Murder She Writes

I get asked a lot about the pros and cons of joining International Thriller Writers and Romance Writers of America. Here’s my two cents about the benefits of each organization, so you can decide which is right for you.

ITW
* Founded by published authors for published authors. They attempted to be another fan organization, but it didn’t work (IMO.) They are now expanding more into the unpublished author realm, and I think that will be far more successful. They promote the thriller genre, and specifically thriller AUTHORS.
* Approximately 1,000 members. 80+% are published authors (print published only.) Only published members can vote. The organization is controlled heavily by the board (which for this group works very well) and the by-laws both support no major upheavals/take-overs while also requiring new blood regularly via term limits. Associate members (non-voting) can be anyone from unpublished, agents, editors, publicists, reviews, fans, etc.
* Incredible debut author program for thriller writers (in any genre–mystery thriller, romantic thriller, etc.) If you are a debut author that can even remotely be classified as a “thriller” you need to join.
* Gender parity–probably 60/40 men/women . . . maybe with an edge of 65% men. This is to be expected because men write more thrillers.
* Published author focus–published authors do not pay dues, they have opportunities to be in anthologies that financially support the organization, and there are other (paying) opportunities to buy ads in their growing online newsletter The Big Thrill and join in other promotional venues.
* Conferences have 400-500 attendees.
* Not a big online chat group.
* No local chapters. The once a year conference is it.
* Volunteering matters–if you volunteer for something, opportunities generally follow (it might not be this year, but they have a long memory.)

RWA
* Founded by romance writers (published and unpublished) to promote/support romance and help romance writers learn the business.
* Over 9,000 members, of which about 20% are published. At least 95% female, if not more. Women generally write romance.
* The focus is really on unpublished authors. There is no better place to learn the business of publishing than RWA.
* RWA conferences have 2000+ attendees.
* Strong local and online chapters that provide workshops, classes, friendship, and the human connection that as women, I think we need because writing is so solitary.
* Some promotional opportunities through the RWR, a print magazine.

One key difference, which is partly because of the size of the organizations, is that at Thrillerfest, there are events where everyone mingles. The Random House Reception this year everyone was there–you had authors and agents and editors all mingling in a warm and friendly atmosphere. There wasn’t a sense of competition as there often is at RWA. It was all business, all professional. Very similar to the PASIC industry receptions we have, but on a much larger scale.

For me, I am a member of both. I joined RWA in February of 2003 after I went to my first local chapter meeting. I had an agent (not my current agent, not an agent who was able to sell me, but that’s another story.) I had two completed novels and hardly knew anything about the business. I’ve always believed that I would have been published with or without RWA; with RWA, however, I learned far more about the business of writing than I could have learned on my own, and I think I sold faster because of the information I had through the organization. With everything, you have to take advice with a grain of salt and consider the person offering the wisdom. Some things work for some people and not for others. But with RWA you get a breadth of experience and advice, can pick and choose what works for you, and make informed decisions. My caveat is that you can’t take anything you hear as gospel, whether it’s from me or Rocki or Karin or even Nora Roberts. What works for us might not work for you, BUT you can take the variety of experiences to help you carve your own path that works for you. I’ve been to every conference since Reno 2005.

I joined ITW shortly after it was formed in 2006. I went to the first ITW conference quite nervous–these were some major authors. Who was I? I was a newly published nobody in mass market, and these were mega authors. I fell in with the debut authors because I felt more comfortable with them–they were like me. Sure, they didn’t have a book out yet, but my trilogy was essentially a debut book and I still didn’t know a lot about the business or what to expect. This is where I met Toni, Robert Gregory Browne, Brett Battles, Alexandra Sokoloff, JT Ellison, and more. They were all debut authors in 2007, and I ended up sort of by chance mentoring my pal Gregg Olsen and landing in an anthology edited by Lee Child. I missed 2007 conference because it conflicted with RWA and my base is RWA, but honestly? I really missed going. I’ve been to the last two, and am definitely planning on 2009.

