And the Beat Goes On . . .

Hello again after a three-week hiatus. During that time, I’ve busied myself with visiting the websites of literary agencies to determine which agents represent historical fiction. As I look at what each agency represents, I’m also interested in the following genres: memoirs, fantasy, and inspirational gift books.

         Why? Because these are the categories on which I’ve been working the past few years. Let’s begin with the memoir.

         My other blog is an online memoir. I hope one day to take the postings and shape them into one or two memoirs—depending on length.

         Back in the early nineties, after the publication of Angela’s Ashes by Frank McCourt, memoirs really came to the fore in publishing. Rick Bragg’s All Over But the Shoutin’ and James McBride’s The Color of Water, both published a few years later, cemented the premier place of memoirs in the publishing world.

         But so many memoirs have been published since then that the genre is not as popular with publishers as it once was. So some agents no longer represent this genre while other agents will say in their listings that they do not want “misery memoirs.”  

         I’m not sure what my memoir will have going for it. Nor am I sure what thread could hold the memoir together. Perhaps I will simply concentrate on the convent years, but I admit to wanting also to share the story of my mother’s influence on my life. I would also like to share some of the post-convent stories, especially those that have to do with peace and justice issues.

         For the fantasy genre, I now have ready the first book in a trilogy. Judy King, who illustrated A Cat’s Life: Dulcy’s Story, has done stunning pen and ink drawings for Book One. I’m nearing completion of the other two books in the trilogy.  

         The manuscript for the inspirational gift book A Celebration of Angels is also near completion. Recently, several friends read it and responded enthusiastically to varied aspects of the manuscript.

         When I worked for Winston Press in Minneapolis in the 1970s and 1980s, all I knew of publishing was the developing, writing, and editing of curriculum for grade and high schools.          

         Today I know almost nothing about what’s happening in publishing: What are agents looking for? What kind of stories do editors want from agents? What are the developing trends today?

         From a fairly thorough reading of the websites of many literary agencies, however, I have learned that some agents represent just nonfiction, while others represent only certain subgroups of fiction.

         For example, many do not represent fantasy, sci-fi, poetry, Westerns, children’s pictures books, and juvenile books. Some agencies represent only “commercial fiction” or “literary fiction.” What do those two terms mean? I’m just not sure.

         I do understand that agents are effective only if they know a wide group of editors at publishing houses. They must know what those editors are looking for with regard to manuscripts. If an agent doesn’t know many—or even one—editor who is looking for a historical novel, then she/he won’t be interested in A Reluctant Spy. The agent will look upon the novel as a dead end.         

         Many editors who retire or leave publishing become successful literary agents. Having worked in a publishing house, they know enough people to approach with a proposed manuscript.

         That’s another thing I’ve been investigating on those web sites for literary agents: their professional background.

         Lots to do. I’ll report more when I get a nibble or two. Peace.

Cat Photograph from Wikipedia

Not Much to Report

Hello All on this lovely day here in Missouri. This past week, I polished the generic query letter, the synopsis, and the first fifty pages of the manuscript.

         But somehow, no matter what plans I have upon awakening, I never get done all that I need to do in order to start sending out queries. As the saying goes, “Life happens.” And while it’s happening, I’m napping, walking, dealing with a headache, doing errands, simply staring off into space . . . or reading mysteries!

         I did go to a number of agent web sites this past week and read them carefully to determine exactly what materials each agency wants beyond the query letter. Also, I read the lists of authors each agency represents. If I discover an author whose books I’ve read with pleasure, I can add that to my query and personalize it.

         So now I have a list of 8 agents to whom I hope to send queries this week. I’ve found 104 agents who represent historical fiction and I’ll write to all of them if need be in my search for someone to represent The Reluctant Spy. My hope of course is that several will ask to read the entire manuscript. That may be an unrealistic goal, but I’ve always believed in dreaming big.

         I won’t be posting again on this blog until I have something to report. That may or may not be next Sunday. Please just keep those fingers crossed for me. 

