First novel?

[N. E. White]

Hi guys. I've been doing alot of thinking and have decided what I want to do as my first novel. I have heard that it is easier to get published for the first time if your novel is short (im guessing 250-300 pages?) But i think my idea, although being a one novel idea, will be more like 500-700 pages. Of course there actually isn't any way to know until its finished.

Anyway my question is: Is it true that it would be best to keep my first novel around 250-300 pages? If that's the case it would actually only be the first half of a novel (like Hyperion) or the first of two books. Or would I be just as well off trying to publish it at full length (something like 500-700 pages)?

Hmmm, good question. I think, and I'm sure it's been said a number of times already, just write the darn thing.

I recently completed my very first novel (yeah me!). It's around 72k at the moment. May get a little longer, but not much. It's the first in a seven-book series (or so I think).

The entire story that I want to tell is HUGE. Way too big. So, I thought I'd just tell a small part of it and see how that went. That's my first book. Now, I have to figure out how to fix the darn thing to see if it's worth it to continue with the rest (though I probably will just because I like the characters so much).

Anyway, to answer your question, maybe set out to write a portion of the story and see where it takes you?

 

[KatG]

My oh my, I really hope I did not create chaos in the wake of my Stephanie Meyers comment. I do want to put this out... I don't hate Stephanie Meyers I in fact quite enjoy that she showed up.

A. She got teenage girls to read which has never damaged ANY of us authors last time I checked. (Even though I do hope that their mothers are thoroughly involved in their lives before they seek out a 'bad boy' boyfriend they percieve to be Edward, because that COULD be bad).

B. In response to Jon Sprunk's comment about being long-winded, I wanted to remind everybody that famous run-away novels are both long-winded and to the point, which Stephanie Meyers is illustrative of. (Afterall, Meyers DOES spend a long time discussing how beautiful Edward Cullen is)

C. Apparently any idea can work... even ones that you NEVER would have thought could take off (Seriously, a sparkly vampire?? I never would have thought that would fly and it did, and that is admirable).

D. Meyers not only releases an idea that I thought to be outlandish, but she re-released the same storyline under a second point of view and it still sold! Meaning that ideas can become new again if told from a different point of view (which means things that might be cookie-cutter don't have to be!)

So as strange as I think her success is, I still applaud it because as I said before, no matter how long-winded, or strangely "Lisa Frank" your idea is, it CAN be sold and can do well.

It's somewhat like the Ratatouille slogan, "Anyone can cook." In this case, anyone can tell a story that the world cares to hear. Good luck to us all.

LOL, well we apologize for dragging you into it, then.

Who said anything about me reading it?

That's what the people who say what you write is trash and therefore you are a hack say too. And when you're at the SFF convention with your fellow writers, be sure to tell them that you haven't read their stuff, but you know they're hacks. (And then define hack, as people have different definitions.) you'll be very popular on panels, I'm sure.

She got a gimmick that worked and she sold it. Emphasis on sold. But, when trying to publish, there's something you can learn from every author.

See, this again shows the lack of knowledge that I'm suggesting is not of benefit to you. That you think a YA vampire romance is a new gimmick and that's why Meyers sold her novel and it did well shows a complete lack of knowledge about the YA market. The YA market, even several decades in the past when it was much smaller, relied on teen romance, and romances with supernatural beings were common, including vampires. The Vampire Diaries, which was recently adapted into a t.v. series, was started by a book packager as a trilogy back in 1991. It became a bestseller, but many other YA vampire romance just sold a few thousand copies and that was it.

So when Meyers came to the table with her book, she was not bringing anything new except for those few sparkles, not the vampires, not the star-crossed lovers, not the Italian vampire council, not the werewolves, the Native American lore, the no sex before marriage, etc. -- not new to YA. But she did bring her own characters and she did bring her flowery writing style and her story and teenage girls and some of their moms liked it and spread word of mouth which built. And when you get published, you will also have readers spread word of mouth and the more of them you get, the more there will be other people who say that the only reason you did is that you had a gimmick and sales promotion, not that people actually like your book because they can't fathom how it could possibly do well any other way. So really the gimmick notion is one I'd suggest you toss, as the fiction market is symbiotic and the SFF category market is a field where a lot of authors are in contact with each other on a regular basis. And because it just shows that you don't know much about the fiction market you're trying to publish in. If you don't know YA, try not trashing YA authors you haven't read, even if the sparkliness is provoking. (Yes, I know you read it Kaeru, I was referring to Asimovking there.)

