The Boston Globe wonders who will pick up the Robert B. Parker mantle now that he's gone. And you've gotta love a town that has 46 comments offering up a variety of OTHER choices, and lambasting the reporter for missing them.
They're all wrong. They just don't know it yet.
Here's next guy up there that's going to knock your socks off:
Mystery/Crime
Steve Ulfelder's debut PURGATORY CHASM, whose protagonist is a former NASCAR driver and now a fixer for AA, pitched as a gritty, young Robert Parker, to Anne Bensson at Minotaur, in a nice deal, for publication in May 2011, by Janet Reid at FinePrint Literary Management (NA).
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Philip Marlowe could not have said it better himself
The first, “Coffee, Black” by Bill Cameron, is a great bit of caffeinated noir – a coffee-house mystery that perfectly captures Portland’s espresso-fueled and anti-corporate culture. Camron has the hard-bitten prose down flat:
She’s a touch thick, not quite shed of her winter fat, but she wears her flesh with oblivious self-assurance. I have no doubt a man with a flatter belly could pay her bar tab and bed her the same night, with no idea of the problems she’ll cause over breakfast.
Philip Marlowe could not have said it better himself.
From ReadingLocal
QueryShark
I've critiqued 148 queries at QueryShark.blogspot.com. 143 are still available for people to read. Five elected to have their queries taken down after the critique. I didn't ask why, and didn't argue. And I don't think less of them for asking (an option available to everyone who submits work to the Shark.)
What I do is think more of the 143 people who have embraced the public critiques of their work: more still of the 100+ who have sent revisions; more still of the 50+ who've sent second revisions; and I'm frankly awed by the one has sent five revisions.
Revision happens most often in isolation. There are few ways to learn from other people, particularly people removed by geography or subject matter. To let us into that process, to see what works, what doesn't, and how you try and try again is a resource beyond value. Its only price is courage. A price I do not pay, nor do the readers. Only you, the writer, pays it.
You have my utmost respect. Never doubt it. Never forget it.
What I do is think more of the 143 people who have embraced the public critiques of their work: more still of the 100+ who have sent revisions; more still of the 50+ who've sent second revisions; and I'm frankly awed by the one has sent five revisions.
Revision happens most often in isolation. There are few ways to learn from other people, particularly people removed by geography or subject matter. To let us into that process, to see what works, what doesn't, and how you try and try again is a resource beyond value. Its only price is courage. A price I do not pay, nor do the readers. Only you, the writer, pays it.
You have my utmost respect. Never doubt it. Never forget it.
Shameful
I've got nothing against people who elect to publish their own books, or use print on demand technology to do so. I think it's terrific there's an affordable way for writers to see their work in book form PARTICULARLY if the work isn't something that's suitable for general trade publishing.
I mention this because I don't want you to start ranting that I'm anti-POD, or anti-self publishing when I tell you that PublishAmerica's latest endeavor to separate writers from their hard-earned money infuriates me.
It preys on people's hopes and dreams, and uses their lack of knowledge specifically and intentionally to make them buy something the company knows is unlikely to achieve the results implied. (Implied of course is key. They don't actually tell you it works, they let you believe the implication.)
Here's the text:
More than the specifics of why this is a crummy idea, though, this stinks because it uses lack of knowledge to make a sale.
That's a morally bankrupt way to earn money.
PublishAmerica is beneath contempt for this.
If you intend to self-publish, or use print on demand, I urge you to patronize another company.
I mention this because I don't want you to start ranting that I'm anti-POD, or anti-self publishing when I tell you that PublishAmerica's latest endeavor to separate writers from their hard-earned money infuriates me.
It preys on people's hopes and dreams, and uses their lack of knowledge specifically and intentionally to make them buy something the company knows is unlikely to achieve the results implied. (Implied of course is key. They don't actually tell you it works, they let you believe the implication.)
Here's the text:
Your Book Published By Random House?
From: PublishAmerica Author Support Team (noreply@publishamerica.com)
Sent: Tue 2/23/10 11:35 AM
To: [Redacted]
Dear Author:
PublishAmerica will submit your book to Random House!
(submit means something very specific in publishing parlance. They use it incorrectly, but you don't know that. They mean SEND)
Random House, the publishing company? Yes. We’re submitting your book to the world’s most famous publisher so they get a chance to read it and see if they want your book.
(see the clever implication and connection here? If they SEND it to RandomHouse, there's a chance it will be read. The chance is miniscule; they don't mention that. This kind of talk in advertising is why "your mileage may vary" is a mandated caution in ads for cars.)
Every writer dreams about becoming a published author. Once they have reached that goal, as you have, many dream of the next step up: to become a Random House author. Random House is one of the most prestigious publishing names. Their extensive operation a few miles from our own headquarters makes them virtual neighbors.
(Any Random House facility located near PublishAmerica is a warehouse or production division. Editorial decisions are made at 1745 Broadway, New York, NY. That's nowhere close to "neighbor" for a company located in Maryland.)
We will submit not one, but up to five copies of your book to Random House’s acquisition editors, so that they can also pass the book around their imprints if they want. They may do anything they choose with the books. We will alert you immediately if Random House shows interest, and in that case we will do everything we can to ensure a smooth transition. Since PublishAmerica is not affiliated with Random House or its owner Bertelsmann, we would totally share in your pride.
