As surely as the changing of the moon and the appearance of new seasons of Survivor, there always seems to be a website out there devoted to poking fun at bad queries. These come and go, with varying levels of humor and angst.
The most recent iteration has been the subject of some debate on various blogs in the past week, and I’m curious what people think. Do you find these sites rude, funny, educational, malicious, informative, privacy-invading, entertaining, possibly a combination?
And, just FYI, my personal policy that I will never ever make fun of a query that is sent to me, nor will I quote from one without your permission. Query freely.
I like the way you go about things, Nathan. Comment on the generic without using an author's exact words.
Unless it is stated somewhere in the query submission guidelines that the author's words might be used on a blog, etc., I'm not sure it's a good idea to do so without the author's consent. And I'm not sure that I'd feel entirely comfortable submitting to an agent knowing that it might be me up there next…
Thanks for always being so careful about an author's privacy and writing! I know I appreciate it!
Dear Undifferentiated Agent-Type Person Dude,
This is my query for a query for my fictional novel book. It has approximately 268.6386 words. The query, I mean. In it, the query's protagonist (moi) writes about the query for his (my) fictional novel, using words and letters and paragraphs and punctuation. Characters do things in the novel, and some don't do anything, which I won't tell you about here, because this is only the query for the query and not the actual query itself, which I just said before above in the first place already.
I believe this query for a query will appeal to agents between the ages of five and ten who read other queries. If you like this query for a query do NOT tell me. I will then post it on the most obscure display website I can find, where you will have a snowball's chance in hell of finding it, assuming you even find the obscure website in the first place, and you still give a damn by then.
I look forward to not hearing from you, or anybody else, ever.
Your truly,
J. T. Shea
(Which currently brings up 4,540 Google hits, 99% of whom are not me. In particular, I do not play the ukelele.)
I think they're hilarious. And largely harmless.
At first I thought these sites were entertaining and harmless, but then I realized that these are real people that the agent is making fun of – not helping (as these individuals most likely do not follow agent blogs). The agent also does not have their permission like in QueryShark or others.
This would not be acceptable in any other profession (like HR publishing bad resumes), and I would not want this agent to represent me, especially when he/she started making jokes outside the publishing field and about religion.
So no, I do not feel these websites are ok. At first I was on the fence, but reading your post and the comments has helped me figure out what I really think, so thank you Nathan.
I find such websites/twitter feeds educational, both in terms of what not to do on a query and which agents I'd prefer to work with.
Personally, I find SPH hysterical because most of the examples so outrageous I believe the bloggist makes them up. So unless one of y'all claims their work was actually used (and please give the specific example), then sorry, I can't jump on the hate wagon.
If that happened to me, I would be mortified.
A gentleman never kisses and tells.
The first sign of an impending nervous breakdown is losing the ability to laugh at yourself!
Haste yee back 😉
I've only ever followed this type of thing on Twitter, but I tend to really enjoy agents' comments and *gentle* teasing about query letters. I find it super educational. Also, I think writers should try to learn as quick as they can not to sound crazy/delusional/unprofessional.
BUT- Your query letter mad lib is Fantastic!!! See- you show people what they SHOULD do, rather than just mocking folks who do it wrong. Most agents, in my opp, don't give anywhere near enough guidance about what they want- so they shouldn't be too surprised when they don't get it.
Reading this thread, though, does make me see that a lot of people are going to be discouraged and head to self-pub- maybe not because of the mocking per se, but y'know, because the process is long, tedious, and has a low success rate. A lot of people could write and self pub 2 or 3 additional books in the time it takes to hear back from the average agent. If it's a choice between waiting for a "yes" and just heading out and looking for readers, some folks will choose the latter.
But that's not really an issue for agents. They can just deal with those authors later- if they want to go the query to agent to publisher route once they develop a platform.
Awesome topic, as always! Thanks!
I think they're hilarious. Usually only extreme cases are used, and I don't think anyone who reads this site would make the kind of egregious errors highlighted.
I admit I read the website I think you're referring to. I enjoy it and think it's funny. But it also makes me feel uncomfortable. What if it were my query being subjected to public ridicule? It's private correspondence; it shouldn't be mocked in public. It's like an ex-boyfriend publishing my love letters for his friends to make fun of. So even though I enjoy that site, I think it probably isn't a good idea.
