Now that you have walked 50 queries in an agent’s shoes and likely pictured yourself answering 50 queries a day stretching on into infinity, how would you handle your slush pile if you were an agent?
Would you personalize? Would you form reject? Reply-if-interested? Crawl under your desk and hope no one finds you?
I’m really curious to hear everyone’s submission policy. Knowing what you know now.
Some of the reader comments were off about word count, but I sure haven’t seen many YA or MG writers who are getting their first books published lately straying very far from 60k words. Shorter or longer can be a good book, but it depends on the book, not the word count, even if people used word count to support their rejections.
What I’ve learned from this exercise:
– I’ve no idea how good I’d be as a slushpile sifter. I reckon I might have found a couple of the published books. Certainly no more than that.
– I do know that the queries I’ve chosen are the ones that appealed most to me, rather than the ones that are most likely to be good sellers.
– Is it fair for an Agent to agree to represent work they love even if they have doubts that it could sell well? I thought I knew the answer to that one before I started this exercise; now I’m not so sure.
– I’m getting a good idea why my queries have (so far) been rejected. I still don’t have a clear idea of how to distill my book into a really good query.
– Whatever my talents are as a slushpile sifter, I found myself enjoying the work. I ought to be scared by that revelation.
– I used form letters. Life would be meaningless without form letters.
– I did personalise each form letter with the title of the book. I think that’s an important touch, to show that someone at least looked at the query.
– If I ever got a job as a slushpile reader, I’d probably last less than a fortnight. I’m thinking policemen and straitjackets.
Bija Andrew Wright,
Thanks for your response. It was quite helpful. The reason I asked that question was that in the ranking system I used for “be an agent for a day” contest, I only considered consequences of “accepting a bad query” and was not sure how to take the other one “rejection of a good query” into account. I wanted to know if agents do that. Your response helped me picture the whole process a bit better. Thanks.
I would definitely go with form rejections, probably for almost all rejections, regardless of the reason.
I think this was an incredibly effective exercise. I can’t imagine anyone who participated didn’t take away SOMETHING. And it neatly diverted everyone from the frenzy of negativity (for the moment, ha!).
I chose to offer feedback with rejections, and in doing so ensured I would not have time to respond to every query. As a writer who has been through the query process, I know I would much prefer to receive some kind of response, even a form rejection. Furthermore, I discovered how very difficult it is to provide helpful feedback in one or two sentences – each one I wrote I envisioned the recipient shaking their fists in frustration.
– AI
I’d like to think I’d send personalised rejections. There are some I’d reject but want to encourage to keep trying and others that I’d want to make it clear just how far off the mark they are. Possibly one could have half a dozen different standard rejection letters that would meet most situations and then only occasionally add something to these. I really wouldn’t want to write a rejection that encouraged people to keep submitting to other agents when it was clear that the work was substandard. Sometimes the sharp bite of reality is what’s needed.
Form rejections.
I asked for five, but was only really excited about two.
In real life, the three others might have received a warmer letter than a form rejection… might depend upon how busy I was at the time.
It depends on the quality of the submissions. A form reject letter for those are just not bad. Another form type letter for those that are interesting and well written but just not the right subject. Even a form letter rejection is better than no response at all.
I wouldn’t.
I’d find another job.
Thanks for this experience, Nathan.
I did all 50 in about 2 hours and loved the exercise. I would definitely use form rejection on nearly all. Otherwise responding to queries would be my only job — and it’s not the paying one.
My submission requirements:
1. Query plus five pages. No attachments. E-mail only.
2. Automated response saying I received the query and will respond within two weeks.
3. Form rejection for 99%. However, I would be willing to try creating a txt file with form rejections for different reasons for rejection and using those. If that resulted in hassles from writers, I’d go to the basic uninformative kind.
4. The small percentage that were almost right for me or that I thought were excellent queries but just not something I could sell would probably get personlized responses — again, unless those resulted in hassles from writers.
I honestly enjoyed the exercise, and I think I could do this day in and day out. It’s the REST of the agenting job I wouldn’t enjoy! Contracts? Schmoozing? Selling? YUCK!
I honestly had no trouble limiting my requests to just a few. Even though there were some intriguing ideas, the majority of the queries had such serious problems that I wouldn’t waste my time asking for pages. Problems included grammatical mistakes, poor writing, inability to describe the plot, and word counts way off the mark. Maybe I’ve read too many Query Shark posts, but honestly, it was the rare query that intrigued me.
Now I have to go revise my own query!!! I understand much better now why it really has to POP.
Form reject I guess. Anything else just eats up time. It sounds cold but at least it beats wondering for weeks whether or not the agent got your query.
What ever you do, a rejection is a rejection and that just sucks.
On the Susan Boyle thing, I think it’s just the “Don’t Judge a Book by its Cover” thing, nothing more, nothing less.