(They can do anything they want to with it. They can throw it away for example. Why you would PAY to send a finished copy blindly to RandomHouse when you can send it electronically at no cost boggles the mind. Why would someone advocate doing this? Oh yes, of course...that's how PublishAmerica makes money: authors buying their own books)
Here’s how we do it:
If you want to have books on hand, order now, and we will donate up to five copies to Random House. And you receive a 50 pct discount!
Go to www.publishamerica.net, find your book, click on it, then add to cart, indicate quantity, and use this coupon: Random50. Then click Recalculate and finish the transaction. Minimum volume is 10 copies.
Notice there's no verification on this. No way to monitor if PublishAmerica actually sends books to Random House. Even if they send a truck, there's no way to verify if individual books are included or not.
Even IF they do send books, and a book makes its way to an editor who finds something of interest, just exactly how do you think the editor will find the author? Maybe PublishAmerica prints contact info on the bookjackets.
By using the coupon you are authorizing us to donate the books to Random House. You may also request that we ship five FREE books to you instead.
Free means you don't pay for something. Last I checked (italicized above) you were adding books to a cart, and paying for a transaction.
Full-color and hardcovers excluded. Offer expires this weekend on Sunday night.
Thank you,
PublishAmerica Author Support Team
More than the specifics of why this is a crummy idea, though, this stinks because it uses lack of knowledge to make a sale.
That's a morally bankrupt way to earn money.
PublishAmerica is beneath contempt for this.
If you intend to self-publish, or use print on demand, I urge you to patronize another company.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
My secret for knowing just the right thing to say: steal it
I signed Sean Ferrell, and sold his novel NUMB, but I've never been able to describe it with anything other than "here, you must read this now" which works exactly once with an editor, and precisely never with potential readers.
Thus I was pleased to find Elisabeth Black, a talented writer in her own right, has read an early copy of NUMB and blogged about it. Now I can tell you exactly what I think of NUMB: what she says.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
So, I googled "the grammar of hypertext" and
I have no idea what I found, but it was really beautiful, and it got me thinking, and maybe if you read it/watch it/see it you can tell me what it means.
Here's the link.
One of the phrases I plan to steal and use: "narrative makes sense of sequence; it's how we give meaning to observation."
Here's the link.
One of the phrases I plan to steal and use: "narrative makes sense of sequence; it's how we give meaning to observation."
"failing and breaking, failing and learning and failing again"
Rebecca Brown's wonderful essay on Failure in The Stranger contains this:
Young Sook Park, Korea's foremost ceramic artist, was asked to make a group of moon jars for show in a gallery. A moon jar is a traditional Korean vessel made of two thrown pots, pressed together at their lips to make one.
Moon jars developed in the neo- Confucian culture of the Choson dynasty between the l5th and early 20th centuries and are the epitome of Choson sensibility, representing elegance, humility, integrity, purity, and self-control. They are solid white. Traditionally, moon jars have been relatively small—the size you can hold in one or both of your hands.
But when Park went to look at the gallery and saw how huge it was, she realized that traditionally sized moon jars—which had been made for more intimate settings—would not be right there. So she decided to make really big ones. And though she had been a ceramist for decades, it took Park five years to make a moon jar the size she wanted.
It was one of these five-years-in-the-making moon jars that I saw at the Seattle Asian Art Museum a while back, and it was stunning. Even if you didn't know what went into making it, you'd just find it plain beautiful.
Then, when I saw the making-of video, I was blown away. In one scene, a bunch of guys are loading some big, white, beautiful pots onto the back of a cart.
As I watched the video I thought, They're being kind of cavalier—just popping those babies into the cart like that, with just a little piece of cloth between them. Then the guys push the cart a little way down a path and unload the cart, yanking the pots off and hauling them up into these woods.
Then I saw the artist, Young Sook Park, standing next to a big shallow hole in the ground. The guys bring the pots over to her, and she takes a hammer and slams it right into a pot. The pot breaks and she hammers it again and again, into smaller pieces, then kicks the busted pieces of pot into the hole, and the guys bring another pot and she does it again. Smashing all these huge beautiful pots to smithereens.
It turns out that each of those pots had some little flaw or crack or blemish, something most people wouldn't see, but not exactly what the artist wanted. So she knocked apart that "draft" to see how and where it broke apart, then took that knowledge back to her studio and started another pot again.
She did this for years, failing and breaking, failing and learning and failing again on the way to make the object she desired.
The article is here.
Young Sook Park, Korea's foremost ceramic artist, was asked to make a group of moon jars for show in a gallery. A moon jar is a traditional Korean vessel made of two thrown pots, pressed together at their lips to make one.
Moon jars developed in the neo- Confucian culture of the Choson dynasty between the l5th and early 20th centuries and are the epitome of Choson sensibility, representing elegance, humility, integrity, purity, and self-control. They are solid white. Traditionally, moon jars have been relatively small—the size you can hold in one or both of your hands.
But when Park went to look at the gallery and saw how huge it was, she realized that traditionally sized moon jars—which had been made for more intimate settings—would not be right there. So she decided to make really big ones. And though she had been a ceramist for decades, it took Park five years to make a moon jar the size she wanted.
It was one of these five-years-in-the-making moon jars that I saw at the Seattle Asian Art Museum a while back, and it was stunning. Even if you didn't know what went into making it, you'd just find it plain beautiful.
