Every Monday morning, as sure as the rooster’s cry (I don’t actually have a rooster) I can expect to come in to 100+ e-mails from the weekend, mostly queries. I like to think of it as the Monday Deluge, and it means that if I’m going to answer all of them (and oh, I do) plus the regular work for clients and such, it can make for a bit of a hectic day.
It also explains why you may be hearing from me on the weekend: if I put in some Saturday or Sunday e-mail time it makes Monday oh so much easier. But since I was reading manuscripts this past weekend I didn’t get to any queries. So: hello 100+ e-mails! Nice to see you this chilly Monday morning.
As I was working through the e-pile, it got me wondering: how many e-mails do I send anyway? Sure seems like a lot.
Well, as of today, according to Outlook I’ve sent 11,921 e-mails so far this year. That’s just for work — it doesn’t count personal correspondence. Most are responses to queries, but it also includes e-mails to clients, colleagues, editors, you name it.
11,921 e-mails as of August 24th translates to about 50 per day, including weekends and vacation time.
To put that in perspective, let’s say I worked nine hours every single day, including weekends, and didn’t take any vacation or break for lunch. 11,921 e-mails translates to an e-mail every ten minutes. Somewhere in that time I also theoretically have to read manuscripts, have meetings, talk on the phone, and, you know, read the queries I’m responding to, while still maintaining that e-mail every ten minutes pace.
Oh, and in real life I really do take vacation and try to break somewhat on weekends… and thus have to work considerably more than nine hours a day during weekdays.
What does this all mean?
First of all, I’m not complaining. I love my job, even if it means I’m staring at a screen (computer, Kindle or iPhone) for the majority of my waking hours. Please don’t ever hesitate to e-mail me.
But here’s what it means for writers: the next time you wonder why agents send form letters or why some don’t respond to queries altogether… please remember these stats.
It also means that I necessarily have to make snap decisions when I’m reading queries. I don’t really have time to sit down, contemplate, and absorb the aura of a query. There are tons more in line and I have to move quickly if I’m going to get through the day. So if a query is needlessly long or doesn’t include key details (published authors, once again: PUBLICATION DATE AND PUBLISHER DON’T MAKE ME GO TO AMAZON ARGH) hopefully this puts into perspective why literary agents turn into lunatics about certain pet peeves that end up costing precious time.
So there you have it. I would write more… but I need to go write some e-mails.
I solemnly swear I will never email you again : )
Thank heavens I don't need to…
My immediate thought after reading: why not hire an assistant to help wade through the slush?
Three immediate answers pop to mind:
1.) CB doesn't want to pay an extra grunt (at least not for a junior agent)
2.) An unpaid intern wouldn't have enough experience to know what works and/or know your preferences.
3.) b/c you're a masochist 😉
Since you added the '1st 5 pages' clause to your query instructions, have you noticed a great shift in your time requirements?
The "snap decision" nature of agent responses also explains why good projects can easily fall through the cracks. So much of the query game is a crap shoot–all the more reason why writers shouldn't read too much into the rejections they recieve.
That's why agents are so detailed about how they want things sent to them. They have a million items on thier to do list and rather not waste time deciphering sloppy queries.
Yikes–I spelled "receive" wrong! That's the kind of thing that can ruin my day!
Hey Nathan we all respect and admire you so much for all you do. The blog is great and you are obviously a great person. One of these days I will send you a query and I am fully prepared to see it as business and not personal. You have prepared me well for all possible outcomes…so cheers to Nathan Bransford…may you live long and prosper.
bofa-
Yeah, an assistant isn't in the cards.
VLL-
Things definitely fall through the cracks, which is frustrating considering how much time I spend caulking!
I had a mini panic attack just reading that. I really don't know how you do it.
Hmm… So would you prefer to be e-queried during the weekdays?
(I'm starting the querying process next week) *Wink*
Phew! And I thought I sent a lot of email at work. (maybe only 15-20 a day on a busy day).
So does this mean I shouldn't forward you random funny emails?
Ok I don't…..but I want to.
If this is the not complaining post I don't want to see the other variety.
Thank god for this blog, and for helping a young, first-time author get a bit of perspective on what the scene is like on the other side. As someone who is just on the verge of beginning to query, you have no idea how insanely helpful it is to come home to an itemized list of things that make agents want to lose their lunches.
Thanks for that, Elaine.
