Agent/Editor Panel Day Two

Welcome back to our editors and agents panel on PASTimes. If you missed yesterday, you’ll want to go back and review the bios of our guests.

Here’s the key:
JS: Jan Stob, fiction acquisitions editor at Tyndale House Publishers.
CM: Chip MacGregor, literary agent, MacGregor Literary.
TB: Terry Burns, literary agent, Hartline Literary.
JG: Judy Geary, editor, High Country Publishers.

Q: Since trends do seem to come and go, would you advise a writer of historical fiction to write in other genres as well?

JG: Write what you know -- and what you love. Some authors have used different pen names to write in different genres, but of course we know that because it's an open secret.

TB: I hate to see anybody trying to force themselves to write in any genre. We have to write the stories that are on our hearts to tell in order to deliver the kind of projects that will touch people. Now, anybody who has stories to tell that span genre lines, they'd be shortchanging the reading public to not tell them. Anybody can write down words, having the story to tell and the ability to tell it well is the name of the game.

JS: I would advise them to write their passion regardless of the genre. But I would also encourage them to consider whether or not they are writing a unique story, a story that will hook your reader.

CM: I don’t think that’s the right question to be asking. A better question would be, “What’s the right place for me to write?” When you look at writers who are making a living at their writing, you find they come in two basic types:
TYPE 1 is the writer who writes all over the map. There are plenty of examples of this in CBA – writers who do kids books, teen books, women's fiction, romance, thrillers, Bible studies, and the occasional novella. This author has good years and bad, makes decent money, is certainly out there a lot.
TYPE 2 is the writer who figures out what she wants to write, then writes it. She focuses on a genre, figures out her voice, and writes to that audience. An example of this is Terry Blackstock (there are plenty of others). She's writing suspense novels, everybody recognizes her voice, and she's focused on that one audience.

I'll tell you right now that TYPE 1 writers rarely hit it big. You know that feeling of being overwhelmed because you're doing six books in four different genres? Well, that's the sort of life a TYPE 1 author is going to lead forever. Because she can't build an audience. Readers have trouble following her. Bookstore owners have a hard time getting behind her because they don't know what her next book is going to be.

TYPE 2 authors have a much greater chance of building an audience, hitting the big time, partnering with retailers, establishing a brand, not working so hard or writing so many books. BUT it's more risky being a TYPE 2. Why? Because WHAT IF YOUR VOICE DOESN'T CATCH ON? Take a look at publisher mid-lists -- they are filled with good authors (occasionally great authors) who are writing and publishing but struggling along. I can think of a couple fantastic writers -- literate, fun, insightful, solid craftwork….but they’ve never really had a hit. There's no guarantee that becoming a TYPE 2 author will establish you as a bestselling author. On the other hand, a good TYPE 2 author continues to get published, because she's GOOD.

So...ask yourself what you want to be. One problem I see is that many authors writing numerous historicals aren’t taking the long view – they started out with the goal of “locating a contract,” and they continue with that as a goal. I would simply suggest a better goal would be “establish a successful long-term career.”

Q: In your opinion, should an author who writes fiction stick only to fiction? Since so much historical research has to be conducted, how do you feel about authors using their novel research to pen nonfiction?

TB: A writer should do what they can do well. Some fiction writers can't cross that line well and vice versa. If they can, and if it's on them to do it, they should.

CM: It depends on their calling. I don’t have any problem representing authors who write both fiction and nonfiction.

JG: Write anything you can at every opportunity. Nonfiction publications lend extra credibility to the fiction writer, so I believe they're valuable. For example, Anita Diamont's nonfiction works lent credibility to her portrayal of Dina in The Red Tent. Pat Mestern and Albert Bell write nonfiction as well as more than one genre of fiction. I've written a number of articles about aspects of Roman culture or my travels, published on the Internet. Most recently, I've completed an article for a young adult biography collection of colonial America.

JS: Frankly, I don’t care if an author wants to write both fiction and non-fiction. I think the larger question is whether or not the author has a passion for both. An author who writes both also has to realize that they may have two different audiences awaiting their releases. Plus, their non-fiction and fiction wouldn’t be shelved together which means they probably wouldn’t have a large shelf presence in either area unless they are extremely prolific.

Q: What particular skills do you look for in a writer of historical fiction?

JS: As in any genre, I look for good writing and a strong story with a good hook. I also like to know that the writer of historical fiction is willing to do their research.

CM: A strong voice. Passion for their story. A strong sense of history and adequate research so that it feels genuine. A good vocabulary, particularly of the setting and time. A clear sense of mood. Good rhythm to their words, clear pacing. Great characters in interesting situations. Strong dialogue. Clear scenes. Action that moves me from one page to the next.

JG: The areas of common ground among historical fiction, other genres, and creative nonfiction are greater than the differences. A writer must be able to hook the reader with engaging characters, engrossing plots and believable dialogue. In addition, the writer who is building a world with which the reader is unfamiliar must be able to include relevant details and description without unduly slowing down the plot. A challenge that seems unique to the writer of historical fiction is the competitive nature of many readers of historical fiction. It's a game to catch the writer in real or seeming anachronisms. So, one particular skill is to reconcile the different perspectives on an historical event or period in a plausible way.

TB: Someone who realizes that it's important for historical fiction to be true to the facts and have a rich setting, but who further realizes that those things cannot be allowed to get in the way of telling the story. When the facts and setting overpower the story it's no longer a work of fiction but it becomes a history text.

Cindy: Wow. Good points here from the panel: you must have a strong hook and good research skills, you must have a passion for the story you’re writing, you must understand the vocabulary appropriate for the time and setting, you must have all the skills required for novelists of any genre, you must reconcile different viewpoints on historical matters (at least making your version plausible), and you must respect the facts and still not let history bog down the story. It’s a tall order, but when those things come together, you end up with a rich, rewarding story. That’s why we love historical fiction!

More of the Q&A tomorrow…