Then, when I saw the making-of video, I was blown away. In one scene, a bunch of guys are loading some big, white, beautiful pots onto the back of a cart.
As I watched the video I thought, They're being kind of cavalier—just popping those babies into the cart like that, with just a little piece of cloth between them. Then the guys push the cart a little way down a path and unload the cart, yanking the pots off and hauling them up into these woods.
Then I saw the artist, Young Sook Park, standing next to a big shallow hole in the ground. The guys bring the pots over to her, and she takes a hammer and slams it right into a pot. The pot breaks and she hammers it again and again, into smaller pieces, then kicks the busted pieces of pot into the hole, and the guys bring another pot and she does it again. Smashing all these huge beautiful pots to smithereens.
It turns out that each of those pots had some little flaw or crack or blemish, something most people wouldn't see, but not exactly what the artist wanted. So she knocked apart that "draft" to see how and where it broke apart, then took that knowledge back to her studio and started another pot again.
She did this for years, failing and breaking, failing and learning and failing again on the way to make the object she desired.
The article is here.
as usual, most of the really good stuff starts out wearing Slayer underpants
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
yes, it's a glamourous life here in NYC
The very latest in high fashion film accessories modeled by NYT bestselling author Patrick Lee, and kick ass and take names auction deal making agent Suzie Townsend.
(yes, we went to see Avatar! Yes, we loved it. Yes we want to be blue!)
(yes, we went to see Avatar! Yes, we loved it. Yes we want to be blue!)
It's not your politics that offends me, sir
Dear, Literary Agent.
If you are a Latte drinking Liberal this isn’t for you. But if you feel Tea Party movement makes some sense, you will find this interesting.
My conservative non fictional book will offend secular progressives. My commentary is packed with the thoughts and observations of real Americans. Yes, I believe in the tea party. I have independent conservative thoughts. I shop at Wal-Mart. I love my country and hate how the secular progressive are ruining it. Wow. If you are a liberal this could be rocking your senses. Elitist living in New York or Los Angeles could not possibly comprehend the wisdom of the average American.
My non fiction commentary contains over 150 subjects of discussion. Some humorous, some serious, and some will remind you of subjects you forgot you were mad about. The subjects range from the ACLU, Christmas attacks, Guantanamo, Red necks, Taxes, to Yuppies. Here are a few examples from my book (redacted) Somebody had to say it.
Sincerely,
I am offended by the very idea you think I do not love this country with all my heart, and would gladly take up arms to defend her. You do not own the flag, sir. You do not own democracy.
This is a great and noble country filled with people who declare their love in ways you may not agree with nor understand. Do not for a single moment doubt their sincerity or their love.
We may argue about tax rates, and expenditures, but if we do not recognize we both love America, we diminish what this country is about: different people able to co-exist because we agree on how to govern ourselves.
And for your information: I'm nowhere near a secular progressive nor a liberal.
Fuck grateful
In response to my post below on query stats, this comment was sent (but not posted because I wanted to put it here)
If you read just that one post, ok, it's a fair assessment. The tone of the post can be interpreted as "I'm damn annoyed with queriers right now." I was. It's really really frustrating sometimes to work HARD to get information out to writers about how to write queries, and get 11 letters in 50 that don't even tell me what the novel is about.
But, if you've read this blog and Queryshark over time, I hope you understand why this comment annoyed me probably as much as the post annoyed the commenter. Context is everything.
If you really think I don't enjoy reading, or get too many queries, or do instant rejections (for anything other than these), you are wrong.
I don't expect you to be grateful. I'm annoyed you think saying "we should be grateful" is a compliment. I don't want you to be grateful I read your queries. It's my job, and it's in my best interest. I NEED good queries to make a living. Fuck grateful; write better queries.
I sense an egotism at work here that is a little annoying. Liked it at first, but you seem to be fixated on clever reasons not to read people`s manuscripts. I like the kind of agent who enjoys the slush pile, who is willing to read the first few pages of any mss. as long as it is well written. I would go so far as to posit that you get too many queries, probably because of your blog and no longer enjoy reading in and of itself. Insta-reject is a dangerous habit. But if you make a decent living, then I suppose we should be grateful you read queries at all.
If you read just that one post, ok, it's a fair assessment. The tone of the post can be interpreted as "I'm damn annoyed with queriers right now." I was. It's really really frustrating sometimes to work HARD to get information out to writers about how to write queries, and get 11 letters in 50 that don't even tell me what the novel is about.
But, if you've read this blog and Queryshark over time, I hope you understand why this comment annoyed me probably as much as the post annoyed the commenter. Context is everything.
If you really think I don't enjoy reading, or get too many queries, or do instant rejections (for anything other than these), you are wrong.
I don't expect you to be grateful. I'm annoyed you think saying "we should be grateful" is a compliment. I don't want you to be grateful I read your queries. It's my job, and it's in my best interest. I NEED good queries to make a living. Fuck grateful; write better queries.
Query letter stats
I recently took a whack at the query stack and here are some of the reasons I said no to about 50 queries in an hour:
Thinly disguised novel that's really a memoir and thus, egad no: 1
Most people don't live interesting enough lives to be good candidates for a memoir. If you're writing a novel drawing from the "interesting events of your life" you'll need a pretty stringent assessment of just how interesting that is. Assume it's not, and work on persuading me.