But if I conform to that, how can I be sure that will still be what they are buying in 2-3 years? (It easily could be that long before my first novel is ready to shop.)

It's not about conforming because there's nothing set to conform to. The market requires variety to survive, so publishers are putting out everything from erotica to magic realism to children's tales on a regular basis. Studying the market is not about copying the market. It's about understanding what's in it, so that you don't make assumptions about what's in it -- like how long books are, and so that when you go to the market, whether that's an obscure magazine or small press, self-publishing, or a large SFF imprint, to sell your work that you wrote with your vision, you actually know how to communicate about it. You know who is writing in the same neighborhood as you, which might let agents and editors get a feel for what you are trying to do. You know not to say that you've come up with a totally new idea, only to find out belatedly that Important Author X did the same thing thirty years ago and they just reprinted it again. (Which is okay, you can do your version of the idea too, but this way, you don't get tripped up by not knowing what Important Author X did whereas your potential readers and publishers do.)

If you're selling space opera SF, even if your writing style and focus is totally different from the leading authors in that area, you should at least know who they are. You should have an idea of what the publishers are publishing, now and in the coming months. Read some excerpts. Get a feel for the whole sweep of adult SF so that you're not talking out your ear later on.

And when you hear stuff like "all agents do this," "all editors want this," please take it with a grain of salt. Because agents and editors do not act as a single cell organism. Book length varies. Plots vary. Writing styles vary, etc. People have different interests.

So yes, my very peevish sounding and lecturey post for the day from off-handed remarks about Meyers, giving my obnoxious opinions. But it still relates to the thread topic -- know what's going on out there, and especially in the areas that are most important to you.

 

[Kaeru]

KatG, I did not mean vampire romance when I said gimmick. I was trying to be brief and not derail the topic any further than it was going by going into my long list of whys.



One of the definitions of a gimmick is an igenious and USUALLY new scheme or angle. I just wanted to double check. New is definitely implied, but not what I had intended. I am well aware supernatural romance has been done to death and by itself contributes nothing.

 

[Wojciehowicz]

It would take too long to explain, but given cultural shared experiences, most writing is gimmicky, to say nothing of forums like this where advice is usually revolving around calculated story building. Think about it. Think about all the vampire movies and stories in the mass society. Think how few variations really exist at the mass level. Think about the subconscious effects of it.

I recommend some Jungian psychology reading if you want to delve into it. And then a little contrast with Skinnerian behaviorism. Consider the internal dialectic influenced by the mass experience. Consider your similar natures as a species and as cultural peers and how those keep leading you to independently reinvent the same conclusions without an original to copy.

Now add in the usual advice about building stories specifically, rather than feeling through one that pops into your head by itself. Character, tropes, themes, genre, etc.

Yes, everything is gimmicky, and Meyers' work is too, and it was calculated whether or not she wanted it to, almost certainly. You can hardly help it unless, like me and people like me, you constantly have those existential verities on the mind and lead an almost neurotic introspective existence. I specifically avoid the mass social themes not because I want to sell something new, but just because they don't appeal to me and letting myself be drawn into everyone else's definitions would be dangerously leashing. If they sell, fine, if not, fine.

But your main goal is to sell, isn't it? So, you're back to chasing what you think everyone else will read and pay you money for, inherently constraining your choices, and therefore obviously constraining the probabilities by limiting the data sets to consider. So, gimmicky, whether anyone likes it or not.

Now, you can read a value judgment into that if you like, but I certainly don't. It's just what you are. It's not like you should be feeling bad that existential reality constrains your world by default unless you purposely think outside of it and willfully choose to deviate. That's just everyday reality. If you didn't have those shared aspects, you'd not think of yourself as an aggregate entity, such as a culture, a society, a species, or a nation. But you do, and that's just life. Everyone knows it and operates on it every day, and some thrive on it, and some walk away from it. It is what it is to anyone.

