Confessions of an Epic Indian

My agent, John Jarrold, has been the biggest help of my writing career. He gives indispensable advice, and knows the industry inside out. He’ll not only help knock a book into shape, but will work hard behind the scenes to make sure an editor is actually keen to read a submission. He’ll even guide me as to making a book more commercial. He understands audience. Then there’s the whole stack of jobs an agent does once you’re lucky enough to get a deal. I don’t want to dick around with contracts and small print, I just want to write the book, and my agent allows me to get on with that. Sure, there are some dodgy agents out there, those that charge spurious reading fees, or some who are plainly not that good at their job; but for the majority of new writers they are the only way of securing a book deal. It always seems to be that tiny percentage of unagented authors who get some publicity, but I think it’s dangerous to begin advising writers that they shouldn’t bother. Agents are a massive reality-check. They’re there to earn money from your talent, which shows huge amount of faith, and it’s wonderful for your peace of mind to have someone believe in your abilities as well as have the knowledge to tackle any problem you might come across.

The quote is from a recent post on Solaris Editor and debut novelist Mark C. Newton’s blog. It’s in response to a post by author-journalist Mark Liam Piggott which appeared on the blog of prestigious UK newspaper The Guardian here. You can also visit the website of publisher Legend Books which accepted and published Piggott’s book here.

So do you?

Need a literary agent?

Well, on one hand, the answer’s clear.

If you want to build a career as a commercial author, sell books over and over again to publishers, and tailor your writing to meet that publisher (and agent’s) assessment of what they feel you should be writing, and generally deliver consistent and paying books that meet a market need…

Yes. You definitely need an agent.

In fact, though the Guardian blog post refers presumably to UK publishing, where some publishers still do consider un-agented work, if you’re looking to be published in the USA, or even by major commercial publishers in the UK, you can’t afford to not have an agent repping you.

Because most publishers today don’t accept un-agented manuscripts.

That is, they will not even look at a manuscript if it’s not sent in by an agent. Ideally, it should be an agent with a good reputation, whom they know personally, and whose judgement they respect. But first and foremost, it should be an agent who sends in the manuscript. Not the author himself.

In fact, to the best of my knowledge, there are no major publishers in the USA who accept un-agented submissions. And the handful of UK publishers who still do, rarely take un-agented subs seriously, and are almost certainly moving towards an ‘agents only’ policy very shortly.

Why is that?

Well. The main reason is the sheer volume of submissions received by such major publishers. Some imprints will receive thousands of manuscripts each year. Simply to read all those ’slush pile’ manuscripts would require more full-time (or part-time) staff than those companies employ right now.

And the sad truth is that almost all those submissions aren’t worth reading, let alone publishing.

Agents, especially the good ones, filter out the publishable manuscripts and authors from the crowd. In fact, these days, it’s so hard to get a good agent, that authors have to submit their work for consideration to agents, and are rarely accepted. Some agents who are known for their success rate, often receive as many manuscripts as publishing houses!

Good agents do several other things: They take care of all the nitty gritty of contracts, collecting advance payments, keeping the relationship between author and editor well-oiled and running smoothly, and most of all, they negotiate far better advances than most authors can manage on their own. In fact, it’s a safe bet to say that agented manuscripts fetch far higher advances than un-agented manuscripts.

On the other hand…

While agents may be necessary, even essential, to get a manuscript read, let alone published, these days, that necessity itself is not always a good thing.

Agents are primarily concerned with earning money.

That means, everything they say or do is geared toward getting their authors bigger advances, more contracts, and bigger advances.

As I said, if you’re looking for a career as a commercial novelist who writes to meet market requirements, or tailors his or her writing to meet those requirements, then you’ll certainly be happy with an agent.

But that also means that agents are driving the publishing business.

Because editors depend on them to pick out publishable manuscripts and authors who are good boys and girls and will continue to deliver what the publisher wants, when they want it, the way they want it, agents are often dictating what’s written–or at the very least, how it’s written.

I’m not just talking about commissioned books. Or franchise novels, media tie-ins, spinoffs, novelizations and other ’sharecrop’ cash-in books that are written-to-order to meet a marketing need.