Recitation of events - not enticing: 1
Have you ever asked a little kid about his or her day at school? They can't tell things in narrative form yet so there's a lot of "and then this, and then that." Fortunately they're kids, and thus not querying me. When you query me, you really need to be able to describe your novel more enticingly than a kid describes a field trip.
Interesting concept/query so over written it boded ill for novel: 1
Less is more. Let me say that again: less is more
Spent so much time telling me what the novel isn't, didn't tell me what it was: 1
These are the guys who are going to fix everything wrong with fiction today, genre by genre. Well, ok, but what the hell is the book about?
ewwww: 1
Yes, you can gross me out in queries. But we're also done when you do.
I think the author is seriously deranged: 1
And not in a good way.
sadly out of touch about publishing time lines: 1
I'm selling books for 2011 and 2012 now. Mostly Fall and Winter 2011. If you have a book that's perfect for 2010, you're too late. And you're probably too late for 2011 too unless it's such a fiercely hot topic of interest I can sell it quickly. Figure at LEAST two years between sending a query and seeing a book on the shelf.
Sadly out of touch self-help book: 2
Some problems were big in the 70's. That doesn't mean I want to read about them now.
Non-author submission: 2
I don't care who you are or what relationship you have to the author. If you're not the author, don't query me. This includes all material for people who are dead.
blatant ripoff of another popular book or movie: 2
I don't live in a bubble. I've seen Star Wars, and Avatar, and if I haven't, the people in my office who read submissions certainly have. "Fresh and new" means I didn't pay $12.50 to see it at the Bijou recently.
Don't want to read this/cliche characters and plot: 3
Shadowy billionaires, reclusive blonde bombshells, beautiful female anything. Yawn.
Down on his luck private eye; renegade cop; Islamic terrorists; granola swilling eco-slime.
Yawn.
Now a blonde bombshell granola swilling shadowy billionaire private eye--that interests me.
Nothing compelling or enticing about the novel: 3
When my response is ho hum, that doesn't mean yes.
Nothing fresh or new with usual elements of a novel: 3
In other words, not bad, but not good enough.
Bad writing: 3
All writing is bad on the first draft. The trick is not to send the first draft AND to be able to edit yourself. It also helps if you know some basic stuff such as why "try and do" is incorrect. (If you don't know why, ask me)
Misc: 3
Reasons too specific to the query to list here, but I was tempted to call this category TSTQ for a reason.
Don't want to read this: 5
This is where the subjective part comes in. Some novels just don't interest me. Nothing bad or wrong with them, just not for me.
No idea what the novel is about: 11
And let's assume I'm not stupid, ok? I can read. I can follow a string of sentences and extrapolate information, and have been known to actually draw the occasional conclusion.
What this category covers are the people who tell me about themselves and their marketing ideas, and give me a brief concept statement. That doesn't tell me what the novel is about.
A string of events, particularly if it's backstory is NOT what the novel is about.
This is one of the hardest things to figure out when you start writing queries. I've been known to make my authors write the pitch letters for their novels cause I couldn't describe what the novel was about (yes, I read it!) This is HARD. Practice is essential. If you ever track me down at a writing conference, this is the class I teach most often. And if you want to talk to me about this at a conference, this is one thing I'll help you with any time.
Here's the good news:
referred to another FPLM agent for consideration: 1
requested fulls: 2
(categories were women's fiction and crime novel)
Thinly disguised novel that's really a memoir and thus, egad no: 1
Most people don't live interesting enough lives to be good candidates for a memoir. If you're writing a novel drawing from the "interesting events of your life" you'll need a pretty stringent assessment of just how interesting that is. Assume it's not, and work on persuading me.
Recitation of events - not enticing: 1
Have you ever asked a little kid about his or her day at school? They can't tell things in narrative form yet so there's a lot of "and then this, and then that." Fortunately they're kids, and thus not querying me. When you query me, you really need to be able to describe your novel more enticingly than a kid describes a field trip.
Interesting concept/query so over written it boded ill for novel: 1
Less is more. Let me say that again: less is more
Spent so much time telling me what the novel isn't, didn't tell me what it was: 1
These are the guys who are going to fix everything wrong with fiction today, genre by genre. Well, ok, but what the hell is the book about?
ewwww: 1
Yes, you can gross me out in queries. But we're also done when you do.
I think the author is seriously deranged: 1
And not in a good way.
sadly out of touch about publishing time lines: 1
I'm selling books for 2011 and 2012 now. Mostly Fall and Winter 2011. If you have a book that's perfect for 2010, you're too late. And you're probably too late for 2011 too unless it's such a fiercely hot topic of interest I can sell it quickly. Figure at LEAST two years between sending a query and seeing a book on the shelf.
Sadly out of touch self-help book: 2
Some problems were big in the 70's. That doesn't mean I want to read about them now.
Non-author submission: 2
I don't care who you are or what relationship you have to the author. If you're not the author, don't query me. This includes all material for people who are dead.
blatant ripoff of another popular book or movie: 2
I don't live in a bubble. I've seen Star Wars, and Avatar, and if I haven't, the people in my office who read submissions certainly have. "Fresh and new" means I didn't pay $12.50 to see it at the Bijou recently.
Don't want to read this/cliche characters and plot: 3
Shadowy billionaires, reclusive blonde bombshells, beautiful female anything. Yawn.