I was going to comment, but then I realized that it would probably get emailed to you so I decided against it.
Thank you for taking the time to blog. We really appreciate it. 🙂
Nathan –
Question. With all of this on your desk, how long does it usually take you to read a client's manuscript?
Well, it's obvious your "query me first" strategy helps contribute to the deluge — I noticed on QueryTracker that you're the number one queried agent in the US>
lisa-
It usually takes about three to six hours for me to read a manuscript, depending on the length.
Hey Nathan remember Master of Demon Valley said working against long odds is one of the seven skills of personal success and leadership.
And don't worry about sleep. You get enough rest when you're dead.
Anon, really?
Wow, the #1 queried agent in the U.S. – that's crazy! Go Nathan.
You know Nathan, you could technically take a break from queries. I know that's not your style, but if you ever get overwhelmed…
You'll never hear me complaining about a form letter. I love the form! It's a great way to get the exact information the writer needs: the agent read the query, the agent is passing. Nothing else is needed so why say anything else?
Nathan, I am repeatedly amazed that you have any time to keep up this blog.
On the manuscript-reading note: I recently speed-read through mine and found the experience helpful. Agents seem to have perfected the art.
Do you think that good manuscripts work regardless of the reading speed? I wonder about dense novels being hard to digest that way, for example. Do the relative differences between types of work condense equally for you, or do you find some styles don't lend themselves to fast assessment?
Even six hours seems speedy to me!
Kind of daunting for those of us sending out queries.
It's also why I recommend meeting agents at conferences.
I know you you'll never say it, because you really don't, but let me say it for you, I hate my job, I hate my job, I hate my job…you're welcome.
All the more reason to sculpt a query letter to perfection.
Hi Nathan,
I'm new to your blog, so forgive me if the answer to this can be found in another post, but for every 100 queries, how many get your "yes" vote to see the partial or full manuscript?
Just wondering.
Ryan Potter
Yep, and that's exactly why I have no problem with form letters!
Hang in there! Tuesday will be here before you know it.
Ryan, you can see the answer at QueryTracker (at least, as reported by those who upload their responses) under "Agent Statistics".
Traven,
Ah! Thanks!
Ryan
It's a miracle you blog this much.
I completely understand why agents need to send form letters and can't respond to each query personally after seeing that!
I'm amazed you're also able to write all these wonderful blog posts too, on top of reading manuscripts and working with your clients. Absolutely amazing! I think I'd be huddled in a corner somewhere. 😛
Dude. Get a job in IT. I send that many emails A MONTH. PLUS I have to do my job. You're a lightweight, Bransford.
Okay, first of all, I don't have enough room in this little box to say everything on my mind, so I'll e-mail it to you.
Ha, ha. Little joke there.
Secondly, you have an amazing work ethic. Damn, you work hard. I hope your boss(s) know how lucky they are to have you.
Thirdly, I do want to remind you that not only have I offered to BE your assistant, but I believe I offered to pay you for the priviledge of it. Just in case you forgot.
Fourthly, and please don't kill me for saying this, Nathan, but have you thought about slowing down on queries alittle? Snap decisions are good; I've noticed that you have really good judgement, but still. But what's the point of the whole thing if you let a good one fall through the cracks?
Okay, I know. That was outrageous in it's lack of understanding of your situation, because it would ADD work, instead of taking it away.
Sorry (note: see paragraph above about assistant hiring.)
I had nothing better to do so I looked up the stats. According to QueryTracker, of queries sent to NB, 8% get a request for a partial, 1% for a full MS.
Um, how does Query Tracker know that? Does Nathan report every query to them? Every time he requests a full or partial?
If that's true, I think he should stop doing that and save some time.
I'm alittle suspicious of that data, I'll admit it.
I was actually thinking about emailing you this morning with a question not in your FAQ. But since you get so many emails maybe I can just pose my question here instead.
I started querying last week and I got a request for a partial from an assistant to a literary agent this morning. When formatting my response to the assistant should I still have my salutation to the agent or should it be to the assistant.
I am sure I am just nitpicking but I would still like to be proper and correct to an assistant or an agent who has taken time to ask for and to read a partial of my work.
Unfortunately I have already responded to the assistant and sent the requested partial so this would be for future reference. I was so excited to send out my first request for a partial that the question of who to address the letter to didn't occur to me until afterwords.
