This Week….. Publishing……
Not a whole lot of news in publishing this week, so let’s start with a cheerful reminder: I’ve been getting so so so many questions like, “How do I find a literary agent,” “How do I write a synopsis,” “What are your submission requirements,” etc. etc. If you look to the right side of the page you will find a set of links called “The Essentials,” which will tell you all the basics. You will also find FAQs, which have much more than the basics and contain blog posts on nearly every question I have ever been asked. You can also Do A Google with my name and the subject you’re interested in. Since time is tight, I’m afraid I’m going to have to ignore questions that are easily answered in this fashion.
Cool? Cool.
Now then. On to the links! Starting with….. you guessed it, more layoffs (subscription). This time at Borders, who is cutting 12% of their corporate employees.
And speaking of layoffs: haven’t heard from your editor lately? Well, as Editorial Anonymous explains, in the wake of layoffs the projects of the departed are dispersed to the remaining editors, which creates a great deal more work.
In cheerier news, the indispensable Cynthia Leitich Smith, who runs one of the absolute best writing blogs out there featuring interviews and Cynsational News and Giveaways, will be on Second Life on February 24th! She has an awesome space set up, so if you prefer your book parties to be virtual, here’s your opportunity.
Probably about 25% of the projects I pass on result in a follow-up question asking for a recommendation for another agent. I’m afraid I have to delete these without responding, and Jessica Faust at Bookends wrote a post today addressing these questions.
And finally, via Andrew Sullivan comes one of the most amazing YouTube videos I’ve seen: driving into a dust storm.
Have a great weekend!
Christine says
I remember Janet Reid also mentioned in her blog that only 25% – 30% of query submitters seemed to have done some level of researches to achieve proper formatting and personalization. I wonder if a lot of writers out there are too much sinking into their own writings that they tend to forget the rules in real world.
eLily says
Thanks for these resources. Another interesting link, (which touches on recent topics you've posted: when one's considered a writer; friends & family support systems; creds, etc.) Eat, Pray, Love author Elizabeth Gilbert speaks about the creative process over at TED.
I've also posted the video, as well.
Anonymous says
Nathan–
I doubt that I will ever master the art of writing a good query letter, no matter how many advice articles I read. Is that a symptom of bad writing or have you seen examples of good writers who fail to deliver in a query? I don’t know how you would be able to answer this question since its unlikely you’d request a partial after reading a bad query.
Just wondering….
Sam
Cass says
There is so much information on your Blog and other places. I’m doing my homework because I don’t want to give you any reasons to dislike me or my writing.
I drove through a storm cloud last summer in Montana. Temps dropped from 81 to 39 within a matter of minutes as we drove through it. Visibility was bad, but not as bad as the dust storm video. Wish I had thought to record the experience.
RW says
Question about choosing an agent to pitch to (It will be awhile before I’m ready, but thinking ahead . . .) I figure one strategy is to identify authors whose work mine resembles in some way and to try and identify who their agent is on the theory that they have some track record and interest in selling that kind of book. Is there a simple way to do figure out whose someone agent is that you know of, Nathan, aside from looking in the acknowledgments to see if they thank their agent?
Rick Chesler says
FYI Nathan:
The links for Editorial Anon and Faust at Bookends both go to the Bookends post.
As always, thanks for the TWIP.
Scotty says
I used to be adverse to naming authors that influenced me in some way, but then learned that some agents like to see names because it tells them that you’re professional enough to realize that your writing isn’t “unlike anything they’ve seen before!”.
What I did then was kind of deconstruct my style. I think it’s probably fair to say that most of us write without full knowledge of who we’re channeling. So it’s worth it to figure that out. The sentence style could be similar to one author, the character types another. Mine, as I’ve identified it recently, is what Ira Levin, Raymond Carver and Donald Ray Pollock might all order from a menu if they had to order the same thing. 🙂
So sad to see more layoffs. My best to all of you out there who may be affected by this awful crisis of irresponsibility.
