Is there really a ''key'' to success when it comes to being a published writer?

[Ben]

In today's world, with Twitter, Facebook, Amazon, etc., it's a tad bit easier for publishing houses to gauge the market to see how a particular book might do. A novel about vampires has an immensely better chance of being published than say, a manuscript titled My Life on The Prarie. And even though the latter might be leagues ahead of the vampire book as far quality, plot, and character development, even though the vampire manuscript might riddled with bad dialogue, wooden characters and laughable cliches, it's not going to matter much to the publishers.
They'll look at the vampire script and say well, look how well Twilight has done, The Vampire diaries, True Blood......there's a market for this. Let's publish it. And you know what? I think a large percentage of the writers out there who are disappointed because their work is constantly being rejected, I think they are the people who are essentially submitting My Life on The Prarie and it's like they don't get it, you know?
They don't get it that there has to be a market for your work for it to even be considered for print. Let's say the publishers had a crystal ball that told them the vampire book will sell ten million copies and the My Life On The Prarie five thousand copies. Let's say the vampire book read like it was written by a seventh grader and the Prarie book was in fact penned by a Harvard grad with a phd in literature. Which do you think will get published? Make no mistake about it, the ultimate goal is to make money. That is why a large percentage of submissions get rejected because whoever it is at X publishing house that decides to put something in print doesnt believe the work will bring them money.
Can you think of other reasons?

[cathrl69]

Problem is, if you start writing the latest Big Thing, by the time you're ready to submit, it'll be old hat. Vampire books? Most publishers won't even look at them right now. It's all dystopian stuff. But start writing dystopian now and you won't be done in time.

So, is there a "key to success"? If you've written a good book, sure. It's called luck.

[Hungry Kitty]

Publishing is like any other business. They are not doing it as a public service. The "Public" buys vampire books of Twilight quality, if you can use that word, because word got around amongst a certain target audience that this is the cool thing to read. The same would not happen to Life on the Prairie (5000 copies is probably generous), or a mass of other unfashionable genres. That's not to say that the latter cannot be published in e-format for the less conventional amongst us to seek out and read, but it probably won't make any money for the author.

The key is always to have a good story, no matter what genre. To make serious money you need a strong and populous target audience and an ability to see where the demand will lie in 2-3 years. I predict handsome male angels with a quirky bad side will be big in 2014 in the tween market. Go for it!

[Finesse]

Its all about timing. If you write something original, and it goes supernova, its not so much about who wrote it or how well, its just that the world was ready for something like it. Unfortunately its not something you can bottle or predict, you can totally tell the kinds of books where the author created something they wanted to read, and the kinds where they're trying to be mainstream, trying to get in on a slice of that Hunger Games pie.

[Joss]

The key to success if luck and having talent. Whether talent is something you're born with or something that can be learned is debatable. I believe their are a lot of talentless people out there writing novels and trying to get them published - and they will be rejected.

I have a problem with your examples because, frankly, vampires are old hate. That trend has passed. You're not going to break into publishing with a vampire book unless you bring something truly unique and original to it.

Secondly, your theory about what could happen between a vampire book and a book (genre?) called My Life On The Praire is that your forgetting that concept and plot are important, and I'm confused by your comparison here. What kind of book is the Prairie book? For all I know if could be the title of a vampire novel. You're comparing a trope to a possible title. That's a major flaw and doesnt' make sense.

Anyway, I know for a fact (because not only have many literary agents said it, but editors have said it. A good concept can be killed by bad writing. Many literary agents in particular (not talking about just one or two) have said that they've had to reject a manuscript with a great concept because the writing was poor. That should tell you everything. Just because a book has vampires doesnt' mean that publishers will publish it. There's a lot more thought that goes into writing. Sure, a great concept can overcome average writing, but it can't overcome plain bad writing. Believe it or not, readers expect more from a book.

Also, one thing that I've learned from a publisher - if you have an outstanding concept but are a poor writer, the publisher might agree to publish your book, but they'll hire a ghost writer to write it - if they think it'll sell lots of copies.

But going by your crystal ball comment (I'm not sure what to make of it, really) but yeah, if I were a publisher and I knew for a fact that a poorly written book that I'm holding will definitely sell millions of copies thus making the company millions of dollars then yeah, who wouldn't publish it? Publishing is a business first and foremost. So, even some great authors and great books can get rejected if there's no market for it. Publishers wouldn't be in business too long if they didn't care about their bottom line (making money for their stockholders). that's a given, but it's a given to me because I have a degree in business. But, it probably won't be as badly written when it hits store shelves. The publisher can just invest in a ghost writer on the author's behalf to make it publishable quality or perhaps go through many rounds of editing with the author until its presentable. I mean, Amanda Hocking's book had to go through lots of editing when she got a traditional publisher to publish her self-published ebooks. - even she admits that they were badly written and in need of good editing.

You're wrong about why most manuscripts get rejected: Most rejections happen because the manuscript isn't ready to publish. Just because someone writes a novel doesn't mean it's a good novel that should be published. Most literary agents say the number one reasons they reject a manuscript is: 1) the writer didnt' bother reading the publishers/agents submission guidelines and submitted to them somthing they don't publish - ie: sending a romance manuscript to a publisher that doesn't publish romance. And 2) the manuscript the writer is submitting isn't ready to be published - either the manuscript needs more polishing and editing or the writer still needs to hone his/her skill and become a better writer. There's also another reason that's hit on by many literary agents: A writer might be a decent writer, but in this age of publishing, you need to be more than just a 'good' writer, you need to be a 'great' writer. and writing encompass more than just having pretty prose. Well, I guess you're not entirely wrong: If something is as badly eye-gouging as most of the stuff editors and agents get then I guess you can say that it won't make them money and therefore they're rejecting it - a bit of a stretch though.

And, having a PhD in literature from an Ivy League school doesn't mean you're a great writer who should be published instantly - they still need to learn the craft like the rest of us and will endure just as many rejections. In fact, many literary agents joke about the submissions they get from people who learned creative writing at college - they find a lot of their work is overwritten.

And, btw, we're probably making the same points.