Week in Review 6/26/16

Welcome to the week that was!

Holy moly, #Brexit!

Last week's review referenced the suggestion that agents go back to asking for queries on paper.

John Davis (Manuscript) Frain said:

I'm not going to double down for Donnaeve since I've learned the hard, painful lesson of doubling down here. I won't even admit that I like her idea (even though I do) on going back to the days of paper queries. But I think one MAJOR thing would change in your formula...

You'd no longer be getting 100 queries a week because querying would be a more complicated process. You'd be thinning out the herd by virtue of making the process cumbersome on the writer. Only those willing to invest the time would query, so they'd have to be confident in their product.

It's a way for an agent to play Contrarian, and I wonder if that agent would get fewer and better queries if only snail mail queries were allowed.

Let's do the math: Assume reading queries electronically and on paper takes the same amount of time. The only activity that takes different amounts of time is responding.
 

Electronic query reply steps:

1. Click "reply"

2. Click "No thank you"

3. Click send

Time spent:  3-5 seconds (yes, I actually timed this as I wrote this blog post.)

Paper query reply steps:

1. Hand write: Thank you for your query. I'm sorry this is not a match for me. Janet Reid

2. Fold letter

3. Insert in envelope

4. Seal envelope

Time spent: 30 seconds

5. Take to post office drop box is not accrued to individual queries since I take all my mail to the PO at the end of the day anyway. (Yes, I still mail things, and some of you have books to prove it!)

I also did  not account for sorting the incoming queries either. Someone has to wade through all the mail and direct it to the correct agent.

Analysis: since paper queries take 6-10 times longer (3-5 seconds versus 30 seconds) I'd need to get fewer than 10-16 queries to make it time efficient.

The reason I actually clocked the response time is that it's sometimes easy to scoff and say "oh that won't work" or "please, I know the answer!" when, without actual research, you don't. This is the EXACT failure of No Response Means No.  Replying to 100 query emails a week takes about five-ten minutes. I timed it.

But here's the true cost: in going back to paper queries I'd be sorting out authors based on their willingness to query on paper, and nothing else. Willingness to query on paper is NOT directly related to quality of work, meticulousness of writer, or my interest in their subject.

In fact, because it costs money to query by paper (not to mention time) I'd be erecting a barrier to writers with limited funds, and those who have to work long hours, or who can't get to the post office very often.  This seems like a bad idea to me.

Andrea mentions yet another reason: I'd miss out on international writers (no Gary Corby!?!?)

Regarding snail-mail queries, I don't query any agency who accepts submissions by post only. I don't live in the US or the UK and I couldn't afford to send all my queries by post, so I don't send any. And the postal service of the country where I live is incredibly slow and not very reliable. Things go missing all the time, from birthday cards to packages. I'd have to spend a small fortune on postage and still have no guarantee my queries actually arrive, because no agency (as far as I know) accepts registered post when it comes to queries. (Not to mention registered post would cost even more)

The Sleepy One asked:

Is QueryManager set up like Submittable? I haven't had a chance to check it out yet. I love Submittable. It's so easy to use and it's well thought out from both the writer and publisher side.

Yes. So far, I like it a lot, but I've only gotten about 10 queries or so. I'm not sure how many agents are trying it out.

Celia Reeves said:

I checked out Janet's QueryManager page when she tweeted about it last week. It looks wonderful, simple and clean, but one thing caught my eye. You know how they put red asterisks by the required fields on web forms? On this form everything is required EXCEPT THE QUERY LETTER. Is this a Shark-given free pass to submit a query without a query letter? Sadly, I know that it will be fixed before I'm ready to submit, sometime between Christmas and a decade from now.

Ha! You do have to write a query cause you actually have to email me something. If it's "Hey Snoooks, read my book" that's still a query. And don't think I haven't seen that before (not via QueryManager, but in my regular inbox)

On the topic of going to writing conferences Janice L. Grinyer said:

So even though I walk deep in the forest for work, am prepared at home to fight fire, handle all sorts of animals (does this include the rattlesnake I found wrapped up around an apple tree yesterday?) I'm terrified to go to a writers conference. PLEASEDONTTALKTOMEIDONTKNOWWHATIMDOING. I'm such an easy target right now for talking disasters.

If anyone from the Reef is going to a conference where I'll be speaking, let me know. (Drop me an email)  You can hang out with me at the conference till you get your sea legs. I know what it's like to feel like the new kid (I went to six different schools in six years from 4th-9th grade.)

