Did you "win" QueryShark?

 Hi Query Shark,

Really appreciate your blog.

Quick question: There are a few queries that I would LOVE to read the final published books from, but since you anonymize the blog posts, I haven't been able to find and follow the authors.

I know you mention some of the authors once they get book deals, so I'm guessing these haven't yet, but I'd love to just get on the authors' mailing lists even if the books aren't yet available.

Any chance you'd be willing to share the author names with a potential fan? The authors I'm interested in are query #124, #179, and #181.

(And let me know if I'm just a dummy and missed somewhere on the site where I can find this info.)

Thank you!

Well, I know about #124, cause that query was from Dan Krokos and he's a New Leaf client. While I wasn't able to find a home for the Ford Kelly novel, Dan has also written a wonderful trilogy, the first of which, False Memory, was the Young Adult Thriller of the Year at ITW in 2013.

And he's got a middle-grade series, The Planet Thieves.

As for the others, I don't know, but let's find out!


If you won QueryShark, and particularly if you're #179 and #181, your fans await!

Quote of the Day

Dear Query Shark,

I chose to query you because most of the characters in my book are surfers. You should find it very appetizing. 

To delve or not to delve that is the question

The QueryShark had found herself in a bit of hot water lately over a recent evisceration. Taking a writer to task for putting the word "delved" into the dialogue of a 14 year old,  the Shark challenged thus:

Also, I'll give you a hundred bucks cold hard cash if you can produce a 14 year old who uses the word "delved" in conversation.

Well, that certainly brought a flurry of comments, most of them accompanied by a thump or two across the fin. (ow)

What I left unstated, and in fact assumed (incorrectly) would be clear was that there is a large (vast!) difference between the number and kinds of words people use in conversation, and the number and kinds of words people recognize.

In other words I know many more words than I use.  You do too.

And kids, being people, are included. So yes, they recognize 'delved' and can use it correctly in a sentence.  It doesn't mean they do so in regular conversation.

And that's the trick of dialogue. It has to sound real. I have to believe that's something a kid WOULD say. Not something a kid COULD say.

Getting dialogue and voice write is very difficult.  It can't be verbatim (have you ever heard actual surveillance tapes; or even just plain old phone messages!) but it has to feel real.

I have no idea if slingers on the corners of Baltimore sound like Bodie and Poot, but I believe them when they talk.  Even when Bodie says "I'm standing here like a asshole holding my Charles Dickens, 'cause I ain't got no muscle, no back-up" I believe.

Part of your job as writers is to know that delicate balance between what IS right and what FEELS right.  I actually keep a list of words somewhere that are gender specific: that is a man would not say "munched" for eating lunch; a woman would not generally say she's taking "a piss."  Think about it before you join the SharkBashing mob ok?



I'm pretty sure there is research on this but the closest I could come with the five minutes I spent on google was this article at Slate. (paragraph 7)

If any of you have better resources to add, I'd like to see them. And if you think I'm all wet, tell me why.

Spawn of the Shark!

Those clever and very very savvy agents over at BookEndsLLC are diving in to Shark-infested waters, but you're going to be very glad to hear why:

A query critique every week for a year!

Yay BookEnds!!!

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.

Query Shark

Q: I heard about your blog at a writer's conference this weekend. I'd like to send you a query but I absolutely do not want it posted. Can you guarantee that?

A: This blog does not post queries that come to my agency. Ever.

I do post on a blog called Query Shark. The queries that are posted there are NOT queries to the agency. They are queries sent to the Shark for the purposes of getting critiqued.

The queries to the Shark are acknowledged upon receipt and filed separately from other queries. To be considered for Query Shark, the query must actually say "Query Shark" in the subject line so no query can be posted in error.

Any questions?

Stop me before I do this

Several days ago I put out a call asking for query letters to critique so I could show them to folks attending a workshop.

I received 25, and was able to use about 23. Only one person quivered (so far) at my cold cruel hand. (A new personal best for me, usually they drop like flies).

The thing that has amazed me, really amazed me, is how much better the queries got after one or two revisions. Several went from things I would have rejected in a heartbeat to things I'd actually read.

I've long bemoaned how hard it is for writers to get query letter feedback. Writing conferences emphasize pitching. I think that's a serious serious mistake. The writers are panic stricken, for starters. Even if I like the idea I need to see the actual writing, and it's impossible to help someone with a query letter if they're speaking it to you and trying not to hyperventilate.

So, before I reconsider and/or come to my senses, a quick poll. Where are those of you who read this blog in the query letter process?

(and if you're my client, you better not say click any of these answers! I ain't lettin' none of you go, no matter how much you beg, scream or holler.)

I ask because it occurs to me that doing one letter a week or so, with edits, comments and revisions, might be of use to people here. I'm absolutely not going to do some sort of crazy ass free for all with 500 letters and comments on each one. Noooooo. One a week might even be too much.

The thing is, if you've got a good project and the only thing standing between me, and it, is a crappy query letter, I'd be one smart agent to help you fix it so I'd be enticed to read it, wouldn't I?

(that question is not on the poll but I hope you'd all say yes.)

Where are you in the query process stage are you?



Writing a query letter; haven't sent to any agents.



Sent a query letter to some agents; no positive response



Sent a query letter to agents; mixed response



Redrafting query letter after a lot of misses

View results

Free online survey

No feedback, no critique

On any list of writer's complaints you'll find "no feedback on rejections" near the top of the list.

Most writers understand why agents don't offer feedback, or anything more than a form letter on queries. They understand the time debit of personal responses.

Start talking about partials and fulls though, the attitude changes. I understand that. I do.

But, here's what I do instead: I read more fulls.

Writing personal responses, analyzing, taking notes, writing an email; all those things take time. I elect to invest that time in another way: reading a manuscript.

I understand a form rejection of a full is galling, but think of it this way: I asked for and read your manuscript because I didn't spend time critiquing the other guy's novel.



The only place I critique work is the Query Shark blog.