Week in review 5/22/16

Welcome to the week that was.

In last week's review Steve Stubbs said:

Leatherface from the Texas Chain Saw Massacre becomes Snow White and Her Electric Toothbrush.

and, of course,  I am adding that to the list of what I'm looking for on my #MSWL

KdJames said

Although, got to say, Julie's subhead makes me want to consider a career in nursing...

[Julie's subheader nom: "Cowboy logic: Ride bulls, meet nurses."--Julie M. Weathers]

John Frain referenced an old favorite of mine:

I think JR was the model Lawrence Block used when he wrote "The Thief who Couldn't Sleep." Fun book, read it a long time ago, and this thief got almost as much done in 24 hours as the Queen does. Almost.

Good old Evan Tanner! I read all those books Xyears ago and loved them!

And this from Stacy just cracked me up:

I'm always late to these discussions, but I just saw something that reminded me of a conversation from a while back about grammar. Have trouble remembering the difference between "desert" and "dessert"? Eagle lyrics can help.

On a dark dessert highway
Cool Whip in my hair...

I think the conversation began with my spam filter Priscilla Queen of the Just Desserts

which someone thought should be deserts. Which it should if you're not trying to be hilarious, but clearly this joke is too subject to misunderstanding to keep using. Thus Priscilla has been demoted to Duchess of the Last Desserts. She's still one helluva pricklepuss though.

On Monday the writing contest results were posted. Ya'll are getting downright diabolical in your clever use of the prompt words. I'm not even sure we can say "words" now, just letters in a certain order.

Timothy Lowe said:

BTW, I wonder how many of the rest of you looked at the words for this week's contest and said "Ffffuck..."

On Tuesday we talked about how long to let a manuscript"sit" for revision

and french sojourn just takes the knife and strikes:

And most importantly, the painting...choosing innumerable variations of cottage white. (insert scene of Cary Grant and Myrna Loy meeting with the painters)

Paint! It's almost painting season! I have to wait till the Duchess of Yowl decamps before prying open the paint cans, but I can hardly wait. Well, I don't want Her Grace to leave of course, but painting will be kind of a solace when she's gone.

And yes, I saw that movie, and yes it was funny…but not really. I mean I have 27 paint sample cans here, I am long past the point of laughing!

I like what Lucie Witt said

I think it helps to understand what type of revisions you're doing. After the first draft and any major revisions, I think it's important to let the draft sit at least a few weeks. If you're doing smaller revisions you sometimes don't need any down time at all. For example, near the end of editing I read my book out loud to myself and circled typos, made notes. I started fixing them the morning after I finished the read through, no down time needed.

and MB Owen too

    I always have two projects I'm working on. When I'm finished with one, I'll turn to the other. This gets my head (and heart) in another place, and another voice quicker than anything. The time between revisions varies, (few days, weeks, even months) but because I'm not stuck on the one project, it always has a freshness when I return. That's when the revisions are most valuable: when the heart isn't connected.

 

and Brigid too

I'm noticing a common theme of stories starting later than we expect. We're the mamas and papas, proud as punch that little Johnny Novel learned to crawl early and almost won a spelling bee in 5th grade. But Johnny's employers expect his resume to start with college, since he's grown.

On Wednesday we talked about what to do when the world of publishing is kicking your asterisk up and down the block.

Lucie Witt identified the problem exactly:

I could be way off but I was under the impression it's not the first book's sales that are the problem, it's the second book.

Yes. While some slump in second book sales is the norm, this was a huge drop. It's the kind of drop that gives us all the shivers because it means we're no longer talking about just increasing pr and marketing efforts for Book #3, we're talking about whether anyone will even publish the book.

When I take on a book, I have confidence I can sell it. That confidence may not always be warranted but I start out with it at least. I would not have that confidence here, due solely to those sales figures.

Adib Khorram asked:

For those who wonder about 30,000 being good sales (Janet, correct me if I'm wrong!), the problem is that the 30,000 was followed by 5,000. And in sales you want that trajectory to be going the other way. A 5,000 debut followed by a 30,000 follow-up would sound much more enticing, no?

yes indeed.

DLM said

But there seems really to be no "middle class" in traditional publishing now. You can't be *dependable*: you have to be a breakout, and - never mind the pressure, it's just a matter of numbers, and the numbers dictate, we simply cannot all be The Next Big Thing.

We call it mid-list but you're right. It's like the Army; you can't spend five years in the same rank or your career is pretty much over. Get promoted or get out. Like baseball: you can play on the farm teams for a while, but either move up, or hang up your glove.

Publishing is not the only place this up or out pattern applies.  But it only applies to COMMERCIAL publishing.  You can publish and sell your own work forever. That's one of the many great things about the electronic marketplace: it's easy to access and it actually works. I'm not saying it's easy to self-publish (well, it is, but let's assume I mean self-publishing well here) but that the barriers to buyers are much diminished from where they were 20 years ago.

Dena Pawling asked:

Is there anything OP can do to promote book 2 to generate more sales?
Can OP get his/her rights back and self-pub to generate more sales?
Would doing either of those things help get an agent and traditional publisher to look at book 3?

I don't know the answers to those questions, but they are good questions to ask. And they speak to the importance of having a contract that allows for reversion of rights when sales fall below a certain threshold.