Here's where I'll be:

ThrillerFest

Vermont

Writers Digest

And although I am twice as terrifying in real life as I am on this blog, you won't actually have to talk or anything. You can just hang out and show me photos of your dog/cat/apple orchard.

Colin Smith said:

Elise: You don't want to meet me. A couple of Reiders have, but Janet was there to rescue them from boredom. :)

Yea, Colin was so boring we wrote synopses for comic relief.

Yea, Colin was so boring we brought in a mime to ratchet up the conversation.

Yea, Colin was so boring we considered a writing contest about how boring he was…until we realized no one wanted to read the entries.

Yea, Colin was so boring we told him the next Bouchercon was in New Orleans France.

Yea, Colin was so boring, the table planks inducted him into their Hall of Fame.

Yea, Colin was so boring, he got a 5 star rating from the drill press review at Consumer Reports.

Yea, Colin was so boring, actuarial tables had to be revised.

Yea, Colin was so boring, we called the police to report he was missing when he was actually sitting at the table.

Speaking of conferences, Monday's topic was pitching editors at a writing conference.
I think it can get writers into trouble later when they have an agent.

Lisa Bodenheim asked:

And what if that editor comes back with an, "and when you get an agent, have them send it to me." Is it appropriate for Opie to respond or simply to forward that info to the agent when s/he lands one?

You say: "I'll pass that info along, thank you very much for your interest." And you do pass it along. While the editor may not be the best choice at the publisher, it's good to know who's interested.

Dena Pawling asked:

Does a rejection from one editor at a house, mean a rejection from all editors at that house?

Generally if you've sent it to an editor at WheelbarrowsOCash, you can't send it to another editor there. Yes, there are exceptions but you won't know what they are.

If that editor declines the book, can you submit to the "right" editor after?

No.

Or is the danger here, that the editor who first has the submission actually offers on it, but you would have rather the offer come from someone else at that house?

The danger is the editor passes, not that they offer.

AJ Blythe asked:

As y'all know I'm in Oz. There are very limited opportunities conference wise (for writers). I go to the same one every year, and this year is no different. I've registered to pitch to a senior editor and an agent, both from the US (the conference usually has at least one agent and one editor from the US attend, in addition to the locals).

1. On the basis I want an agent, should I make it clear to the editor from the get-go I am wanting an agent? I was planning on having my query letter with me, so rather than discuss with a view to a request, am I better off using the pitch time to get their feel for market/interest?

Use the time to gather information. The editors that I know who've done this conference all work for places that only take agented submissions anyway. Pitching is pointless. Getting the scoop on what the editor is looking for is useful.

2. The agent in question doesn't personally represent my genre, but the agency itself does. I was wondering whether it would be rude to take my query letter to get their opinion of it (while secretly hoping maybe they'd offer a personal referral to another agent at the agency)?

Getting help on a query is a good idea, if the agent is up for it. Ask her. And if she says "wow, this is great, you should query AgentFabulous" so much the better.

Lennon Faris asked:

OK, sort of (mostly?) off topic - and hope I'm not risking Carkoon - I think a list of conferences and what their 'gist' is would be so helpful to someone on the outside. Janet, I think you mentioned once that Boucheron was more of a fun conference rather than a help to authors with their manuscripts (or I might be making that up). I've heard some comments here saying this or that conference was great for the panels, or the query workshop, etc. I'm thinking of going to *some* conference or workshop but it is a little overwhelming with how many types there are, and how different the prices are.

Bouchercon is a fan convention (a "con") NOT a writing conference. ThrillerFest has a craft component that is akin to a writing conference, but is largely a fan con the other days. Other cons: Malice Domestic, Left Coast Crime, Murder and Mayhem in Milwaukee.  There are others that I'm sure the comment column will reveal.

A writers conference focuses on craft: Writers Digest is a writing conference. So is Surrey. So is CrimeBake.

Then there are the conventions like Romance Writers of America. They are sort of a hybrid, but you need to be a member to attend.

If you want to figure out if an event is a convention or a conference look at the line up of panels. If its largely authors, it's a convention. If it's mostly agents and editors, it's a writing conference.  

Another good way to distinguish: look on the registration form. If you're asked "what you are" (as in reader, writer, librarian, fan etc.) it's a convention. Writers conferences assume you're a writer if you're planning to attend.

On Tuesday I posted a list of the reasons I said no to 25 queries.

Rose Black said:

So, read more, write better, and suck up the fact that not everyone will love your story no matter how good it is. Would that be a fair summary?