I’d form reject most, but include the person’s name and title of their work. I don’t think I’d be able to go the non-response route, since I’ve seen that from a writer’s perspective and know it’s the worst. (As a writer, I lose a little faith in agents who never respond. Would they also ignore my emails if they represented me?).
If I saw promise in the writing or wanted to see future work, I’d make that known. And I’d definitely respond personally to all partial and full requests. When an agent requests material, they start a dialogue. Not responding after making a request is poor etiquette.
I loved Agent for a Day; I feel like I learned a lot. Thanks!
I didn’t have time to jump in from the beginning but didn’t want to miss all the fun. In about two hours, I made it through 37 of the queries. I found it pretty easy to read the first few for full consideration. Then, after a few more, I realized I was skimming for the pertinent info, and for a hook. By the time I finished, I’d made a list of the lessons I’d learned to share and for reference.
I understand why agents don’t personalize every request, yet still I wanted to personalize a few, because the writers were soooo close to something good. But only a few, maybe six.
Dedicated address for queries
Autoresponse upon receipt.
Request query and five pages.
Form letter for rejections.
Personalized letter for partial/full requests
Personalized rejection for partials/fulls
I can’t imagine having an assistant going through queries. Even though most would be rejects, the thrill of finding the good ideas and the good writing must be one of the rewards of the job. Or am I wrong?
If an author submits an SASE with his/her query, then at the very least, he/she deserves a form rejection letter (if not a personalized manuscript request, of course!). I understand how busy agents can be, juggling actual clients, reviewing manuscripts and contracts, and generally helping to keep the publishing industry afloat, but still… authors put a lot of effort into their queries, proposals, manuscripts, websites, etc., and common courtesy dictates some form of a response (even if it is, as previously stated, just a form letter). I realize, of course, that as wonderful as it would be, personalizing a response is not a reasonable expectation. As someone who runs two film festivals, I understand that giving free feedback (even to those filmmakers whose films aren’t accepted) is just not possible, given limited time and resources.
Auto response that it was received initially, then reply with form rejections and requests. I have no problem with form anything, but the “no response = no” folks leave me wondering if the query ever got there in the first place.
This is so much work, I really don’t want my agent using up all his time on queries. I like the idea of a form response upon receipt explaining that if you’re interested, the writer will hear back.
I had a group of 4 “almosts” that I really wanted to give some personalized feedback to. But by the time I dealt with all the clear “nos” I just didn’t have time to do this is more than a very cursory manner. Writing those four were difficult because I really had to think about how to give criticism that would be constructive – that might help the receiver improve but wouldn’t be mean or crushing. So the key seems to be a system to handle the clear “nos” quickly enough, while still being humane, to free up just a bit of time to give constructive replies to the almosts, at least on the days you have a moment to breath!
If I were an agent this is how I would handle submissions.
First, I would not allow authors to empower me. I would let each query writer know that there are many options, including self-publishing. That’s the best advice an agent can give with a rejection notice.
I gave up on queries. It is asking somebody else with more power to help you in your endeavors. There are so many other options that allow a writer to share his work.
There’s a guy in my neighborhood who plays his guitar on a street corner. Maybe it is because he never was signed by a record company. There is an artist who displays his paintings on the sidewalk. And there are singers who are fantastic and they sing on the subway train. And this dude I know self-published his poems. Many people might consider his work mediocre at best, but seeing his work in print helped him find his smile.
I admire their creativity. They are not querying another person and waiting for another person to give them permission to share parts of themselves.
Life is short. It may be a one-shot deal.
As the author of #24, I just want to thank everyone for their comments, especially the ones that detailed what made you reject the query, since it really provided me with some helpful advice on moving forward with my project.
I know that real agents aren’t able to comment on their rejections, but so many of you took time out of your busy agent days to offer helpful suggestions, which really touched me, especially since this was on top of all your day jobs. Thanks so much!
Also, I read your queries with interest and felt proud to have been considered alongside these other talented writers.
One more thing: The jelliquarium rhetorical question was meant to be an inside joke for those who are regular readers of this blog. I understand that it didn’t come across as such, and that one of you even found it “intentionally obnoxious,” but please understand that it wasn’t meant as such.
Also, it really wasn’t a part of the actual query and would have been removed when submitted to any other agent.
1. I would handle incoming e-mail messages like this:
A. Answer queries the same day or the next.
B. After having received a partial, respond within one week.
C. After having received a full, respond within one week.
D. Respond to a request for feedback, within two weeks.
E. Respond to other e-mails, according to their priority.
2. I would create the following folders in Outlook:
– A. QUERY
– B, PARTIAL
– C. FULL
– D. FEEDBACK
– E. ETC.
3. I would form reject, but I would still address the author by his/her name and mention the title of his/her book:
Dear NAME AUTHOR,
Thank you for taking the time to submit your query to me.
At this moment in time, however, I choose to pass on your project. This does not automatically mean your query is not good enough. It simply means that I am not the right agent for this project. This can be for a number of reasons.
