I mentioned recently that I entered an online pitching competition with an agency in NYC. It wasn’t successful but the agent’s response was interesting and has given me something to think about:

Every now and again I read a book to see what all the fuss is about. That’s how I ended up reading Stephenie Meyer’s ‘Twilight’ saga and, eventually, Dan Brown’s ‘Da Vinci Code’. Topping the bestseller lists worldwide and in particular in Europe right now is (Swedish) Larsson’s Millenium trilogy of which ‘The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo’ is the debut. Of all the books I have mentioned in this post I probably enjoyed it the most. The quality of the writing was the best I thought and I really liked Lisbeth Salander, the hacker PI lead protagonist of the series. I couldn’t stand Bella in ‘Twilight’ – I found her limp-wristed and rather pathetic – although in the films I felt she was portrayed as a much stronger character.

There is a lot in the media at the moment about the fact that Larsson’s books have all been posthumously published (and the ‘romance’ of success after death – see Eva Cassidy, Van Gogh etc) and that there is some debate over whether Larsson actually wrote them – some of those that knew him as a journalist think his writing was not of this quality. Blomkvist, the other protagonist, a journalist, natch, was also quite an appealing character, although I was slightly put off by the way women constantly throw themselves at him for sex, which he accepts, generously.

The story itself… well I am not really a fan of crime (since my early forays into Agatha Christie), but it was well set up, whipped along and I enjoyed the contemporary, technological elements which I understand critics are citing as one of the reasons for its popularity. It had a sort of double denouement too, both of which surprised me, but I wasn’t sure if that wasn’t because I hadn’t cared enough to really wonder. I’ve said before that I read to experience circumstances, feelings and emotions that I wouldn’t expect to experience as part of my ‘real’ life, but in the same way that I am not keen on reading about child abuse and such like in Misery Memoirs, I’m not all that interested in  psychopathic, sadistic, misogynistic, serial killers with torture chambers in their basement either. They’re just not my thing.

I have just received the third rejection for ‘Thirty Seconds Before Midnight’ (that leaves three remaining out there, none with acknowledged receipt). It reads:

“Thank you for writing to us regarding your work. We are afraid that, despite its qualities, we do not feel sufficiently enthusiastic to offer to represent your work.

We apologise for the impersonal nature of this letter and regret that we cannot enter into any correspondence about your submission.

We wish you better luck in finding representation elsewhere.”

It’s tempting to try and elicit clues from these responses as to what actually happened to the submission when it arrived. The first rejection I had was returned with a synopsis which was very tatty around the edges as if it had been carried around in a notebook. This one looks unmarked/uncrumpled apart from the covering letter (not sure why this was returned). That said, it is twenty-two days since it was posted, and the postcard acknowledgement of receipt arrived soon after. So, who knows. It doesn’t really matter since it has been rejected and that’s the end of that query.

The second rejection arrived last Friday and later that evening I was out with old friends and family who were very sympathetic and yet I found myself surprisingly unbothered by it. I was wondering why this was and realised I have a kind of personal philosophy of rejection, very much formed by my experiences in my IT selling career.

When I announced I was going to be putting all of my efforts into becoming a professional writer and leaving the IT sales arena for a while/forever if I can achieve my goals, there were some surprised faces. Many people were unable to make a connection between the two professions. My response was that to be a good sales person you need excellent verbal and written communication skills, and most importantly the ability to listen and comprehend what you are told. Additionally, you need to have the imagination to create a solution and to empathise with the client’s situation – ’standing in their shoes’. A writer and reader has all of these things. I’ve always said that the reason I enjoy reading so much is because it enables me to live a thousand other lives I can’t in the only, short one I have (as far as we know!) – to experience things I wouldn’t have the opportunity to do (and might not actually want to!) in real life, in my mind.

Another great thing about the job that I did was the huge variety of people I met and businesses I worked with over the years. It’s given me tonnes of material and life experience and was great fun on a day to day basis. I’ve worked with hundreds of customers over the years – retailers, life sciences and pharmaceutical companies, cake makers, financial services organisations, lift manufacturers, utilities and telecommunications providers, media and entertainment, travel, transportation, distribution – the list is endless!

And another thing you have to have, or grow, when you are selling is a thick skin. New jobs nearly always start from a blank page. A salesperson has to build their own empire. And when you are empire building the empire doesn’t come to you. In one of my jobs I was working from home for a US NASDAQ quoted company who had asked me to start selling their strategic contracts management product into the UK and Europe. We already had an established customer base for the tactical credit control product in the UK but these weren’t the right targets for the new solution.

I took a FTSE 250 list from the Internet and looked up the companies’ phone numbers. I would ring switch and ask to speak with the contracts manager or procurement manager. I would start calling at 8am in my pajamas, stop for a shower about 11am, lunch at 1pm and finish about 6pm. During that time I would make about 90 dials of which between 10-20 would connect, I would have perhaps 4 or 5 meaningful conversations with another human being and convert perhaps 2 of these into appointments (the goal of cold calling). What I often found was that those 2 appointments were booked by 10am. 2 appointments per day from cold calling is a very good strike rate, so it was tempting to say, “Well that’s it, I’ve done all I can today. May as well take the rest of the day off.” The thing is though, even though I knew I would call for the rest of the day and not make any more progress, I felt like there was a quota of ‘no’s I had to get through before I would get back around to the ‘yes’s. So I carried on. And the next morning, I’d get another couple of appointments but I would be convinced that if I’d left off the previous morning without getting through all the afternoon’s rejections, then they wouldn’t have happened.

I feel like this about this getting published. There will be a lot of ‘no’s. And I have to get through them to get to my ‘Yes’(s). There is a slew of material out there about authors’ struggles to be published, lists of famous and successful authors’ who initially received great numbers of rejections (last week I read that John Grisham was rejected 28 times) and I may well do another post on my next rejection that summarises all of these.

The statistician in me would love to have the data on how many writers suffer how many rejections before gaining representation. My suspicion is that more writers have more rejections and very few have very few. I’ve drawn a little imaginary chart below to show you what I mean:

Rates of Writer Success in Landing an Agent

What this says is that another couple of qualities prevalent in successful sales staff would be useful here: persistence and tenacity. Both of which I have in spades.

I quite like the fat ‘Never’ part of the pie. It made me think about 2 things: firstly there are some authors who gain representation without going through the process of application to agents etc. They are few and far between but tend to be networked – see Zadie Smith who fresh out of Oxbridge had her unfinished novel, ‘White Teeth’ picked up by a friend in publishing. And I’ll be reviewing a book on this website soon where the author, when I asked him how he landed his agent, said:

“I got my agent through a friend – how does one paddy get anywhere…Another paddy helps them – this was BB, whose first novel was published around the same time as my memoir. She was introduced to IM at a party – how she came to be at the party I’m not sure. She’d worked in Fleet Street – was PJ’s researcher on the Red Top, then worked for MP (I think) and MS (definitely). So maybe that was how she came to be at the party… IM worked for Reuters – now he works for writers…”

Networking – also an important asset for a sales person. I am well networked… in IT. More work to do in the writing/publishing world. And the second thing is that in that ‘Never’ slice of the pie are those that give up. Not an option.