Nathan Bransford says
Thanks, Rick. Fixed.
Steve Fuller says
Not sure if you guys read Seth Godin, but you should. Recently, he said this about the music industry, but it TOTALLY applies to publishing:
“The music industry is really focused on the ‘industry’ part and not so much on the ‘music’ part. This is the greatest moment in the history of music if your dream is to distribute as much music as possible to as many people as possible, or if your goal is to make it as easy as possible to become heard as a musician. There’s never been a time like this before. So if your focus is on music, it’s great. If your focus is on the industry part and the limos, the advances, the lawyers, polycarbonate and vinyl, it’s horrible. The shift that is happening right now is that the people who insist on keeping the world as it was are going to get more and more frustrated until they lose their jobs. People who want to invent a whole new set of rules, a new paradigm, can’t believe their good fortune and how lucky they are that the people in the industry aren’t noticing an opportunity…”
Amen! I am so excited to be a writer in 2009. There is a whole new world of opportunity that we get to experience!
Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! says
so sad how our economy is crumbling before our eyes.
Anonymous says
Thanks so much for the link to Cynthia’s blog – I love reading agent interviews and there are a ton there! Sorry for the anonymous post, but I’m slightly challenged in the technology arena. Hope everyone has a fabulous weekend!
Rick Daley says
Thanks for the news.
If you look at increase in queries from a simple economic view of supply and demand, there is growing supply and decreased demand. Does this mean only the very best works will be purchased, and they will probably be purchased at or below minimum value?
Not a real rosy scenario.
I think this is a great opportunity to dive back into my manuscript and triple check to make sure it’s in the best possible shape to sell before embarking on another round of submissions. That way, when I do submit again, it will be more likely that the efforts will not be in vain.
Rick Daley says
“so sad how our economy is crumbling before our eyes.”
Is it crumbling, or are we witnessing the economy evolve into something new? (Thanks to Steve Fuller for the Seth Godin quote, great stuff!)
Some people call the glass half empty. Others call the glass half full. I tend to notice that the glass is actually made of plastic, and call it a cup.
Marilyn Peake says
Thank you for more great links, Nathan. I’m so sorry about the continuing layoffs. Amazing video, and interesting that Andrew Sullivan posted it under the heading of Mental Health Break. I got the impression that those people were heading into the dust storm on purpose. The fires in Australia are so sad. Here’s an inspiring video of an Australian firefighter rescuing a koala bear and giving it a drink of bottled water.
Have a great weekend!
BarbS. says
So!?!?!? What happened to the people in the car???? That’s more than amazing. Thats like all the nightmare stories we’ve heard about major volcanic eruptions.
Which leaves me to wonder…No more nice little videos about charming piglets?
LOL, sorry…HAD to ask…
Hilabeans says
Thanks for the info and as always, you’re a class act. Your clients are lucky to have you.
In regards to your preference, do you tend to pick up books that have series potential? More bang per buck? Or would you rather see a purely standalone piece of fiction?
Which is easier to sell, in your opinion?
Has the weakened economy shifted this at all?
Thanks! Sorry for the deluge of questions… 🙂
Furious D says
1. Borders will now be going over the border for illegal immigrant bookstore clerks to save money.
2. That’s why it’s been 8 months without an answer since that editor said they gave my novel to their boss.
3. I won’t join 2nd Life until after I get a 1st Life.
4. That’s why you should keep a list of rival agents that you don’t like to recommend to rejects. Come on, you gotta use strategy!
5. Oooh dusty.
Reason Reanimator says
Sorry, but I’m calling B.S.
Nathan, on one hand, you sound nice; on the other, I don’t understand your motives in blogging. I think your first blog post here basically shows that writers can get reads if they have inside connections (a.k.a. recommendations) and probably shouldn’t bother querying if they don’t.* Even back then you admitted you rarely pick up querying clients.
