Since you asked, here's what I know about the market. It's like duck hunting. (No, I don't shoot ducks.) You don't aim at the duck as it's flying, you aim just in front of the duck. You lead the target. Don't shoot at the vampire, do what my friend Michael Stearns (with Lauren Kate) did, guess what might be next and shoot an angel.

Another example: just before we sold Animorphs everyone was telling us to go after RL Stine's Goosebumps because MG horror was the big thing. We said, no way. First, it would be derivative. Second he owned an existing market and we doubted we could take him. Third, trends have a life span. 5 years give or take and the 5 years was about up. So we led the target, guessed sci fi and shot a duck.

Having aimed at Sci Fi did that mean we wrote something generic? Not a week goes by that we don't get a heartfelt letter or Facebook note from some kid now in college telling us they are the people they are today because of Animorphs. Guy just tonight said he felt he'd be a much meaner person had he not read our books.

So there is no necessary conflict between aiming at a market and writing what you want to write.

You want to develop a feel for the market. That's a very nebulous term, obviously. That "feel" consists of intelligent observation and a sort of intuitive extrapolation. Spend a ridiculous amount of time skulking around the B&N. Stare at the shelves you want to someday own. (Try not to look too much like a pervert while doing this.) Read the trade press — but don't let it bum you out. Over time you'll acquire something of a feel.

You won't always be right. Or you'll be right but too early or too late or with the wrong book. As Animorphs was winding down we led the target again and guessed fantasy. Unfortunately JK Rowling shot our duck. We were unducked.

Or you find you're part of a mob of people who all figured out the same thing at the same time. When I wrote Gone no one was doing dystopian YA. By the time I was on the second book I was in New York on a panel with Carrie Ryan, James Dashner and Scott Westerfeld, all of us discussing the trend to dystopian YA. There was no conspiracy: we all just read the market the same way. And yet, look at those four books and no fair observer would say we wrote the same thing.

Sometimes the wining move is to see the duck, guess where the duck is flying, and then shoot the raccoon. Counterprogram entirely by taking a gamble on a whole new thing, even a thing that seems overdone but you have a new take on it. If you have the feeling there are 8 guys leading the same target, go off on a tangent.

And sometimes you do what my wife did with Home of the Brave and say, "This won't make us much but screw it, I'm writing it anyway." (Not a direct quote. But pretty close.)

There's no guaranteed way to win. Between us we've sold 8 series. (That's not counting things that were pre-sold for one reason or another, just the from-scratch pitches.) We've basically sold every series we ever pitched, but of the 8 only one (Animorphs) was a major hit. Everworld did okay, it earned out against hefty advances but meh. Remnants tanked. Barf-o-Rama tanked. (I know. How could it fail?) Roscoe Riley did okay. Gone is doing pretty well and is still building. Too early to tell on MAG 12, and BRZRK is still just a gleam in my whiskey-glazed eye, so who knows?

You takes yer chances. It's a crap shoot but you can shave the dice a bit if you acquire a feel for the market. (What's the blog limit on mixed metaphors?)

Oh, and don't suck at writing. That's helpful, too.

Moira: Look, here's why this is annoying. When an amateur asks a question and gets an answer from a professional the proper response is, "Thanks for taking time to answer my question." Not, "Ahah! I've found an excuse to accuse you of sexism!" Followed by, "You're wrong, I know it all."

I don't know about the other writers here but I try to do the decent thing and play the appropriate role of "experienced old pro." (It comes naturally to me because I am an experienced old pro. Especially the old part.) But when I take the time to answer questions from amateurs nine times out of ten I get some response that indicates they don't really care about the facts, they just want their presuppositions validated.

Like anyone you are entitled to your opinion. But opinion is all you have. What I have is experience. Experience is worth approximately 1000 times as much as uninformed opinion. (Math approximate.) It's as if I went to Stephen King, asked him how to write the feeling of dread and then upon hearing his answer responded, "Yeah, well you're full of it, Steve."

There are approximately zero people who have sold more kid books to more publishers over a longer career than me. (Well, maybe Jane Yolen. A couple others.) You, Moira, get a chance to learn something from someone who knows what the hell he's talking about and your response is cheap shots.

The smart reply from you would have been something along the lines of, "Jesus, dude, 150 books, 3 simultaneous series right now, how can I learn to do that?" Followed by something like, "Thanks, man."

You might have learned something.

I thought the advice was for "a friend"?

No, Michael, I'm not claiming to have the answers. If you're going to make a comment about writers having husbands, don't get your knickers in a twist if someone calls you on it.

I do know a little something about considering "the market." Marketplace hired me when other national public radio programs called my writing too angry and straightforward. My commentaries had over 9 million listeners, and gained me an appearance on national TV. I still get positive emails from Fortune 500 CEOs and past and present members of Congress, and other former listeners. (And I illustrated a picture book, for which I was paid in the five figures.) I'm not an idealistic amateur. But now I'm trying a market I don't know as well. So I'm asking questions here. Because I'd like to learn. Thank you.