Down on his luck private eye; renegade cop; Islamic terrorists; granola swilling eco-slime.
Yawn.
Now a blonde bombshell granola swilling shadowy billionaire private eye--that interests me.
Nothing compelling or enticing about the novel: 3
When my response is ho hum, that doesn't mean yes.
Nothing fresh or new with usual elements of a novel: 3
In other words, not bad, but not good enough.
Bad writing: 3
All writing is bad on the first draft. The trick is not to send the first draft AND to be able to edit yourself. It also helps if you know some basic stuff such as why "try and do" is incorrect. (If you don't know why, ask me)
Misc: 3
Reasons too specific to the query to list here, but I was tempted to call this category TSTQ for a reason.
Don't want to read this: 5
This is where the subjective part comes in. Some novels just don't interest me. Nothing bad or wrong with them, just not for me.
No idea what the novel is about: 11
And let's assume I'm not stupid, ok? I can read. I can follow a string of sentences and extrapolate information, and have been known to actually draw the occasional conclusion.
What this category covers are the people who tell me about themselves and their marketing ideas, and give me a brief concept statement. That doesn't tell me what the novel is about.
A string of events, particularly if it's backstory is NOT what the novel is about.
This is one of the hardest things to figure out when you start writing queries. I've been known to make my authors write the pitch letters for their novels cause I couldn't describe what the novel was about (yes, I read it!) This is HARD. Practice is essential. If you ever track me down at a writing conference, this is the class I teach most often. And if you want to talk to me about this at a conference, this is one thing I'll help you with any time.
Here's the good news:
referred to another FPLM agent for consideration: 1
requested fulls: 2
(categories were women's fiction and crime novel)
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Seller beware!
I received an email offering a
Frankly, I'm always looking for new revenue opportunities for my authors so I read the email.
Despite the huckster quality of the prose, I'm interested in ways my authors can have electronic versions of their books, so I read on.
And we're done.
From interested to completely "not going to touch this with a ten foot pole" in three paragraphs.
Why?
Because the AAR Canon of Ethics is pretty clear about accepting referral fees/kickbacks/finders fees or whatever you want to call the dosh: No. Can. Do.
Here's the text copied from the AAR website:
And I think that's a good idea. I like the idea my clients can trust me for objective advice. They never need to wonder if I'm recommending a deal or a publisher cause I'll get a little extra under the table.
So, where did this company go wrong? They didn't do a single modicum of research. They certainly didn't ask an agent about the text of the letter. Any agent would have caught that.
And if they'd left it off? I would have happily called them, or gone to their website or asked the next question. And the truly hilarious part of this: they'd make more money too!
There's no way to do a deal with these guys even if I didn't take money, cause it's right there in black and white that they offer it. The equivalent of "I didn't inhale" and no one believed that either.
I almost feel sorry for these guys.
Almost.
New Revenue Opportunity for You and Your Authors
Frankly, I'm always looking for new revenue opportunities for my authors so I read the email.
(Redacted) is an innovative ebook publishing house committed to the promotion and exposure of its authors throughout the publishing industry. We are now accepting 2010 submissions for electronic-format books (ebooks) of full-length fiction and nonfiction titles and short stories.
Working with (redacted) is an opportunity for agents, their authors, and (redacted) all to achieve success:
Despite the huckster quality of the prose, I'm interested in ways my authors can have electronic versions of their books, so I read on.
Agents can realize a new source of revenue that may not previously have been available to them.
Authors have the opportunity to be published and sell their books now—while they may or may not continue to pursue mainstream publishing.
We currently offer you three primary categories of referrals and compensation on manuscripts/authors that you refer to us and for whom we publish works.
And we're done.
From interested to completely "not going to touch this with a ten foot pole" in three paragraphs.
Why?
Because the AAR Canon of Ethics is pretty clear about accepting referral fees/kickbacks/finders fees or whatever you want to call the dosh: No. Can. Do.
Here's the text copied from the AAR website:
A member who represents a client in the grant of rights in any property owned or controlled by the client may not accept any compensation or other payment from the acquirer of such rights,
And I think that's a good idea. I like the idea my clients can trust me for objective advice. They never need to wonder if I'm recommending a deal or a publisher cause I'll get a little extra under the table.
So, where did this company go wrong? They didn't do a single modicum of research. They certainly didn't ask an agent about the text of the letter. Any agent would have caught that.
And if they'd left it off? I would have happily called them, or gone to their website or asked the next question. And the truly hilarious part of this: they'd make more money too!
There's no way to do a deal with these guys even if I didn't take money, cause it's right there in black and white that they offer it. The equivalent of "I didn't inhale" and no one believed that either.
I almost feel sorry for these guys.
Almost.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
What part of "do not do this" is unclear?
A lot apparently.
Let's have a pop quiz:
When should you quote lovely glowing comments received from other agents in your query letter?
A: Always
B: Sometimes: if they're personal
C: Sometimes: if they're spot on
D. Never
Not sure?
Here, read a very calm, very cordial post on the subject by Jessica over at BookEndsLLC.
Want to take the test again?
When should you quote comments received from an agent in your query?
A: When you really want to connect with an agent
B: When you want to demonstrate other people have read and liked your work
C. When the agent said it was great, but didn't fit her list
D: When it clearly wasn't a form rejection, but a personal rejection
E: when you know the other agent you're querying is a friend of the one who made the comments
F: none of the above
G: never
Any questions?