        No need to take your treasured time today to leave a comment. I know—

and so appreciate—that you'll rooting for me. Peace.

Agents, Here I Come!

Hello on this Sunday morning here in Missouri—a morning that reminds me of autumn in Minnesota. The hot-tempered weather has cooled off: a good day for writing.

         Many of you wished me abundant sales at the fair last Sunday. So you may be as disappointed as I was to have sold only two books. But that fact has a flip side: I met several vendors who gave me ideas for other local fairs, like those held in hospitals and schools. So now I have some research to do.

         In 2011, the trade paperback publisher of A Cat’s Life: Dulcy’s Story sent me the final 600 copies of the out-of-print book for the price of shipping. I still have 400 copies in the garage. That’s a lot of fairs, folks!

         Now to the present.

         I spent the past week critiquing a manuscript for a first-time novelist. Back in July, I’d done the same. After that reading I encouraged her “to situate” her scenes by providing details so that readers could visualize where something was happening. I also recommended the use of detail when writing dialogue so that “talking heads” would not confuse readers.

         The author sent the manuscript back to me for review in early September. As often happens, in an attempt to show facial expressions and body language, she had added too many details. Moreover, the timeline was confusing, and in at least one crucial scene she missed the opportunity to create drama.

         I completed my reading, critiquing, and slight copyediting on Thursday. The next day, she and I went through the manuscript on the phone for 3 ½ hours. I explained what still needed to be done—most of which could be accomplished by the deletion of words and the condensing of some scenes. Having words to cut is always easier than having to add words.

         Because this is a young adult novel, it is supposed to be only about 75,000 words. The present manuscript has over 100,000. So the author welcomed the cutting I suggested.

         As we’ve worked together in July and again this month, I’ve come to admire her dedication and maturity as a writer. She’s committed, open to advice, and professional enough to take those recommendations that work for her and to discard the rest.

         She also has a reserve of fortitude and tenacity—necessary virtues when seeking publication. In recent weeks, she’s persevered and sent out eighty-five query letters to agents. Yes—85. Two have asked to see her manuscript.

         I don’t know how you are responding to that ratio, but I’m impressed. Getting an agent is so difficult today and two of those eighty-five intermediaries between author and editor have asked to see her completed novel. That’s great news.

         She plans to do the cutting and have the manuscript ready to send out by early October. I’m so hoping that one of those two agents will want to represent her writing.

         Having completed that project, I’m now going to return to my own query letters to agents. The book 2013 Guide to Literary Agents lists 104 agents who represent historical novels. I have my query letter ready; I’ve visited agent websites; I’ve selected the first few to whom to send a query. Now the journey begins.

         This week I hope to contact several agents to seek their representation of The Reluctant Spy. Start visualizing!

         Peace. 

Snail Mail and E-Mail

Two Sundays ago, I wrote about my befuddlement over what to do with the manuscript for The Reluctant Spy—try to get it published or stuff it into the computer’s innards and let it molder for ages hence. Your responses helped greatly.

         Last Sunday, I shared with you the power of a single word—fascinating. Once again, your responses gave me the courage to make the decision detailed below.

         This Sunday I’d like to share with you what I’ve being doing in the past seven days. What I haven’t been doing is blogging. That is, reading and commenting on the seventy blogs I enjoy and try to follow.

         Why?

         Because that word fascinating has impelled me to look for an agent . . . and to look in a new way.

         In the past few years, I’d done an agent search several times. That involves (1) going to a book such as 2013 Guide to Literary Agents or Jeff Herman’s Guide to Book Publishers, Editors, & Literary Agents or (2) searching web sites that list agents such as Literary Rambles for children’s books or AgentQuery.Com.

         These books and lists may offer a little or a lot of information about a particular agent or agency: names, address, e-mail address, web site, genre represented. That last item is essential because some agencies represent only nonfiction. Other agencies may represent fiction but only a certain kind: literary, historical, fantasy, contemporary women’s, mystery, mainstream, young adult.