I really liked what Lennon Faris said:

"the world and publishing are wired to kick your ass"

- that is actually one of the most encouraging things to hear, even without the sentence that followed. It is so easy to think, "what's wrong with me. My writing must suck. I must suck," when actually that's just the way the system is. They really are out to get you. Or, leave you in the dust might be more accurate. You have to break the system to get what you want. Even then it may not work out, but at least you know it wasn't ever supposed to be easy, or even possible.

And frankly, I just loved the writing in DLM's comment to Angie Brooksby-Arcangioli

Angie: you made my day even more than they did, and that's a job. I want a t-shirt that says Clovis is my king on it. THOU ROCKEST MIGHTILY WITH THY BAD SELF (and, for everyone else, no indeed, I do not indulge that sort of gadzookery of language in my histfic!). I shall have to go home and perhaps do a booty-wiggling dance when Penelope the Publishing Pup and I sally forth on our walk this evening. Like nobody's lookin'.

and then everyone kinda went nutso and started talking about knives.

Rachel Erin said

Wow. Knives. Now I have an image of woodland creatures with bundles of knives like chefs, only next to the paring knife, the chefs knife, and the cleaver is an obsidian blade, an army tactical knife, and depending on genre, a silver blade.

I'm at the broadsword stage of editing myself, hacking and whacking and breaking scenes cracking.

I think the Her Grace, Heidi, the Duchess of Kneale had the very last word on that:

I use a laser scalpel. Cuts and cauterises in a single swoop.

On Thursday we talked about how to break the news of a series in a query letter.

I pointed out that telling the agent that several plot points were unresolved was the problem, not the fact it was intended as a series.

Jennifer R. Donohue made me laugh with this one:

But when I first read the post title, I was all huffy "It isn't an agent's business if you decide you're going to have childr---oh. Of course."

Then AJ Blythe offered up:

Hah, I thought the post was going to be about this

I've always wanted another me so I can write all day. The copy can do all the drudgy stuff that gets in the way of writing.

all I could think was ME TOO! (pardon the pun)

nightsmusic's comment exemplifies the readers I was thinking of when I wrote the post:

From a reader's POV, I have quit three 'first in a series' books because:

1. I didn't know until the end that it was a first in a...

B. Thee major plot point/romance/big blue hairy bear was left hanging with no resolve in sight

8. When I get to an ending like that, it's a wallbanger moment because I've lost all trust in the author to be able to bring things full circle in a reasonable manner.

Please, don't do that to your readers. Or your prospective agent. Just...don't.

SiSi said:

As a reader I agree completely with Janet. It's bad enough when TV shows end on a cliffhanger then get cancelled. It's even worse with books.

Oh my god do not get me started on the last season of The Glades, and the final episode.

And if this doesn't beg for elaboration, I don't know what does. Where There's A Quill:

I live in fear of middle-of-the-night phone calls. Nothing like getting a call at 2am from frantic clients who have been denied boarding because their passports don't have enough validity/they opted to organise visas themselves and WHOOPS we screwed it/we forgot our kid's birth certificate and South Africa dun' want us!

Apologies in advance to any agents who might call me at 2am one day if I answer the phone with "Let me put on my pants and I'll meet you at the airport".

And then Craig just upped the ante with this

You can call all you want at 0300. I will not be answering.

I still get cold sweats from one of those calls. It was right at about two years ago. It went like this:

"European Championships are coming up."

"I hope you guys have been practicing."

"You build us special boats. We need them faster."

"I think you need to practice more."

"You build us boats or we send people to visit."

"I build you boats and your neighbors will send people to visit. Practice harder. I am going back to sleep."

Two days later I went to Miami and bought some things. I will not tell you what those things are. Plausible deniability is a lovely thing.

 Julie M. Weathers said:

Ringing me at 3:00 am is going to merit a prayer. It is the witching hour after all. Yes, I have been known to pray for people who call me in the middle of the night. Crazy comes in all forms.

I got a call one Sunday morning from a nice young man some years back. It was a wrong number and when I was pleasant to him, I reaped the reward of a return call. He was interested in a date. Being fresh out of jail,  he really was a "wrong number."  I told him I didn't date,  I was a nun and he'd reached me in the office of the convent. Which was hilarious right up until he asked "Sister, do you think God still loves me?"

On Friday I ranted about queriers who seem to disdain commercial fiction.

french sojourn cracked me up with this:

When my book is done, even someone like you may like it.

Sherry Howard hit the nail on the head with this:

I'm a pragmatist. Putting aside the boot-in-the-ass issues pointed out, why would anybody include that in a query letter?

That is a VERY good question.

luciakaku cracked me up with this reminder:

I'm reminded of a moment in Castle, specifically the face Castle made as his mother said this:

"Never mind them! Harper Lee only wrote one book! You've written dozens! ...Of course, hers was literature...."

He appeared torn between suicide and homicide, in fact.

Claire said:

Umm. A bit of a tone fail on the part of the querier. But I have some sympathy with him/her. It's because of the popular, simplistic misconceptions of literary vs. commercial fiction that writers are reluctant to self-categorise as the former. Because to describe oneself as writing literary fiction can come across as making a qualitative statement about the value your writing, rather than a simple one of genre. So then you get this silly pussy-footing around the term, with the author simpering that "I'd like to think of this as literary fiction, but really that's not for me to say..." And then The Shark gets enraged.