In my opinion and experience, getting published isn’t mainly about writing quality today; I wish the whole crowd of you insiders would finally admit writing quality is secondary. If it were primary, you’d ask for actual manuscripts FIRST, not last. If writing quality were primary, who a writer knows would NEVER matter. All the stuff around the writing–who the writer knows, past publishing credits, how pliant–easy to work with–the writer is, how the writer describes the work–all that stuff is more important to you. And that stuff probably has little to nothing to do with the writing quality of the actual works in question.
Evidence of this abounds. Querying and how to kiss publishing ass are the entire focus of most insider blogs. How to improve actual written works, how to write novels, how to write stories, how to revise–that’s rarely the focus. I’m sure plenty of writers have learned from your blogs–have learned how to write queries. But I seriously doubt their novels will be as good as their queries! THEIR ACTUAL WORKS SHOULD BE THEIR FOCUS.
Nathan, why on earth have you spent so much time repeatedly answering the same questions about querying when the odds of queries working are very small?
To other writers, you must learn how to find answers for yourself. The more time you waste asking publishing insiders the-answer-should-be-obvious questions, the less time they have for reading submissions and representing clients. …And that’s another reason why I don’t understand why insiders blog at all. Unless it’s an ego-trip thing.
Nathan, I think your previous statement that “anyone who can write a good book can write a good query” is particularly B.S., and you should know this. Instead, it’s like you’ve used that statement to help keep the commenters here querying in general.
Does the flipside of your statement hold true: anyone who can write a good query can write a good book. Of course that statement doesn’t hold true, and neither does yours. Yet people should believe yours does? Why? Why should they believe it only works in one direction, and in the direction that favors the current publishing system? Expecting writers to believe that would be self-serving for someone wanting the query system in place–a system which hardly benefits writers but usually harms them.
Just like one-hit wonders exist in music, one-hit wonders exist in writing. One-hit wonders in FORM also exist. They can only write in one writing format–they’re quite bad or at least quite boring in others. Not everyone who can write long-form can write short-form. Not everyone who can write novels can write queries, not everyone who can write queries can write novels. Some novelists are bad screenwriters, some screenwriters are bad novelists. Some novelists can’t write short stories, some short story writers can’t write novels. Some playwrights can’t write short stories, some short story writers can’t write poetry.
A query letter is a QUERY LETTER–IMO at least, it has little to nothing to do with the work it supposedly represents. It’s a separate writing format. Each form of written work is unique–excellence in one type doesn’t necessarily translate into excellence in another. People have said F. Scott Fitzgerald sucked at screenwriting. I personally don’t care for his prose work either, but if those people are correct, then my point should be clear.
The best writers can write really well in multiple forms, but I think they are a minority of writers. Most writers can write really well in one or two formats at most.
Not only have I seen good queries about bad published books, but I’ve seen bad queries about published books (don’t know if the books were any good). I know of at least one query that not only contained typos, but grammatical errors too. AND THAT QUERY LED TO REPRESENTATION. THE AGENT HAD IT PROUDLY POSTED ON THE AGENCY’S SITE. How embarrassing for both the agent and the writer.
If writers must (foolishly) continue soliciting the traditional route, must (foolishly) continue giving up their power to the publishing industry, maybe they should approach query letters as a separate writing format, because that’s what a query is: separate from the actual written work.
I can’t think of anything more boring then spending hour after hour crafting letters about my work and about me. I’ve done it but never again. It’s an exercise in futility. I’m a fiction writer, not a query writer.
So, congratulations to all you accomplished query writers, spending day and night supporting the largely anti-writer publishing system, doggedly sending those letters to people who barely read what you’ve written. But…but-but-but, can you write a NOVEL? You need to ask yourself this.
Society needs well-written novels more than it needs well-written query letters. If you can’t get satisfaction through the traditional route (and chances are you won’t), publish your work yourself, blog your work–whatever. But focus on your actual WORK. Most of your writing effort should be directed THERE.
*What Nathan said in his first post: “The best way to find an agent is through a referral from an existing agented writer. Mine your personal connections and degrees of separation. Go through your friends and friends of friends to see if anyone knows anyone remotely connected to the publishing industry.”
