On Five Writers Explain How They Got, Kept and Fired Agents
dear "anonymous" (from someone who worked at a literary agency) -
while i understand there are bad agents, and do not want to diminish your experience because i don't know which agent you're talking about, there are several complaints you make that seem to demonstrate confusion about appropriate expectations of an agent. an agent's job is to make the deal, period. this can be more extensive or less extensive, depending. i'll elaborate.
as matthew galloway and alexander chee eloquently pointed out, agents now do a lot of heavy-lifting re. editing. This is an exciting and important part of the job for a good agent. However, an important distinction needs to be made about WHY the agent does editing at all. (1) Of course - the agent wants (should want) the book to be every bit the success you do. The agent's role is to help you discover or unearth what is genius (or sellable) about your book (sellable to the publisher, to the public, to the award committees, your legacy/ posterity - depending on your genre and personal objectives). However, once you have an editor, the agent should not be an editor - it is stepping on the real editor's toes. As an agent I loved and used to work with would explain to her clients "I was your editor up until this point, now so-and-so will be your editor, and I value this editor's role and have intentionally put you into good hands going forward". When the book sells - the editing job shifts, as it should. (2) An agent wants to sell your book, and often this requires extensive and critical editing. THIS is the reason (#2, not #1) that editing has shifted from publishers to agents. Editing happens upfront because the agent couldn't sell the book without editing it, for a variety of reasons (publishers not creatively envisioning opportunities for books that need work, editors being overwhelmed with marketing, email, production and distribution roles, the changes to publishing generally and the increasing difficulty of making money doing it, etc.), and this is why the agent takes the trouble to edit.
So - when you approached an agent AFTER you'd already found a publisher, that is why the agent didn't lift a finger to edit your book (and shouldn't have). Your agent should handle and negotiate the deal terms in this case. As you say, this is why you went to the agent, because you were daunted with foreign sales etc. And, when the agent negotiated your contract for you, s/he did his or her job. Period. It IS the editor's job to edit, and the agent's job to sell the book. If you'd approached the SAME agent at a different point in the process, you'd like have had a different experience. But your expectations don't make sense to me in the context of when you began working with your agent. Editing was necessary by the agent - the sale was already made.
Also, I'm curious to know what you thought was outrageous that the publisher was asking for that your agent wasn't helping with. Yes, an agent is an author's advocate, and should be irrevocably and fundamentally and passionately dedicated to this vocation. But, did you ask your agent nicely? (I'm serious - it's a professional relationship, as Alexander Chee admonished.) Did you ask for reasonable things? You said you thought your agent was "working for" the publisher, and didn't respond to your requests because s/he had to manage the relationship out of consideration of 12 other books. In contrast to your reasoning, because your agent had 12 other books with this publisher, this means your agent would have had A LOT of negotiating power to persuade the publisher on your behalf. The publisher would care just as much about his or her relationship with your valuable agent, who this publisher relies on for bringing them 12 valuable projects.
This leads me to believe that in fact your agent did not think your requests were reasonable. Is it possible you were not familiar with the publishing process, and things the publisher were asking for were quite standard, and you were balking at things that are customary in the business? Or that were so minor that it was really not a good idea for the agent to make a fuss about it? This would have been an example of that agent not only acting in self-interest, but also acting in YOUR interest, and doing the agent's job of also guarding YOUR relationship with the publisher. Yes, agents and publishers manage their relationships with each other, but agents, especially, also manage an author's relationship with the publisher - which may have been the agenting work your agent was doing that you completely missed.
As someone who also has writerly inclinations, I understand and sympathize with authors who find it a murky process and even an unsavory one. That is why agents are there - you're good at writing (and you like it), the same may not be true for you re. handling business relationships or deals. Let the agent do this for you - and listen to them. And, dare I say, thank them, profusely.
- E
3
On Five Writers Explain How They Got, Kept and Fired Agents
omg, ps, note to self- one day learn to use words such as "coloratura" to advise delicately; surely, bill = part literary diety; Matt G., lovely and worth-reading retelling. thank you. any chance you'd publish the "high concept" agent list?