Honestly, I'm not sure. I find them wonderfully entertaining, but I also don't want to be disrespectful.I wouldn't say they're particularly educational, as most people who are reading those blogs already know better.
I know there is some way to do it and not be disrespectful, but I have no idea what that would be.
I look at it this way – some of us were told 'if you don;t have anything nice to say…'
My grandfather – may he rest in peace – told me 20 years ago never to say anything about anyone unless you would say it to his/her face.
So… would I call Mike Tyson a scumbag?? I think not.
Likewise, if some agent was riding the subway with me would he/she say 'Excuse me Mr. X, I read your query last night and you might be the stupidest person on earth. Epic Fail.'?
Maybe.
Would I proceed to shove 245lbs of pissed off lunatic down their throat?
Maybe.
But in all likelihood, said agent would approach me with an attitude right after I spit in Mike Tyson's face.
Seems to be there is a reason for that and a less to be learned. No, it isn't that Mike Tyson beating me up makes him right. It means that if I am afraid of Mike Tyson;s reaction to me spitting in his face, it probably means I know doing it is wrong. It also means that if doing it to Mike Tyson is wrong, doing it to some 120lb weakling is probably wrong too.
If I attack people who can't do anything about it but avoid the Mike Tyson's in the world, it doesn't make me discriminating or smart.
It just makes me an asshole.
I love reading them, but I feel squeamish because the authors haven't volunteered. However, since the authors on the site mentioned have obviously never read an agent blog about proper queries, this probably won't hurt them either.
That's why I love reading Evil Editor. No guilt, because people VOLUNTEER to be mocked.
I think it's unfortunate the writers whose queries are being made fun of are likely to NOT see the posts.
Since every other agent is bound to take a pass with a form reject, those writers will NEVER understand what egregious errors they've committed.
What's more humiliating: to discover after the fact that you've sent out a query that's gotten laughed at by 50 or more agents; to be rejected by so many agents for committing mistakes you don't realize you're committing that you give up writing altogether; or to find out exactly what you're doing wrong, even if it means a lot of someones are laughing at your (anonymous) expense, and being given an opportunity to correct your mistakes before it's too late?
How much less cruel is it, really, for an agent to read these things in private and not speak up about them?
And I suspect if an agent were to post these mistakes with more reserve, no matter how gently they may couch their criticism, you as reader are going to laugh at the writer's words just as hard
as the agent did.
So long as it's the words the post is directed at and not the person, and all is anonymous, I don't have a problem with it.
Too bad perfectly serviceable queries aren't fodder for laughter — I'd love a site that pointed out just why well-written queries get passed over! :o)
"If I attack people who can't do anything about it but avoid the Mike Tyson's in the world, it doesn't make me discriminating or smart.
It just makes me an asshole."
Bravo, Anon!
Slush Pile Hell is hysterical to me, which I think is one of the newest and cruelest of the sites. If you do one or two solid hourr of research on queries, you can find out all the pitfalls to avoid so your query doesn't up as a cautionary tale. A writing career is worth it, dontcha think? While I'm not for humiliation, I do think some people set themselves up for it by putting in stuff that maybe really important to them on a personal level but that don't mean a rats butt to an agent. It's like the people who audition for American Idol. Sometimes we think more of ourselves than is warranted. lol
With that said, I had my fair share of humiliation with queries before I got an agent. I used the rejections to make my query better. We're grown-ups and should be able to do that without falling to pieces…at least that's my humble opinion.
I don’t like those kinds of sites, and I completely avoid them. I belong to an online writers' group that is extremely supportive, never snarky, and – holy camoly! – the success rate within that group is phenomenal. Every few days, another writer signs with an agent. This week, someone with quite a few agents reading their manuscript signed with one. Recently, one of the New York Times best-selling novelists in the group landed a movie deal. Everyone supports each other. Even the New York Times best-selling authors come back to chat and critique other’s work. Several writers in the group decided, with great difficulty, to part ways with their agent, and managed to sign with a new agent very soon afterwards. It’s a truly amazing group, and I feel both humbled and honored to be a member. It’s both the most supportive and most successful group I’ve ever seen, and I think the tone of the environment helps members to willingly raise the bar for their own work. For me, my best writing comes from a quiet, contemplative place, not a place of noise or snarkiness.