–So, Nathan, if writing quality is number one with you crowd, why doesn’t your post say: “The best way to find an agent is through writing a great book.”
I don’t mean to verbally beat up you in particular–at least you’re honest about your focus. The problem is when insiders spread their elitist nonsense toward unpublished works, about how if they haven’t been published, it’s because they suck. To me, it seems writing quality’s barely on publishing’s radar anymore.
Nathan Bransford says
What in the heck is in the water today? Are you the same person who sent me an e-mail earlier saying my generation is vapid and doesn’t understand anything?
But secondly, I don’t have time to wade through unsummarized manuscript pages and have to get to page 275 before I figure out what it’s about and whether I want to represent it, nor does any other agent. I need a summary. It’s the only feasible system. I’ve yet to see anyone come up with a plausible alternative. Until that changes, best to get over the moral or philosophical objections to the query and work on writing a good one.
People act like agents don’t want to find good books. I’m here to tell you: WE DO. For the love of God we do. But we’re also getting completely deluged by queries, constantly, they never stop, and we have clients and lives to attend to. This is the only tenable way to make it all work.
Time to get over the system and start learning to work within it. I’m trying to help.
Nathan Bransford says
Oh, and yeah, referrals work well too. Either/or.
Hilabeans says
Reason Reanimator –
Wow!
I can understand your frustration, but tell me, is there any industry where a warm intro or a proven track record of success doesn’t give you an edge?
The odds of ‘making it’ are slim. I know this, but I continue on in my pursuit. And so should you.
Nathan’s blog helps us, as writers, to understand what we’re up against. Using this forum as a rant platform doesn’t change anything.
My passion is writing – improving it, making it more fluid and engaging, telling a better story, touching someone with my words and thoughts… (terrible sentence structure, I know – please put down the gun)
But along with all of that, I want to get paid. So, knowing what hoops are out there and learning how to jump through them is paramount.
Thank you, Nathan, for all of your insight. I appreciate it.
Steve Fuller says
Nathan,
Yikes.
But a serious question: Why not have writers create a “query site” or whatever you want to call it? The site/blog could easily list an author’s credentials, a summary of the novel, sample chapters, and the full manuscript.
That is NOT my intention with this linked blog (it’s just a short story I am writing for fun), but something similar to https://fullerblogisode.blogspot.com
As an agent, you click on the link (emailed to you the way queries are currently emailed) and start reading. If the summary isn’t something you want to represent, you stop. If it seems pretty good, you keep reading. If you get bored with the first few paragraphs, you stop. If you are interested, you keep reading.
Seems so much more efficient.
Even if you never get to the sample chapters, it makes writers feel so much better thinking agents/publishers are reading their actual novel, and not just a query letter.
Reason Reanimator says
No! I didn’t email you. I wouldn’t do that–I would think that would be obvious.
If you want, I could email you NOW simply to show you I don’t have the same I.P. as whoever you’re talking about. But I’d rather not email you. I don’t want to talk to anyone personally. Let me know what you want.
Back to the topic, I’m sorry, but AGAIN I must call B.S.:
“But we’re also getting completely deluged by queries, constantly, they never stop, and we have clients and lives to attend to. This is the only tenable way to make it all work.”
–If you don’t want to be deluged, STOP FOCUSING SO MUCH ON QUERYING. That so many writers spend so much effort on querying is partly the fault of publishing insiders–that they could ever deny this is ridiculous. Yet they do deny it. YOU want this system; the majority of writers probably do not.
Publishing is supposed to be a creative industry in part–why not come up with other models for finding good writing? Many of your posts here are about querying–DUH, you’re getting a lot of queries. That isn’t surprising. I wonder if the they-don’t-blog agents are getting the same increased amount?
Nathan, I’ve worked in publishing, mostly on professional journals, but I’ve also edited a few (looooong) nonfiction books. When you make statements like the ones above, what I think is the illogic of them pisses me off. My nickname isn’t Reason Reanimator for nothing.