Getting published is a process, and getting an agent is only a start – that’s not a guarantee of making it into print. There are many, many books written on the subject, and many ways to do it. The first thing to do is to write the book (check) and the second I believe, as has always been my working philosophy, is to make every day count. Keep activity levels high. Know the market and the players in it. Keep knocking on doors until one opens.

This is one of the loveliest ideas I’ve heard about for ages. In 1970 no-one won the Man Booker prize because in 1971 the prize was changed to be awarded not to a book from the previous year, but as it remains today one in that year of publication. And so the whole of 1970’s literature was lost. To the prize anyway. I understand the logic in making it more current – it makes the commercial impact stronger as hype and coverage can be sustained. But how nice to go back and fix it. Even if it is forty years later.

In another nice touch they have chosen a judging panel where all of the judges were born in or around 1970. Here’s the longlist – the shortlist will be announced in March but the winner will be chosen by international online voting:

- Brian Aldiss, The Hand Reared Boy
- H.E.Bates, A Little Of What You Fancy?
- Nina Bawden, The Birds On The Trees
- Melvyn Bragg, A Place In England
- Christy Brown, Down All The Days
- Len Deighton, Bomber
- J.G.Farrell, Troubles
- Elaine Feinstein, The Circle
- Shirley Hazzard, The Bay Of Noon
- Reginald Hill, A Clubbable Woman
- Susan Hill, I’m The King Of The Castle
- Francis King, A Domestic Animal
- Margaret Laurence, The Fire Dwellers
- David Lodge, Out Of The Shelter
- Iris Murdoch, A Fairly Honourable Defeat
- Shiva Naipaul, Fireflies
- Patrick O’Brian, Master and Commander
- Joe Orton, Head To Toe
- Mary Renault, Fire From Heaven
- Ruth Rendell, A Guilty Thing Surprised
- Muriel Spark, The Driver’s Seat
- Patrick White, The Vivisector

I don’t know who I’ll be voting for as I have not read any of them. I may wait until the shortlist is announced before taking on that particular task. I’d like to read the Naipaul and the Murdoch. And actually I’m interested to see Ruth Rendell on there too because I guess my perception of her was that her work is considered commercial fiction and the prize is usually more ‘literary’.

This is a must see film for any aspiring writer – and anyone involved in the publishing industry. Naturally symbiotic professions are pitched head to head in this taut psychological drama revealing the ugly underbellies of writers and their agents. Stephen, the once published but barely sold writer has submitted his second manuscript to his agent, Alexander who unfortunately does not believe in the commercial viability of Stephen’s new work. Four months after Stephen has submitted his final draft, Alexander calls him in for a meeting. What ensues is a game of cat and mouse where Stephen’s desperation to be published leads him to illegally force his agent to work harder to sell his book. It’s proactivity gone mad but with both of the characters’ personal happiness and professional success at stake, things finally begin to happen and during the conflict our perceptions and the truisms of this industry are put under the spotlight.

Alexander is a salesperson, highly commercially aware and time-poor. Stephen is ambitious, creative, compulsive and struggling with his self-belief and his doubts. He asks a great deal of questions of the purpose and integrity of literary agency. He feels impotent in the face of their power – at one point he refers to them as “a bridge – because most writers can’t swim”. He also says they should be a kind of Robin Hood, ensuring the best work is in front of the readers. Alexander in contrast feels impotent in the face of market forces. He admits himself that he “peddles a lot of rubbish”. Best-selling, confident, productive published writers are almost mythical creatures in this story which generates a great deal of sympathy for both parts. Who’s worst off? The impoverished but talented writer who can’t seem to get a break or the agent that works all hours in a machine which is driven by sales and hype, where they are bombarded, bullied and stalked by Stephens on a daily basis?

It’s painfully humorous to watch the writer struggle with his fears and the agent’s judgements and rather horrifying to see how much perception and manipulation may contribute to success in this industry. Ultimately I hope, as Stephen and Alexander both do, and believe that the readers have the final say, but for Stephen to be read, he must get through this gatekeeper.

I thoroughly enjoyed this film – it reminded me very much of The Interview with Sienna Miller and Steve Buscemi where an actress and a journalist are consumed by a similar battle, one to one in a compressed time frame and the rules of engagement and power dynamic change so often you are left feeling giddy. This film, The Agent, stars William Beck, Stephen Kennedy and includes a wonderful scene from Maureen Lipman.

Here are some things other sources had to say about it:

“I doubt a more truthful film exists in relation to the literary world and if it does it could hardly be more energetic, funny or stylish.” Robert Monk – Clash

“The two leads are superb” London Evening Standard

“Sharp, funny and engrossing” Film Four

***** Five stars from me; an awesome view of a complex industry with a tightly twisting plot.

Interestingly, today after having posted yesterday about the status of my queries I have received a rejection back from one of the agencies and not the one that had sent back their postcard acknowledging receipt! So there is a third option other than had not opened package or lost in post and that is, received package but not put postcard in post.

This rejection letter reads:

“Thank you for your submission. We read it with interest but we did not feel that it was suitable for our list.

Unfortunately, due to the high volume of submissions we receive and the relatively small size of our office staff, we are unable to give individual consultation on manuscripts.

We wish you every success in finding an agent and a publisher for your work, and we thank you for thinking of <US>”

Onwards!

A little update on progress (or not!) with pitching my novel. On the 11th January I posted 5 queries to a shortlist of agents I had identified. Seventeen days later and I have only received one of the stamped, self-addressed postcards I included for the agents to acknowledge receipt. I can only assume then that the other 4 packs have not been opened as yet, or, horror of horrors, that they may have been lost in the post. Not being known for my patience, I am mildly frustrated by this, but the best course of action is to focus on writing my next novel and investigate other avenues to sell ‘Thirty Seconds Before Midnight’.

On Twitter earlier in the week I saw that US literary agency, Caren Johnson, was inviting online pitches of 100 words today and so I have submitted mine:

A poet. ‘A Scattering’ by Christopher Reid, in fact. And no, I haven’t read it. But I will order a copy. BRB (be right back). Ok, so have ordered a copy from Amazon who interestingly only had two in stock. They should’ve probably ordered more in, right? But perhaps they didn’t think it would win either… Or maybe I put too much importance on prize-winning and the knock on sales effect. Who knows?

Anyway, the succinct quality of my opening sentence may have belied my surprise here. And leads me onto a subject that I may have alluded to on this website and, if not, certainly in my debut novel. And I will hold my hands up here to my own inconsistencies having referenced poetry both classic and contemporary (Donne and E.E.Cummings) here too. I am a poetry lover, if not much of a reader these days.

Here goes: I think poetry is dead. I don’t believe it has a place in our current culture. I believe it has been entirely replaced by popular music. And greeting cards. And online dating. And texting. And social networking.