Yup!

Craig said:

I know I played the fool the first time I halfheartedly queried. I am sure that some will hold that against me but I hope to get a query good enough that even those who pass will know remorse from it.

No one will hold it against you. No one will remember. Unless you are nuts enough to remind me of a bad query, it's all water under the bridge about 30 seconds after I hit reply.

I don't have enough time to keep some sort of black list for well-intentioned but idiotic or lame queries. My black list is limited to people who have actively disparaged me or my clients. A bad query isn't insulting. It's just a bad query. I see those all the time.

Regarding the larger story needed in memoir Janice L. Grinyer said:

 I wrote the initial chapters of my fire memoir with factual evidence on what a person can do when a wildfire threatens, intertwining our story in the process. Not only have I had training, but I have colleagues in the field, respected for their knowledge. Though that could be why we survived...Here I was fretting that you shouldn't do that unless you had a Ph.d. I was wrong, but right. Don't worry; that last sentence was for me.

I've been reading (we all have!) your comments about the fire and I think it could actually be a very compelling memoir. It's not just about fire though. It's about what happens when devastation (in a variety of forms) looms.

Every single person can resonate with a memoir that talks about how to prepare for, and survive something that is out of your control and changes your life forever. Fire would certainly be one thing. Hurricanes, the levees of New Orleans failing, a spouse suddenly arrested and jailed for terrible crimes you had no idea about.

When you dig deep and answer the question "how would this apply to other situations" you'll get the larger story.

Lennon Faris asked:

It's interesting that three out of 25 had no plot. What were the queries about? Just events with no direction?

Events with nothing at stake. Plot requires a choice. If Our Hero chooses to Save The Day, he must sacrifice Something. Also described as skin in the game.

Lennon Faris also asked:

#20 confused me. "textbook illustration of what not to do, including answer the question "what is the story about"" - meaning, the query did not answer that question? Or they answered it in a textbook illustration bad way?

I should have said "what not to do, including FAIL to answer the question" because the query not only did not answer the question of what the story is about, it also made every other basic mistake you can think of. I didn't make a list because I did not want the query to be readily identified by the writer (although why I think that writer reads this blog I do not know.)

Lennon Farris went for the hat trick:

#22 Surprised me. I knew you would read queries for genres you don't represent, but I didn't know you encourage that. Strangely I would feel inexplicably nervous querying the QOTKU! Oh wait, not so strange. This agent has rows and rows of teeth!

You guyz get your categories and genres wrong so often I'd rather encourage you to send things you don't think I want, rather than miss a good thriller that you think is YA Western haiku.  It doesn't take me long to read a query and I don't view it as a waste of time to read things that may not be for me.

kdjames said:

I have to admit to feeling torn about #22. I don't doubt that you mean it, Janet, and this isn't the first time you've said it. But it would just feel so horribly gauche, like I hadn't researched an agent's genre preferences, or maybe had a severe deficit in reading comprehension. Ah, well. As my daughter recently said to me, "What have you got to lose?" I replied, "Other than fear? Not a damn thing."

Listen to your kid. She is clearly brilliant.

and kdjames said further:

Colin, I know, I know I've heard the admonishments not to assume an agent won't like something and not to self-reject. It's hard not to imagine an agent reading a query and thinking, WTF. Was I not clear? What part of *I don't rep this* did they not understand? Why would I want to work with someone so clueless? Actually, I've seen more than one agent say this on twitter.

I really like the phrase self-reject.

And let's not overlook the fact that agents who mock writers on Twitter are idiots. You may quote me. In fact, PLEASE quote me. The sooner agents quit acting like they're the frosting on the cake of publishing (rather than the baking soda in the cake) the better off we'll all be.

John Davis (Manuscript) Frain said:

Janet, looked like between the lines you were kinda asking if we'd like to see a post like this again. You had to look really hard between the lines, but it was there. Anyway, I vote YES.

It would probably be just a repeat of this post.  This was a pretty average day in the query trenches. But I hear you.

Mythical one eyed peace officer said:

#1 and #24 generate the same question so far as memoir...."why would anybody want to read this?" I get that but wonder how one would query something like the Chicken Soup books. These have obviously been quite successful commercially. I've never read one, just thumbed through at the bookstore and while after the first one I guess a readership was established I wonder how one would have queried the first one. (I think the first Chicken Soup was self published, no?)