If RWA and ITW conflicts again, I can’t honestly tell you where I would end up. It depends on a variety of things, but I don’t want to lie: I have more fun at ITW. I’m not as stressed, I don’t have to work as hard, people tend to be less competitive and it’s not as fast-paced and busy. If I accidently ignore someone because my mind is in a million places, they don’t take offense. If I see an acquaintance talking to a mega author, they make room for me when I lurk around the side wanting to meet the individual. Authors go out of their way to introduce unpublished or new authors to editors, agents, the press, and other authors. ITW isn’t perfect, there are cliques like with every organization, but the people truly go out of their way to include.

I don’t mean to diss RWA, and I’m not. There organization is huge–ten times larger than ITW. They have a different purpose and mission. And the opportunities to hear a diverse and fascinating group of authors is incredible. RWA has networking opportunities that you can’ believe, and you make friends that last a lifetime. Or should. As a woman, you have people who understand what it’s like to write with a husband who thinks you’re ignore him, or juggle the kids’ schedule with your, and RWA members are much more willing to share heartbreak and the downside of the business. We share success and failure, and when you have a group of friends in RWA, there is NO ONE more supportive of you and your career. As a woman, I need that emotional connection with people who understand what I’m going through without the need to explain it. Because writing is so solitary, RWA provides the online and in person venue (though local meetings–which usually rock) to connect with like-minded humans. ITW doesn’t have that sort of emotional connection and they don’t have local chapters–and they shouldn’t, because that’s not the purpose.

There is no reason why you can’t join both if your write romantic suspense. In fact, you should. But you should know the benefit of each and accept that they are different organizations with different purposes and try to love each one for what they are. Check out the offerings at each conference. Thrillerfest is more expensive than RWA, but on the flip side you can only pay for the days you want to go. So if you just want to go to Craftfest (geared toward unpublished authors) you can. PASIC, the published author chapter of RWA, is similar experience for me as Thrillerfest on a much smaller scale. We have a bi-annual conference with industry professionals and gear everything toward the professional romance writer.

Next year, I am thrilled that there is a week break between the two conferences. I don’t think I can do a back-to-back conference again.

If you’ve been to both, what’s your experience?

1  1

I love my agent and think she’s the greatest thing since the discovery that grapes can ferment into wine, but she doesn’t have a blog and I love agent blogs. I regularly visit Kristin Nelson at Pub Rants and Nathan Bransford and on occasion BookEnds and a few others.

A few weeks ago, Curtis Brown agent Nathan Bransford solicited queries from both published and unpublished authors. On a whim (or a completely idiotic moment) I sent him the query I’d sent my agent Kim Whalen in December of 2003, for THE COPYCAT KILLER.

For those who knew me then (Karin) know that THE COPYCAT KILLER was my title for the book that eventually became THE PREY. It was my fifth completed manuscript and I felt that the book had “it” — whatever “it” is. I couldn’t define it, I just sensed that this was the book I would sell.

In hindsight, I think I figured out why it worked for my agent and the editor who bought it, but that’s another blog for another time . . . but at the time I sent the query, I just had the feeling. Can’t explain why.

So you don’t have to click through to read my letter, here it is:

Dear Agent for a Day:

I have been seriously writing for nearly two years and am a finalist in fourteen RWA contests with twelve different books, including second place in the Daphne du Maurier Single Title category. THE COPYCAT KILLER ranked second in the Golden Opportunity contest. I’m a member of the Sacramento Valley, Kiss of Death and FF&P Chapters of RWA, and earned my PRO pin.

Why do some children grow up evil? That is the timeless question addressed in THE COPYCAT KILLER.

Ex-FBI agent turned fiction crime writer Rowan Smith wakes up one morning to discover someone is using her books as blueprints for murder.

Her former FBI boss fears one of her past arrests is out to terrorize her and insists she hire a bodyguard, or he’ll assign two FBI agents to watch her. Rowan, who relishes her privacy and solitary life, doesn’t want a bodyguard, but reluctantly hires ex-cop Michael Flynn.

The killer systematically goes through each book and chooses a victim, sending mementoes of the crime to Rowan. Michael’s brother, freelance DEA agent John Flynn, accuses Rowan of hiding something and calls in favors to learn enough to confront her. She confesses that her father and brother killed her family. Her father is in a mental institution and her brother was killed trying to escape. They fall into bed needing a physical connection. The murderer kills Michael that night.

John and Rowan deal with their guilt over Michael’s murder as they work with the FBI to find the murderer. They discover that Rowan’s boss lied to her about her brother’s death–he’s in a Texas penitentiary. But when they go there to confront him, they discover that someone took his place.