         Finding an agent takes time. Thought. Effort. Here’s what I’ve been doing in the past week instead of blogging:

·      I wrote a generic query letter for The Reluctant Spy. Crafting the first sentence and paragraph so as to entice an agent into reading the entire letter requires going over it repeatedly. When I begin to contact agencies and agents, I’ll modify that letter as necessary. That is, I’ll mention some book an agent has represented or the agency’s client list or an agent’s particular interest in some area. Finding out that info requires extensive research.

·      I studied the books and lists mentioned above to determine which agencies represent fiction, specifically, historical fiction.

·      I visited agency web sites to determine two things: the names of those agents in a particular agency who are interested in the type of fiction I have to offer and how they want someone to query them: electronically or by snail mail. Do they want only a letter? Or a letter plus the first five pages of the manuscript? 30 pages? 50 pages?

         Slowly, I’m beginning to develop a list of agents to contact.

         In the past few years when I’ve done an agent search I’ve taken the easy route—sending out only e-queries. That’s cheaper than snail mail and usually, if the agent does choose to respond, the response comes much quicker than through the mail.

          This time, I’m decided to do two things differently—bless that word fascinating! I’m going to send out snail queries and I’m going to send them not only to agencies that represent historical novels—which is what I’ve done in the past—but also to those agents that represent “mainstream” fiction. That’s a breakthrough for me. I believe that in the past I’ve been too narrow in my vision. I’m going to cast a wide net this time.

         In this coming week, I hope to continue my search and also to visit each of your blogs at least once. How can I expect you to offer your thoughtful suggestions if I don’t follow your postings? And I so enjoy discovering what you are all doing and thinking.

         I’d appreciate any thoughts you have on the process I’ve detailed. I plan to spend the month of September searching lists and sending out queries. I’ll keep you posted. Lots to do . . . and I love it!

                  

Free at Last!

Last week I bemoaned my inability to decide if the manuscript for The Reluctant Spy was ready for publication despite the email from a friend who’d read the story and found it “fascinating.”

         This week, while tracing the arc of my writing life, I’ve pondered that word. In 7^th grade I won first place in the Kansas City diocesan essay contest. I can remember Mom’s broad smile as I returned from the podium with my prize—a prayer book.

         In college I was one of twenty finalists in the prestigious 1958 Atlantic Monthly essay contest. At the time, my writing mentor, Sister Scholastica, tried to impress on me that in this nationwide contest I’d excelled among thousands of entries. But I, preparing to enter the convent, had little time for such foolishness.

         During the next twenty-seven years I became a nun, taught, and found a new life after leaving the monastery. Then, in 1985, I became a freelance editor, copyeditor, and curriculum developer. Suddenly writing became important again.  

         Four years later, the cat I’d loved for nearly two decades died. Dulcy immediately began to channel through me the story of our life together.

         Late that summer, I told a friend about this strange phenomenon. “Well, it’ll all be trash,” she said with surety. “You’ll just have to throw it away.” Her words stunned me.

         A few weeks later another friend, a published writer, read the first draft of Dulcy’s story. “Put this in a safety deposit box,” he recommended, “and don’t look at it for five years. Then maybe you’ll find something worth keeping.”

         His wife’s take on the book? “Bor-ing! Bor-ing!”

         When I expressed doubts about my writing ability to an acquaintance, she said, “Well, Dee, maybe you can’t write. Maybe you just don’t have the gift.”

         With that, my thoughts jelled: I wasn’t a writer. I couldn’t write well. I was a hack. Dulcy’s book being published made no difference. After all, she wrote the book; I simply edited it.

         I knew two things: I could edit; I couldn’t write.

         The years passed with me crafting sentences, seeking to find the cadence of words. Because no agent was interested in representing my writing, the belief that I was a word-dabbler rooted deeper and deeper into my psyche.