A collection of memoir essays. The Chicken Soup series includes multiple authors in a volume but is that a significant difference? I would guess people buy them because they are just enjoyable to read for some people. So the answer to the question, "why would anybody...." perhaps is - because it is fun or enjoyable or interesting to read.

Oh the Chicken Soup books. Dear old Jack Canfield, I adore him. The first Chicken Soup book was NOT self-published. Jack tells the story of campaigning through BEA back in whatever year looking for a publisher. He found one in HCI which was just about to shutter the doors and turn in the keys.  The book of course as you know took off.

BUT the reason the series went nuts was this: the publisher said to the authors "hey, we've got some blank pages at the end. Do you want to include anything else?" And the heavens opened and the angelic voices said "include a page asking people to send their stories of hope etc."

And they did. And people did. And thus was a franchise born.

You can't query something like Chicken Soup. It's not a memoir. It's not even a collection of essays. It's more like a collection of anecdotes. A compilation. Like a joke book. The reason it got published was HCI had literally nothing to lose in doing so. And it paid off.

Linda Strader asked:

I see many references to memoirs in your post, Janet, but the last time I checked, those aren't on your wish list...correct?

I'll look at anything. Memoir is narrative non-fiction, and I do rep that.

On Wednesday I indulged in some snarling about people asking me for info that is easily found in a google search:

E.M.Goldsmith said:

But, your Majesty, you know everything and sometimes the Internet spews out poppycock. I can understand the tweeter, at risk of being dumped into Carkoon's Oblivion Cell, thinking they have stumbled upon a mythical Oracle. It is going to happen.

Boy howdy do I know it. I was researching books on how to write query letters, and honest to god, some of the information was so bad I wanted to post a review on Amazon that said something like "this is utter balderdash!"

The difference with finding poppycock on the internet and asking me to do your research is of course that you actually tried first and are confused by the results. I'm always happy to weigh in on those questions. But you gotta at least try first.

Peggy Larkin has provided me with my favorite new toy:

Oh man, what a perfect opportunity for my favorite passive-aggressive/snarky website, Let Me Google That For You!

Example: Let me google this for you

Julie Weathers said:

I don't like asking agents publishing questions on social media aside from blogs like this.

The exception is in invitation windows. For instance, The Bent Agency does an #Askagent thing from time to time. I'm convinced someone in the office knocked over a sacred statue in the Holy Order of Agent Temple and they are doomed to answer the same questions from would be authors for all eternity.

What's the word count for X?

Do you accept manuscripts that aren't finished?

What if I'm self published, but the sales aren't so good. Will you be my agent?

What do you think the next hot thing will be?

Are vampires out?

Why do I have to write a query letter? Can I just send sample pages?

Do I have to send the first five pages? They are kind of boring.

What can you do for me?

You rat B@stahd agents are all the same. You're just in it to crush dreams and kill all hope of ever getting published. I just wanted you to know how I feel.

I love those last two.

Here are my answers: nothing, and you're right.

It's kind of awesome to see the questioner's face when they've asked those kinds of questions in person at a conference panel Q&A.

DLM has provided my new answer to questions like this:

Being a secretary for 30 years now, I've fielded some extraordinarily stupid questions in my day. Usually, I just feel like they're a nice opportunity to talk with my team or someone who thinks I know more than they do. At TIMES, I may passive-aggressively ask them "Oh, you couldn't find anything when you looked in Help/Google/the manual?" - but that is only for people who annoy me. Most often, I'll just find or give the ready answer, and enjoy the sense that people are under the impression I'm a Knower of Things. It's not the worst feeling, people turning to you.

Since everyone annoys me (except my blog readers) (oh wait, and my clients too) I'm using that answer for everyone.

Except maybe not this girl, as told by Heidi the Duchess of Kneale:

My library story:

A teenage girl doing research asked me to help her find books on a subject. She had the physical Dewey subject catalogue in her hands, but wasn't sure how to make it work. She earned one point for attempting to do her own research.

Unfortunately, one point was all she earned.

"What are you looking for?" I asked.

She pointed to an entry in the catalogue: "The Great Depression". Not a problem. I'm good at history. I ask her refining questions: Any particular aspect of the Great Depression?"

She didn't know. "Social impact? Financial impact? Cultural impact?" She had no clue. Just gave me this vague look of bafflement. All my questions couldn't get a clue out of her. "I don't know." Was the best answer I could get out of her.

In frustration she abandoned me because I was asking her too many hard questions.