THE COPYCAT KILLER is a 100,000 word suspense novel with romantic elements, in the vein of Iris Johansen, Lisa Gardner and Tami Hoag.

In addition to THE COPYCAT KILLER, I have two additional single-title romantic suspense novels, a futuristic suspense currently under consideration at Dorchester, and a women’s fiction novel with a ghost as a main character.

A full is available upon request. Thank you for taking the time to consider my story.

Sincerely,
Author

Nathan asked for the letters for his “Agent for a Day” contest where writers could pretend they were agents and request or reject manuscripts based on a one-page query letter. The “Agents” could only request five manuscripts, and they were told that there were three queries that led to published books among the fifty posted.

The whole thing stemmed from that agent twitter thing that I didn’t follow and still don’t get, except that apparently a bunch of authors were ticked off that some agents were cruel in their rejections.

Welcome to the real world, Neo.

All I have to say to anyone who feels such is to read some of the one-and-two-star reviews at Amazon. Feel free to read what people say about my books. Develop a thick skin and get over it, or you’ll never survive this business with your sanity intact.

So with nearly 300 comments, my query had a 15% request rate. Compare that to the 59% request rate I had when I originally sent it.

Some of the comments about why they were passing:

1) I listed my bio first.

I may be wrong, but I think this is a dumb reason for rejecting a query. Maybe it’s not standard form, but to reject an idea because of format of a letter seems a bit short-sighted.

After the contest was over, Nathan said:

But more importantly, I think this contest goes to show how people may have overemphasized the query itself when they were playing agents. The queries that generated the highest response rate were the most technically precise. They were tidy, they were well-organized, they followed the rules. They were good queries (and some of them may go on to have success stories of their own). But this wasn’t a contest to spot the best queries.

When an agent is reading a query we’re trying to look past the query to get a sense of the underlying book. We’re evaluating the concept and the writing, not ticking off a box of requirements. . . .

. . . A good concept and strong writing are more important than good query form. . . .

Now, a strong query helps your odds and your request rate . . . But remember: the most important thing is not writing a good query, but rather writing a good book. A strong concept is so important.

2) Work sounds too familiar.

I didn’t take offense to these comments because this book was written in 2003, sold in 2004 and published in January 06.

However, how some of the “agents” felt my book was too similar to a 90s movie COPYCAT. I never saw the movie, so I looked it up–though I was comfortable in my ignorance to say that my book was nothing like it. I was right. The movie’s premise was about a serial killer recreating famous murders of the past. (Great idea! I want to see the movie now.) My book was recreating the fictional murders of a crime writer. Since CASTLE just came out this year, I’m pretty safe in saying I had my idea first. But in all honesty, you can give 100 authors the same premise and you’ll still have 100 distinctly different stories. Creativity is truly individual, and there are no new ideas.

On concepts, Nathan said:

One of the reasons that the agents for a day missed some of the actually published works is that the queries did not demonstrate wholly original concepts. They possibly sounded like they had been done before.

But here’s the thing about book concepts: originality is (somewhat) overrated.

[snip]

About once a generation a Mary Shelley or H.G. Wells or Tolkien or S.E. Hinton comes along to invent a new genre basically from scratch. Odds are you’re not that person (although if you are, I want to meet you).

All the rest of the mortals on the planet, even our best writers, are working within fairly established genres and tropes.

There were detective novels before George Pelecanos, there were dragon and boy stories before Christopher Paolini, there were wizard school books before J.K. Rowling, there were mistaken guilt stories before Ian Mcwan’s ATONEMENT. What sets these writers apart is a unique take on an established trope. And ultimately that comes down to execution.

What is a unique take on an established trope? It varies from book to book. . . .

. . . it’s very nearly impossible to be wholly original. Even when new genres are invented they tend to use classic story arcs that have been around for millennia — the coming of age story, the great man with a fatal flaw, the hubris tragedy, the celebrity memoir. When new genres are invented they just place these stories in a new world.

Unless it is truly out there, pretty much everything is a fresh take on an existing trope. It really does need to feel fresh, but that’s not the same as being completely original. The originality is all about how it’s done, not what it’s about.