Nothing funny about snarkiness.
Most of us reading and posting on your site already know what to do in our queries. Most people reading those other websites know, also. Anyone who needs to learn, and who's serious about writing, can take a Writer's Digest Webinar with Chuck.
The only point to these websites is for certain people to show just how rude they can be (and it's soooo easy to be rude on the Web).
I guess some people get their jollies that way.
Poking fun at queries, not funny, not informative, not helpful. If someone (agent, editor) wants to let others know what works, what doesn't, the does and don'ts, that fine. Posting a misguided query, unprofessional.
Sounds terribly unkind. BTW what is the 'sandwich method ' you speak of ? Buttering up both sides and baloney in the middle ? Hmm..
On the one hand, they ARE sometimes funny. And possibly educational to those who don't know better already.
On the other hand, though, what would I think if I'd sent one of those queries and then, browsing the Internet or something, found it being ridiculed? If that didn't stop me from writing, I don't know what would.
As several people have mentioned, it's also unprofessional. I mean, I don't want to work with an agent who would make fun of either my (early) queries or other people's.
So I definitely come down on the con side. It's not worth the pain it causes, and it's not good business.
You know, I participated in that thread at Bookends. I started out appalled the SlushPileHell and being concerned about the effect that site will have on the industry.
However, over the weeks since the post at Bookends, my anger about the site has grown, so that now I'm more than appalled, I'm furious that any agent would potentially humiliate any writer.
I mention that, Nathan, because I'm so pissed off, I forgot to thank you. Thank you for opening this up for discussion.
And the fact that you would never participate in something like this, well, that goes without saying. Of course you wouldn't. It's unthinkable.
I've said it before: you are a Prince among agents, Nathan.
Every time I see an agent do this, I think their personal lives probably suck. After a while, I think of them as whiners rather than teachers. I've seen some interns do this, and started thinking to myself, "Who the heck do you think you are?" The same interns mentioned writing books themselves but not having enough money to pay their bills … and yet their tone of superiority was there, as if they were hugely successful or something. Also, they seemed to assume that writers would be interested in buying their books if they ever get them published – huge sense of entitlement, thinking they can make fun of writers and then expect writers to buy their books. Ummm, no thank you.
Oh how I agree with Patty Blount. I want to learn and I want feedback, but not from someone who is going to make fun of me. It's hard enough to write these things. Constructive criticism—yes. Meanness and cruelty at my expense–no thank you.
Isn't it bad enough that I have to live with my thighs.
rude, malicious, and privacy-invading
Most people have no business trying to write. If they persist, they deserve to be mocked.
I'd prefer to see a lot more sites like that one rather than watch people who have no talent encouraged and strung along by things like the Monday page critique.
I interpret "poking fun" in any guise as self-servingly building self-esteem, making hay, and getting laughs at the expense of others. There's a time and place for it, but not with private or business correspondence. Decorum is the mainstay of courteous, considerate, professional, and personal discretion.
Do not upbrade or castigate or discipline or chastise anyone in front of others. It's no one else's concern. Morale suffers. Anyone who does so loses all my respect.
Counseling can be positive, public, and beneficial. It doesn't have to be negative, private, or counterproductive.
Irony doesn't hurt as much when everyone laughs together.
Larry stepped off a ladder into a bucket of wet plaster. The boss said, "Good job, keep it up and we'll all get bonuses."
The crew laughed, moaned, and said, "Way to go." Larry laughed along.
Oh, and more often than not, "poking fun" is thinly disquised jealousy reflecting miscreants' own inadequacies.
I love these kinds of sites, even if it's just for a laugh. Then again, it's not hard to make me laugh. Still, I think these sites can be informative just in case our queries resemble the ones mentioned on these sites. If I found one of my queries on one, while I might originally be annoyed, hopefully I'd have the good grace to have a bit of a laugh and learn from my mistakes.