I was sent a poem by a lover once, years ago. I’m sorry to say that it wasn’t received in the manner in which it was given. I didn’t even keep it. He even felt the need to apologise for sending it much later when we became lovers again for a while. I always assumed he didn’t write it himself, but I have no way of knowing now, since I no longer have it and at the time was careless/stupid/selfish enough not to pay attention to it. And I don’t talk to him enough now to ask.

My point is, what’s the point of poetry? Either it’s a one to one romantic message or it’s a universal romantic message. Poetry’s never really about anything but love, is it? Where novels can be about crime, suspense, families, history, politics, war, religion, everything and of course, romance, poetry’s nearly always about love (or at least lust). The only exceptions that immediately spring to mind are Milton’s ‘Lycidas’ (about realising one’s own mortality on the death of a very young peer) and Larkin’s ‘This Be The Verse’ (on the ‘challenges’ of parenting).

So if a poem’s function is/was to woo or seduce a lover, how do we do it now? How many people now receive a poem from their prospective lovers/partners/spouses lyrically expressing their innermost emotions? When we are in pain from a break up, how many of us turn to a poetry book for succour and solace? Or do we send and receive suggestive emails and texts, offer materially valuable gifts to express our interest, infatuation or love? Do we switch on the radio and feel our ecstatic joy or agonising loss in the words of the songs in the chart that week? Or the classics from twenty or thirty years ago?

At University we had an essay in Literary Criticism, I think, for which I received one of my highest A’ grades for my effort. Which was on the lyrics of several songs from the album ‘Shooting Rubber Bands at the Stars’ by Edie Brickell and the New Bohemians. I still have the album and can remember the lines:

‘Little Miss S in her mini-dress,
Living it up to die,
In a blink of the public eye.”

And much more but I won’t go on… although that reminds me very much of one of Lily Allen’s songs ‘The Fear’ from her most recent (and last?) album ‘It’s Not Me, It’s You’.. Both of these actually aren’t centered about love, unless we include narcissism within the definition in which case they very much are. However, I drift slightly off the point that I was making which is probably about mass communication and consumerism. But if you think about all the other songs on those albums, ‘Love Like We Do’, ‘Keep Coming Back’ for Brickell and ‘It’s Not Fair’ by Allen – they are all about love.

How many people go to poetry readings now? How many people buy poetry? Where are the ‘Poems on the Underground’? I love these and have their books. On Facebook I am a member of the ‘Bring Back the Poem to the Waterloo Underpass’ group – I used to walk past it and the homeless and buskers every time I went into South Bank. Once we have those numbers let’s compare them to; How many people listen to the radio? How many people download from iTunes? How many people will buy Corinne Bailey Rae’s new album on the 1st February? How many people know who Carole-Anne Duffy is? Or Andrew Motion was? Or can give you a line or a title of a work by Coleridge? Versus one by the Beatles?

Anyway, it’s all a bit of rant but here’s my final point. I do think I am a creative person. But I do also think that you can break creativity down into three parts; 1) Visual 2) Aural and 3) Literary – that is, pictures, sounds or words. I do words first, pictures second and sounds last. But I think anyone that wants to be a poet now needs to combine their words with music – in order to reach what we define as success now – mass consciousness. We’re not in the business of standing around camp fires telling rhyming stories anymore. Digital media and musical sophistication’s taken care of that. Short words and tunes are bound together. And in my mind and ears it’s a good thing.

It’s a big night for awards tonight with both the Costa and the Southbank award ceremonies in London. Man Booker shortlisted ‘The Little Stranger’ by Sarah Waters and Adam Foulds’ ‘The Quickening Maze’ are both nominees for the 2010 and last ever (the South Bank Show has been pulled due to budget constraints) South Bank literature awards along with Peter Akinti’s ‘Forest Gate’ (which is also shortlisted for The Times Breakthrough Award).

The Costa award category winners were announced on January 6th and are as follows. Each of these picks up £5,000 and the book of the year, which will be announced tonight, wins a further £25,000.

2009 Costa Novel Award Winner
Colm Toibin - Brooklyn

2009 Costa First Novel Award Winner
Raphael Selbourne - Beauty

2009 Costa Biography Award Winner
Graham Farmelo - The Strangest Man

2009 Costa Poetry Award Winner
Christopher Reid- A Scattering

2009 Costa Children’s Book Award Winner
Patrick Ness - The Ask and the Answer (Chaos Walking, Book Two)

This book started out life as a column in The London Paper and is a true story of rabid ambition, hard work, success, disillusionment and survival in the storm of our current recession. As you would expect there is a great deal of comment on the sexism that is rife in the city (world) but it is not a feminist text – it’s about equality although there are some very smart comments about how female behaviour could moderate the mistakes that have led us to where we are today. The style is extremely readable and I found it very difficult to put down – I started it this afternoon and apart from a couple of short breaks read it the whole way through. There were a couple of annoying typos – for example “yoke” instead of “yolk” and “principal” rather than “principle” but given the currency of the book I guess they were rushing to put it on the shelves.

The writer, ‘Suzana S’ (a pseudonym but hopefully no-one will feel the need to out her in the manner of blogger ‘Girl with a One Track Mind’ or she will feel the pressures to out herself as blogger Dr Brooke Magnanti or ‘Belle de Jour’ felt since she will surely be careerless since “City girls know all too well that the women who collect cheques in court rarely collect cheques in the City again” – and this expose is certainly a worse misdemeanour) mixes the technical side of the trade in layman’s terms with simple psychological observations highlighting the often ludicrous situations the City puts its people warriors in:

“At one point I felt like laughing out loud. We were adults, not children, I wanted to say. This is a job. It’s not the army, it’s not a cult and, despite the sponge pudding, it’s not a new school. I kept quiet, of course. Because there was always a chance I was wrong.”

Despite the author’s rampant desire to beat all of the boys at their own game and the seriousness she needs to be able to do this, the book is self-depreciatingly funny and full of entertaining if somewhat nauseating anecdotes:

“The other boys talked about planes, yachts and Swedish models. ‘You know Madonna once said about toys like that?’ I said once. ‘If you can fly it, float it or you-know-what it, then you should rent, not buy. That’s sound financial sense from a woman who knows.’ The boys thought about it for a while. Then we had a long conversation about the cost-effectiveness of renting prostitutes.”

And there’s plenty in her about the seedy sides of working in the City – the debauchery, alcohol, lewd, rude and disrespectful behaviour, marital infidelity through affairs and one-night stands, lap dancing, prostitution and cocaine use. And a sharp eye on the nature of the job in hand itself:

“‘If ordinary people get addicted to horse racing they get treatment. If we get addicted to this we get promoted,’ Gordon would say. I gave him a high five for that. Who cared if all our values had been turned on our heads? I no longer cared about life outside our trading floor. All I wanted to do was click into the world’s biggest legal casino and prove I could win.”