Mira, I'm gonna answer you assuming you're not being sarcastic…
querytracker stats are created by the users… e.g., I could report that I queried Agents A,B,D,E, & F and that A,B,D,F rejected me, but E asked for a partial…
Of course, people could lie, but b/c it's done anon, that's not gonna happen too much, IMO and 8% sounds pretty close to NB's PR rate.
Patrick, address it to the person who requested it (unless he/she explicitly stated something like 'I'm requesting this for [agent you originally queried]'… and good luck.
Bane – no I wasn't being sarcastic, and I still honestly doubt the results.
In order to have an accurate reading, that would mean all queriers would have to report to querytracker. Otherwise you're getting a skewed sample of those who know about QueryTracker in the first place.
I didn't even know about it, and I'm on the blogs alot. So, I would guess that a high percentage of queriers don't report their responses from Nathan.
That said, 8% seems high, from what I've heard in the industry, so that's cool.
Please don't ever hesitate to e-mail me. Like I said, I'm not complaining, it's my job! Unfortunately I'm not able to respond to all questions (and hopefully this will shed some light onto why that is), but no one should ever feel hesitant about e-mailing me.
Patrick-
Unless the assistant specified that they're the ones now considering send it to the agent's attention. But you really can't go wrong either way, they just want to see the partial.
Also, for my query stats click on the "query stats" label under the post. The Query Tracker people have a higher request rate. My guess is that it's a self-selecting group – if you're on Query Tracker you're probably more plugged into the publishing internetosphere and thus probably more likely to be writing a better query.
Mira, if the sampling size is large enough, it's probably a halfway decent estimate.
WV: sproggle — boggle for sprogs… what is a sprog, you ask… you don't want to know, trust me.
Thanks Bane its been an interesting learning curve week that's for sure. The first couple of queries I sent out I didn't notice that gmail changed my formatting for them and I agonized over that for hours. I have since clicked that remove all formatting option every single time now that I send a response. My query letter was written in Word and while the formatting was just slightly different it still drove me crazy and you almost wish you could have those first couple of queries back.
Then of course reading these posts I wasn't aware that Nathan had started asking for the first five pages to be included with queries and that has bummed me out too. I actually wrote and formatted my query letter for Nathan months ago when he wasn't asking for the first five pages as he was the agent I wanted to work with. I got a rejection from him (my very first rejection and if I ever get published I am framing it) but you just have to wonder in the back of your mind if you had included the first five pages would he have been more inclined to ask to see more. Now it's too late to go back and do that as it would be rude and downright annoying to resend the query with the five pages and the agent you wanted to work with the most if off your lists.
I should have waited to query Nathan until I had the kinks worked out and the learning curve was over to better my chances even if the result might have been the same. You always want to give yourself the best chance at succeeding.
Or a decent trend at least — using Nathan's reasoning, it may be a bit high, but if you compare it to other agents, you can at least get a sense of where that agent stands (there's one agent on there who requested 1 out of a 132, I believe — as Joey Lawrence used to opine, "Whoa!")
Bane – Nathan agrees with me.
Ha! I win.
But I don't want to rub it in. Bane, let me just say I've noticed that you're an intelligent person with many fine qualities. Truly. You can't help it if I'm right and you're wrong. Really. You have much to offer the world, don't let this depress you too much.
You're amazingly sane for the amount of reading and responding you do.
Very impressive.
I'm exhausted reading that – and feel vaguely sloth-like.
Patrick,
Yeah, I think we've all been in those hole-riddled dingies before (i.e., the email fackocked our formatting boat and we thought our query was polished, but now we hate it or realize it wasn't up to par boat)…
Try not to worry over it too much (easier said than done). As Nathan and many others have pointed out before, the query doesn't have to be perfect (though close ;).
Also, regarding Nathan, I'm sure he'd be a great agent to work with, but I think a lot of us on here have a bit of idol fever b/c of his generosity and thus assume he'd be the best agent for us even though his preferences may not be in line w/ our writing as much as we'd like.
Of course, if you queried him awhile ago and did some polishing and didn't include pages and you really think you're right up his alley, maybe you can try him again. I know he doesn't encourage it, but w/ ~12000 emails, his memory's bound to be clouded some ;)… and what's one more query to the mountain?
Mira, I have been wrong many many times before (or so my wife keeps telling me).
Nathan, can I have your iPhone?
kthanxbai!