3) Comparing myself to other authors.

In the letter, I stated that my book may appeal to readers who enjoy Lisa Gardner, Iris Johansen and Tami Hoag. Why? Because I wanted my prospective agent to immediately see the market I was aiming for. In truth, my books have a bit more romance in them than those three write today, but at the time (early 2000s) they were all writing edgy romantic suspense/thrillers, which is what I was writing. I wasn’t saying I wrote like them, or was better than them, or was the “next” one of them. I simply said that their readers may like my tone, and I still believe this is a great way to show an agent your intended market.

4) “The story sounds as though it might be interesting, but the query itself isn’t.” . . . “I can see where this would be an intriguing story and an edge of your seat suspense, but this blurb doesn’t get me there.”

I think one of the main points of Nathan’s exercise is that agents are trained, through experience and instinct, to pull the story from the query. If they think they can sell the story, if it’s something they have passion or interest in, they’ll request pages. A sharp query letter may get an author read, but in the end, it’s ALWAYS about the writing. Hmm, I wonder if he would have requested mine? Probably not, because I don’t think he represents romantic suspense, even darker RS like I write. One of the queries I would have requested wasn’t the best query in the pile, but it had something special about it that had me intrigued enough that I wanted to see if the author was a good storyteller.

Many authors have been rejected on their first novel. Nicholas Sparks has a great article here on his website about how he found his agent for THE NOTEBOOK. He queried 25 agents and 24 rejected him, even after reading his book.

But it only takes one.

So what did this exercise teach me?

1) I like rejection. I must have been a masochist in a previous life.

2) I appreciate more the experience and wisdom of good agents who can pull the idea from the query, because it’s not as easy as it looks. (I picked only one of the other two published books; only two of nearly 300 “agents” picked all three published books.)

3) I was lucky that my agent got past my imperfect query and thought my concept had merit, because good queries with strong concepts are still better.

4) It’s still all about the writing.

So do you think you could be an agent? Do you think you can look past technical imperfection and find the nugget of a good story? Do you think that agents are cruel in their rejections? Should they give more? What if they don’t know why they don’t want to see it, it just doesn’t speak to them?

Definitely some things to think about.

I also have some good news. My fabulous agent sold the first two books of my Lucy Kincaid series to Ballantine. Woo hoo! I am so excited about writing Lucy’s books. She is such a compelling character for me, and this will be a little bit different (but the same . . . ha!) They’ll be romantic thrillers, but there’ll be a multi-book relationship and two love interests. I’m really excited . . . the first comes out in October of 2010. But that’s after the first two books in my Seven Deadly Sins series (March 2010 and June 2010.)

Comment, share, tell us about your queries, rejections, agents, favorite blogs, or anything else that comes to mind!

Okay, I’ll admit, I’m a news addict. When I worked in the legislature, one of the things I did every morning was read the headlines. My excuse: it was part of my job to keep informed on the important news and events of the day. I used facts in my writing about crime, education, taxes . . . and I liked to use anecdotal stories to illustrate or prove my facts.

When I sold, I switched my news obsession to the publishing industry. It may surprise you to know that I now have to rely on my husband for important news of the day, because I don’t watch television (unless it’s on DVD or my AppleTV) and I rarely read the news, unless it’s crime related.

Now I subscribe to Publishers Marketplace and Publishers Weekly and the new Lunch Automat on PM is going to be the death of me. Every morning and every night I have to skim the headlines. I’ll admit, I’m pretty good at pulling at the stories I’m interested in, and I can get through the headlines in five minutes–it’s when I click through, then click through, then click through one more time that the process becomes a time suck.

So through all this, I’ve found all the agent blogs. I enjoy them. I don’t know why. I have an agent I love. But I think knowing what’s going on outside of my own little bubble is important. Not just for me and my career, but because I am inundated with questions from aspiring writers. I’m not saying this as a bad thing–I like helping people if I can–but if I didn’t know anything but my finite world, I wouldn’t be much help at all.

This past week there has been a plethora of blogs about the subjective nature of publishing. This is something we all know. Reading itself is subjective. If we all loved and hated the same books, life would be boring. There is a breadth of books out there to suit the tastes of all readers–and thus, there are books out there–many that are hugely successful–that some of don’t care for.