It’s this kind of observation that could get the writer in the most trouble though – when she, as many others do, question the value of the work they do vis a vis their salaries. She explains nicely how we arrived at this situation:

“There’s always been this preposterous idea that City players need to earn more each month than teachers do each year because of our extraordinary talent, and the volatile nature of our employment. Realistically, our most exceptional skill is scamming the system for the maximum amount of cash. Meanwhile, it is the mercurial nature of City careers that, in effect, pushes our salaries up so high. We made it a volatile profession by jumping ship as often as we could. That was far easier than doing our jobs well, and waiting to be promoted.”

And finally, in a nutshell of a paragraph, here’s how we shot ourselves in the foot:

“It was quite refreshing actually to finally see the truth if how the public had been taken for one over-extended credit holiday over the past few decades. Bankers stopped banking and became magicians, using misdirection, deception and illusion to make their billions. What’s securitisation, after all, if not a hoax? Is it any different from the age-old trick where the magician turns a penny in one hand into a pound coin? In the City, bankers took sub-prime mortgages, sold them to investors all over the world and distanced the lender from the borrower so far that the penny loan really did look like a pound one. The investors – and the regulators – could not believe their eyes and could not think of an explanation for the astronomical profits. Pure magic.”

Apart from the fact that ‘Suzana S’ is a great story teller who has met some fabulous characters along the way and seen and experienced some fascinating, on the edge moments and environments, I was able to sympathise with her. I worked in IT Sales for many years, still do on a very part time basis at the moment while I concentrate on writing, and although it’s like a diluted version of the City there certainly are a number of similarities. Male-dominated, although not as bad and the men are have worked with have in the vast majority been respectful and I’ve never been warned off or felt doors were closed to me because of my gender. But I could identify with her desire to balance her femininity and sense of self whilst playing in what’s mainly a man’s world and she did remind me of a client lunch not so long ago. I and another young, female colleague took two male customers to lunch near the Barbican. The men were probably ten to fifteen years older than us and directors in the IT department of the travel company where they worked. They had no problem understanding that as the supplier, I had asked them to lunch and would therefore be taking care of the bill. What amused me was that when I asked the waiter for the cheque, he gave it to the older gentleman who then passed it to me with a wry smile. I gave it back to the waiter along with my payment card who then gave the machine with the card in it back to my customer. My customer passed the machine back to me and I put my PIN in the machine and gave it back to the waiter. Who then gave the receipt to my male customer.

Here’s the main course for Martin’s supper from Audrey Niffenegger’s ‘Her Fearful Symmetry’. See the introduction and starter here.

“Rajasthani Roast Venison Saddle with Ginger and Onion Sauce

Ingredients

1 venison saddle cleaned and cut into 4 steaks
1 tablespoon oil
1 quantity of Rajastani Spice Paste

For the marinade:
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon red chilli powder
1 tablespoon oil

For the ginger and onion sauce:
50g clarified butter
6 cloves
11/2 quantities of Fried Onion Paste
4 tablespoons plain yoghurt
50g venison trimmings, finely diced
3/4 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon sugar
2.5cm piece of fresh ginger, finely chopped
juice of 1 lemon
a little lamb stock or water

Instructions

Mix together all the ingredients for the marinade, rub them over the venison and set aside to marinate for at least 30 minutes. Meanwhile prepare the sauce. Hear the butter in a heavy-based pan and add the cloves. When they puff up, add the fried onion paste and cook until thickened. Then whisk in the yoghurt and cook on a low heat, stirring occasionally to prevent the yoghurt separating. When the sauce comes to the boil, add the venison trimmings, followed by the salt, sugar, ginger and lemon juice. Simmer for 10 minutes, until the sauce becomes glossy and the fat has separated out at the side of the pan. If the sauce is too thick, add a few spoonfuls of lamb stock or water. Set aside and keep warm while you cook the venison.

Heat the oil in a large ovenproof frying pan, add the mean and sear over a medium-high heat for 5-6 minutes, until browned all over. Transfer to an over preheated to 200c and roast for 12 minutes, if you like your meat pink. Remove from the over, spread the Rajasthani spice paste on top and place under a hot grill (or return it to the oven) for 1 minute, until the past is lightly browned.

Divide the sauce between 4 serving plates and place the venison on top.”

Anticipation and expectation are dangerous things. A bit like the contradictory proverbs ‘many hands make light work’ and ‘too many cooks spoil the broth’, anticipation is reputed to heighten the pleasure at the moment’s arrival and conversely if expectations are inflated we can invite disappointment. Niffenegger’s first novel (discounting her beautiful illustrated books ‘The Two Incestuous Sisters’ and ‘The Adventuress’) ‘The Time Traveller’s Wife’ is one of my all time favourites. It was the last book I read on my first visit to Thailand around four years ago and I finished it lying in the sun by the pool on the thirteenth floor of The Banyan Tree in Bangkok. And cried my eyes out. I don’t often cry and so this memory is etched in my mind forever. It was so totally unlike anything I’d ever read and so Niffenegger so clever in the way she managed the chronological confusions within. The love story central to the book was so fatalistic, the ultimate romantic device, and this is what made the book so emotionally devastating.

So onto ‘Her Fearful Symmetry’. I had this on pre-order from Amazon for so long that I think eventually my order was cancelled and I was distracted by other things. It launched to a fair amount of media attention but mostly passed me by until one of my book group suggested it for our next read. I jumped on the opportunity. I had a similar sensation to when I read Paul Torday’s ‘The Girl on the Landing’ having been swept away by ‘The Irresistible Inheritance of Wilberforce’ – the first one of his I read which also had an unusual narrative timeline (he launched with ‘Salmon Fishing in the Yemen’ which I am yet to acquire and read). The authorial voice was still there, and the essence of their imagination, but it was slow. Niffenegger’s prose is unobtrusive, not quite as sparse as Hilary Mantel’s and AS Byatt’s, but it’s low on descriptiveness which now being aware of her talents as a visual artist I find slightly surprising. This novel requires a similar suspension of disbelief to ‘The Time Traveller’s Wife’ but because the subject matter didn’t seem so startlingly original to me, I found myself more reluctant to play along, enjoyed the game of the idea that little bit less. That said, when the secrets unfolded and the plot began to twist, late on, like in Torday’s ‘The Girl on the Landing’ I was completely caught up in it, and as with ‘The Time Traveller’s Wife’ at the end I felt fairly desolate, although not a tear escaped. In summary then, a very good book, but not one that rocked my world.

In Audrey Niffenegger’s ‘Her Fearful Symmetry’ there’s a lot of eating but it tends to be simple things: soups, sandwiches and lots of eggs – scrambled, soft-boiled, fried. There is a particularly sweet scene though where estranged couple Martin and Marijke share a virtual supper to celebrate her birthday. She is in Amsterdam at a restaurant and he is at his home in London, since he suffers with OCD and is unable to leave his flat:

“Her phone rang just as the waiter brought her a glass of wine. ‘Martin?’
‘Hello, Marijke. Where are you?’
‘Sluizer. In a private room.’
‘What are you wearing?’ he asked.
She glanced down; she was wearing slacks and a grey turtleneck. ‘That red dress with the low back, open-toed heels, my earrings.’ She actually was wearing the earrings. ‘What are you having for dinner?’
‘Mmm, I thought I’d go for the Seekh kabob of mutton starter, and then roast saddle of Oisin red deer with pickling spices for the mains. And a nice Merlot.’
‘That sounds meaty. Where are you pretending to be?’
‘The Cinnamon Club.’
‘Isn’t that the Indian restaurant that’s in a library?’
‘Yes.’
‘I’ve never been there.’
‘Neither have I, I’m experimenting.’ Martin was ripping open boxes of frozen food as he spoke, his mobile clamped between head and shoulder. Chicken tikka masala and saag aloo. The Cinnamon Club didn’t do take way. ‘Are you having your usual sea bream?’”