Two days later she shuffles up to the Check-Out desk with a stack of books on Depression in Teenagers, Clinical Depression, etc.

She was talking the Black Dog, not Black Tuesday. But what made her situation pathetic is that she didn't know how to explain herself, nor did she know how answer my questions with, "I don't think that's what I'm looking for."

Sometimes people want to know something, but they don't know what it is they want to know. No research librarian can help you if you don't know what it is you're looking for.

On Thursday I posted a revision to my earlier post on how long to let works in progress lie fallow while revising:

Kitty said:

Tinkering has turned out to be the important phase for me. When I keep going back to a word or a phrase, something that seems fine and yet it pesters me like a gnat at bedtime, then I know I've overlooked something. Sometimes the something is nothing and sometimes it isn't.

Colin Smith asked:

Here's what I'm curious to know. There are writers out there (not me) who only ever produce one draft because they edit as they go. I've heard them say that their writing day begins with looking over the previous day's work to correct mistakes, and craft it into good prose. They then begin the new stuff. My question: Do they not re-read the entire manuscript when it's done? Do they type "The End", do some work on the section they just wrote, and then send it to their agent/editor? I know I couldn't do that. I'd want one last read through to be sure everything is in place.

My first English lit prof once said Anthony Trollope wrote like that. Straight through, no revisions. When he wrote "The End" on a novel, he then pulled out a fresh blank page and started the next novel. At the time I was not sophisticated enough to ask whether this was literal truth, or a comment on the quality of Trollope but the image has stayed with me, lo these many years.

As to how other people do it: there is no one right way. There's only the way that works for you. The reason I share these things is not to say "This is the Right Way." It's to say "if you're looking for tactics, here's what I do. Try it. If it works, terrific. If it doesn't, keep looking for others."

Colin Smith also asked:

Here's something else I'm curious to know: how many published writers continue to use Beta Readers? Or once they have a few books under their belt, do writers feel like their agent/editor team is sufficient? I have heard more than one bestselling author say that the only other person who sees their manuscript before it goes to their agent or editor is their spouse. And sometimes not even their spouse!

I ask my writers to not send their work through a critique group if at all possible. Some clients don't anymore. Some still do. My preference is that I read it, and their editor read it, and the client not get bogged down by advice from a writing group. 

Kate Larkindale said

As someone coming to the end of a rather arduous revision, this post couldn't come at a better time! And to answer a question, even though I have an agent who made suggestions for the direction of the revision, I still have beta readers and crit partners I trust and I wouldn't send the MS back to my agent without a thumbs up from them… I'm still waiting to get to that point.

On Friday we talked about sales figures some more.

Donnaeve said:

"It's worse with digital publishing because I used to be able to say "he sold all the books they printed" but with ebooks, there is no limit to the number available for sale."

What if, for instance, an author is paid an advance, and depending on the price point of the ebook, they sell enough to pay it back...that would be good, right? Couldn't you say they sold enough to pay back their advance?

The term you want here is "earned out" not paid back. Don't EVER think of an advance as something you have to pay back. 

And no, I never use the phrase "he earned out his advance" because the terms of that earlier publishing contract are confidential. The writer could share the info. I cannot.

And earning out an advance isn't a reliable indicator of sales. Some very very very big name authors never earn out. Essentially they're being paid a higher royalty rate. The publisher would no more drop them for not earning out than they would shoot themselves in the foot.

Want to see the math to get a better picture?

Author Lightning Strike is paid an advance of ten million dollars for her novel Girl on the Carkoon Kale Express.

Author's royalties are 10% of jacket price: 10% x 25.99, or $2.59/book.

To earn out she'll need to sell close to 4 million books.

$2.59 x (number of books) = $10,000,000
[If the numbers seem too big to multiply think: $2.50 x 4 = $10]

If she only sells 3 million books, she doesn't earn out.

On the other hand, she's #1 on the NYT list for 66 weeks.

Essentially, the publisher is simply paying her MORE money than $2.59 a book.

They're paying her $3.33/book

3,000,000 x $3.33 = $10,000,000

Joseph Snoe said:

Is there a way trade off something (like a smaller advance) with a publisher in return for a two or three book guarantee even if the first book does not generate decent sales?

No.

There are no guarantees. A first time novelist with a three book contract has to sell well enough that the publisher wants to publish books 2 and 3. It's not a given they will.

BUT if you're just starting to query, or you're still revising your first novel, don't even think about this stuff. This is like worrying your unborn baby won't save enough money for his retirement. Get through labor and delivery, then worry about teething. Leave off worrying about anything except what you have to do next.

