This post was written by me and Sherwood.
The unnamed agency in our previous post has chosen to present their perception of the exchange. We confirm that it was the agency we referred to. We stand by every word we wrote in our original article.
We did not wish to name them, because we preferred to focus on the larger issues. We did not spread rumors about them, and we don't know who did.
This is why we went public: After the initial exchange a month ago, we spoke in private to a number of other writers, without mentioning the name of the agent or agency. There was an overwhelming response of "Me too!" Many other writers had been asked by agents and editors to alter or remove the minority identity of their characters, sometimes as a condition of representation or sale. Sometimes those identities had been altered by editors without the writers' knowledge or permission.
That response, and posts like Malinda Lo's recent statistics make it clear that the problem is much larger than a couple of writers and one specific agency.
We urge you all to continue focusing on the bigger picture.
Discussion is welcome but abuse and name-calling is not. Please do your best to be civil.
ETA: Since several people asked: I do have an agent for my nonfiction, Brian DeFiore. He's great. The work Sherwood and I do together is very different from what we both do solo, and we wanted an agent to represent us as a team.
The unnamed agency in our previous post has chosen to present their perception of the exchange. We confirm that it was the agency we referred to. We stand by every word we wrote in our original article.
We did not wish to name them, because we preferred to focus on the larger issues. We did not spread rumors about them, and we don't know who did.
This is why we went public: After the initial exchange a month ago, we spoke in private to a number of other writers, without mentioning the name of the agent or agency. There was an overwhelming response of "Me too!" Many other writers had been asked by agents and editors to alter or remove the minority identity of their characters, sometimes as a condition of representation or sale. Sometimes those identities had been altered by editors without the writers' knowledge or permission.
That response, and posts like Malinda Lo's recent statistics make it clear that the problem is much larger than a couple of writers and one specific agency.
We urge you all to continue focusing on the bigger picture.
Discussion is welcome but abuse and name-calling is not. Please do your best to be civil.
ETA: Since several people asked: I do have an agent for my nonfiction, Brian DeFiore. He's great. The work Sherwood and I do together is very different from what we both do solo, and we wanted an agent to represent us as a team.
Tags:
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
"But even worse, by basing their entire article on untruths, these authors have exploited the topic. "
God forbid that you raise a topic which you made completely anonymous and not, in fact, about them in particular. That's exploitation!
From:
no subject
Also really tired of the red herring about whether the agent in question was "personally homophobic" or not. And all the other red herrings and straw men.
From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I do wonder/worry how the name got out. (Not blaming you, just wondering who leaked.)
From:
no subject
It's possible that the agency defended itself vigorously behind closed doors, and it got out that way.
It's also possible that readers figured it out all by themselves. We mentioned that they were respectable and repped a bestselling YA dystopia. We didn't think that was that identifiable, but it may have been enough for people to put the pieces together.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
Homophobia fucking sucks. I'm sad to see that they couldn't see what happened and learn from it.
From:
no subject
It does sound, though, as if the grapevine mutated the message before it reached them.
From:
no subject
I wish people would read the article we actually wrote before jumping to conclusions about what we said.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
I really do think the bit about self-promotion was uncalled for. Yes, frankly you did get me interested in reading a book with an Asian gay character(Asians in Scifi/Fantasy don't get enough love), but I'm also extremely grateful for the linkage of YA LGBTQ and POC book list in your original post. If anything, you're using this to promote diverse fiction in general.
Also, in reading many of the comments all over the place, I am reconsidering some of the decisions I have made with my webcomic. Several characters' sexualities aren't mentioned because I don't want it to be viewed solely as a BL, since it's not a romance. But now I do realize it's important for a character's self-identity to be prominent in non-romance genres as well.
From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
I repeat myself repetitively
You guys were quite specific about not naming the agent, and you were also quite specific about focusing on what people could do, rather than blaming one person. The point is that market forces obvious, and taking the path of least resistance is also obvious, not that one person was a mustached villain.
From:
Re: I repeat myself repetitively
Re: I repeat myself repetitively
From:From:
no subject
I mean, that's how I behave in those business situations. Because people forget.
From:
no subject
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
Going to go kick something now.
From:
no subject
From: (Anonymous)
no subject
I am an author. I am not represented by Nancy Coffey Literary, but I have friends who are. I do not think what Rachel and Sherwood are saying in this article is true, and I am very upset that PW allowed it to be posted without fact-checking. I am also upset that Rose closed comments on the follow up post at http://blogs.publishersweekly.com/blogs/genreville/?p=1533, but I'm commenting here because I think that it was wrong for Rose Fox to post an article like that without fact checking it, and even more wrong of her to do that as someone who is in a position of power to affect author's careers.
I am afraid to speak out under my real name because I'm afraid PW and Rose will give my books bad reviews because I criticized her for doing this. I know some people will think that is unfair, but since she allowed two authors to post something which could damage an agent's professional reputation without fact checking or any PROOF that this happened at all other than their word, I do not trust her to be impartial in reviews either. I spoke to my agent and she said my fears were reasonable and that she felt the same way but would not say anything in public because she didn't want to risk hurting her clients by having Rose Fox or Publishers Weekly give them bad reviews.
I don't know if Rose/PW will even allow this comment to be posted or if they'll censor it, but if other authors or agents are reading this and share my concern I hope they will say so, even if we have to be anonymous. Then maybe Rose's boss or the powers that be at Publishers Weekly will address this situation responsibly and not allow PW to become a platform for unsubstantiated accusations of this kind in the future.
From:
no subject
...
I do not think what Rachel and Sherwood are saying in this article is true,
One of these things is not like the oooother.
Plus, are you actually claiming that publishers and agents never whiten or straighten characters?
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2011-09-15 10:33 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:From:
no subject
From:
Followup on "Say Yes to Gay YA"
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
You two are, and remain, a class act who were not intending to mention names, but instead to address the actual issue.
As for the other party: if the shoes fits, folks, wear it.
(They're also attracting some support of the kind of that people don't usually want to see lined up on their side.)
From:
no subject
From:
The TOO MANY TABS! linkfest
From:
#yesGayYA