I'm not sure what the answer is. Does there need to be a better term for character-driven, thoughtful mainstream fiction that doesn't fit into a particular genre? 'Cause that's a bit of a mouthful...

There's a big difference between "that's not for me to say" and "my ego would like to think it's literary" Tone deaf indeed but indicative of a state of mind.

And John Frain, now gussying himself up as John Davis Frain cracked me up;

I would reward you with my comment, but my ego doesn't allow me to post beside all you commoners. Had my ego not intervened, you would be reading three poetic remarks, each assembled at 100 words, discussing the literary relevance of blogging. But I'm above all that. And above you.

Meantime, will you Like me on all my social media outlets?

Joseph Snoe has a very funny, and pointed, comment:

At the conference earlier this year, the moderator read the first page of submitted manuscripts. Four agents listened and were instructed to raise their hand when they would reject the submission. Attendees were told to put the genre at the top of the page. One person denoted his or her entry as something like “Literary Romance.” Bam! Rejected before the first sentence.

Two agents jumped all over this. “How dare you call your novel Literary. It is not for you to decide that. It is for us to decide.”

I felt bad for the writer. She classified it the best she knew how.

Ironically, one of the agents gave me her card. She called herself a “Literary Agent.” I wanted to make a joke about it, but she would have been the one to decide if it was funny, and I didn’t risk it.

I hate those Literary Idol events. They seem to bring out the worst side of us. While it's true that "literary romance" isn't a category at all, you'd think most agents would have realized that writers get category wrong at least half the time. 

It's one thing to comment on flaccid writing; it's another thing entirely to castigate a writer for not knowing the mores of category.  It's not like any of us were born knowing this stuff OR that we don't struggle with it ourselves in our pitch letters.

And the scene Timothy Lowe sets here cracked me up for days:

I guess this sort of thing is equivalent to describing what you look like to someone across the table from you at a speed dating event. Even if you do it in modest terms, you still come off as pretty stupid.

"hi, as you can see I'm a good looking smart well-read hunk o'love, just looking for a good home."

And this from Angie Brooksby-Arcangioli made me laugh:

So... Back in February I read seven of K'Wan's Hood Rat series. While I was overdosing on the violence and the sex, I had dinner with a friend who is a director of lyric opera. I raved about K'Wan and she raved about Moliere. She said Moliere wasn't much different, he rode around France in a wagon with a bunch of hooligans and performed in the streets. And she said Shakespeare wrote for the thugs.

Literary writers. Yowl.

On Saturday I posted an excerpt from AnthimriaRampant on editing

kdjames said

Gee, thanks a whole hell of a lot, Janet. And by extension, Mr. McIntyre. I just spent way too much time reading and enjoying all the posts on that site (subscribed now). OK, fine, not all-- I skipped the one about Star Wars language.

Throughout the week on Facebook, there was more from Her Grace, The Duchess of Yowl:

The Duchess of Yowl at your serviette 

The Duchess of Yowl has some notes

 The Duchess of Yowl gets ready

The Duchess of Yowl is peckish

The Duchess of Yowl makes an observation

The Duchess of Yowl is set upon

Is this the first week with no subheader noms?

I must be losing my eye.

I can't believe it's almost the end of May! 

Have a great week!

week not in review-updated but still not the WIR

Where oh where did you hide the Week In Review?

Sorry readers, this is one of those weeks where the WIR had to be sacrificed for the actual work of being an agent.

I'm knee deep in an editing project that has a good chunk of my eyeball time and

pretty much ALL of my brain.

I am hoping to am lying in a puddle weeping with despair about the talent i
get to the that damn writing contest
 later in the day
so results will go up on WEDNESDAY

but right now and I'm still just sitting here murmuring

"lie lay lay it's is it is affect effect ofuck"

In other words: editing.

Have a bloody Mary the strongest drink you can for me. I need it.



PS Dena Pawling's idea isn't half bad! 

"Because the contest entries have become more and more difficult to judge, and your time this week is already full, I propose you choose all the entries as winning entries, and then send all of us a copy of John Frain's manuscript.

You're welcome."

Week in Review March 6, 2016

Welcome to the week that was.

In last week's review, Steve Stubbs took his life in his hands with this (particularly the last two lines!)

A comment on your statement that you reject fabulous manuscripts every day: I wonder if your kindheartedness is showing here, I read somewhere a comment by a former editor from Simon and Schuster.

When they were using in-house first readers to sort through the slush pile, he said they would typically find one publishable manuscript in every 5,000 unsolicited MS that came in over the transom. First readers were used mostly to sort out letters that contained threats and throw the rest of them away. The letters that contained threats were turned over to the police.

If you want to become a bestselling author, just send a threat letter to Simon and Schuster is what I always say. Works every time. A threat will make up for bad writing any day.

If you get 54 queries per week and there are 52 weeks in a year, according to my abstruse mathematical calculations, that comes to a mere 2,808 queries a year. At the end of a year you would still have 2,192 queries to go to find one salable MS. If you are rejecting masterpieces every day, you are on to something. I think I know what it is. You’re a kind person. Not a shark at all.

Here's where your logic trips you up:  Simon and Schuster gets not only MORE queries than I do, they get the ones from people who don't know that S&S doesn't take on unagented material. And my guess is that this comment is an editor recalling something from 20 years ago.  As far as I know, slush is simply discarded at all the major houses now.