On Saturday we talked about agents-as-publishers.

Jenny C said:

From what I can tell of the agent business, agents are already overwhelmingly busy. Answering queries. Reading fulls. Attending conferences. Collecting and distributing royalties. Having lunch with editors. Writing submission letters. Writing edit letters to their clients. Plus family life and pets and loaner cats all demand time. And I'm sure there's a bunch of other stuff I don't even know about.

In addition to those things, just this week I:

1. met a client in the office for some scheming, conniving, planning and plotting.

2. went with a client to a radio interview, followed by a bookstore event

3. juggled two offers on a book

4. worked on redrafting a pitch letter

5. followed up on outstanding submissions

6. updated clients on submission

7. plotted and schemed on submission next step for book that is getting no love.

8. followed up on film interest for clients

9. tracked down unpaid money for an author

10. Audited royalty statements ←HUGE HUGE HUGE part of the job

This is GREAT advice from Jenny C:

" if you're published by a small press prepare to become a salesperson for your book."

And this is where your local Indie bookseller can help. The one you shop at regularly. The one where the booksellers know your name. The one where you buy gift cards for your kid's teachers. The one whose events you attend to meet other authors to support their books.

Booksellers love to sell books! And they really love to sell their friend's books.

Dena Pawling said:

I get most of my books at my library. When I see people here on this blog, and elsewhere, raving about a book, I check for it at my library. If it's not there, I request it. So far my library has purchased two books I've requested.

This is VERY helpful for authors. Librarians take note of circulation. If lots of library users request Donnaeve's novel, and it circulates well, that will help her now, and on Book #2.

Any kind of support for a writer is good and valuable. Don't ever feel that reading books from the library is somehow less than buying books. For starters, you can read more authors. And for finishers, library sales are non-returnable. Authors LOVE library sales.

Since many of the comment trails go off topic (something I treasure!) here's a recap of things that really didn't fit other places in the WIR:

There's a new picture of our friend Gossamer!

This from DeadSpiderEye and Colin Smith just cracked me up.

Was I the only one who read "bog roll" as blog roll at first? And then thought that toilet paper was a new phrase for blog roll? When I tell you I'm self-centered, I'm really NOT kidding!

Speaking of Brit translation services, here are some of the lovely new insults I learned on Twitter after The ShihTzuHairDo said #Brexit would bring more money in to his golf course in Scotland.

#4 is my favorite.

susan said

A little off-topic, but has anyone seen the BadLiteraryAgent account on Twitter? I just discovered it yesterday and can't figure out if it's really an agent or an author. Some of the advice is good and similar to what's being said here on the blog (though you have to dig through the snark). I'm not sure how I feel about it.

I checked out @BadLitAgent (Twitter bio: Gatekeeper to the publishing industry. Regretfully, due to the volume of queries I receive, I can't respond to any.") and found it HILARIOUS! Your mileage may vary of course.

Julie Weathers:

I loved my pony Bimbo, but he was never going to win the Preakness no matter how many times we raced down that dirt road.

this falls into the so weird it has to be true category: my first horse was named Bimbo.

A new category for the Week in Review: things we need to know more about

My father was an auction addict. He probably saved my life via an auction, but that's a story for another time.--Julie Weathers

the rattlesnake I found wrapped up around an apple tree yesterday--Janice L. Grinyer

reasons Colin is boring--Colin Smith

And for those of you not on Facebook, the Loaner Cat returns!

Loaner Cat: I'd like to negotiate a raise in pay.

Me: I'm not paying you anything right now.

LC: Sad but true. However, I've added to my duties.

Me: Really? What else are you doing besides providing petting, purring, and palling around?

LC: Housekeeping. I've dusted for you.

Me: (putting on glasses) holy Charlotte's web, you're covered in dust and spider webs!

LC: Miss Tidypaws you are not.

Me: You're not the first cat to notice that. Where have you been?

LC: behind the books on the bookshelves.

Me: looking for something to read?

LC: looking for something to eat.

Me: There's kibble right here in your nice freshly washed dish.

LC: I like to stalk and kill my food.

Me: You're stalking that can of tuna right?

LC: Now, kill it with the can opener please.

Loaner Cat

Subheader nominations:

-do the research

-be interesting

-write better

Simple. But not easy.--Beth

------

Don't worry if there are exceptions to the rule. Assume you won't be an exception and keep working.--John Davis Frain

Have a lovely week.