Any authonomists browsing for new follows on Twitter last Thursday may have caught the 'queryfail' stream of tweets that a group of US-based editors and agents created over the course of the day. The subject of the collective stream was the multiple (unidentified) author applications ('queries') and pitches that were coming in, and why they weren't being picked up.
From the ill-informed about what agents do for a living ("I’ve got a great idea for a book. You write it and we’ll split the profits!") to the hard-for-a-cynical-editor-to-swallow ("My inner voices told me to send this to you. I channeled the whole thing from an angel named Thomas.") the tweets listed in excruciating detail the common pitfalls unagented authors make in pitching to the publishing industry
Now, if you're part of a community that prides itself in supporting aspiring authors - are an aspiring author yourself - the occasionally mocking tone of this dialogue may come as a blow. In fact the backlash from bloggers has been pretty harsh, calling it 'evil'.
And if I had to pick sides I'd probably come down mildly on the side of inexperienced authors' here. After all, albeit through lack of necessity rather than anything more sinister, the publishing industry isn't exactly transparent about our methods of operation, or what we require from fresh creatives, which sometimes veres on the arbitrary. Guidelines help but I'm not sure we make them available enough (your thoughts...?) And just with embarassing job interviews and naive first dates, everyone makes mistakes on their first pitch - I'm sure authonomists can back me up with anecodotal evidence here!
But, as the twitter stream hosts said, their idea wasn't to mock or be intentionally cruel, but to educate. “I know writing and querying are hard,” wrote agent Lauren MacLeod. “So my queryfails have been chosen from people who did not follow submission guidelines.”
So with this in mind, there's also another reaction, which writers' community jacketflap has decided to go with, and that's to grab 5 solid learnings on how to do a great pitch. I think it's worth linking to here, as this is advice all-too-hard to get through conventional channels until its too late, and you find your own pitch the subject of an agent's tweet.
PS: jacketflap advises "don't toot your own horn": pah.
If you can't resist a bit of self-tooting, do try shameless plugs thread at the authonomy forums. We all welcome a bit of self-promotion there.
12 comments:
The 'How', and much of the 'Why', was done, in my opinion never better, in Pat Walsh's book "78 Reasons Why Your Book Will Never Be Published And 14 Reasons Why It Just Might". I championed it in the forum once and I do it here once more.
Mike Reilly "Mississippi" (#4992)
Kudos to Nathan Bransford for refusing to participate. Instead declaring "positivity week" on his blog.
I thought QueryFail was a brilliant idea and a loot of fun. Not a singe person was highlighted and I very much doubt anyone following an agent on Twitter would have made any mistake they twittered. If you're submitting a novel to an agent, you ought to have at least got to the point of reading submission guidelines.
I'm heartily in support of Colleen Lindsay here.
"the publishing industry isn't exactly transparent about our methods of operation, or what we require from fresh creatives...I'm not sure we make them available enough"
I disagree. There is a huge wealth of information and advice out there on the net about how to go about writing and submitting a query. I can think of at least a dozen agents and editors who put an extraordinary amount of effort into letting people know what they should and shouldn't do when pitching a book.
The point being made by queryfail was not one of ridiculing the unwary. It was aimed at trying to encourage writers to DO THEIR RESEARCH.
Find submission guidelines and follow them. Know who you're submitting to, and only submit to agents who are looking for and represent what you have to offer. Don't rant and moan if you get rejected, especially if you haven't targeted your submission correctly. Rejection is par for the course in this game, even for the very good.
Toughen up, do the legwork, and look for the information - it's all out there for the finding.
Start here, and read the comments, they're invaluable:
http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html
i loved queryfail. It was great to get into the head of an agent and editor to see what goes thru their mind when they get a query. think mistakes are one thing, but some of the queryfails were just plain frustrating. Every writer shoudl know to look for guidelines, follow them, spell check and watch the name spelling.
I have to say that as an aspiring writer I get far more frustrated with many of my fellow writers than I do with publishers and agents. Defensiveness is rarely a wise policy. Critical opennness to every suggestion is far better. If writers want to go through an agent and publisher they should be analysing everything agents and publishers say. And if they are going the self-publishing route they should equally be soaking up everything the "opposition" says. It constantly amazes me so few writers realise that they are part of a business. A cut throat and desperately hard to break into one at that. So however good your work is, first and foremost you need to do two things - be (in Alan Sugar's immortal words) "drop dead shrewd" as a business person; and show that you are a great, attentive, professional, and affable person to work with.
Oh, and by the way - no one has mentioned the obvious - as an aspiring writer you can't afford not to Twitter - go see me at
agnieszkasshoes :-)
I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Sarah
http://www.lyricsdigs.com
So excited to have found this blog. On the subject of messing up with agents, I need you to settle a discussion I am currently having with another writer (and also help me to avoid egg on my face with agents.)
The other writer claims that there is a 'rule' about never starting a novel with dialogue/speech but doesn't any novel with an internal narrator break that rule? A quick glance at my bookshelves showed up Wuthering Heights, Great Expectations, The Great Gatsby, The Steep Approach to Garbadale and The Prisoner of Zenda to be rule-breaking books of one sort or other.
I've just finished my second novel and am about to release them both into the wild to do battle with slush piles but both novels begin with dialogue. My question is: am I bad?
Thanks,
Rebecca
Rebecca Woodhead
my writing blog: http://frombrain2bookshelf.blogspot.com
Well, in the spirit of transparency and having a laugh, let's carry out this exercise: every editor to publicly reveal their track record of failures; their projections of the profits they were going to make, but the huge losses they actually incurred.
As we all know, a few best sellers subsidise the large number of books that were "loved" by their editors but completely bombed.
Oh, and let's have the names of all the agents and editors who rejected Harry Potter.
Oh dear, is that the "sound" of complete silence coming from all those who snigger at the writers?
Mockery should be a two-way process, should it not? Or are we dealing with an elitist gang of insufferable snobs - the sort of people who rush to throw millions at Jordan for sticking her photo on a ghostwritten book about absolute celebrity trivia.
I personally don't see what is so difficult about following submission guidelines, and then submitting a sensible business letter with your ms. However, agents should grow a sense of humour, recognise that it takes all sorts to make a world, and there is a fair chance that as an agent you are going to receive letters from folk who heard an angel called Thomas tell them to do it. Virtually everyone in business receives those kinds of letters, why should literary agents be a special case? Frankly not everyone is experienced in the art of concocting the perfect business letter, and we all make mistakes... we're only human!
Rebecca
you are definitely not bad.
I'm sure an agent wouldn't dismiss your submission on the grounds that you'd started the first chapter with dialogue.
Kate
Kate,
Thanks. Good to know I am not bad.
On the subject of things good and bad, what do agents and publishers generally think of would-be authors having writing blogs?
I didn't expect much of mine when I started it three months ago but it now has a loyal following; has won an award and been featured as Editor's Choice on a large blogging forum. I receive frequent requests to 'guest blog'/write content for other sites so the blog now has its own 'tour bus' for subscribers to follow my writing around the web.
It's great fun and I'm getting lots of positive feedback about my writing. It has the feeling of 'a good thing' about it but I wonder whether that is the general feeling in the publishing industry.
Rebecca
http://frombrain2bookshelf.blogspot.com
Post a Comment