That means I'm getting better slush than S&S is.

For every 5000 queries, they may only find one, whereas last year with 2192 queries, I took on two, and there were several I passed on that other agents took. And this doesn't count the mss that get placed elsewhere that I don't know about.

So while it may be hyperbole to say every day of the year, it's certainly NOT hyperbole that I pass on things that get published and win awards.  I'm not giving you the list but I've got one. Oh yes indeed I do.

And we don't call the police for threats either. I'm surprised S&S ever did. Unhappy writers threatening to dangle your modifier out the window are hazards of the trade.

As for this kind person thing, here, let me dust your rose-colored spectacles my friend.

Timothy Lowe said:

Love the Dirk Diggler shot. Although I still can't quite wrap my head around how I prevent people from getting a bunch of porn stars when they google my name. Very disturbing. Does this mean I change my name when it's time to publish?

Oh, I suppose I should mention too that I'm not a porn star.

Interestingly one of my clients had this problem. She told me that when she googled her name, up came a porn star. Since she's a very respectable Texas lady this was a problem. She began using her middle name, becoming Stephanie Jaye Evans, to solve the problem.

Cause really, when your main character is a Church of Christ minister, the author can't be a porn star.

 And Craig is probably going straight to Hell for this one:

The treasure cave needs more than one idea. So, Colin, when you are bored, or one your tech savvy kids is bored, do a spread sheet of sub headers by Reiders.

The sub-headers don't last. There's no way to go back and find the subheader for three months ago. Once they're changed, the old one is gone. This would be setting Colin to chasing his tail.

Oh wait….Hey Colin??

luciakaku disagreed with my assessment of why her story wasn't a story:

Ma'am, I respectfully disagree about your reasoning why my story wasn't a story. Your example strongly suggested that a story has to have a happy or uplifting ending to be a story. Her "growth" went backwards. She went from having faith in herself to having none. A valid character arc is often going from having no faith in yourself to having some, so I don't see why the reverse is not a story. It's a flash tragedy.

Here's what I'd said:

But it's not a story because it's a series of events. To be a story, it needs some sort of what I call a twist: something unexpected that sheds new light or interpretation on what we've read. "my boss hands me a tray" and says "get to work princess" and I discover I'm strong enough (bringing in the last line) to wrap my tank top around his neck and rein him in. (which is godawful writing, sorry, but you see the point I'm making.)

A story does not have to have a happy or uplifting ending at all. (We've seen some flash fiction winners that substantiate that) And I did understand what you call "backward growth" and I would call "slide to despair".

What's missing here is the something that takes this from just a list of things that happened, to a story about how she changed the trajectory of events.  In other words, a twist of some sort. It's that twist that is the crucial element to making something a story. Life is a series of events. The unexpected is what makes life a good story.

And I do like your phrase "flash tragedy" a LOT.

Lennon Farris did see a twist in the story:

Not to quibble with any said teeth, but... when I read luciakaku's entry, in my negligible experience, I would have said it had a twist because the word 'princess' was used at the beginning to convey a world of possibilities and support. And then at the end, it's used as a derogatory, sexist term. It's like even after all those other derogatory things happened to the m.c., she still held onto her hope. Then when her boss used that same word, it's like she had a paradigm shift about what she thought her parents had given her, and what her own potential was. That was my own take on it!

Which just goes to prove that this is a subjective endeavor and (banging the drum yet again) why you query widely! What doesn't twist to me, can be someone else's idea of a perfect twirl!

I loved Laura Mary's cat whisperer comment and when she asked

Is this the universe telling me I am destined to be a crazy cat lady?

I can only say: there are many many worse things to be.

On Monday, the first post was to let everyone know I hadn't finished reading the contest entries, so Gossamer would be standing in for me for the morning shift.

(I adore Goss!)

You all had some great cat stories to while away the hours until the results got posted.

Dena Pawling demonstrated she is a TRUE writer cause she put the worst possible spin on what was intended as an accolade:

I got a "special recognition for extraordinary exploration of form and style" which my writer brain translates as a euphemism for "WTF was that????!" But it was fun to write.

Special recognition for exploration of form and style means I think you did something really interesting and I LIKED IT.  Sheesh. Youse guyz!

On Tuesday we talked about essay collections, memoir, and why they are sometimes (often) not taken on for trade publication

I mentioned I'd shopped two terrific memoirs last year without any nibbles.

Lisa Bodenheim asked

Janet, are you able to share, in vague-protect-privacy language, what it was about the memoirs that you thought had real potential but received no nibbles?

Frankly, I'm convinced the editors took leave of their senses. Nothing else really explains it. Those memoirs were GREAT.

DLM made a very good point:

I feel awful for "saying this out loud" so to speak, but when I hear about a series of unrelated personal essays, I think that's a blog.

There is SO much of this sort of thing out on the internet for free, there has to be a seriously compelling reason to invest in the cost to produce it on paper (and/or e-book form), and for anyone to spend money on it.

Yes! The amount of work available for free now just boggles the mind, particularly essays/blog posts on people's lives. I'm trying to think of ANY blogs like that I read regularly (I can't.)  I remember reading personal essay columns in the newspaper (before the internet) but those are now mostly gone (unless you count the op-ed page of the NYT which I don't.)