I’ve never been to The Cinnamon Club either although I would love to one day. I do however have their cook book. I acquired a copy to celebrate the completion of my new kitchen in my old flat in London about three years ago and will a little shamefacedly admit to having never cooked any of the recipes from it. Here, however, are the lamb kebabs:

“For the soola:
400g lamb fillet, cut into 6 thin slices
1 teaspoon Ginger paste
1 teaspoon Garlic paste
1/2 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon red chilli powder
juice of 1/2 lemon
1 tablespoon ghee or oil
3 cloves
1 tablespoon Greek yoghurt
1 tablespoon Rajasthani Spice Paste
1 teaspoon oil

For the seekh kebabs:
500g minced lamb
1/4 teaspoon cumin seeds
2 green chillies, finely chopped
8 springs fresh coriander, finely chopped
3 garlic cloves, finely chopped
1cm piece fresh ginger, finely chopped
3 tablespoons grated processed Cheddar cheese
1/2 teaspoon red chilli powder
1 teaspoon salt

For the soola, pat dry the lamb and mix together the ginger and garlic pastes, salt, chilli powder and lemon juice. Rub this mixture over the meat and leave to marinate for 15-20 minutes.

Heat the oil in a large, heavy based frying pan, drop in the cloves and then remove them from the pan when they puff up. Add the meat to the pan and sear for 3 minutes on each side until well browned, then remove from the heat.

Now mix the yoghurt, Rajasthani spice paste and oil together to form the second marinade. Spread it over the lamb and set aside for 20 minutes. Place under a hot grill and cook for 8 minutes, until well coloured, turning once.

For the seekh kebabs, mix all the ingredients together and divide into 6 portions. Shape each one around a skewer, squeezing the meat gently with wet hands so it adheres to the skewer. Place under a medium-hot grill for 8 minutes, turning regularly, until the kebabs are dark brown all over. Serve with the soola.”

Aloha! The narrator of this religious satire is a shopping trolley who, along with a number of inanimate objects and electrical appliances in the not so distant future, was built with an Infinity Chip providing him with consciousness. Edgar Malroy is the founder of Scepticism Inc, a global chain of metaphysical betting shops where you can place a bet on your religious and spiritual beliefs – and is very rich because of it. Sophia Alderton, whose beauty is so extreme it defies description (although they try; “she is as beautiful as the stagnant pool out of which life arose”) and causes every man in her presence to fall in love with her, is his nemesis and adversary – she is one of the religious ‘nuts’.

This will be forever one of my favourite books. It’s irreverent, ridiculing the concept of organised religion and playing every one you can think of off each other. And of course, I am a massive fan of the quirky idea of using a shopping trolley as a narrator. It’s fast paced, clever and hugely funny and more than a little bit sweet. It’s thought provoking whilst being highly entertaining – here’s a piece from where the narrator has a spiritual crisis whilst scaling Everest:

“While all this was going on I was trying to scale the Khumbu icefall at the base of the western face of Everest, no easy take for a supermarket trolley.

The concept of God was no different if there was such an entity in existence or if there wasn’t.”

Fowler’s style is straightforward and action oriented, the chapters are short and snappy. If there was one thing I didn’t like about this book it was the preponderance of question marks separating some paragraphs. A teeny, tiny formatting thing. He reminded a great deal of Douglas Adams in style and imagination. He uses two types of humour I have mentioned being a fan of before – one using a joke or a phrase and running it like a ribbon through the whole act or book – “Who knows?” is the key joke here. The other is Fowler’s sense of bathos:

“On the 6th of September Edgar Malroy took his one billionth bet. It was made by Robyn Moller and was for £125. The billionth bet was that a combination of seated meditation, counselling with Zen Masters and the use of paradoxical sayings leads to a realisation of supreme truth. Robyn Moller was given two luxury holiday homes and a life supply of toilet paper by Scepticsm Inc.”

The book was first published in 1998 and may have been a little before it’s time. Certainly, any Richard Dawkins fans would lap it up and it has the additional appeal of humour and a fantastical storyline. It has the advantage of being a great deal more entertaining and engaging that Dawkins’ non-fiction work:

“Edgar lectured to us on all manner of things. He told us about his Guessing Hypothesis, how no metaphysical assertion was any better than any other. That there exists an all-powerful being outside of space and time was no more likely than there exists outside time and space a ponderous haddock. ‘Anything could be out there. The universe may be shaped like a giant vagina for all  we know. The priest, the metaphysician, stands in his pulpit and tells us what’s going on when in fact he’s just guessing or, even worse, repeating someone else’s guess. These guesses aren’t even educated guesses. They can’t be. The metaphysician doesn’t know what the hell he is talking about, religion is just a series of utterly blind guesses; that is to say, religion is bullshit.”

Fowler even gives the reader a delicious and totally unexpected twist at the end. It’s so very annoying then that he is reputed to be a sufferer of ‘first novel syndrome’ – that is, he received a reputed £100k advance for the novel (in happier fiscal times) and it was received to huge critical acclaim: “the debut of a prodigiously gifted writer”, but has failed to execute on his early promise. As far as I can tell he followed this with ‘The Astrological Diary of God’ in 2000 (looks to be out of print now) but nothing since and seems to have disappeared into some sort of black hole. Disappointing. I am left wanting lots more.

I saw this link on Twitter today to the Abundance blog article ‘54 Tips for Writers, From Writers’. I recommend reading the whole thing but here are my favourite parts in summary:

- Writers are readers (Stephen King)
- You have to live a little first (John Grisham)
- Only stop for the day when you know how you are going to start tomorrow (Ernest Hemingway)
- Kill your darlings (Elmore Leonard)
- Be a sadist (Kurt Vonnegut)
- Consciously write terrible first drafts to get started (Anne Lamott)
- Practice and persistence are key (Octavia Butler)

Q: Hello Samuel and congratulations on the publication of your debut novel ‘Playground’ hitting the shelves later this month. Thanks so much for letting me read a copy and for this opportunity to discuss your work with you in more detail. Let’s start by talking about how this book came about and how you found a publisher. You finished a Film Studies and Creative Writing degree at the London Metropolitan University in 2008. Did you start this book as part of your degree, or was it something that you worked on after graduation? What was the path you followed that led to the publication of your book by Janus Publishing?