 

[KatG]

But your main goal is to sell, isn't it? So, you're back to chasing what you think everyone else will read and pay you money for, inherently constraining your choices, and therefore obviously constraining the probabilities by limiting the data sets to consider. So, gimmicky, whether anyone likes it or not.

Well no, that's what I keep trying to convey. A lot of people go into the marketplace believing that this is the deal and that they know exactly what will sell and what will not and therefore if they write to certain formulas, it will sell. And most of these people will be rejected. The marketplace is much, much broader than most people focus on, and it is absolutely essential, in order to make money selling fiction books which requires maximizing the scope of readership, to have as much variety in it as possible because contrary to what seems to be the belief, readers don't like the same things at all. The bigger the publisher, the more variety they need in their lists. So constraints are not in the market's best interest and "what will sell" is a varied, complicated miasma, including the bestsellers.

That doesn't mean that individuals operating in the marketplace don't have views of what might work best or don't have preferences and interests specific to them and their companies that they act on. They are deciding whether to invest in an author, and that decision involves a great deal more than the list of plot or world-building elements an author may have chosen for a story.

And even when they make that decision and invest in the author, they are often wrong. And they may make a minor investment in an author who then becomes through word of mouth an incredible bestseller, or they may have passed on that author but another publisher did not. They may make a minor or major investment in a book that wins a literary prize -- and then also becomes a bestseller. There may be no publisher -- the author may self-publish. The books that do well are sometimes very weird and sometimes very romantic and sometimes very violent and sometimes sentimental village tales. Some of them are structurally complicated, others are straight chronologies. Some have tragic endings, other happy ones, or mixed ones. A lot of them are thrillers and a lot of them are not. There are small presses that sell as many copies as titles at larger houses, and then they have other titles that only sell a few hundred copies. There are chap books, illustrated books, tie-in books, university presses, medium sized houses with regional bestsellers. A translation of Beowulf was a major bestseller, which was rather a surprise to its publisher.

Nobody knows what will sell -- they guess, they gamble. This is the one thing that you get taught in fiction publishing very early. So while I appreciate the confidence of various authors that they have the crystal ball and know, and will use that knowledge to sell or refute it as a game they will not play, my experience is that the market does not work that way at all and you're talking out of your hat.

But I'm not going to try and stop anyone from pursuing that course. If you want to "write for the market," fullspeed ahead whatever you think that is. If you want to "write for your soul" fullspeed ahead whatever you think that is. (You'll still be in the market, though.) But if you're going to suggest that only short space opera SF is being published, I'm going to challenge that because physical evidence says no.

 

[Asimovking]

Hmmm, good question. I think, and I'm sure it's been said a number of times already, just write the darn thing.

I recently completed my very first novel (yeah me!). It's around 72k at the moment. May get a little longer, but not much. It's the first in a seven-book series (or so I think).

The entire story that I want to tell is HUGE. Way too big. So, I thought I'd just tell a small part of it and see how that went. That's my first book. Now, I have to figure out how to fix the darn thing to see if it's worth it to continue with the rest (though I probably will just because I like the characters so much).

Anyway, to answer your question, maybe set out to write a portion of the story and see where it takes you?

Thanks. That could be a good idea.

 

[Asimovking]

You keep track of the market. You note what publishers are buying, what books agents are reping and how your own work fits with these. You note what your work is like and which publisher is printing it and which agent rep'ed it. It is all a matter of finding roughly where your work will fit, then when you start submitting you are not sending out blanket submissions, but targeting the agents/publishers that might be interested.

So basically write whatever I want but keep track of what agents/companies are involved with that kind of stuff?

 

[Asimovking]

That's what the people who say what you write is trash and therefore you are a hack say too. And when you're at the SFF convention with your fellow writers, be sure to tell them that you haven't read their stuff, but you know they're hacks. (And then define hack, as people have different definitions.) you'll be very popular on panels, I'm sure.

You don't have to read something to know about it. When you have plenty of friends that have read it and are on both sides of the fence about it and give you details like my friends did, you dont need to read it. Just like harry potter, i know everything about it without reading any more than the first 60 pages of book 1. and im sure you have an example where this is true for you. we all do. If you had alot of friends that read LOTR when it came out, you didn't have to read it to know everything about it. You didn't have to be in the hotel room with Heath Ledger to know he was dead before you watched him work his magic as The Joker. Stephanie Myers is a hack. I have said it to her face and will again.