On Wednesday the topic was writing conferences

Colin mentioned Bouchercon, which is not a writing conference, but a fan convention but still has a lot of value for writerly types. He referenced this story about me,

Heck, anyone who can walk into a restaurant and promote one of the table bussers to being her waitress for the night has a certain amount of chutzpah. And Janet has chutzpah in spades (if you hadn't cottoned on to that already). :) So, trust me--you'll know her when you see her. :)

I'd forgotten all about this till Colin mentioned it again. We (and I mean there were four or five of us I think) had a terrific young lady bring us drinks and food one night and when we returned the next day (or later that same day, I'm not sure) we asked for her again, only to be told she was a busser, not a server. Well! I liked that girl, she was TERRIFIC. So I kind of made a point in what we here in New York might call an everyday playful tone. Which I think in North Carolina they call Pushy Yankee Harlot voice. Anyway, we got her, at least for a while. Turns out they do need the bussers to buss, so when things got busy we had to have a "real" server. The manager of the restaurant actually came over to explain why. (I was mortified to my shoes that I'd inconvenienced the restaurant staffing plans quite unknowingly)

Brian Schwarz mentioned BEA, also not a writing conference

I went to BEA one year and basically floundered around like a shark out of water for 6 hours. Lesson learned? BEA is not a writing conference. BEA is not for writers at all. Everyone is busy at BEA and asking anyone anything is sort of like trying to buy a BMW from a barista at Starbucks.

Granted, I was invited to BEA and I didn't spend any money, so basically I just blew a weekend of my time. But to say I was ill equipped is the understatement of the year.

BEA is morphing into more of a book festival reader event than it used to be. The number of publishers willing to cough up big money to exhibit at a trade show is decreasing, so Reed Exhibitions is looking for ways to fill the coffers. They can read tea leaves like everyone else so they're reaching out to readers and self-published authors.  

That of course makes BEA less valuable to someone like me, and I've got an eye out for what the attendance will be like this year. BEA is in Chicago; we're not going. BEA is exactly valuable enough to pay for a three day pass, but NOT valuable enough to buy airfare and three days lodging. This is the first BEA I've missed in decades. It feels VERY weird.

Timothy Lowe got my hopes up with this:

I hear they're developing a new technology: a shot of bourbon you can send through e-mail. I wonder how that will impact the querying process?

 I don't know but I hope they need beta testers.

On Thursday we talked about the first 3-5 pages included with the query, and the problem with main characters appearing later, and footnoting anything in a query.

Lisa Bodenheim said

She didn't have footnotes and I don't know French (sorry, this Midwesterner learned Spanish and a bit of German and Amslan) but I was able to intuit.

 I had no idea what Amslan was (is it spoken in Andorra? Andalusia? American Slang?) Turns out it's American Sign Language!

2Ns brought up prologues (well, someone had to)

Prologue is such a dirty word to some agents. I am wondering if I should simply send the first five pages of chapter one, and if do, do I mention there’s a prologue, or at the risk of alienating a potential agent who abhors prologues, do I send the prologue and mention it’s a prologue or not mention that the book actually has one at all?

The reason I hate prologues is so very VERY often they aren't really relevant to the story. I can think of exceptions of course: the first chapter of Indigo Slam by Robert Crais is a prologue. In Sunset Express (also Robert Crais) the prologue is called just that. With those examples however, it's very clear that they ARE relevant to the story; you just don't know how yet. And Mystic River by Dennis Lehane (quick, do you know what episode of The Wire had a cameo with Dennis Lehane?) is a sterling example of "the story before the story" that is compelling in its own right as well as necessary to understand the rest of the novel.

The prologues I hate are the ones set in Peru in 1600 when the novel is about a contemporary archaeologist; or London in 200 when the novel is about a detective in Scotland. 


Or WORSE when the prologue is full of action, and then chapter one is "six months ago" and the main character is sleeping in the rain, dreaming about driving home and getting a phone call from his irate boss.

In other words, BAD STRUCTURE or BAD WRITING.

Prologues are all too often a crutch for what simply needs to be taken out and revised.

Prologues that function as backstory are often better excised, and backstory woven into the narrative as the main character learns it. 

On Friday we had another writing contest, this time inspired by Dena Pawling's DLM's purloined shark tooth story. (sorry Dena and DLM. Clearly I need to verify my sources rather than try to remember---argh)

For those of you who suggested phrases, the prompts can only be single words.

For those of you who suggested words, the best prompt words are short and have more than one definition. Thus you did NOT see "purloin" as one of the prompts, although I did think about it. Frankly, I was a bit afraid of what y'all would do with that. "I spur loins" was just too likely a phrase.

I hope to have results up on Monday. We'll see how it goes.

Subheader noms:

Everyone dies some day. I'd prefer to do so with a cat on my face. --Brian Schwarz

I need to have WORDS with my muse.--Celia Reaves

"My pet Shih Tzu was a stunt double for Donald Trump's hair."--Colin Smith

"Please try to keep your demons on a leash, but under no circumstances should you ever tame them. Tamed demons simply do not sell." E.M. Goldsmith

"Oh, that [sentence] just dances on your tongue like a swizzle stick." John Frain

"thank you for this community. Today is a day I am so grateful I had you guys to turn to." --CarolynnWith2Ns.