Let's have a pop quiz:
When should you quote lovely glowing comments received from other agents in your query letter?
A: Always
B: Sometimes: if they're personal
C: Sometimes: if they're spot on
D. Never
Not sure?
Here, read a very calm, very cordial post on the subject by Jessica over at BookEndsLLC.
Want to take the test again?
When should you quote comments received from an agent in your query?
A: When you really want to connect with an agent
B: When you want to demonstrate other people have read and liked your work
C. When the agent said it was great, but didn't fit her list
D: When it clearly wasn't a form rejection, but a personal rejection
E: when you know the other agent you're querying is a friend of the one who made the comments
F: none of the above
G: never
Any questions?
Monday, February 15, 2010
Fan mail
I got a copy of a letter lauding FIRST CONTACT by Evan Mandery recently. It was a letter that I'll frame and put next to the copy of the book in my office. It said all the things I think, only so much better I wanted to call up the writer and gush my thanks. I refrained, since it would probably only frighten her, and I want her to read every book I sell from now forward.
It was wonderful to know Evan connected in this profound and intimate way with a total stranger. To me, that is one of the greatest joys of writing. Even in my limited capacity as a blogger, it's the comments and sense of connection that makes this special to me.
There is a Slate article about the woman who worked at Harold Ober and Associates, J.D. Salinger's literary agent. JD Salinger never read his fan mail. From the article it sounds like he never even SAW any of it.
I'm sure there are a handful of authors these days who don't see any of their fan mail, but I'll bet most see at least some.
Which got me thinking.
I had lunch with a brilliant young editor recently who was wonderfully cruel and sent me a book that knocked my sox off. I read it, then read it again, and then again. Under threat of decapitation and public humiliation, she swore me to total secrecy regarding author, title, publisher, and pub date. (When I can reveal it, I will. You won't be able to shut me up in fact)
But after I read this book, I realized the author was going to get fan mail. Some of it would be the gushing thanks I wanted to send to Evan Mandery's fan. Some of it won't.
Some of it will be "this is my life you're writing about." And some of it will be from people whose lives are in ruins, who are clutching this book like a lifeline.
And because of Twitter, Facebook, webpages, blogs and the plethora of ways to reach authors these days -- ways publishers and agents demand authors be available in fact -- this author will not have the luxury of not reading these messages.
And some of the authors of these incredible amazing YA books that reach right into your heart? The authors themselves are young. They are social networking savvy. They are right there on the front lines and they will hear everything said, no filter available.
How do we, agents, editors, booksellers maybe, others, adults anyway, help these young authors with this modern burden? I've never even thought of talking to my authors about what to do if someone reaches out like that. I've mostly been worried about my authors' privacy and security concerns.
This is something I'm thinking about now. I haven't seen anyone else talking about it. I think we'd better.
And the irony of the timing of this post is not lost on me: just today I wagged my finger at you and said censoriously Be Reachable.
It was wonderful to know Evan connected in this profound and intimate way with a total stranger. To me, that is one of the greatest joys of writing. Even in my limited capacity as a blogger, it's the comments and sense of connection that makes this special to me.
There is a Slate article about the woman who worked at Harold Ober and Associates, J.D. Salinger's literary agent. JD Salinger never read his fan mail. From the article it sounds like he never even SAW any of it.
I'm sure there are a handful of authors these days who don't see any of their fan mail, but I'll bet most see at least some.
Which got me thinking.
I had lunch with a brilliant young editor recently who was wonderfully cruel and sent me a book that knocked my sox off. I read it, then read it again, and then again. Under threat of decapitation and public humiliation, she swore me to total secrecy regarding author, title, publisher, and pub date. (When I can reveal it, I will. You won't be able to shut me up in fact)
But after I read this book, I realized the author was going to get fan mail. Some of it would be the gushing thanks I wanted to send to Evan Mandery's fan. Some of it won't.
Some of it will be "this is my life you're writing about." And some of it will be from people whose lives are in ruins, who are clutching this book like a lifeline.
And because of Twitter, Facebook, webpages, blogs and the plethora of ways to reach authors these days -- ways publishers and agents demand authors be available in fact -- this author will not have the luxury of not reading these messages.
And some of the authors of these incredible amazing YA books that reach right into your heart? The authors themselves are young. They are social networking savvy. They are right there on the front lines and they will hear everything said, no filter available.
How do we, agents, editors, booksellers maybe, others, adults anyway, help these young authors with this modern burden? I've never even thought of talking to my authors about what to do if someone reaches out like that. I've mostly been worried about my authors' privacy and security concerns.
This is something I'm thinking about now. I haven't seen anyone else talking about it. I think we'd better.
And the irony of the timing of this post is not lost on me: just today I wagged my finger at you and said censoriously Be Reachable.
Honest to Godiva, I think you DON'T want to hear from me
Come to think of it, maybe you don't.
You certainly give every indication of being uninterested.
There's no email listed on your blog, or your website.
In other words, if I need to reach you to tell you (just for example) that the HILARIOUS link you put in your recent comment had to be rejected because it was faulty, I have NO WAY TO REACH YOU!
I've ranted about this before.
It doesn't do you any good to be bright, insouciant and hilarious and wonderful IF I can't reach out to you on both matters mundane (a deleted comment) and otherwise.