It's not about conforming because there's nothing set to conform to. The market requires variety to survive, so publishers are putting out everything from erotica to magic realism to children's tales on a regular basis. Studying the market is not about copying the market. It's about understanding what's in it, so that you don't make assumptions about what's in it -- like how long books are, and so that when you go to the market, whether that's an obscure magazine or small press, self-publishing, or a large SFF imprint, to sell your work that you wrote with your vision, you actually know how to communicate about it. You know who is writing in the same neighborhood as you, which might let agents and editors get a feel for what you are trying to do. You know not to say that you've come up with a totally new idea, only to find out belatedly that Important Author X did the same thing thirty years ago and they just reprinted it again. (Which is okay, you can do your version of the idea too, but this way, you don't get tripped up by not knowing what Important Author X did whereas your potential readers and publishers do.)


If you're selling space opera SF, even if your writing style and focus is totally different from the leading authors in that area, you should at least know who they are. You should have an idea of what the publishers are publishing, now and in the coming months. Read some excerpts. Get a feel for the whole sweep of adult SF so that you're not talking out your ear later on.

And when you hear stuff like "all agents do this," "all editors want this," please take it with a grain of salt. Because agents and editors do not act as a single cell organism. Book length varies. Plots vary. Writing styles vary, etc. People have different interests.

I think this is awesome advice. It will help me alot to know what im getting into. I was confused at first but I think I know what you two are saying now. Write whatever I want to write and make it as long as it should be for the story but also pay attention to what is going on in the market, not to make my book like theirs but to know where to take my book and what to say.

So yes, my very peevish sounding and lecturey post for the day from off-handed remarks about Meyers, giving my obnoxious opinions. But it still relates to the thread topic -- know what's going on out there, and especially in the areas that are most important to you.

Haha. They aren't obnoxious. I admire you're passion on the subject.

Edit: *golf clap for myself* I finally figured out how to multi-quote a single person in a reply.

 

[KatG]

You don't have to read something to know about it. When you have plenty of friends that have read it and are on both sides of the fence about it and give you details like my friends did, you dont need to read it. Just like harry potter, i know everything about it without reading any more than the first 60 pages of book 1. and im sure you have an example where this is true for you. we all do. If you had alot of friends that read LOTR when it came out, you didn't have to read it to know everything about it. You didn't have to be in the hotel room with Heath Ledger to know he was dead before you watched him work his magic as The Joker. Stephanie Myers is a hack. I have said it to her face and will again.

You missed my point, but that's okay. As I mentioned in the other thread we've got now, just remember to confine your remarks to Meyers' work and not Meyers personally, as in the forum rules.

I think this is awesome advice. It will help me alot to know what im getting into. I was confused at first but I think I know what you two are saying now. Write whatever I want to write and make it as long as it should be for the story but also pay attention to what is going on in the market, not to make my book like theirs but to know where to take my book and what to say.

Yes, that was what I was trying to convey.

 

[Susan Boulton]

So basically write whatever I want but keep track of what agents/companies are involved with that kind of stuff?

Yes, it helps a lot when you start submitting. Least you know they are going to look at the pitch/first page.

 

[A. Lynn]

...if they write to certain formulas... So constraints are not in the market's best interest and "what will sell" is a varied, complicated miasma, including the bestsellers.

Speaking of miasma, I do believe it was the Greeks in the first place that began studying the principles in storytelling. From what I understand from my Bachelor's program, there ARE certain story-telling formats that do aid the author in telling a good story. Though, I've have also been told that these are guides more than anything.

For example, read Save the Cat by Blake Snyder. This book is technically about screenwriting, however the principles could still work for a book all the same I would suspect. Also, I would say be aware of Joseph Campbell's Hero with a Thousand Faces. It does not hurt to gain the perspective of amazing story tellers and philosophers. Be aware of the Hero's Journey.

Also, Aristotle believed that there were four principles that helped make the story enearing to readers. Allow the audience to pity the lead character, to feel fear for the character, allow them to see character go through Catharsis (purging of the soul), but make sure that we reserve an aesthetic distance from the character all the while.