It’s so cool that everyone here seems like they’re friends.--Brian Biggs

"Firefly season 2- ah, don't tease me. It's cruel. Nathan Fillion must come over and comfort me."--E.M. Goldsmith

WIR 2/28/16

Welcome to the week that was!

In last week's roundup, E.M. Goldsmith said

On the sub-header, funny story. I went to the Atlanta Writing Workshop yesterday where I met Penny Moore for 2nd time(she works at Fine Print with Janet). I happened to have drawn up business cards for the Slush Pile Cafe.

Well, if there's only one good reason for the week in review it's this: by the time Penny got back to the office on Thursday I'd forgotten to ask her about these cards! Writing the WIR prompted a quick email and I'll have them on Monday! Can't wait to see them, and of course, I'll post (probably on Facebook)

Lynn Rodz returned to the topic of exclusives here:

I'm at the airport so this will be short and sweet. Janet, you say exclusives are a no-no, but I would be afraid to say no to an agent who is interested in my work, more so if no other nibbles have come in. I would find it easier to say, "No, I'm sorry, on Janet Reid's blog she advices against it." Would that be wrong to say?

Well, yes. You really want to say "I'm not able to offer an exclusive but I'm glad to send this to you."  And even if someone else isn't looking at the ms, you're still not able to offer an exclusive because someone else could ask to see it tomorrow, and you don't want to have to say no.

On Monday we had two versions of the results post (prelim and final) because I was having a hard time picking the winner.

Amanda Capper rebelled:

Oh no...no...no you don't. No shoving it off on us. These 100 words killers are your idea, you pick.

Lochlan Sudarsharn noticed:

I didn't realize until now that you'd snuck one by me with the prompt words. Tray sure. Treasure. You got me

Ha! I love it when I sneak one by you guyz! Picking good prompt words is more of an art than I realized when we first started. Having failed you utterly with "diddy" I am now determined to have words that are fun, but also flexible. Thus: treasure with but one really useful meaning is not as attractive as "tray" and "sure" which can be used in multiple ways.

Laura Mary wondered why luciakaku's entry wasn't a story.

Here's the entry:

When I was five, my parents called me “princess,” and I thought I could be anything.

When I was ten, I stole my mother’s makeup because I wanted to be pretty, too.

When I was fifteen, I wore tank tops to school and got detention because my chest was “distracting.”

When I was twenty, I was pressured out of shop class because I wasn’t strong enough to be a smith.

Now I’m twenty-five, my boss hands me a tray--“Get to work, princess.”--and I know I’m nothing.

Of course this is good writing so I looked at it very carefully. I like the rhythm of it. I like the progression. I love the open and close "princess" lines.  But it's not a story because it's a series of events. To be a story, it needs some sort of what I call a twist: something unexpected that sheds new light or interpretation on what we've read. "my boss hands me a tray" and says "get to work princess" and I discover I'm strong enough (bringing in the last line) to wrap my tank top around his neck and rein him in. (which is godawful writing, sorry, but you see the point I'm making.)

The entries that are "not quite a story" are usually very very good writing and it just kills me to see that lack of twist. This one is a perfect example of that.

Sara Halle was finally selected from among the nine finalists. She earned a copy of Jane Steele by Lyndsay Faye.

And after a quick comment exchange between me and  Colin Smith  (cor blimey mate!) when Colin suggested some sort of something (AGAIN!) that called up eviction to Carkoon,  John Frain said of my comment:

Not only is that a classic sendoff to Carkoon ... it's also 98 words!

Janet Reid, send me your address and what you like to read and I'll send you my manuscript. I mean, a book.

Which just cracked me up completely.

And I liked how kdjames listed her progression in these contests for Jason (who was feeling a bit overwhelmed at the array of talent)

Jason, I'll echo what others have said. When I first worked up the nerve to enter these contests, I was lucky if I could write a SCENE in 100 words. If I was really lucky, it was a scene that made sense. I got all sorts of "not a story" comments. Or sometimes a "nice line" comment. But I kept reading and paying attention to comments and, here's the key: I kept trying. Sometimes now I end up on a list as a finalist and it's a great feeling. But the big payoff for me is to see how I've improved, both my ability to tell a complete story (not quite, this week) and the art of being more concise (not quite, this comment). Keep trying, you'll improve too.

Her Grace, the Duchess of Kneale said:

Much what makes these stories work is what the reader brings to the tale. If I wasn't familiar with the myth of a werewolf, I would not have gotten the significance of the phases of the Moon, just as I didn't get the connection of the Mayor's tab until someone enlightened me with the smoking laws of New York City.

It's not that the info is missing from the story; the clues are there, if the reader knows how to interpret them. That is the difference between missing info and subtle info, and a mark of the mastery of the craft.

"what the reader brings to the tale" varies with the reader of course, which is why there are knock down drag out fights these days about what should be included in The Canon (ie the books everyone should read to be considered educated.)  I always think of those books as the ones you have to read to get the jokes.

So yes, I had to look up Benelli (sorry Craig!) but I wouldn't have to look up St. Mary Meade, or google "coffee swilling drifter" to understand the references being made.

On Tuesday I was perturbed by a querier who told me she thought the query process was backwards, and wrote a post about why she was not only incorrect, but unlikely to accomplish her goals by saying so.