You're not just here for fun and games.
You're here to develop and advance your writing career.
Act like it.
You certainly give every indication of being uninterested.
There's no email listed on your blog, or your website.
In other words, if I need to reach you to tell you (just for example) that the HILARIOUS link you put in your recent comment had to be rejected because it was faulty, I have NO WAY TO REACH YOU!
I've ranted about this before.
It doesn't do you any good to be bright, insouciant and hilarious and wonderful IF I can't reach out to you on both matters mundane (a deleted comment) and otherwise.
You're not just here for fun and games.
You're here to develop and advance your writing career.
Act like it.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
The demon donkey
Here's Karen Kennedy's podcast about her trip to Greece with her sister (total run time is about four minutes --I laughed for three of them.)
Best start to a query in awhile
Dear Janet,
I’d like to say that I am looking for an agent to represent JD Salinger's inside account of the story behind the headline, “The Pope Elopes”. I’d like to say that, but in reality I am looking for representation for my (redacted)
It addresses a major problem I see in most books published today: there aren’t enough books with my name in the byline.
You will see that it has a lot of similarities with the Bible as it involves people, places and events. Hopefully because of these similarities it will move as many if not more copies.
I’d like to say that I am looking for an agent to represent JD Salinger's inside account of the story behind the headline, “The Pope Elopes”. I’d like to say that, but in reality I am looking for representation for my (redacted)
It addresses a major problem I see in most books published today: there aren’t enough books with my name in the byline.
You will see that it has a lot of similarities with the Bible as it involves people, places and events. Hopefully because of these similarities it will move as many if not more copies.
my favorite phrase of the day
“Il a manqué une occasion de se taire.”
(He missed an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.)
I found it in an article about an untranslatable novel that sounds utterly delicious and fun: Foreign Tongue by Vanina Marsot.
More on comparisons
I've ranted at length about the dangers of comparing your books to others.
Here's a new reason to be wary. A colleague of mine sent me this exasperated email about a querier who used comp titles:
Notice the different title reference?
If you use Publisher's Marketplace, or even Amazon, to cull titles for comparison, be aware titles change, and sometimes they change AFTER they're on Amazon or BN.com or other lists.
You don't need a comparison, but if you just can't resist, use books you've read. ***
There are all sorts of pitfalls for the unwary querier but this one can be avoided pretty easily. As such, when I see this mistake in a query, I draw conclusions you're not going to find flattering.
***an interesting and valuable question from the comments
If you're using unpublished books as a comparison, say how you came to read them. And you might mention you also know they are not published yet.
Here's a new reason to be wary. A colleague of mine sent me this exasperated email about a querier who used comp titles:
He can't have read any of the specific books, two of the authors hadn't been published yet and one of the books will have a different title when it IS eventually published. And I may be the ONLY thing those books have in common.
Notice the different title reference?
If you use Publisher's Marketplace, or even Amazon, to cull titles for comparison, be aware titles change, and sometimes they change AFTER they're on Amazon or BN.com or other lists.
You don't need a comparison, but if you just can't resist, use books you've read. ***
There are all sorts of pitfalls for the unwary querier but this one can be avoided pretty easily. As such, when I see this mistake in a query, I draw conclusions you're not going to find flattering.
***an interesting and valuable question from the comments
Just a thought - but I'm on a couple of writer's forums and a lot of us have read each others arcs and manuscripts. I would have assumed that the querier had read the books before they were published - but I've also been accused of being a bit on the naive end of things.
Would you say it's bad form to compare your book to pre-published books whether you've read them or not b/c it just looks bad?
If you're using unpublished books as a comparison, say how you came to read them. And you might mention you also know they are not published yet.
Another book on the I Want to Read This list
Here's the Wall Street Journal review that enticed my interest in THIS BOOK IS OVERDUE: How Librarians and Cybrarians Can Save Us All by Marilyn Johnson.
A side benefit of reading reviews is you can learn how to talk about books. For example, I'm just starting to work with a very very beginning writer who has a non-fiction book in her. We're working on how to describe her story. One of her "assignments" from me is to read multiple reviews of a book and see what works, and what doesn't in making the book sound enticing.
There are two other reviews of THIS BOOK IS OVERDUE: one in the Boston Globe, the second in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
Which of the three is most enticing to you, and why?
And if you've read the book, I'd like to hear what you think of it.
A side benefit of reading reviews is you can learn how to talk about books. For example, I'm just starting to work with a very very beginning writer who has a non-fiction book in her. We're working on how to describe her story. One of her "assignments" from me is to read multiple reviews of a book and see what works, and what doesn't in making the book sound enticing.
There are two other reviews of THIS BOOK IS OVERDUE: one in the Boston Globe, the second in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
Which of the three is most enticing to you, and why?
And if you've read the book, I'd like to hear what you think of it.
Dick Francis has died
I loved his books.
I read most of them many times.
It was widely believed Mr. Francis' wife, Mary, did the actual writing, and after her death in 2000, the subsequent books made me think that was true.
But I loved the books. I don't care which Francis wrote them, I loved them.
Thank you Dick and Mary Francis for hundreds if not thousands of hours of good reading.
The news came in The Telegraph today.
I read most of them many times.
It was widely believed Mr. Francis' wife, Mary, did the actual writing, and after her death in 2000, the subsequent books made me think that was true.
