old-same-old few examples trotted out every time. I'm NOT saying don't self-publish, but I am saying go into it with eyes wide open because success comes rarely and at a huge price - if you're a writer, you are likely to love writing, not selling. And you're likely not to understand the business. If you do, and you do prefer selling to writing, and you have lots of money to invest in paying for help, fine.

But what if I don't mind about small sales? I just want my book out there. I need to see it between lovely covers, in a shop. Pleeeeeease!

I know, I know. Trust me, I do so know how you feel. But another aspect of bad publishing is that it probably won't be between lovely covers. It will be between crappy covers, looking all limp with cheap paper and print that goes too close to the edge because the publisher was cutting costs. It will be full of typos and weird fonts and widows and orphans and peculiar layouts. And the back cover blurb will make everyone laugh, for the wrong reasons. (I have several examples on my shelves, sent to me by authors furious at what has been done to them and their beloved books by unscrupulous companies masquerading as publishers.)

Oh, and it won't be in a shop. Most books published by most publishers are not in most shops. For self-pubbers, multiply that ten-fold.

And when you then write another better book, how you will wish that the first one wasn't published! I offer you Editorial Ass's wise words again:

"Some projects, however good they are, never need to see the light of day, because they've been stepping-stones on your road to self-development. They are what will train you to write the book that really matters."

The book that really matters. Isn't that what really matters to you? The thought that the book you are trying to sell now, that you have slaved and sweated and angsted over, may not be the book that should be published, is a terribly difficult thought to bear. But the moment when you come to that decision and start another book, gently wrapping the first one up and laying it to rest with an ausible sob, could be the most important and positive moment of your writing life.

You may be interested to know that I have two such novels, and about a week ago I realised that I am now ready to write them again, and properly. I have realised how to make them work. And gosh am I glad they were not published! I shudder at the thought.

I'd also like to you to read this older, excellent post from the Kidlit people here. Please. It underlines all the above.

Now, it could be that the novel you are writing or submitting now IS fabulous and will be published well and for all the right reasons. But it is statistically more likely that it isn't and that you are still at the practising stage. Think of it as being like wanting to be a concert pianist: you wouldn't want to go on stage before you were good enough, would you? You'd wait till your teacher said you were ready. Well, consider the distinct possibility that this piece of writing is not the piece that will happily launch your career, but that it is very usefully making you better, until you will one day be ready, and then you can launch your career, knowing that you really are on the way to success and that you will look at your first published book with pride.

It comes back to my oft-repeated "simple" theory of getting published: write the right book in the right way and send it to the right publisher in the right way at the right time.

And that right time might not be now because this book might not be the right one. But it will make you better.

DELUDED COVERING LETTERS

I am re-posting this earlier post to help those of you approaching covering letters / queries for the first time. Many of you, I know, are old hands at this, but there are new writers coming along all the time and terrible mistakes are being made. I want to save you, honestly!

The covering letter will give an agent or editor the first clues (and they may not look further) that either a) you may have a great book and really know what you're doing or b) you can't write and / or are going to be too difficult to deal with, perhaps because you have completely the wrong attitude or level of understanding. If you make too many howlers in the covering letter, too many agents or editors will not look at your work. There's just too much competition out there for you to be able to afford to get this too wrong. So, while you'll hear of people getting published even after doing things wrong at this stage, that diminishes your chances hugely, especially if your book is not 100% gloriously saleable. Perfection is unattainable, but most of what agents and publishers receive is horribly short of perfection, which is why almost all of it is rejected summarily. I aim only to protect you from this.

A POINTY POINT ABOUT QUERIES

I know I'm focusing on craft rather than querying for a while, but every now and then I come across a post on **querying which I'd like you to see.

Apologies, btw, for any glitches in this post: I'm going to be away when it goes out, and it's so much easier to proof it once it's published. So, bear with me and don't tell me about typos.

[**I seem to have gone all American in my use of the word "querying". I mean it to include the various processes of approaching an agent or publisher on any side of any ocean and with any type of writing. Let's say that querying has become a generic word for "approaching" and that it incorporates the chosen method/s of your country.]

Anyways. Here is the post I want you to see. When you've read it, please come back, because I want you not to focus so much on the detail but on three general principles obliquely raised:

1. The agents and publishers whom you are querying have usually seen far more query letters than is good for them. They can read between the lines and judge your level of knowledge and readiness from the things you say and the things you don't say. They are often cynical, glazed and pessimistic about the basis of your enthusiasm. Don't push your luck: just be confident about your one best project, even if you mention the existence of others in passing. [Which is a good idea, but do keep that bit brief, unflaky and sedate. No gushing from the fount of your enthusiasm.]
2. If you are a beginner or otherwise unpublished writer, your work is likely to have many faults, faults that make it more or less unpublishable, and faults of which you are horribly unaware. So, if one of your ongoing projects has these faults, they all probably have. Therefore, just present one piece, and make it your best one. If the best piece is an early piece, ask yourself why you're not improving. Because an agent sure as hell will be wondering.

Clearly, there are exceptions to this rule. Genius is one. But it is better to allow your genius to shine through in this one piece of writing. Leave 'em wanting more.

3.  The third point to take from the Kidlit post is this: agents know what they're looking for and they know how to find it. Or if they don't know, it's not up to you to tell them. Don't mess around by trying to give them what they've not asked for. Like the tea-bag my agent friend just received. Last week she also got a letter which started by calling down a curse on her, and then went on to ask if she'd like to read a manuscript. You couldn't make it up.

A couple of you have asked if we could have another bad query competition. I think that's a very good idea and should be a reward for good behaviour in a few weeks' time. Meanwhile, to remind you of how bad queries can be, go and read the winning entries from the last one.

Soon I will be hitting you with a post especially for aspiring children's and YA authors. It will be about pitching your work appropriately for age. Kids' books follow all the same rules as grown-up books, but there are extra rules. There are also extra pitfalls, as this true story shows.

Early on in my career as a YA author, I was doing an event for middle grade / upper primary kids. [I'm going all American again - dang you yankee critturs]. I was not talking about my first and at that time only YA novel, but about Being A Writer. The teacher happened to mention to the kids that I'd written a book called Mondays are Red. Here's what followed:

A grubby boy, whom we shall call Liam, interrupts to say: I've read that, Miss.
Teacher [looking somewhat surprised, as Liam had done nothing to indicate a tendency to read unless forced]: Really, Liam? Did you like it?
Liam: No, Miss. It was pure shite.

Shite or not, it was my first baby and Darren was not worthy.

Now, I am away in London for a few days, for some school talks and meetings. [Watch out, London.] Please don't misbehave while I'm away. a) I will be able to read your comments even if replying is tricky and b) that scary Jane Smith is going to be policing you and de-spamming me. She is donning her weaponry as we speak.