I will tell you up front that the title of that blog post was Do the Fucking Math for about three days. Then I realized the symbols were funnier, and more appropriate so I changed it. Yes, I revise these blog posts like you revise your work.

frenchsojourn said

s/he should just have sent you the title of the m/s.

Can't you just imagine!?!?  "Dear Querier: I choose projects based solely on the title. You're welcome to query again when you think of a better one."

In other words you had me at CARKOON.

Laura Mary said:

I can partially see a (misunderstood) point here - the fear that an agent could pass on a crappy query, where the pages and the MS were excellent.

I understand that a lot of people think there can be an excellent ms and a crappy query, but in my experience that never happens. Someone who has a good manuscript (ie well written) has a well written query. If you write well, it shows in all your writing. You may have some problems in your query with what you're saying or not, but the writing is good.   That's as universal a truth as I know after a lot of years reading not just queries, but blog posts, flash fiction, and writing conference contest entries. 

And Laura Mary asked further

Do the majority of agents read pages anyway? Or do I really only have that short pitch to hook them?

Yes, no.  Unless there's a huge problem in the query "it's a western written in haiku, 240K words" I glance at the first couple pages. If there's promise there, I flag the query and set it aside to read when I'm not skimming.  I'd say 20-30% of my queries end up being flagged for closer reading. I don't know if  other agents do this.

And Amen Sister to Claire for this:

Even if you privately think the query process should work differently, it takes a special kind of self-destructive hubris to destroy your chances of getting representation quite so effectively. Nobody likes being schooled in their job by someone who's not even in the field.

And Stephen Kozeniewski wins the Coffee Out The Schnozz Award this morning for:

I don't understand. Why don't you just read the entire manuscript? That's the only way you can really tell if the query's any good or not.

And honest to god, I wish I'd had this from Elissa M when I replied to that query cause she said it PERFECTLY:

I wonder how many writers go into a book store, pick up every book in the store and read the first three chapters of each before deciding which to purchase?

Yeah, I thought so.

Hungry Bob has a good point here:

Personally I get exhausted with the querying process because it feels like it's my query writing ability that's on trial, not my writing or storytelling ability, especially when so many agents admit they don't touch writing samples if the query isn't full of wow and pizazz.

Then you read stories like the one on this very blog where a writer had a "phenomenal response" to their query letters, which must mean they have a great novel, right? But then they had a 100% rejection rate based on writing samples, which makes it look like getting requests (which are obviously required to go forward) is based on how well you write a query and little else. Writing and storytelling? Unimportant if you can't write a query.

That said, using a query letter to complain about... the query letter is probably not time well spent.

What you're describing here (good query, bad first pages) happens a lot. When I help writers work on their queries at conferences, I'll often ask to see those first few pages and most (if not all) of the time, the pages need a ferocious amount of work.  They start in the wrong place (weather, driving, sleeping, a prologue set 1500 years earlier)  or they spend too much time moving their characters around.

One of the things you'll see on QueryShark a lot is "apply what you've learned here to your novel."

It's absolutely true that you can have a great query and a novel that isn't ready for publication. I see it more than I can tell you.

Lennon Faris said:

I'm bummed I had to skim through some of the comments for now, but this is how I think of it: A query letter is like a first date. Or maybe even earlier: when you have that initial conversation. Sure, you won't get the whole person in those few minutes. But a gal can almost always say, right then, if she MIGHT be interested.

Can you imagine a first date with the mindset of the original querier?

"Hi, I'm interested in marrying and having children, so let's have sex now to see if we're compatible."

Now that I think about it, I have gone on dates like that. And the less said about those, the better.

On Wednesday we discussed being a debut novelist even if you've published non-fiction.

Brigid asked:

Does that hold true if the book is a short story collection? Fiction, but not a novel!

Yes. This is your debut work of fiction.

Kate Larkindale asked:

Could you still be a debut novelist if you've had a novel published already, by a small e-book only press that has since closed, so the book is no longer available (except on pirate sites, but that's a whole 'nother story)? I guess not... even if the book only sold a handful of copies.

No. You're a debut novelist once.

Janice Grinyer asked:

If I query a non-fiction (memoir) book proposal, How long should it be before I contact the same agent with a novel query if they represent both? Or are they two different beasts and an Agent who turns down a non-fiction may be willing to look at the fiction, if the writing is where it should be?

Not instantly as in "hey you said no to that, but how about this" kind of thing but I don't think you have to wait longer than a couple days. Two very different projects like that shouldn't be a problem. It's two novels that I'm less eager to hear about in close proximity.

Completely but wonderfully off topic Dena Pawling mentioned The Stolen Shark Tooth

And I wondered what the rest of that story was. So I googled but still got no sense of why someone wanted to steal this shark tooth.

We may need a flash fiction contest to get to the bottom of this!

Shark/tooth/steal/

We'll need two other words to round out the list! Any suggestions?

John Frain asked:

I just read a Writer's Digest article last night that proclaimed (among other things) never mention in a query that this is your first novel.

I know, I know: no reference, it didn't happen. I'm off to find it.

But this strikes me: If I'm querying an agent and don't mention previous titles, can I be anything but a debut novelist? Or do people try to sneak some poorly sold self-pubbed books past agents?

That's interesting, but not really very good, advice. I assume it's a debut unless the author tells me otherwise, but yes, I have been gobsmacked to find five (self) published novels on Amazon that weren't mentioned in the query. Or this actual novel on Amazon and also not a word about that in the query.

