Today in Publisher's Lunch was a UK deal for a Da Vinci Code rip-off:
quote:
James Becker's APOSTLE, a high-concept adventure thriller comprising a scroll, an ancient chalice, two deadly men from the Vatican, and a race-against-time to uncover the a deadly secret that will threaten the basis of Christianity, to Selina Walker at Transworld, in a very nice deal, in a two-book deal, for publication in July 2008, by Luigi Bonomi at Luigi Bonomi Associates. Translation rights are with ILA.
Not to mention that Agent Jennifer Jackson posted a link on her blog to where her agency tries to answer what type of plots would interest them. The two hypothetical fantasy plots were: 1) A Huck Finn-like fantasy featuring a raft trip down the Mississippi, with magic. 2) An African-American Lord of the Rings. So here we have a journey-focused fantasy and an epic quest fantasy. Yes, I get the point that they both have a unique take on the old standards, but I thought that the point was to get away from those standards. Apparently, I was wrong...or I'm missing the point.
As many of you know, Agent Kristin Nelson recently posted a blog entry saying that she'll spend more time reading a query that compares your novel to specific characters and/or scenes in her client's books. Since there's not much room in a query to begin with, it boggles my mind that we're being encouraged to focus on how our novel is similar to currently published books instead of that unique element in our own book. I understand that Ms. Nelson was trying to be helpful, but my brain has stopped being able to make all these apparently contradictory statements and occurrences make sense.
I suppose I should be happy that originality doesn't matter as much as I thought, but instead my poor, logical mind is stuck on "gibbering" mode.
[This message has been edited by DebbieKW (edited October 03, 2007).]
[This message has been edited by DebbieKW (edited October 03, 2007).]
I am going to be soooo rich!!!
Then again, how much can we tell from a few lines? There might be some truly unique aspects in that novel, which aren't presented to us in that blurb.
I think that while agents are sitting around waiting for new, original, fresh, and exciting they still have to sell books. If they don't find what they're looking for, they still need to fill their client roster.
So, they might be sitting around thinking, "Gosh, I wish I had a Huck Finn River Fantasy, but this Da Vinci rip-off is the best I've got, and my roster is getting thin. I guess I'll offer to represent this guys."
Despite what Kirsten said, I think some care has to be taken with referencing existing books and scenes.
If you break stories down to very basic levels, you wont find much that is original. The quest story. The revenge story. The mystery. etc. It's hard, near impossible, to break from these vague arcs. I think it's in the details that things get fresh and interesting.
I think the thing is, that a lot of agents don't know what's gonna grab 'em till it does. If they knew what it was going to be, they could just write it themselves, and they wouldn't need us at all. Hey, does that river trip come with a fish-keeping white whale named Haddock?
quote:
As many of you know, Agent Kristin Nelson recently posted a blog entry saying that she'll spend more time reading a query that compares your novel to specific characters and/or scenes in her client's books.
She wants to:
1) Make sure her time isn't wasted by reading something she doesn't represent.
2) Have an idea how to market it.
At least, that's my take on it.
This book on the other hand doesn't sound unique OR original. It seems derivative for the sake of cashing in on a trend, which is kind of creepy.
[This message has been edited by JamieFord (edited October 03, 2007).]
quote:
I have one about a young african american wizard name Kunta Kinpotter and his big dreadlocked rastafarian friend Hagry Marly. They are on a grand adventure to find the philosopher's bong, which was stolen by a talking fish. They have embarked on a 7 book long oddysey to find this fresh water fish as it migrates down the Mississippi.
I am going to be soooo rich!!!
That's probably exactly what they're looking for 
quote:
This week has shattered my belief that they actually mean it.
You actually believed this?
Folks, this business is so finicky I'm surprised anyone tries to tell people want they want, and I'm equally surprised that anyone tries to pay attention to it. A publisher/agent wants to make money. That's what they want. They make guesses on what will do it. Do they want something original? Yes and no. They want something original only if it will make money. Do they want something similar to what they're already selling? Yes and no. They want something that they can market as the next Harry Potter or the next DaVinci Code, but only if it isn't a complete rip-off that sucks (rip-offs are okay if they don't suck).
My advice?
1. Write the best book you can.
2. Submit the crap out of it.
3. If that doesn't work, repeat steps 1 and 2.
4. If that doesn't work, reevaluate your career options.
[This message has been edited by oliverhouse (edited October 03, 2007).]
Business sense says that if something has made a billion dollars in the past, something like it might do well again.
Creative sense says that something good should be fresh and new, and not what has been done before.
So on one hand, they'll look at something if it reminds them of a best-selling book, but they still want fresh and original.
One one hand, they want to make money. It's a job. On the other, they want to discover the next [insert great author here].
Hmm, I may create a new market, YA Urban fiction...the book on tape version should do well :-)