The "Ten Commandments according to John"

[John Jarrold]

No problem! Hope it helps.

[Scarfy]

Yes and no

Yes, because it shows me how I should be constructing my scenes and ensuring I stay within the correct viewpoint.

No, because it makes me realise just how much editing I have to do to my manuscript...

But, no, your pointers are appreciated. Are you quite inundated with manuscripts at the moment? Or have you managed to get through the backlog..?

[John Jarrold]

There's always a backlog, but I enjoy it!

[Scarfy]

I'll post you some Optrex so that when you get to mine you can prevent your eyes from melting...

[John Jarrold]

Ha! It's interesting, many editors and agents I know - and some authors - find reading and editing on-screeen difficult. I do it for around eight hours, most days. No problem.

[Scarfy]

Actually, I meant because you'd find it so poor that your eyes would decide to spare you ever having to see something like that ever again...

[Scarfy]

But, yeah... eight hours of screen reading..? Wow.

[The Ace]

Probably a bad choice of words, but family sagas, bodice-rippers and romances seem to sell much more than Science-Fiction or Fantasy, books that don't seem to make any demands on the reader's intelligence or imagination.

I always felt that the editor's job was to prepare a viable book for publication.

[John Jarrold]

Viable book, absolutely, but it has to be viable in terms of the market. At a time when, in the last decade, new SF writers have included Alastair Reynolds, Richard Morgan, Justina Robson, Charles Stross, Liz Williams, Jon Courtenay Grimwood and Neal Asher - and Fantasy has turned up China Mieville, Scott Lynch, George R R Martin, Joe Abercrombie and others, I don't feel anyone can say the market is constricted.

But every editor turns down books they love personally, because their head knows they aren't commercial. The writing is great, but the basic story isn't strong enough, for instance, and the book would need to be rewritten word by word and lengthened by 30,000 words. At that point you make it clear to the author and their agent that you want to see more from the author and you'd be happy to discuss future projects face-to-face, but not this book.

The editor's job, as far as their MD is concerned, is to sniff out bestsellers - commercial publishing is about the bottom line.

[John Jarrold]

Originally Posted by Scarfy

But, yeah... eight hours of screen reading..? Wow.

Which is why occasionally I wander off to a pub for a few hours and talk about anything but publishing over several pints of good beer! Luckily I have discovered some very good pubs since I moved last July!

[Scarfy]

I'm going to let you go in a minute, so I don't consume your whole evening with questions But just wanted to pick up on one thing you said...

Originally Posted by John Jarrold

At that point you make it clear to the author and their agent that you want to see more from the author and you'd be happy to discuss future projects face-to-face, but not this book.

Do you usually give feedback on manuscripts you read? Or will it depend on if you thought there was potential?

[John Jarrold]

As an agent who is a one-man band, I don't have the time to make editorial comments on the books I turn down (about 99% of those I see), but if I see one specific thing that sticks out as needing work, I'll mention it.

[Scarfy]

Okay then...

Thanks for the info.

[John Jarrold]

And sometimes there will be a book I think is very good, but it just doesn't entirely work for me (always remember that publishing is very subjective) - in that case I suggest a couple of other agents privately to the author.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by John Jarrold

Telling from outside puts a pane of glass between the reader and the action. Anything that comes to me told I throw back instantly and reject.

So I assume you would have rejected Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell?

(You said we shouldn't mention classic books, but this one was published in 2004.)