A: I just wanted to write something. I came away with the Creative Writing major but didn’t really know what to do with it. I’ve really been into writing stories and stuff like that since a young age and started taking it a bit more seriously when I was at Uni. We once had this author come to talk to us there and she won some kind of prize for her book, and I read an extract and had a feeling I might be able to write something better, and since that moment it stuck in my head that when I finished I would try and bang out a novel.

My basic plan was to do one just for practice, have a go at writing something at length just to work all the kinks out of my style and really try and sharpen my creative blade. I wrote some werewolf story (as I always kind of had a thing about werewolves) which was only about 100 pages long, then I dabbled with a Sci-Fi story that was about 200 pages. Then I wrote ‘Playground’.

Q: Once you started working with the publisher how has the process worked? Have you been collaborating with editors? How did the book-jacket come about? What are your expectations in terms of your own efforts to sell the book? I know that you are planning to join me for a book swap/author panel event I am planning for a charitable event I am involved with and I’m very much looking forward to that.

A: Well, I got into a bit of a panic when after six months I hadn’t got a job, so I got the Writer’s Yearbook and applied to every relevant publisher and I was getting jerked around and stuff like that. I nearly gave up but then I decided I’d go around and phone them all up, and only Janus gave me the time of day, which I was extremely thankful for.

I started working there part time (unpaid) just to learn the ropes and to put a building block on my CV, while I was also working in a sports shop and trying to write my book. I finished Playground in July and had asked a designer friend of mine to design me some front covers cos my initial plan was to take my manuscript to an agent with a front cover already designed and then make them do all the work in trying to get me a deal. But what actually happened was, I showed the front covers to the Managing Director at Janus and she sort of fell in love with them. Then she was like ‘have you got your book on you?’ and I’m like ‘only the first draft,’ so what she asked me to do was give it an edit, get it into some kind of shape, then give it to her to be test-read. The review came back positive and I was offered a contract.

I gave the book two edits and on the third draft I gave it to a friend of mine to read and she came up with some pointers. Then it was proofread through the publishing house and since then it has just been a case of getting rid of all the little bugs.

As far as sales go, well I don’t really know. I really do believe that I have a good book, with a great front cover (which I’m going to attribute about 90% of the sales to), but I know the state the publishing industry is in. I’m a first time author and I’m not Katie Price, so I probably won’t get the kind of Waterstone’s attention that a genuinely good book deserves. But, I got a really good PR woman working on it and she read the book and got all excited and is talking about big things, and plus my old Creative Writing teacher (who is also a published author, Sunny Singh) is giving me a lot of help and attention.

Apart from all that, Facebook, Twitter and all that stuff is helping generate a buzz. I’m just trying to be hopeful and pray for a miracle.

Q: It’s a commonly held perception and often misconception that a writer’s debut novel is heavily autobiographical. That said, I know that you grew up on a council housing estate in North London. How much of ‘Playground’ is based on what you have experienced or seen in your own life? In my review I cited several other works (the books ‘Boy A’ and ‘Lord of the Flies’ and the Brazilian film ‘City of God’) that I drew parallels with. Who or what are the influences on your work?

A: Well see here’s the thing. None of ‘Playground’ is based on me or anything like that. I’m a good guy. But I grew up in an area that was, shall we say, very working class, and had a lot of bad stuff happen in it. And I had to seriously consider if ‘Playground’ was the type of book that I wanted to write because me personally, I hate all that Kidulthood stuff and those films that are about gangs in London. It makes me cringe a little bit. But I knew I could use London as a backdrop to tell a scary story, something dark and disturbing. I like horror novels and horror films, and that was what I was really aiming to do, use London and the epidemic of teenagers killing each other, and show the evil in it. I mean, the papers try and say that kids stab each other to death because of rap music or because their influenced by American gang culture or whatever, and there may be some truth in that. Though what I tried to do with ‘Playground’ is show that some people are just evil, or that they can be manipulated and influenced to do evil things.

Oh, and I was flattered that ‘Playground’ was compared to ‘Lord of the Flies’ (which I read the year before based on my girlfriend’s little sister’s recommendation) and I really like that film City of God. Haven’t seen Boy A but my girlfriend tells me it’s meant to be really good. So anything like that that my book gets compared to makes me extremely proud.

Q: ‘Playground’ effectively starts with the ending. Did you know how the book was going to finish where you started it? Did you have a plan for it or did the book make its own way as you wrote it?

A: I didn’t plan one single part of the book. In fact, I started the book only with one scene in my head, which was the prologue. I thought it would be a really good opening to get people hooked; a boy staggers on stage in front of a packed auditorium and puts a picture of a gun on an OHP. I don’t know where the image came from, but the whole time while I was writing this long Sci-Fi thing, I kept thinking about it over and over and I just really wanted to start writing it.

Everything else just unfurled itself. I mean sometimes I’d have a rough guess as to what might happen later down the road but nothing ever stayed that way. The only thing I planned with certainty was that I wasn’t going to shy away from anything. I was going to be raw and blunt about the swearing, the nudity, the racial slurs, the violence, because readers know when the author doesn’t tell the truth.

Q: Although ‘Playground’ is essentially a tale of good versus evil, Jonah is by no means pure; he is good in a relative sense, relative that is to his old friends whose characters have degenerated in his absence. Much of his goodness is driven by his naivety although his logic and judgement prevail. Did you set out to write a morality tale and did you always see Jonah’s ultimate role as an evangelist or an ambassador for hope and informed choice?

A: No, I didn’t want to do anything like that. I actually shy away from writing that kind of stuff. The way I saw it was that Jonah had to be real. He didn’t have to be real good, just real. Some people have commented that the book is an analogy warning against gang activity and that kind of thing, but I don’t agree. It’s a story about friendship mostly, and the power your friends can have over you.

I never tried to write something that could be seen as a metaphor for kids to wake them up to the dangers of that kind of lifestyle because let’s face it – any kid with a brain in their head knows the difference between right and wrong. It’s wrong to kill your classmates, it’s wrong to gang rape a girl, it’s wrong to smoke crack. And these things have no excuse, nothing the media can safely put the blame on. It is the individual, who, somewhere down the road, decided they didn’t care what they do to other human beings, or maybe simply they do stuff because they enjoy it.

Either way I don’t care, and I don’t care to try and figure it out. If a youngster reads my book and it changes his attitude for the better, good for him. Maybe he can buy me a beer if I ever meet him. But it was never my agenda.

Q: As a thirty something white female middle class reader this isn’t an obvious book for me to choose to read, although I do have rather eclectic tastes and enjoy writers such as Irvine Welsh who are hardly light on the palate either. I said in my review, for someone like me it has the effect of making me revaluate the privileges and luxuries I was born into. When you wrote the book, who did you see as your target readership? People that need to see that they can make different choices or people who need to realise that not everyone is born with the same opportunities?