I think it all depends on the delivery of the criticism. There's no need to get uptight about this. Names are not mentioned so the only people who would recognize the queries are the authors themselves, and possibly those who have read it before.
Thank you for being so kind. Us writers tend to be sensitive types. I don't approve of the vitriol.
Oh, twice, the process is grueling enough without adding peevish excretory a-holery to it.
It's tricky, because everyone has different limits. If I wrote a very silly line in my query, I'd laugh along with it when someone pointed it out. However, being dyslexic means I'm somewhat sensitive to people mocking my spelling, due to it being used in the past to imply I was stupid. Someone else might be fine with all of it, or be hurt by all of it.
Sites where people offer their queries are fair game though. People know what they're getting into. Query Shark has removed a few queries, which I assume were because the author didn't like the feedback and requested it. It's entirely opt-in.
Perhaps it shows what agents really receive, perhaps it's juvenile humour. Either way, it's not particularly instructive and one would have to have a lot of time on one's hands to be bothered with it. Is that sour?
Daryl Sedore –
I agree! Kids bullying and picking on other kids think it’s funny, but it’s not. Agents don’t know anything about the person who sent the query. For all they know, the query could be from someone struggling with nearly insurmountable personal problems. Maybe the person sending the query doesn’t know how to write well, but that doesn’t excuse the professionals for mocking them. When a kid goes to school dressed poorly, is it OK to excuse bullying them as helping the child to learn better fashion choices? If the kid doesn’t speak clearly, is it OK to excuse mocking them as a way to help them learn better language skills? I think not.
Like you, I’m not having problems with my own query letters. I’ve had requests for my manuscript and some wonderful feedback. But it breaks my heart to see the mocking that takes place online. I recently decided to just stop reading it and to unfollow people on Twitter who do that on a regular basis. There are so many positive, supportive people to read and follow!
If I'm correct (and I could be very wrong), didn't one of the people who started #queryfail just leave agenting to work in another area of publishing? And I don't think this person was an agent for longer than about three years.
I think that speaks for itself.
The good ones don't mock queries. I've never seen Nathan do it. I've seen some blogs joke around about queries, all in good fun, but they don't mock them and they don't put serious writers down.
I hang my head in shame for all the times I have chuckled at slushpilehell. I should stop getting kicks from such things. But then, I would have to stop laughing at half the stuff I see on the Simpsons, too. I continue to work on becoming more sophisticated about my sense of humor, but only because I don't actually mean to cause pain. In these contentious us/them times, working to improve in this way actually is important.
So, intellectually and emotionally I believe they are wrong. Do I laugh? Yeah.
I'm torn.
On one hand, the idea that agents could be laughing at my query is stomach-twisting and fear inducing.
But then again, that fear helps me. Because of it, I strive to make my query the one that stands out. I spell the agent's name right, I do a bit of research, I don't say things like "This is a fictional novel…" or "This is going to be the next Harry Potter/Twilight/Hunger Games!"
I kind of think the sites are pointless, though. The people making the mistakes are obviously not spending enough time researching how to write a query properly and probably will never even see these websites. The people reading the sites are the ones who care enough to do the research, but they're being turned off by the way these agents are reacting to the queries.
It just makes the slush pile that much more intimidating.
Humor is subjective. Everyone laughs about their work though. How public they make it varies depending upon their audience. Today with facebook, twitter, and blogging, things tend to get pretty public.
Most of us here are making statements in regard to the tender egos of writers who desire fame and fortune anyway. Personally, I think fame takes a bit of pain to grow, and life in general happens to be riddled with lots of nasty people who will screw you over and make fun of you whether you like it or not. It doesn't matter if it is a good or bad thing, it is still going to happen, and we all really need to get used to it. I always thought that was sort of the point of adolescence.
Frankly I feel for all the agents out there who have to slog through piles and piles of often shoddily written and not at all humorous queries on a daily basis. What happened to their right to give a positive spin to a grueling job? Who among us writers wants to read terribly written books all day long? Would that be fair?
Laugh when you can. Toughen up IF you can. Lighten up whenever you can. For the rest drink more coffee. 🙂
To be honest, I think of these sites as the literary equivalent of William Hung on American Idol. Take that to mean what you will.