Nathan Bransford with Curtis Brown has a blog I enjoy, and this week he played “Be Agent For A Day” and posted 50 queries he had his blog readers–most of whom, if not all, are aspiring authors. What amazed me was some of the cruelty that came from writers on the queries that were volunteered to Nathan for his project. Comments like, “Burn the manuscript.” Off a query letter someone can tell whether the manuscript is any good? Some of us just don’t write good query letters.

Unpublished author contests, which are prevalent in RWA but not as widely used in other genre writers groups, can offer valuable feedback–or kill your muse. IF you let it. The truth is, I’ve never heard an agent or editor be as cruel to an individual writer as other writers. Agents reject dozens of queries and manuscripts every single day–it’s not personal. It’s truly subjective.

Over at the Thrillerfest Blog, Randall Klein with Bantam reflected on passing up bestsellers. Editors, and agents, have a fear that they might not see the next great thing, but in the end, they have to buy what they are passionate about and what they think they can sell. It has to be both–because honestly, it’s much harder to sell something you can’t be passionate about, and it’s hard to be passionate about something you think has no marketability. Yet it’s not personal–and as we all know, sometimes you just have a bad day and think everything sucks.

Amazon reviews can be harsh. True, you’re now a published author! You have amazon reviews! RT reviews! Maybe a PW review! And you may be trashed by readers who hate your book. Some of the readers are not your readers–they may not love your voice or your twist on their favorite genre. Some of the readers are your readers, but think you wrote a dud. Not everyone will agree on which book is your dud.

Rejection hurts, whether you’re published or not. It’s what you do with the rejection that separates the weak from the strong. Here’s my advice for handling rejection, whether it’s from an agent, editor, or reviewer:

QUERIES

You’ve queried an agent with a one-page letter. They reject it. “It’s not right for me.” “I didn’t connect with the story.” “My list is full.” This is not a personal rejection. Hell, they’re not even rejecting your book–they’re rejecting your query letter. Suck it up and send another. If you think your query letter needs work, then fix it. But in the end, it is always the BOOK ITSELF that will sell an agent on you.

PARTIALS

An agent read a partial. “It’s not for us.” Suck it up and query more agents and start your next book. Most authors don’t sell their first book. If they do, more power to them. But it’s common to write two, five, ten books before you sell one.

FULLS

An agent loved your query enough to read the full manuscript. “I didn’t connect with the characters.” “I didn’t love it enough.” “The story was superficial.” Whatever they say, know that not everyone will agree with them. On my debut novel, I queried twelve agents and five requested fulls, and two others requested partials. Five rejected on the query letter. One full rejected, one partial rejected, and the other partial requested the full, but my very wise and savvy agent had already signed me. They others just too too long Their loss, right? My debut novel hit #33 on the NYT list. But would I would an agent who didn’t love it? Hell no. I want an agent who LOVES my book. So it’s worth waiting for that agent, either by sending out more queries, or writing another book.

CONTESTS

Learn to discern advice. Read it, if it makes sense and you agree, incorporate it. If you disagree, ignore it. Most of these judges are unpublished authors. Do they know what’s best? No. Do you? Probably not. But you know what’s best for YOUR book. Never change anything because someone (other than an editor!) tells you that you “have” to.

And if they get personal? Screw ‘em. Editors don’t reject you personally, they reject your manuscript. Contest judges need to be professional, and if they’re not, they can pound salt.

Whatever you do, do NOT cry or get discouraged because an idiot contest judge told you that you write like an amateur or you’ll never be published or you need to take English Composition 101. If you do, get out of the game now, because you’ll never survive Amazon reviews when you do get published.

REVIEWS

There are three camps of authors: Those who read all their reviews (me); those who read only the good reviews their agent/friends send them; those who never read reviews.

If you have a thin skin, don’t read your reviews.

If you do read your reviews, remember that it’s just the opinion of ONE person. A stranger. If they love your book, they have wonderful taste . . . if they hate it and trash it, they’re having a bad day. Move on. You’re a published author. A bad review is not going to kill you.

IT’S SUBJECTIVE

When an agent says, “It’s subjective,” it is. Good books get rejected every day. It’s part of the business.

So be a big girl (or boy) and don’t take rejection, however it comes, personally. Move on, improve your craft, and keep submitting.