But I loved the books. I don't care which Francis wrote them, I loved them.
Thank you Dick and Mary Francis for hundreds if not thousands of hours of good reading.
The news came in The Telegraph today.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Best Opening Line in a Query Today
Also, I noticed that you had answered all of your queries as of February 1. Surely, you need more.
Monday, February 08, 2010
Why I may not be the right agent for you
As usual, Ed Anon says exactly what I think, only better.
Here she talks about what can be fixed easily, what can't, and why some authors who "fix" things drive us to drink.
I should add to this by saying I am not an editor, nor an "editorial minded agent." I've never been an editor, and after seeing the work of some truly talented editors, I DO think they are superheroes.
Which means if something needs to be fixed, even if I know what it is, which I often don't, I'm more likely to say "not for me" than "here, let me give some suggestions." Not all agents are like that of course.
That is one of the top five reasons you should query widely, not offer exclusives, and not obsess about rejections. Agents bring different skills to the game. Not all agents, even spiffy sharky ones, are the best agent for you.
Here she talks about what can be fixed easily, what can't, and why some authors who "fix" things drive us to drink.
I should add to this by saying I am not an editor, nor an "editorial minded agent." I've never been an editor, and after seeing the work of some truly talented editors, I DO think they are superheroes.
Which means if something needs to be fixed, even if I know what it is, which I often don't, I'm more likely to say "not for me" than "here, let me give some suggestions." Not all agents are like that of course.
That is one of the top five reasons you should query widely, not offer exclusives, and not obsess about rejections. Agents bring different skills to the game. Not all agents, even spiffy sharky ones, are the best agent for you.
Sunday, February 07, 2010
A word about titles
Titles, at the query stage, really don't matter. If I think you have a great title, hurray for us, we don't have to come up with a new one.
If I think your title could be better, I'll make some suggestions.
All of this of course is about as permanent as a summer sandcastle because the publisher has final control of the title. You love it, I love it, the editor loves it and B&N hates it: we're getting a new title.
That said, there are some things you should NOT use as book titles in a query:
Hamlet
Romeo and Juliet
To Kill a Mockingbird
Catcher in the Rye
In other words, don't use a title that is so very obviously associated with a great classic.
Sure, you can't copyright a title, so if you and Lee Child both decide to write a book called 61 HOURS it's hunky dory, but you really do NOT want to title your book something that's going to lead to obvious confusion. F for Phineas Flittergibbit isn't where most booksellers will direct buyers looking to buy Romeo and Juliet.
If I think your title could be better, I'll make some suggestions.
All of this of course is about as permanent as a summer sandcastle because the publisher has final control of the title. You love it, I love it, the editor loves it and B&N hates it: we're getting a new title.
That said, there are some things you should NOT use as book titles in a query:
Hamlet
Romeo and Juliet
To Kill a Mockingbird
Catcher in the Rye
In other words, don't use a title that is so very obviously associated with a great classic.
Sure, you can't copyright a title, so if you and Lee Child both decide to write a book called 61 HOURS it's hunky dory, but you really do NOT want to title your book something that's going to lead to obvious confusion. F for Phineas Flittergibbit isn't where most booksellers will direct buyers looking to buy Romeo and Juliet.
Thursday, February 04, 2010
Take One!
This is fun and wonderful for a lot of reasons but the reason I love it is cause four of the five stars of this video started their publishing careers with us here at FinePrint. I'm just so darn proud of all of them!!
The new rallying cry of writers everywhere: NO! No! NO!
I'll bet you thought this was about e-book royalties and pricing didn't you?
Not a chance.
It's the next installment of Gary Corby's hilarious tips on making your word processing program work magic for you.
Not a chance.
It's the next installment of Gary Corby's hilarious tips on making your word processing program work magic for you.
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
I was looking...at Gary Corby's blog
I was thinking this info about search/replace will be pretty valuable if you, like Gary, have a fondness for present participles.
Monday, February 01, 2010
This just cracked me up
How many agents does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Agent 1: Sorry, we're not accepting screw in light bulbs anymore. Bayonets only, and we only get them from the store.
Agent 2: We considered your light bulb but it's a bit too modern. Have you tried turning it into a candle?
A3: Loved your light bulb. Great light. Lots of illumination. Unfortunately, the agency's decided to remain in the dark indefinitely.
Rachelle Gardner's blog is the source of all merriment today.
Agent 1: Sorry, we're not accepting screw in light bulbs anymore. Bayonets only, and we only get them from the store.
Agent 2: We considered your light bulb but it's a bit too modern. Have you tried turning it into a candle?
A3: Loved your light bulb. Great light. Lots of illumination. Unfortunately, the agency's decided to remain in the dark indefinitely.
Rachelle Gardner's blog is the source of all merriment today.
If you are a writer, read this
I want to understand how it is that being by myself
with my keyboard is when I feel least alone.
That's from Betsy Lerner's blog. As is this:
I think one of the worst parts of being a writer is trying to appear normal. .... We are among you. Observing, sizing up, spying. Listening in on your conversation and writing down your best lines. We are having an affair with the grad student at the Blue State Cafe, telepathically of course.
I know Betsy is a fabulous agent because she represents two books that knocked my socks off: COLUMBINE by Dave Cullen and JUST KIDS by Patti Smith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)