         Then in 2011, I began to blog. Several readers commented that my writing was good and so I’ve come to believe that I can write a 600-word story. Yet that realization hasn’t expunged my belief that I’m a rank amateur with regard to writing longer stories that demand well-drawn characters and extended suspense.  

         Recently a psychic told me that in this life I was meant “to let go.” Not of specific things—like the convent or a dysfunctional relationship with a couple who’d been friends for years or a home in Stillwater. No. She meant the mega things—those beliefs that arc my life from beginning to now. During this past week I’ve examined the belief that I’m a charlatan.  

       

         Now here we are today. I’ve mulled the past, recognized the belief, and read that wonderful word fascinating. It has broken through the bars of my conviction that I can’t write a novel.

         Fran’s word has, literally, freed me from a way of thinking about myself that has shackled me for years. Today I want to thank her for helping me let go of that old belief about myself and my writing. I can write. I can write a novel that will, perhaps, be published. But whatever happens, I will be grateful to this friend for freeing me.

         Peace. And Hallelujah!

When's a Manuscript Ready to Publish?

In early June, I posted that Judy Healey—a friend and published author of historical fiction—was reading “The Reluctant Spy,” a novel I’ve written that takes place in first-century Palestine. Judy suggested that I explain unfamiliar words, such as jasper ring and tamarisk, and clarify the difference between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Responding to these suggestions will take little time or effort.

         Her bigger concern—one demanding a restructuring of the first third of the novel—was the dynamic between two of its characters: Ephraim and Daniel. She wanted to know the background of their dissension much earlier than I provided in the novel. I had presented their past in several scenes sprinkled throughout the first third of the manuscript. I hoped this would intensify tension and suspense. That didn’t work for Judy.

         While in Minnesota recently, I enjoyed a working lunch with her. Having read only the first third of the novel, Judy believes its main thrust is the story between Daniel and Ephraim.

         For me, as the author, that thrust is between Ephraim and Yeshua. That’s why I began the novel with a scene between the two of them. However, Yeshua does not appear again with Ephraim until nearly a third of the way through the book, when Part II begins in the Galilee. Then the story line becomes theirs. In the latter part of the manuscript, Daniel re-emerges several times. He’s the catalyst of the ongoing need for Ephraim to attach himself to Yeshua, a man for whom he has only contempt.

Orchards in the Upper Galilee.

         Back in January an editor read the manuscript and made suggestions that led to the deletion of 9,000 words. She thought the novel was ready for publication. So after returning from Minnesota, I was left with a conundrum: to publish the novel as is per the editor’s counsel or to change the first third per Judy’s recommendation.

         Unable to untie this Gordian knot, I asked a friend, who’s a prolific reader although not of historical novels, if she would read the manuscript. I gave her a series of questions to consider in her reading. She’s now gotten back to me. Here’s her e-mail response:

I just finished "The Reluctant Spy" and found it fascinating! I don't usually (almost never) read historical novels because I generally find them to be slow.  I tend to skim through the descriptive parts and to read only the narratives thoroughly.  I determined to read every word of your book and I'm glad I did. Yours required a lot of description in the beginning, but the pace picked up at about page 20 and stayed strong throughout.  

         There are quite a few instances of incorrect punctuation and random typos and spaces that need to be corrected.  

         I loved Ephraim’s conversations with God/Hashem.  

         I felt I got a true understanding on why the characters, especially Ephraim and Yeshua, acted as they did.  

         The only suggestion I can make is to make sure you get it published!

Model of Herod’s Temple at the Israel Museum.

While my friend’s response delights me, I’m still perplexed.  Judy is a published author so her opinion sways me. And yet I know that any reading of a third of a novel over a three-month period needs to be taken with a grain of salt. We seldom hold the intricacies of a book in our heads for three months when we do sporadic reading.

         On the other hand, a friend often cannot be objective even when trying hard to be. Still, this friend has been honest with me before when something I wrote didn’t work for her. Perhaps only those first twenty pages of the novel need recasting.