Don’t imply (and I think you and others saying similar things are implying) that reading a manuscript’s first page is more difficult than reading a one-page query letter. I’ve edited, proofread and copy-edited till my eyesight started getting detrimentally affected. Reading is READING.
IMO, reading the actual manuscript is the only way to know if the manuscripts writing will be any good. Until that leap is taken, you just can’t know with high accuracy. Why bother making extra reading for yourselves? You could simply say, “Submit the manuscript’s first page, and a brief description of the work”–and actually spare yourself some reading (of the query letter that never happened), assuming you request the whole manuscript in future.
And–nope! I’m not getting over the system, nor am I working in it anymore. Either it will change or I want no part of it. I am here only to express my opinion and hopefully wake up some other writers that they’re writing is likely suffering while they’re endlessly querying. But I won’t waste my time on that anymore.
Thanks for responding to my long post–most agents would not. They would either censor me or ignore me. That you didn’t is to your credit.
Have a good weekend yourself.
Nathan Bransford says
Steve-
I would like to be able to read everyone’s actual work, but it’s just too time consuming and exhausting. Try it yourself for a while — dip into one manuscript after another for a few hours a day. It’s almost impossible to keep up.
I’m going to have a post on Monday that explains further why it’s necessary to write a good summary even after you’re published.
I honestly feel that this is all misplaced frustration. Not everyone can be published. It’s frustrating. I get that. It’s not the system’s fault.
Reason Reanimator says
Ooops–“that they’re writing is likely suffering while they’re endlessly querying” should be “that their writing is likely suffering while they’re endlessly querying.”
Nathan Bransford says
reason-
“Submit the manuscript’s first page, and a brief description of the work”–and actually spare yourself some reading (of the query letter that never happened), assuming you request the whole manuscript in future.
Everyone is free to submit some sample pages with their query! This is precisely what most people do with a query. I don’t ask for it in my guidelines because so many people get it wrong and start sending attachments, but most people who follow this blog closely enough to read the comments section know that it’s fine to paste some pages into the body of the e-mail.
Here’s the thing: it’s very easy for me to know at a glance at a query whether it’s something I want to read or not. Piece of cake. All I need to know is the summary and see how the author writes the summary, even if it’s not written perfectly.
The summary is essential so I don’t have to try and guess what in the heck genre I’m reading as I’m perusing an introduction about a man walking through the forest. I can tell from the description alone. If I’m curious to read more I ask to see more.
And honestly, I’m content with the success rate of the system. I’m not looking to take on 50 people a year. I’m looking for a handful. It works.
And I don’t mind the query deluge. It’s efficient. I can scope far and wide. I put myself out there on the Internet so as many people can find me as possible. It’s a very, very efficient system. I’d rather read too many than miss the right one.
Reason Reanimator says
“It’s not the system’s fault.”
–Then who the hell’s “fault” is it? The little person’s, the little writer’s? Come on, Nathan. Geez, are there any other writers reading this and seeing what I’m saying? Why do you put up with being spoken about as if you’re morons?
I think writers help prop up the system and there are sooo, so many compared to the publishing slots available. So some deserving ones will invariably fall through the cracks. But the publishing industry having such a high we’re-infallible opinion of itself is retarded–yet it seems it has that opinion, without evidence to support it.
THIS IS YOUR SYSTEM; YOU OWN IT.
IMO, that the publishing industry seems loathe to engage in self-examination has been to its detriment. But, whatever. I’m tired of going over this. It probably won’t make a bit of difference because I’m only a single writer and writers are too divided to do anything about their crappy position in the publishing hierarchy.
Go back to whatever you were doing and forget I was here. You will anyway.
Nathan Bransford says
reason-
Yeah. Don’t know how helpful it will be to keep going around like this. Bottom line is that there has to be a weeding out process because there are far more books out there than the world has time or inclination to read. It’s not fun to get weeded. Trust me, it’s not a boatload of fun a lot of days to be the weeder. We’re doing what we can, and I’m doing my best.