A: I don’t really think about that stuff. I used inner city London as the setting because I remember it being a scary place to be growing up. Both scary and exciting. I liked it and I knew that I had to keep my eyes peeled a lot. I understood how easily I could wind up with a case of death by treading in the wrong place or saying the wrong thing, but I’ve always been pretty observant. I didn’t consider a target audience, though I did hope that I could catapult my book on the back of this obsession and trend that’s going around about youth culture in London. I mean, E4 is bang on it and the National Lottery don’t mind forking out money for some mindless film about teenagers. At the same time though, I avoided putting slang in the book and things of that nature because I didn’t want it to be aimed at teenagers and for them to identify with it because of the way the characters speak, I just wanted to tell a shocking story. See, I want to get paid to do this full time and to do that, you need to sell a lot of books. Why not make something that will grab peoples’ attention?

Ultimately, I just wanted to write a truthful tale with a bit of intelligence. Something that had more than one layer to it, characters that were human and driven by human desires.

Q: If you were a gun, what sort of gun would you be? I think I’d be a water pistol -completely harmless and more than a little bit silly.

A: Lol. I would be some kind of magnum, the kind of thing that could make a dinosaur explode. They make noise, they get noticed.

Welcome to Hell. Jonah returns to London to visit his friends having been away for a year. His mother had made the decision to take her son away from the inner city ghetto of burned out cars and escalating crime and Jonah is enduring college, working his way to University and holding down a job in a bakery. He goes to stay with his old mates Dwayne and Billy for a week.

His initial elation on being reunited with his friends is short-lived however as the luxury of the cars, clothes, box-fresh trainers and bling reveal an underbelly of guns, knives, supply and abuse of illegal substances, theft, rape, animal cruelty and murder.

Although the prologue sets your expectation that there will not be a happy ending to this morality tale, the final action sequences are so fast-paced and vital, hope still shines at the end of a twisting, turning tunnel. Jonah is by no means a flawless protagonist – he’s an ingenue that goes along with the ride, even though his fears of retribution run deep. He is more concerned about the fate of a rabbit at the paws of a crazed dog than he is of the sexual abuse of the house-whore and coke addict, Genie, and his initial reaction to discovering his crush is a single mother is disappointing, if real.

This is a hefty slice of gritty reality from the wrong side of the tracks. It’s raw and visceral, violent and downright disturbing. It has elements of the supernatural and mystical pumped through it via the presence of Solomon – a character or a characteristic, the reader isn’t sure – the edges are blurred. It’s about growing up, growing apart and making choices in a world where we do not all start out equal.

It’s not a happy book and reading it reminded me of the 2004 Jonathan Llewellyn Rhys prize winner ‘Boy A’ by Jonathan Trigell, later made into a Channel 4 film and the 2002 Brazilian film ‘City of God’ and also William Golding’s ‘The Lord of the Flies’. So – not everyone’s cup of tea by any stretch of the imagination but it takes street tales and makes something meaningful out of them, something that made me sit up in my middle class armchair and reassess my lot.

The author has very kindly agreed to do an interview with me so keep an eye out for that being posted soon.

Building on my earlier post about how querying agents today has made me think more about the importance of the extensive team of expertise involved in publishing a book once the writing has been written I came across the following article by the fabulous Gary Smailes at Bubblecow on Twitter relating to his experiences working in the publishing process. Pay particular attention to #5! Here’s Gary:

“When I first started on my writing career I was lucky enough to work for Horrible Histories writer Terry Deary. I spent a number of years working alongside Terry as a researcher on a string of Horrible Histories titles. Looking back this was more than just a job, it was an apprenticeship. It opened my eyes to, not only, writing children’s non-fiction, but was also an insight into how big publishers work and how it was possible for writers to actually make money in a very competitive industry.

So, in the spirit of web 2.0, here’s the eight things I learned from Horrible Histories:

1. You are producing a product not a book: It was made very clear from the start that Horrible Histories was a product. In fact, it was a brand and a brand that sold predictably well. It was these predictable sales that made the series the power house it still is today. I also learned very quickly that no one wanted to mess with the basic concept. Scholastic (the publisher), as well as Terry, took a very clear ‘we are writing to a formula’ approach.
2. Be excellent: To this day I maintain that Terry Deary is the greatest ever children’s non-fiction writer. He has a very clear understanding of his craft, an uncanny insight into the mindset of his audience and understands his place in the wider picture. In short, he has distilled what it is that makes him excellent and delivers it constantly with each book. For me, this was highlighted in his ability to sieve through pages and pages of research to find a gem of information and then build a whole section around a fact that had passed me by as unimportant.
3. It is your vision: Terry also taught me that the publisher is not always right. He often explained that it was him, as the writer, who understood the book better than anyone else. As a result he would resist, with a passion, anything that messed with his vision. Marketing, sales and the wider strategy were areas he had an input but never a massive voice. However, when it came to words on the paper he would fight tooth and nail to keep his vision intact.
4. Publishers play a very important role: I learned very quickly that publishers were the key to success. This might seem obvious, but it is very easy for a writer to become precious about their idea, leading to conflict with the publisher. At the end of the day the publisher WILL have the final say. As a writer you have to bend and sway with the publishing breeze, moulding your product into something that sells. In a way this contradicts the above point, but Terry would only stand his ground in the face of the publishers when they wanted to mess with a concept that had ALREADY proved it would sell.
5. It is a partnership: Wow did I learn this quickly. It takes lots of people to make a book. The writer is just the start. Add into this an editor, a proofreader, a typesetter, an illustrator, the marketing guy, the marketing guy’s boss, the editor’s boss and you start to get a feeling for just how many people are involved. This list fails to take into account researchers, picture researchers, third party experts and the many other people who may be asked to lend a hand. You must realise that you are just a cog in the machine. The reality is that the bigger the sales, the bigger the cog you become but is ALWAYS a partnership.
6. It is not all smooth sailing: Publishing is full of big egos – very big egos. The result is that arguments and differences of opinions are common place. It is all part of the game. However, as a writer you need to learn very quickly to not become an obstacle. It is a delicate balance between standing your ground and swaying with the breeze. It is vital you never become a ‘problem’ writer but it’s also essential that you get your voice heard, even if it is ignored.
7. Write quickly: On average writers get paid very little – end of story. However, the POTENTIAL earnings are huge. If you are the writer of the next big thing then you have the potential to make millions. However, the reality is that you will not write the next big thing. So the alternative is to write lots of books and get lots of small amounts of cash flowing in each year. The beauty with royalties is that once the book is written it is money for old rope. In an ideal world a writer should also not go for an advance, but instead ask for a slightly higher royalty rate. This may be a problem in the short term but can pay off in the long run.
8. It is about what happens to people: Terry explained to me within the first few weeks of working with him that Horrible Histories were not history books. Instead, they were stories about what had happened to people in the past. He would always say ‘events are boring; it is what happens to the people that is interesting.’

I hope this helps give you a bit of an insight into an industry that is shrouded in mystery for most unpublished writers.”

