Yesterday's blog post drew a comment from Jennifer R. Donohue
I'd been operating under the (pre plague, perhaps) notion that querying multiple projects at once was frowned upon? I don't know if I read that advice here however, and we know how these kind of nebulous Things That Are Done™ get shared around without attribution sometimes, and are permutations of what us querying writers on the hamster wheel have extrapolated, vs. being things that actual agents have said.
Response times are horrifying, harrowing, abysmal. I've had a full out for what will be a year on Wednesday (with nudges and communication, not radio silence.)
Querying more than one project at the same time seems like a database nightmare to me, BUT the reality of response time, and the prevalance of no-response-means-no require an adjustment of acceptable practices.
Waiting a year is not unheard of, I'm sorry to say.
There are some very good writers who are being very patient with me right now, and I'm truly grateful my doormat does not have flaming bags of kangaroo poop on alternate Saturdays.
If you've queried enough agents and not heard back, it makes sense to query a second project.
You might want to query a new batch of agents instead of just sending to the same list you used before.
I have a regular querier who has queried me probably a dozen times this year for different things.
I haven't mentioned to him that a dozen unsold projects in a year isn't something I think is a plus.
To me, it means you've got a dozen things that are half baked. Revising and thinking take time. If you're churning out a ms every three months, I'm doubtful you're doing much thinking or revising.
But if you're not speed querying, you do need to keep your career moving.
Querying a second project makes sense.
Now the question is, do you mention the first project?
I suggest you not.
No sense in making the agents in Round 2 look like second choice.
No sense in making your project sound like the first runner up.