I think I’ve made it clear that I’m very, very open to new ways of doing business. I haven’t found one that’s superior, so referrals and queries it is. If someone finds a better innovation they’ll succeed, and more power to them. (and I’ll probably quickly copy them).
Reason Reanimator says
I swear my word verification was just: eatcess. Eat cesspool? Nice. Maybe this blog’s trying to tell me something….
I won’t eat cess, but I will leave.
“And I don’t mind the query deluge. It’s efficient. I can scope far and wide. I put myself out there on the Internet so as many people can find me as possible.”
–Then don’t complain if your eyesight starts going.
Your system may seem efficient for you, but it’s not for most writers. And publishing should be about the comfort of writers primarily, not agents. No one will convince me otherwise. If it weren’t for writers, you wouldn’t have a job as an agent for writers. Writers are the foundation of WRITING.
But it’s your blog, so whatever you wanna say and portray. Good luck!
Steve Fuller says
Nathan,
You may have missed my point in all the chaos.
I totally get that you need to see a summary first, and from that summary, you may immediately know you don’t want to represent the work.
And summaries are important to consumers too. I mean, what consumer reads an entire book before they decide to buy? Consumers read the book jacket before they decide to read page one. Writers have to write excellent summaries. Agreed.
I just think that writers want to feel like (even if you never actually read a page) that their actual work is being read by agents.
Meaning, I feel much better being rejected by an agent who asks for a query AND a few pages of the novel. Even if he/she didn’t read the pages, I feel like I had a fair shot.
Does that make sense?
Trust me, you are an agent, so you know way better than any of us. Not trying to tell you how to do your job. But even if you never read the sample pages, I wonder if it would be helpful to ask for a query plus page one, just to appease all the crazy writers out there.
Nathan Bransford says
RR-
I don’t work for and am not accountable to all writers, just those whose work I believe I can sell, i.e. my clients.
And I’m not complaining. As I said, I like queries. I’m just trying to help the people who are working hard and trying to figure out the rules of the game.
Nathan Bransford says
steve-
Ah, I see now, sorry. The reason I haven’t in the past is that when I ask for it people start sending attachments, which I then can’t/don’t open.
But hey — definitely open to the idea. I’ll take that suggestion and do a trial run!
Jenna is as Jenna does says
Seems like someone took a sip from the bitter cup today! Personally I don’t see what the difference is between asking for a query letter or the first page of a manuscript. Either way the author is going to stress over it.
If query letters suddenly disappeared, there would be post after post and question after question about what you should do with the first page, how it should be formatted, should it start with dialogue or description and so on.
The fact is that with all the competition out there for publishing books, agents have to try to whittle down the field. That means that the person who is more skilled and can write a summary of their work is more valuable than the person who can’t. Why is that surprising? Agents want to take on the most skilled writers possible, as they are more likely to have longevity in the industry.
Nathan, I personally appreciate everything that you write. My novel isn’t finished yet, but I am working on summaries and queries as I go so that it won’t be so stressful, but I still am happy to read about it. I am happy to read about ANYTHING to do with the industry. Your blog rocks!
Nathan Bransford says
steve-
Ok, here are my new and improved submission requirements (in my bio on the front page):
If you are interested in submitting a project for representation, please e-mail me a query letter describing your project and five pages pasted directly into the body of the e-mail at nb@cbltd.com. **No attachments, please.**
We’ll see how it goes — you may be correct that it cuts down on the angst for people to be able to submit some of their actual pages along with the query.
Nathan Bransford says
Thanks, Jenna, I appreciate it.
Hilabeans says
Back off, RR. Inappropriateness does not become you.
Nathan Bransford says
Annnnnnnnd that’s enough. You’ve had your say, no need to start taking down other people.
Steve Fuller says
Let us know how the experiment goes. And if we have saved one writer from going crazy, then our work is done. 🙂
Jenna is as Jenna does says
Aw, I missed the exciting bit! Late to the party as usual!