Regular readers will know that I sent the first query letter out for my debut novel ‘Thirty Seconds Before Midnight’ in November and have been ‘patiently’ waiting for the passing of the festive season in order to follow up with another round. Today I sent a further five queries out. Here are some things I did not do:

1) I did not describe my book as a ‘fictional novel’
2) I did not claim to be the next JK Rowling/Stephen King/Dan Brown
3) I did not claim to be the next Salman Rushdie/Ian McEwan/Zadie Smith
4) I did not send any food items that could fester along with the paper in the slush pile
5) I did not try to be funny
6) I did not say that I had better chapters at home or send a selection of the ‘best’ chapters
7) Or say that I thought the novel needed more work

Here are some things I tried my best to do:

1. Choose agents who research showed to be in a position to add the right authors to their list for representation
2. Open with a snappy, intriguing paragraph describing my novel
3. Describe my target market and high-light how it matches theirs
4. State that the novel is complete and its word count – a word count in line with publisher’s expectations for a debut novel
5. Research each agent and refer to their other authors and their work
6. Ask a specific question and include some additional material I had prepared when researching the marketplace (adult novels with animal narrators)
7. Include a small, thoughtful gift (of a tortoise i.e. Herbert ornament) with each query
8. Follow the submission guidelines each agency made available – synopsis (including short biography), first three chapters and SAE, and request for response by post where needed
9. Be professional and polite and have a personality
10. Include a self addressed, stamped postcard with the message “AgentX has received your query” for each to send back to me on receipt
11. Ensure that the manuscript/synopsis/letter all followed correct formatting rules i.e. single sided, black ink, Times New Roman font, 12 points, double spaced for the manuscript/synopsis/article/market report, single for the letter, page numbers, contact details on cover page etc
12. Keep it smart – plain postcards, white rubber bands holding the pages together, white paperclips on the synopsis pages and attaching the cover letter to supporting materials, purple tissue paper for the gifts, neat but stylish handwriting
13. Include references – i.e. positive feedback from a reputable source – in this case, the TLC

Phew. I think that’s everything. Obviously writing the novel is the largest and most important part of being a writer but it’s surprising how much effort and thought this part of the process takes. Or is it? Having an agent is by no means a pre-requisite and actually sometimes when I think about the huge percentage of books that are sold on Amazon and that the effect of marketing effort is so immeasurable, many people believing that books sell primarily by word of mouth, self-publishing seems a fantastic option. But publishers really know how to publish – like how to best edit and print the things, they have the connections to the press and to the distribution and retail networks. And agents know the publishers and how to do a deal and make a pitch. Querying is the first step in building the team who will be responsible for what is the product, the book, but what has the potential to be a brand – the series, the ‘author’ (as the team deliver it). Well then, this is definitely a very important investment.

In addition to time and effort, here’s a quick cost summary:
- Envelopes (white, Jiffy, A4) * 10 = £10
- Stamps (2nd class, 5 packages out, 5 back in) = £20
- Stamps (2nd class, 5 postcards) =£1
- Paper/toner
- Rubber bands
- Gifts (eBay is a fantastic source of tortoise related items I have discovered, much easier than the High Street. I have yet to part with the original Victorian brass paperweight though… I have rather fallen in love with it myself. Perhaps as my mother suggested, it should be the ‘welcome’ gift to the agent who signs me)

I estimate it costs just under £10 to query an agent. About the same as a good bottle of wine. Only £2 more than it cost me to enter a single short story competition today. As anyone in business will tell you, you have to spend money to make money, and when you are effectively asking someone to share the burden of selling with you so that you can spend more time writing, to me this does seem a good investment.

I did have one hiccup that I found rather distressing. In the Post Office there are now automated machines where you can weigh your parcel and print out postage labels. Since Post Offices always have immense queues I’ve got rather into using these. Halfway through labelling the SAE’s and placing them inside the envelopes that I would then seal I discovered that the labels are only valid for the day of purchase. WHY??? I then had to join the queue, try to peel the labels back off the SAE’s and replace with normal stamps that the cashiers exchanged the labels for and then reseal the envelopes thus soiling my perfect presentation. Sigh. The cashier did not seem to fully empathise with my disappointment with the situation but I hope she was not furious enough with me to stop the packages being sent… ooh the paranoia!

On the 5th December 2009 Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were sentenced to 26 years and 25 years respectively for their parts in the murder of Meredith Kercher, a Leeds University student studying in Perugia, Italy. Rudy Guede had already received a sentence for 30 years via a fast tracked trial. In this book a team of authors (TV producer, crime writer and forensics experts) have delivered a comprehensive account of the backgrounds of the suspects, the evidence collected, the outcomes of the trials and the speculations around the crime and motivations.

I read very little/no true crime and none of the fictional variety either, not since an early fascination with Agatha Christie and a short spell of considering forensic science a potential career option in my teens. I think this was a result of an accompanying obsession with that Saturday night drama on TV, Casualty. Something though about this story caught me and I was genuinely shocked when Knox and Sollecito were found guilty so pre-ordered this book to find out more. I was not alone with being caught up in the story – the media coverage was vast with most news networks interrupting their programming when the verdicts were announced and huge speculation in the public arena with many amateur blogs being set up to cover the story and debate the minutae of the evidence.

What was it that was so compelling about the crime? Youth, beauty, sex and drugs were all involved – and it was a genuine mystery. British and American students abroad, a young privileged Italian man involved… add to that a wrongly accused black man, another black man traced to the scene of the crime, on the run who later admits to being there, but being on the loo at the critical moment… racism, political and professional ambition, a country perceived to be corrupt in many areas. You couldn’t make it up.

This book explains the evidence and the timelines involved. I was left with the same sense as when watching the progress in the media though. I, along with many, including the authors of the book it would seem, of being dissatisfied with the judicial process and the ultimate verdict. The book explains the processes around collecting, analysing and presenting DNA evidence in great detail and answered a great many questions I had. It still left many questions unanswered though. What did Kercher’s friends think of her liaison with Guede? Did she welcome him into the house? Who really stole the €300? Surely it was Guede on his way out? The DNA evidence on the knife and bra clasp were critical to the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito – but this evidence is extraordinarily flaky. Without these items, there’s no evidence of either of them within the room where the murder was committed. Guede ran, read the reports of the global media suspicion placed on ‘Foxy Knoxy’ and Sollecito, some would say trialled and found guilty by the media (MySpace and FaceBook accounts allowing them to build character profiles and widely publish pictures) and knowing that his DNA (and footprints) would be found at the scene, brought himself in but accused them…

Knox in particular received particularly bad press. She was labelled ‘Foxy Knoxy’ for her soccer skills, but the press also found her physically very attractive. Some reports suggested she was promiscuous and cold-hearted. The hard facts in this book show that she was no more or less sexually voracious that most young women today, including the victim, Kercher. Was she cold-hearted, or were she and Sollecito so confident in their  innocence that it did not occur to them to self-censor their every move?

I can’t do the story justice in a post – but if you are interested in it, I strongly recommend you read this excellently put together account. Probably, like me, you’ll feel this story isn’t over but you might feel better informed about why one young person just starting out was brutally killed, and why three more young lives will be ruined by incarceration. And you may feel that two of them shouldn’t be there.