I personally don't feel guilty about getting a good laugh out of the really outrageous ones. C'mon, you have to wonder what some of those folks were thinking. Maybe I'll be more sensitive when it's time to send my "baby" out into the world, but for now… Meh.
I say, do your homework and you won't have anything to worry about.
I enjoy the ones where the identifying features are stripped off, and the wording rephrased. (In other words, the agent makes them, "based on" actual query letters.) It makes me feel that I have a chance, because surely I won't do that in a query letter.
However, I removed an agent from my list of "possibles" because s/he posted an email exchange with a rejected/disgruntled person on the agency blog.
Yes, the person was a jerk, but I thought the agent was unprofessional for letting it get personal and then posting in on the blog.
Haven't read comments so sorry if I repeat anyone: I can completely understand people being hurt/offended by it, but personally I find it very useful. Sometimes its the most feedback you're going to get so I have no problem querying people who take part in that (on twitter, specifically).
Amy Ashley, you're assuming that the agents poking fun are the ones representing great literature. Many of the best books are represented by kind, respectful agents. Some of the agents and interns who spend the most time making fun of queries also spend a great deal of time complaining about being flat broke, living in poverty. Many have chosen to represent pop culture books that haven't made a lot of money. So how valuable, really, is their advice and mockery?
I find websites posting bad (and good) queries to be educational and useful. When they mock…sometimes the criticisms are dumb, and yes, sometimes they are entertaining (which reflects poorly on me for being entertained by them). I have less of a problem if it's just a snippet posted and the original author is anonymous, but it still is rather mean. We aspiring authors need tough skin, it's true, but this does just add to the struggle. I much prefer criticism, since it's actually useful.
I'll just tack onto my previous comment (way up there) that I enjoy participating in bad query contests.
It should be opt-in, though. I reserve the right to make fun of myself! 🙂
I don't feel I am emotionally WELL ENOUGH to read query ridicule. We writers are a hypersensitive lot and often our conceits make us easy targets–a volatile combination. If my query were skewered, I would cry. A lot.
Ok, I must admit I had no idea sites like this existed. What a downer. Using bad queries to instruct on what not to do is one thing, using them to humiliate the writer is another. I can imagine that only non-writers would find this funny, not someone who has agonized hours of their life away over trying to write one.
I feel the need to stand up for the interns that run #queries and #queryslam. Their intent is not to poke fun or be mean. Their goal is to help those of us in the query trenches learn what to do/what not to do. They do not call any authors out, only provide a basic summary of what worked or didn't work for the query. They do a great job of keeping it vague enough that there is no way you could tell who wrote the query. Their critiques are straight to the point, so you know what they did wrong, all while protecting the author.
I personally have queried an agent that posts her queries live as she's reading them, waiting to see if she reviews mine (and she did). It was educational and I appreciate the time she takes to go over her queries live.
I find these insightful and educational and have taken each and every comment they have made (on mine and other queries) into consideration when I revise my query. I think they do a great job at making the experience educational while avoiding 'making fun' of any author. They are authors too and are in the query trenches themselves.
As far as the sites that making fun for the sake of being mean, that is never ok and I don't condone that, and thus I don't follow/read those blogs.
I don't have a problem if the author gives permission for their query to be used in this manner. Otherwise it's a breach of trust.
W.I.P. It: A Writer's Journey
QueryShark has been mentioned a few times in this thread. I want to make sure everyone knows QueryShark is entirely voluntary. No query is drawn from my own agency queries. If an author does not like what the QueryShark says, they can tell me to take the letter down at any time, no reason required.
Yes, sometimes the critiques are sharp. Yes, sometimes (ok, a lot) I get exasperated with mistakes I see too many times.
But, QueryShark WORKS. It helps writers improve. I have letters telling me so, and signed clients that prove it.
I don't want QueryShark to be lumped in with "websites that poke fun at queries." QueryShark doesn't want to poke fun at you. QueryShark wants to point out places to improve.
It's not a painless process, but I can't figure out a better way to help writers than this.
And I think SlushpileHell is hilarious, but just like underwear, I don't want to see it displayed in public.