Anonymous says
reason,
The phrase is “best-selling author,” not “best-writing author.”
And if you don’t like the query sysstem, there are other ways. Seems to me that the latest trend is to POD-self publish with accompanying Amazon blitzkrieg marketing plan until you sell enough copies that the agents/editors come to you.
But you gotta ask yourself where you fit in. To me there’s 3 main catergories of writers;
1) commercial wannabes–these are the ones who want to make $ selling genre fiction, and want to be in the agent-NYC house system, but can’t execute.
2) literary writers–these are the ones who write their art without consideration of the marketplace. This stuff is generally tougher to sell, even when well executed, and doesn’t have as large a market as genre/commerciaal fiction. In short, it doesn’t lend itself to the agent-query system as genre fiction does.
3) commercial genre writers who are selling
This group is either already in the agent-pub system, or the system eventually comes to them.
I suspect, reason, that you’re a #2 guy.
And as faar as the query blurbs go, they’re quite useful. Imagine trying to pick what movies to watch without those little blurbs. “Oh, just watch the first ten minutes of the movie to see what it’s about”–no thanks! What a waste of time and $$$. It’s the same with books.
Good luck.
Reason Reanimator says
Well, since you’re now censoring me when I make a personal attack after I’ve been attacked, but you’re leaving up personal attacks toward me, I’ll post my responses to “Jenna” at my place. You can’t censor me there.
Nifaerie Noven says
Nathan, about the Borders layoffs . . .
Please take that news with a grain of salt. If you take a good look at Borders' stock, it's worth $0.53. The company has been loosing money for two years and 94/136 layoff are concentrated in Ann Arbor. This is not an indication that things are bad for agents, editors, writers or even the book market in general. If you look at share prices for the other major book sellers– B&N, Amazon.com and Books-A-Million– you'd see that, even though their stock prices fell in December, they are all still beating the S&P 500.
Publishing houses on the other hand?! A lot of publishers are owned by large multimedia companies. It's hard to tease out their profits from their parent companies. It looks like the independently owned houses like Scholastic or McGraw had rough Novembers, but their prices have stabilized since then.
Newbee says
Nathan,
So glad you are calling this query portion a summary now. I think it would help so many people out here on our side of things if you would call it that. I’m thinking to myself… “Does he want a teaser…or the whole enchilada?” Point taken and noted… I’m sure it helps you with marketing concepts and believing in a project. I can see the benefits of doing that.
Jen
Jinx says
Nathan,
I love your blog and have learned quite a bit from it. If people would just pay attention, they’d know what you wanted in the query, but I thank you for revising your submission requirements and adding them to your bio. It means I don’t have to mega-search through your entire blog. =p I knew I saw the “add pages” thing somewhere in here.
Now, on to more important things–
Can you believe those people drove into that dust storm? I’m still in awe. I hope they pulled over and stopped! That thing looked worse than the ones we get here in AZ. Wow! It also reminded me of an old fantasy movie–Krull. LOL ahem… sorry. I’ll go back to cooking my roast now.
=)
Anonymous says
RR has a point things won’t ever change if everyone just goes with the flow. There is alway room for improvement with any system. Jenna I have to disagree about the first page verses the query letter. Lots of people can write a good query letter or have someone else fairly cheaply write it, but does it truly represent the MSS? There is a reason a MSS is 100,000 words, hopefully it is because it takes that many to tell a beautiful story, and it couldn’t be told in two paragraphs. I spent two months perfecting my last query, and I can tell you that was a lot longer (59 days) than I spent on my perfect first page. When you get that down, you research all 100 agents that you decide to query to make sure they don’t toss your letter because you didn’t personalize or follow their directions. I can write another book faster than I can query. Unlike RR none of us want to be blacklisted because we complained (and I have seen that threatened on someone else’s blog); he obviously doesn’t care.