I’m talking about authors whose entire careers are guided by their agents’ decision-making. Who actually write what their agent suggests they should be writing, or at the very least, put aside manuscripts that the agent doesn’t think they should publish or even submit, and take up projects that the agent feels are more viable.

I’m talking about books that wouldn’t exist if that agent hadn’t said to his or her authors: “So-and-so kind of book is selling, so-and-so is not. You should do something along those lines.”

Is that a bad thing?

Not necessarily.

Earlier, editors had this power. And of course, they still do, except that, with the agent becoming a ‘pre-editor’, and editors themselves finding more and more of their time taken up with other matters such as pitching their books and authors in-house, overseeing the complexities of marketing a book in today’s fiercely competitive publishing arena, and various production and publicity matters, the agent really does wield the scepter of power.

That means that to some extent, or in the case of some authors, a greater extent, agents actually decide what an author should write, how he or she should write it, who should publish it, and how much he or she should get paid for it.

That’s where I would draw a line.

A pencilled line perhaps, and with various caveats and footnotes.

But a line.

Yes, agents can be a good thing, even a necessary thing.

Yes, they can help sell your book, build your career, get you big advances, keep those contracts coming.

But ask yourself this one question: Should that much power be in the hands of a person whose only real goal is to earn a percentage of someone else’s income?

Not a creator of original content.

Not a publisher.

Not an editor.

(Even though many agents are often ex-writers, ex-publishers, ex-editors, or even all three.)

But simply a commission-earner.

Because of course a commission-earner would need to sell manuscripts in order to keep earning that commission.

Would have to sell more manuscripts each passing year, at higher advances, in order to increase his or her income.

Would have to make sure that the authors from whose work he or she earns those commissions keeps writing what sells (to publishers first, readers come into the picture much later, if at all), and that they write it without question or comment, deliver it on time and neatly packaged by commercial standards, and are always smiling and holding out that bowl and saying “Please, sir, can I have some more?”

As I said, if all you want from a writing career is to meet a market need, do it well, and earn well for doing it, you’re very well off with an agent. You will enjoy yourself and have a great time while earning better than you ever could on your own. Besides, you really have no option.

I’m okay with all that.

But the part that worries me more than a little, the part that makes me actually wrinkle my brow, and scratch my balding head, is that so much power is concentrated in the hands of people who don’t actually contribute content in what is essentially a content-driven business.

Perhaps that’s because publishing, especially the commercial, US-led variety of mass market publishing today, isn’t content-driven anymore.

It’s concept-driven.

Pretty packaging.

Big ideas.

Trends.

Genres.

And sub-genres.

And sub-sub-sub-genres.

Media brands.

Celebs.

And other things that sell quicker, better, and bigger than the most beautifully written, elegantly edited, and marvelously published books.

In short, it’s an industry now where individual writers are replaceable and agents are not.

Where publishing lists are slots to be filled by smart agents with willing authors.

Where readers are given more of the same endlessly, till they tire of those groaning shelves of me-too titles and finally move on to another trend or sub-genre, at which point agents quickly jump (carrying their authors under their arms) to fill those slots as well.

It’s a commercial world, and not an entirely bad one. There’s a lot of great entertainment to be had out there. Some truly good literature too.

But it’s not the same as a publishing world driven by authors who write good, even great books, for no other reason than that they feel driven to write those books. Where editors buy those books and publish them because they’re good books. Where marketing departments at publishing companies find a way to sell those good books, not merely demand that they’re given more of what already sells. Where readers can go into stores and find those good books and discover them and enjoy them, even cherish them.

Where individual talent counts for something more than merely a ’style’ to be tweaked and corrected and used as a minor talking point.

Where books are books, not merely commercial products.

To be honest, I don’t have an issue with agents per se. Or even with the commercial side of publishing. I’m all for it in fact.

But I just wish there was an alternative too.

An alternative that was driven by more than just the desire to earn bigger commissions year after year.

An alternate that cared about the 85% percent of the business, rather than that 15%.

And I’m just a little sad that there is no alternative.