Nathan Bransford - The Forums

Margo wrote: I wasn't actually referring to him when thinking about new writers who insist on believing what they want to believe, but I was thinking of the ones who would latch onto his suggestion that word count shouldn't matter at all.

That kind of goes back to your post about professional responsibility, doesn't it? I mean, the information is out there for anyone with access to google or who knows how to click onto a link and read. Though I suspect you think most newbies aren't going to do that. Maybe you're right. I don't know. They'll learn eventually after enough rejections. Or quit. It's usually one or the other.

My first book is around 115k or so (I think, it's been a month of NaNo since I looked at it). I had it whittled down to 110 at one point but it went back up on me, and I think it needs more flow so it might go around 120)

If a person rejects me on word count alone then that person wasn't the person I'm looking for.

I'm specifically avoiding the use of the word agent here because a true agent would have been hooked at the query and story, and not completely scared off at 120,000 words.

I get so tired of people who say, "Oh, but it's too long, you'll have to shorten it." Because they haven't even read a synopsis or the book yet. It's like going through a movie store or theatre, looking at the APPROX TIME and going, "OMG it's TWO HOURS. That's TOO LONG."

WTF, people.

steve wrote:

Down the well wrote: He is also a provocateur who I think enjoys yanking people's chains.

I only listen to songs between 2:50 and 3:10 in length.

cheekychook wrote:I'd comment, but I only reply to posts of a dozen words or more.

Totally didn't see these before I posted. We must have been CHANNELING EACH OTHER.

sierramcconnell wrote:I'm specifically avoiding the use of the word agent here because a true agent would have been hooked at the query and story, and not completely scared off at 120,000 words.
...
WTF, people.

It's about handicapping yourself. You write a good pitch. Check. Maybe the synopsis is just okay. No big. 120,000 words. Orange flag. Now you probably have anywhere from a few pages (sometimes none) to three chapters to reinforce the positive impression of the pitch, reassure them about the synopsis, and convince them the length isn't the problem they are afraid it might be.

My first point, why hobble yourself with your debut? Why keep rolling the dice? Eventually you'll get snake-eyes, and it won't be the agent's fault.

My second point, I thought you didn't care. It is what it must be. If people (agents, editors, readers) like it, great. If they don't, that's not the point.

Are you being straight with yourself about what you want, and are you acting accordingly?

Margo wrote:It's about handicapping yourself. You write a good pitch. Check. Maybe the synopsis is just okay. No big. 120,000 words. Orange flag. Now you probably have anywhere from a few pages (sometimes none) to three chapters to reinforce the positive impression of the pitch, reassure them about the synopsis, and convince them the length isn't the problem they are afraid it might be.

My first point, why hobble yourself with your debut? Why keep rolling the dice? Eventually you'll get snake-eyes, and it won't be the agent's fault.

My second point, I thought you didn't care. It is what it must be. If people (agents, editors, readers) like it, great. If they don't, that's not the point.

Are you being straight with yourself about what you want, and are you acting accordingly?

I would reply but I'm very tired today post-sleep-study and I think anything that's going to come out is going to start a cat fight. =^..^=

I wonder how many words have been expended arguing about word counts. I am always reminded of the Austrian Emperor's complaint in AMADEUS about 'too many notes'!

steve wrote:

Margo wrote: Read lot of these, and some consistencies emerge:

Yep; word count is consistently the dumbest metric used to evaluate books.

I only look at paintings that use 15-18 tubes of paint.

Well, I know I'm going against the grain of this thread, but Steve, I could not agree more! Quality of writing is the key. And thank goodness that with e-books, word count will become much less of an issue.

Let's see.......I only look at photographs with 1 inch margins around the edges. Ha! :)

Mira wrote:Well, I know I'm going against the grain of this thread, but Steve, I could not agree more! Quality of writing is the key. And thank goodness that with e-books, word count will become much less of an issue.

I'd be interested in hearing thoughts, then, on why online magazines have word limits on story submissions. For them, the physical printing requirements are meaningless. So...

At an average reading speed of 150 words per minute, a 4,000-word short story equals a lunch break. 2,000 words equals a coffee break. How long does an average mass transit commuter spend on a commute? How long does an average patient spend in a waiting room? I suspect about fifteen minutes to a half an hour.

Margo wrote:

Mira wrote:Well, I know I'm going against the grain of this thread, but Steve, I could not agree more! Quality of writing is the key. And thank goodness that with e-books, word count will become much less of an issue.

I'd be interested in hearing thoughts, then, on why online magazines have word limits on story submissions. For them, the physical printing requirements are meaningless. So...

Well, just a guess, but probably because it's traditional and it hasn't occured to them to change it yet. Also, I think publishing in general keeps trying to control externals, like word count, in the hope it will control internals, like talent and skill. It just doesn't work well, but they tend to stick with what's known, which is why publishing faces so many of the challenges it does.

I will say there is something to be said about attention span - especially in a magazine format - but the best way to control for that is not word length, but quality of writing, imho.