Nathan, you are fairly easily figured out, but Agent B,C,D,E, F, G…. want something totally different. Then when you hear an agent say they dislike non-personalized queries, it’s almost like a slap in the face. Maybe Harper Collins is on to something with their Authonomy. A site that writer can submit part of their work where it can be viewed by a mulitude of agents at one time for a limited time span could be an option, even if the writer had to pay a small fee for the privlege.
Thomas Burchfield says
Finish first and THEN THINK about marketing? Sorry, not interested in purchasing that idea.
First off, it’s possible to do more than one thing at once. I’d already started my book when I first pitched it to Nathan a couple of years ago at a writer’s convention (oooo, bad dog!). I wanted more than an “in.” I wanted to know if anyone in the biz would express enough interest in my idea to make it worth the following three years I’ve spent diligently working on it, bad word by good word.
And, since then, I have been, from time-to-time, THINKING about how I’m going to get my little book out to the world so folks, (including the other writers who post here)will want to read it.
This, I believe, is called marketing; no, I’ve not sent out any queries, though I have draft or two somewhere.
“THE END” is in sight and guess what? I am THINKING about querying more and more as the that day draws near. Sorry, Reanimator, can’t help it. The THINKING disease just pops into my mind like hunger or sex. I don’t want to be the only guy in the world who reads my book.
Like it or not, better and worse, writing–at least writing for other readers–has always been partly about business, capital, money. Shakespeare was a businessman–he helped run a theater company that produced his plays, fer chrissakes!
Are writers all good business people? Not only no, but hell no–that’s why there are agents, business managers, etc. out there to help; it’s a good idea to do your homework and find who they are, even before you type “THE END.”
I visit this blog because Nathan seems as knowledgeable, well-connected and professional as anyone else, maybe more so. *WHY would I NOT do that?* I am more than aware that he may very well decide my book isn’t for him, but, right now, I’m too damn busy to visit the thousands of other sites on the Web (and the other interested agents don’t do blogs); he’s only a starting point for most of us and he knows it too, I bet (I also question people who hang out too much online).
Your view of writing is one I believe held by few writers, especially the great ones; and there *are* good books out there; so many, there aren’t enough readers in the world who will live long enough to read all of them and more will be continued to be published; if a good book doesn’t get published, it may be because the writer walked away from the table too soon and got um bitter.
Finally, Reanimator, I am a chronologically older writer (and freelance editor) who has been writing for many years with little significant success, but has not become bitter.
You actually remind me more of a young person who has just made an amazing new discovery: That life is hard.
Good luck to you,
Thomas Burchfield
scottgfbailey says
My understanding is that the query process has become a necessity because (and Nathan has been too polite to say it so baldly) most writing that’s submitted for publication is Very Very Bad and Awful Writing Indeed (VVBAWI), and many writers who submit their VVBAWI to agents lack social and business skills as well as writing skills. A query letter seems a quick and easy way for agents (and editors as well) to filter out people who can’t write a coherent sentence, and/or people with whom you’d never want to find yourself in a business relationship. Almost every query letter I’ve seen, frankly, makes my head hurt, they are so awful.
I hate working on my query letter, and I hate having to reduce my pitch down to a couple of short paragraphs. But I trust that, because I have some facility with the English language, merely being able to form complete sentences will at least get my query read all the way through, and that will hopefully lead to the reading of my attached pages, etc.
And geez, everybody. Mellow out.
Anonymous says
I’m curious if anyone else saw a face in that dust cloud right before they drove into it. It reminded me of the Mummy or was it the Mummy Returns?
Dara says
I’m constantly surprised by the number of writers who simply don’t do their research.
I mean, come on, you have all the links conveniently posted on the side of your blog; it doesn’t get much easier than that.
Anyway…that video of the dust storm was astounding. It was really freaky how it went from day to night in a matter of seconds. I do have to wonder why they would want to drive into that.
Personally, I’d shoot a video of it in the distance and head the other way. 😛
Anonymous says
“You actually remind me more of a young person who has just made an amazing new discovery: That life is hard.”
That’s great characterization!