Then, once you've learned some of the guidelines that have worked for the ancients, then by all means break them. Zach Braff specifically wanted to get away from the typical 3-act story and did so when he wrote the storyline for the movie Garden State.

Ms. KatG, please add in your two cents as necessary

 

[KatG]

Since Garden State has a pretty standard 3-act structure, I find that comment strange, I guess. It was a nice epiphany movie and had a great soundtrack.

Writers can get lots of useful ideas and aids from a variety of sources, and it's a matter of writers finding what works for them and their brains individually and for the things that they are pursuing in the writing the story, thematically, etc.

 

[Wojciehowicz]

Speaking of miasma, I do believe it was the Greeks in the first place that began studying the principles in storytelling. From what I understand from my Bachelor's program, there ARE certain story-telling formats that do aid the author in telling a good story. Though, I've have also been told that these are guides more than anything.

Actually, every culture in one way or another distills the essence of what is storytelling to that shared experience, largely through repetition of pattern. As a consequence of human pattern recognition if nothing else, humans abstract from unique specifics to coarser grained systems, then back towards specificity in a generalized non-unique manner. They are then free to use those as frameworks to purposely create unique and more specific identities which will be used for abstraction and mutation of previous generalized non-unique specifics.

For example, read Save the Cat by Blake Snyder. This book is technically about screenwriting, however the principles could still work for a book all the same I would suspect. Also, I would say be aware of Joseph Campbell's Hero with a Thousand Faces. It does not hurt to gain the perspective of amazing story tellers and philosophers. Be aware of the Hero's Journey.

Excellent example. Blake's book and approach were a good distillation of non-unique specifics suitable for creating a new creature on that skeleton. Some actually feel threatened by it, and go the other way, trying write a non-sequitur. On the other hand, some subjects --periodicity, apophenia, pareidolia, etc.-- might be better with a non-sequitur layout for an overall big picture.

Like spending the whole movie following a mute man, digging what seems to be a pointless trench over the course of his lifetime. At the end, the man's little girl all grown up walks to the top of a mountain overlooking the valley and sees a structure resulting from the digging that says I Love You. A lifetime all at once shout from a man who could not even whisper.

Feel free to use that idea.

 

[A. Lynn]

Since Garden State has a pretty standard 3-act structure, I find that comment strange, I guess. It was a nice epiphany movie and had a great soundtrack.

Writers can get lots of useful ideas and aids from a variety of sources, and it's a matter of writers finding what works for them and their brains individually and for the things that they are pursuing in the writing the story, thematically, etc.

Perhaps I should be a little more specific. During the commentary of Garden State, Zach Braff stated that he strongly wanted to break away from the typical three act format, and also made it a point to not follow the typical industry standard of placing catalyst on this page, catharisis on this page, etc. (In case you're not sure what I'm referring too: There is actually a specific page numebr that screenwriters are supposed to place certain events on in order to make it easier for editors to understand and approve a said script).

 

[KatG]

Well, he didn't manage it, if so. Garden State is a typical 3-act epiphany movie:

Spoiler

Act 1: Catalyst -- the Main Character Wakes up to his Life -- Braff's character comes home for his mother's funeral, the catalyst event. He is questioning things about his life, even though he is a mildly successful actor, such as being medicated into drowsy emotionlessness all the time, and wanting to change his life and dealing with the conflict with his therapist dad now that his mother is gone. He reconnects with old friends, starts looking at his past, encounters a young woman who also has been sleepwalking through her life in a different way.

Act 2: Quest Journey -- the Main Character tries to figure out what his life should be about -- Braff hangs out with his old friends and the new woman, tries new experiences, talks to a man who runs a quarry about living life, confronts his guilt over causing his mother to fall and become paralyzed when he was a child.

Act 3: Catharsis/Epiphany -- the Main Character chooses a new path -- Braff's character receives a gift of his mother's necklace and decides to let go of his guilt over her, he decides to stay off his meds, he confronts his dad over the blame his dad had about the mother and starts to forge a new relationship with his father, he realizes that he is in love with the woman but feels he must leave again and make changes in his life first, then changes his mind and decides he can start his new life with the woman.

It was pretty much beat by beat and it's only about 90-100 minutes long, so I don't really see how he could be that off on page markers. He did not have a big outside physical event that leads to the epiphany, but then not every epiphany movie has one of those -- they are often quiet. Movies with similar structures are Nothing in Common, the upcoming Will Farrell movie Everything Must Go, Youth in Revolt, etc.