If you would like to know why, you can send a reply to this mail. Please change the subject line to: FEEDBACK / TITLE / YOUR NAME.
I will respond to your request within two weeks.
Good luck with finding representation and keep on writing!
Kind regards,
Nicole34
4. If I had to pass, but something in the query did catch my eye in a positive way, I would remark on this in a couple of words first, though (for instance: I think your work shows promise. At this moment in time, however …).
5. I would always offer feedback.
6. I would probably also form accept. I would ask if they could reply to my mail, attach a Word document and change the subject line to FULL OR PARTIAL / TITLE / THEIR NAME. When I would be very enthousiastic I would just accept however I felt like it and probably in rare cases, I might consider asking for an exclusive.
7. If somebody apparently did not read the submission rules, I would politely ask them if they would please (re)read them. After that, they might feel free to query me again.
8. Regarding feedback (because I know people might not get this), yes I do realise this will generate more e-mails. This system would work for me though, because I can respond a lot more quickly to queries by splitting up the decision between pass / accept (I would mostly do this on gut instinct) and explaining why to the author. Also, I read very fast and have a good memory which is easily jogged.
And last but not least, I would use the system of offering feedback, because I believe in second chances. For the author and also maybe a bit for me, too. So I don’t have to lose any sleep over having turned down the next Stephanie Meyer, because I read twenty queries about vampire novels before I read hers / I was really tired / I had a headache / …
Nicole34
R. Markiem said:
“So the key seems to be a system to handle the clear “nos” quickly enough, while still being humane, to free up just a bit of time to give constructive replies to the almosts, at least on the days you have a moment to breath!”
It just isn’t practical for Nathan to function as a writing teacher. His job is not to give constructive criticism. And agents have learned that too often that comes back to bite them. The writer has one more question, or worse, gets in an argumentative dialog set off by the criticism.
For the query stage, I don’t think the agent has to even respond. If it was pages he asked for or a full, that’s different.
April 19, 2009 7:58 AM
Nicole 34, your system is just not practical. Your entire day would be eaten up by dealing with queries and the responses.
Agents have other things to do than deal with queries, you know.
If I were an agent —
1. Form Rejection, it’s the only sane way to handle the onslaught. But I would make it nicer than the one(s) I’ve used for this exercise.
2. For borderline queries I would have a form rejection asking the Author to keep me in mind for future projects.
3. And, most importantly for my peace of mind, I would request that every query be accompanied by the first 3 pages. I find I can tell much more about the work’s promise from the actual writing than from the query. This would also save me having to reconsider a work later based on a partial request of 50 pages I may not actually need to read.
Hideously late this time!
I’d have a form reject. There’s no way you could personalise all those ‘nos’. It’s the writer’s job to generate such an amazing query that you just have to say ‘yes’.
I see form rejects as indicators that my query hasn’t yet reached the required peak of amazingness.
I’d also have a separate email address for queries, and would generate an automatic receipt along lines suggested by previous writers. This would keep query emails and normal business emails separate. There are probably reasons why this is impractical, but I think it’s what I’d prefer myself.
Finally, Nathan, I don’t know how you ever managed without the first five pages. After reading a few queries they all started to blend, but an extract gave me an instant feel for the writer’s voice.
Anon 6:41 PM (April 19)-
I understand this system does not sound practical to you. However, it honestly would cost me more time to reply and give feedback immediately.
This is because I would like to give feedback the same way I would like to receive it.
Nevertheless, I also believe an author should get a reply back as quickly as possible. For me (and hopefully for an author too), this system of mine would be an acceptable compromise.
I think I would have enough time for other things. And I have a legal background so that would give me an advantage regarding contracts anyway 🙂
Personally, I think people sometimes look down on authors and their queries.
Me, I would actually find it a challenge to look for a voice that appeals to me or an interesting premise, or even a sentence that is a little gem among others, which might show the potential of a particular author.
I do think you are right regarding the danger of just being busy with queries and feedback all day. However, I think this problem might be solved by only doing queries at certain times of the day, like Nathan does, and adding an extra period of time just to give feedback. Again, this would work for me. I would not expect it to work for other people necessarily.
Anyway, if giving feedback immediately (or just form reject) works better for you (and apparently also for many other people in this contest), that is fine too.
As long as an author receives some kind of reply within a reasonable period.
And Nathan, I have a lot of respect for how you do your job and write this blog.
Nicole34
My submission guidelines for fiction would be as follows, and reflect Nathan's preferred query letter format:
1. Title of work/word count/genre/target group;
2. Two lines about previous publications OR what is the current motivation to write;
3. A five-line abstract written using the fill-in-the-blanks example in Nathan's preferred query letter format;
4. 3000 word sample to include both narrative and dialogue.
I would respond with a maximum of five lines on the basis of a correctly submitted query, either requesting the manuscript or indicating why not, otherwise answer with a simple "Thank you for your query, which does not address the submission guidelines."