State of the historical fiction industry: a report on this #HNS2023 conference panel

In between numerous work commitments, I’ve been spending the last week attending (virtually) the Historical Novel Society’s conference, which has been taking place in person down in San Antonio, Texas, and via Zoom. I was up bright and early on Saturday morning for the 8am State of the State: Publishing in All Its Forms panel, aka the editor/agent panel – in which four representatives from the industry responded to questions about trends and current issues in historical fiction relating to traditional publication. The panelists were Amy Durant, editorial director at Sapere Books in London; Shannon Hassan, agent at the Marsal Lyon Literary Agency; Marcy Posner, agent at Folio Literary Management; and Mitchell Waters, agent at Brandt & Hochman, all of whom work with historical novelists. The moderator was author Maryka Biaggio, HNS conference board member and editor/agent liaison.

This was a plenary session, very well-attended in person, and with around 70 virtual attendees at the highest point. While the panelists were enthusiastic about historical fiction and its potential to reach readers, the overall tone relating to the industry was sobering. Publishers are understaffed, and aside from a few chosen titles, books aren’t getting the editorial or marketing attention they used to. Agents are overworked and taking on additional tasks to get authors the support they need. Authors should get their manuscripts in as close to publishable shape as possible before submitting their work. They should also realize that they’ll need to take on many marketing activities themselves.

With all that said, let’s look in more detail at what was discussed on the panel.

Regarding trends in historical fiction: Mitchell Waters feels authors should write the book they need to write but also look around at what’s being published currently: “If you haven’t seen any books on a certain period, ask yourself why that is.” It’s hard to anticipate trends, but there are enduring themes and topics. He’s found that some editors are reluctant to go back too far in time with historicals, like before the mid-19th century. Marcy Posner said it’s hard to chase trends because they will change, and editors can be fickle; she echoed Waters’ comments that authors should write that they want and write it well. Amy Durant looks for consistently popular subjects: Tudor, medieval, Victorian, and military fiction (naval and aviation). Shannon Hassan underscored the importance of contemporary relevance for historical fiction subjects, using an example of recent novels about the Trojan War.



What about World War II? This question has reappeared at the last several conferences. I dare say many of the attendees were curious whether it was still hot or not. Waters admitted to feeling fatigue with the number of submissions dealing with WWII and the Holocaust, and there was a sense that some publishers were pulling back from the era, but with this topic and others, he emphasized the importance of a fresh approach: that there must be something to interest readers other than the quality of the writing.

On editing and marketing: it’s definitely the case (as mentioned by Marcy Posner) that less effort is being placed on these aspects by publishers, compared to years past. Some top books receive a great deal of attention, while others don’t; publishers are making choices about which titles to devote most of their time to. Authors and their agents must pick up the slack. Shannon Hassan said that coming to this conference gives authors a great start (my own thoughts on this: it can help them not only learn the craft but establish a network that helps them navigate the industry). Mitchell Waters noted that he has to spend less time on revisions with authors, that they need to have their books “closer to ready to go.” He cited an example where he once spent 18 months getting a manuscript ready for publication, but he can no longer do that since the volume of work has “increased exponentially.” He described a manuscript he missed out on acquiring (and which later got a good book deal), which he regrets, because he was too busy. Shannon Hassan echoed that she doesn’t have time to provide detailed feedback on queries, and it may not even be appropriate if she doesn’t fall in love with a book. Marcy Posner echoed this, saying she’s now doing the job of five people (relating to editing, marketing, counseling authors, etc.). The gist: editors and agents are swamped, something authors should keep in mind when querying.

Maryka Biaggio then asked the panelists about the issue of cultural appropriation – writing outside your own ethnicity – which generated conversation in the virtual chat room. The topic comes up frequently at HNS conferences; audience members have asked the same question of speakers at this conference, and I also remember it being asked at the in-person 2019 conference and the virtual event in 2021. The responses from industry representatives have been consistent, and I agree with the Zoom chat comment that it feels like writers (those not from the cultural group they want to write about) keep asking the question as if they’re hoping for a different response.

From Amy Durant: it’s important for writers to be sensitive to these issues, do their research, think carefully about their characters, and also question whether they’re the best person to be telling this story. Mitchell Waters tackled the issue from a marketing standpoint as well, in asking writers to consider if people will be interested in them as the author of the book, if the characters’ experiences are too far away from their own. Generally: write the best story you can, do diligent research, approach your subjects with sensitivity. For a related question dealing with depictions of LGBTQ characters in history, since there’s increased industry and reader interest in marginalized lives, Marcy Posner mentioned the importance of showing the joyful aspects of these characters’ lives, not only the struggles they face.

I didn’t make notes about the question dealing with why people might want to leave an agent, or vice versa, or the number of authors they signed from conference meetings, although the latter was a small number. Other notes from the Q&A: Waters shared some of the positive aspects of historical fiction: that people have an underlying reason to want to read it, aside from whatever beautiful writing they come across: it offers a rich canvas about a wide range of time periods (though he acknowledged some are trendier than others). The ‘60s and ‘70s are popular settings, which provides a sense of nostalgia. Advice for midlist authors: they should realize they’ll be responsible for doing additional work before submitting and after publication. He mentioned Rosamunde Pilcher’s The Shell Seekers as the author’s breakout book. She’d written many earlier novels, but The Shell Seekers was a more substantial book in many ways (in terms of scope, setting, and length – my thoughts) that allowed her to break out of the midlist. However, her situation is unusual, especially today, with publishers having less time to devote to books. Also, the phrase “fictional novel” or “fiction novel” (redundant!) looks bad in a query letter.

On prologues: These insights were especially interesting and on point. Waters mentioned they’re so frequent now because “readers have no patience” and “need to know from the first page what the stakes are.” Prologues can be a useful way of signaling to readers about events later in the plotline and can motivate readers to continue. There’s been considerable debate in the industry about whether they’re helpful. Regarding marketing strategies, Amy Durant commented that it can be hard to market an author with just a single book, so she looks for the potential for a series. (Sapere publishes many novels in series.) A question from the audience on artificial intelligence and synopses: the panelists discussed the pushback against AI (such as the model clauses for publishing contracts newly developed by the Authors’ Guild, as mentioned by Hassan). Amy Durant mentioned AI could be used as a tool for synopsis ideas, but writers should take care to write them in their own words.

So there you have it. Optimism about historical fiction, tempered with realism about the industry. The recording isn’t up yet, so this writeup is based on two pages of scribble. My fellow attendees: if I missed anything important or got anything wrong, please drop me a note or comment!