         Given these three responses, I’m befuddled, wondering if I need to hire another professional editor—Judy gave me the names of two who have helped her—or if I need simply to go for publication.

         As you read this posting—in the United States or Great Britain or Australia or wherever you are—please send me your best thoughts about this manuscript. The truth is I’m confused, wondering if I need to continue to fish or if I should cut bait!

Judy's Reading of "The Reluctant Spy"

In my May 5 posting, I shared with you the first response of a friend—July Healey—to the manuscript for The Reluctant Spy. Judy is an established writer of two historical novels published by HarperCollins to excellent reviews. In April, she offered to read my manuscript when I told her the beginning of the novel was giving me trouble. Last Saturday, she sent me the following e-mail:        

I think The Reluctant Spy is a terrific story and you have told it well. Everything I have to say is embroidery. You have well developed characters and a strong plot line. . . . You have done a wonderful job here. Best, Judy

But a fine editor—like the one I had back in December whose sound advice enabled me to delete 9,000 words and tighten the story line—does more than simply give an overview of her first response to the manuscript. Truly gifted writers and editors find what doesn’t work and suggest solutions. And Judy knows what to look for. On Wednesday, I received the following in-depth comments from her about the first 86 single-spaced pages:

Plot and character: 

Several strains feed the animosity of Daniel and Ephraim and, to a lesser extent, Ephraim and Yeshua—or rather Ephraim for Yeshua. The first case seems based on Daniel’s childhood envy of his father’s pride in Ephraim and the betrayal of Ephraim by studying the Pharisaic tradition rather than Sadducean and his concealment of this. For me, the character of each of these men and their relationship forms the core of the story. 

However, it’s taken me some time to piece this together. What would have helped me earlier is the following:

·      Clear understanding from the outset of the difference between the two traditions.

·      Understanding the relationship of Daniel’s father to Ephraim: How had he come to live with the family? Why was Daniel’s father paying for Ephraim’s education? How could he not know where Ephraim was studying if he was paying the fees?

·      Clear understanding early on (rather than much later) of how Daniel and Ephraim parted.

·      What, exactly, is Ephraim’s relationship to Daniel now? In some scenes he seems excessively obsequious, although once in a while he musters the character to challenge Daniel. Ephraim is awfully tough on God but can’t stand up to Daniel. I think, especially early on, there should be more resistance on the part of Ephraim.

·      Daniel is the most interesting character in the book to me, so far, although the portrait of Yeshua is fascinating. Yet Daniel seems relentlessly vicious. Why?

·      I expected more of a reaction when Daniel tells Ephraim that it was his testimony that led directly to John’s death. I think you should do a little more with that scene.

Herod's Temple at the time of Yeshua.

Bridging your knowledge of the times with the readers’ ignorance:

• You are steeped in the times and the words of the times but your reader is not. Every historical fiction writer faces this challenge and we each address it in our own way. One way is to have a glossary of terms so the reader can flip back when she comes upon an unfamiliar term
• Another is to add more description when you use an unfamiliar term. “Jasper ring” for instance. We don’t care that you know the right word. We want to see it. Describe it for me now and I’ll continue on in the story. But without the description, I’m only faced with the fact that you have esoteric knowledge that I don’t have and I am annoyed and halted in my reading. “Tamarisks.” What are they? What do they look like?
• Most of these words can be embroidered with little effort. Honor your reader’s ignorance rather than displaying your knowledge of the time.
• But the larger problem is that of helping the reader early on understand the difference between Pharisees and Sadducees and, by understanding, enter into the tribal world these characters inhabit. This is core to the story.
• It’s really good Dee. I know it will be published. But that strategy is another story!

             Judy has now sent me her comments written on the margins of the first 86 pages. When she completes her reading, I’ll get busy determining which of her suggestions work for me. But already I can see that I need to work on delineating relationships and making Ephraim more believable. I’ll share more with you as I receive Judy’s comments. Peace.