My point was that written fiction authors would best be served if they got away from the idea that they are "breaking" something, rules, guidelines, etc., simply because they choose one story structure instead of another -- a choice that many other authors have already made before them. (Screenwriters are working in a very different medium, a collaboratory one with all sorts of restraints and requirements regarding to it being a visual, auditory medium, to the way that movies are sold, etc.) It is a marketing technique, to describe a work or product in that way, that has gotten mistakenly adopted as a not really provable mantra for fiction.

 

[nalysale]

Yes offcorse, novel should be near to 250-300 pages.But in real talking subject of novel and the quality metters.For esiear job you should use novel writing software for better resuls.

 

[SilentDan]

Write about characters who have lives and personalities and who want things and do stuff to get those things but get blocked by other things and have to deal with those obstacles or make a choice or compromise where they might not get what they want but end up with what they need and where some friends become enemies and some enemies become friends with a beginning middle and end...

*collapses from lack of air*

 

[Window Bar]

How much does it cost to self E-publish? And about how long would it take to shop the novel?

First of all, it costs nothing to ePublish. Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Smashwords (which has several affiliate distributors) all have ePublishing programs that are free -- but of course, you will do all of the work, including promotion. If the book sells, you will keep somewhere between 35% and 85% of the proceeds, depending on the vendor and the price of the book.

Therefore, the How long would it take to shop the novel? question can be answered in one word: Zero.

FYI: The most successful eBooks (at least in the self-publishing market) are duets or trilogies. Therefore, the extreme length of your project would be an advantage, not an impediment. You could simply choose a midway point that feels like the end of Book One... then finish off with Book Two and/or Three.

(This post is not, BTW, intended to suggest that you go the self publishing route. That is an entirely independent discussion, one which is often undertaken on this board.)

As a side note, many (if not most) writers find that their first novel is well shy of masterpiece material. It is a learning experience, and is often left unpublished.

Good Luck -- WB

 

[EMMAXIS]

Long? Short?

I've been down this particular road here too many times. Publishers publish a variety of length, including long tomes, as first novels, particularly in secondary world fantasy:

Among Thieves, Douglas Hulick: 432 pages
The Unremembered, Peter Orullian: 672 pages
The Winds of Khalakovo, Bradley P. Beaulieu: 464 pages
Thunderer, Felix Gilman: 544 pages
The Warded Man, Peter Brett: 480 pages
Empire of Black & Gold, Adrian Tchaikovsky: 612 pages
The Red Wolf Conspiracy, Robert Redick: 544 pages
The Lies of Locke Lamora, Scott Lynch: 736 pages
The Name of the Wind, Patrick Rothfuss: 672 pages

I am becoming less a fan of "world building" these days. Newer writers get too caught up on this idea and forget that first and foremost comes story. This accounts for much of a novel's word length. If the story can best be told in X number of words, that is the optimal number to write. Lest I get flamed to death, I won't mention popular authors who write too much (they know who they are) and instead mention favorite quick read authors:

H.P. Lovecraft
Edgar Rice Burroughs
Richard Matheson
Kurt Vonnegut
Kafka
J.K. Rowling
Philip Pullman

I think in my next book I will get rid of proper nouns. Who needs them anyway?

 

[EMMAXIS]

Stephanie Meyer wrote a book she loved, submitted it to agents, suffered rejections, and was lucky enough to sell it. Putting her down and putting down those who loved her books is not smart. You should instead be trying to do the same thing: write, finish, submit, and hope.

So you think she wrote crap. Write better than she did. Raise the bar.

Meyer did us all a favor by hooking millions of readers. Many of them are young. Some of them will continue to read. They will grow up, their tastes mature. And maybe by the time you get your stuff published - if you ever do - they will be ready for your wonderful, witty, startlingly original material.

As a writer myself, I hate to hate on other writers. There are certainly books I consider crap, but I try to keep an open mind. There are, after all, many kinds of readers out there. I remember Christopher Paolini being lambasted about Eragon being unoriginal, but my nephews (12 and 14) who are new to fantasy fiction enjoyed it immensely.

Nick Alimonos