And yes, authors do that. Just exactly often enough that I now google every author I'm interested in. So, not at the query stage, but definitely at the requested full stage.

And it's kind of amazing what google reveals!

And CarolynnWith2ns has provided me with my new form reply to query writers who have odd ideas about comp titles (particularly titles by authors I represent)

Madonna and me, we're a lot alike.
She sings, I listen.
At over 50 she did cartwheels in high heels during a Super bowl halftime years ago, I watched the game.
She's famous, I have lots of 'fan'.
She sang "Like a Virgin" I was one.
Yup, me and my bud, Madonna.
Now lets talk about what I have in common with the other Madonna, Mary, mother of ....

On Thursday we talked about whether it would create problems if a more junior agent chose a project that a senior agent (at the same agency) had rejected.

luciakaku said;

More on topic, I do kind of prefer for myself a more junior agent at a good firm, surrounded by experienced agents. In fact, Brooks Sherman is near the top of my list of (eventual) query targets for this very reason.

This prompts me to remind you that people who used to be junior don't stay that way. Some of them don't stay that way very long at all. Brooks is such an agent.

Sure he started out sitting six feet from my right hand (what I call thwacking distance) but he has proven himself immensely capable and been enormously successful. I would not consider him a junior agent in any way these days.

And if you want visual proof of why that is, well, here ya go.

Sure he hasn't been in the biz as long as some older sharks, but I consider Brooks a colleague, certainly NOT a junior one.

LynnRodz picked up on the comments about rejection and said:

That's why I think it would be hard to just get a no. We don't know if the rejection was for the reasons you've stated and there's no need to go back and change/edit something. Or if the reason was because the ms wasn't up to par.

It would be nice if there was a form rejection for all agents that had a few boxes where they could check off their reason(s) for saying no.

- Ms is good, but I have a similar one.
- Ms is good, but not my strong category.
- Ms isn't there yet, too much work needed.
etc.

The problem with replying with anything other than a form rejection is that it invites (or seems to) conversation.  Once it's a no, it's a no, but it's impossible for writers not to ask "can you tell me just one more thing here."

And honestly, this isn't something I want to spend any time on at all. My job isn't coaching. It's selling.

Donnaeve asked:

ON TOPIC: "3. I've just signed a new client and I'm hesitant to take on more work just now (that happens a lot)"

That brings a question to mind for QOTKU. The first thing I thought when I read #3 was, wouldn't you close to queries for a while if the work load was getting beyond your comfort zone? And then I thought, maybe she doesn't b/c its possible someone will send her THE MS she's been waiting for. (?)

Closing to queries is more of a pain in the asterisk than not if the time period is less than a year. I've tried it a couple times and unless I'm just overwhelmed, I won't do it again.  And "not wanting to take on more work at present" is farther down the busy line than "overwhelmed."

CarolynnWith2Ns said:

A part of me still believes that agents keep little black books with lists of authors they rejected, authors who wrote lame queries and authors who acted pissy when rejected. And, agents within an agency would pass around their little nincompoop books, while drinking cool beverages and eating pretzels, and talk about how lame they perceive us to be.
So to hear from the sharks gullet that perhaps this may not be true gives me hope.

I do keep a list but not of authors I reject, or who write lame queries, or even those who are pissy. My list is of people who scare me; people who send fake queries to QueryShark; people who've queried the same project too many times. And it's color-coded on my data base, not a little black book.

I don't think any of you need to worry about ending up in it.

And then it was Friday, and it's the flash fiction contest. Results will be posted on Monday…we hope.

Subheader noms

"Query widely and prosper my friends." --Craig

WIR 2/21/16

In last week's review, Mister Furkles asked:

Janet,

Would you have not represented a client with novels like Father Andrew Greeley's?

I'm assuming this question was about my statement that I wouldn't work in the Christian market since I don't know enough about it.

Here's a link for  those of you who don't know the books of Father AndrewGreeley. I read the mysteries he wrote in the '80s starting with  The Cardinal Sins. These books were not "Christian fiction" although they did involve a cast of characters who were ordained clergy. These books were published and sold as mystery novels.

Christian fiction has certain parameters that involve redemption and faith. I think another requirement is that Christianity be seen in a positive light only. (Again, I'm not well-versed on this) I haven't read Father Greeley's novels in more than two dozen years but just glancing at the description, I'd say his novels really don't qualify as Christian fiction. 

If you disagree or have a more informed opinion on this, I'll be glad to hear it. 

The answer to your question however is no, I wouldn't have taken those books on, but not because they are Christian fiction. I don't take on any books about the Church. As a side note, I was both astonished and delighted to find one of the priests of my parish was a devoted fan of Charlaine Harris, and quite agog that I'd met her. The priest was an amazing guy, from Poland, now here, and reading genre fiction in English.

On Monday the blog came in two parts: (1) The Quiz (2) The answers

In the comment trail to blog post one mhleader said

Personally, I'd go with CHOICE #2 for all three scenarios. I'd make it a limited-time request (one week? two at most). I'd IMMEDIATELY email the other agents, explain that I have an offer for representation, and give them (slightly less) time to respond if they are also interested. (So, if I ask agent #1 for 2 weeks to think about it and investigate, I'd give the other agents with full mss. maybe 10 days.)

I should remind everyone that an offer (at least from me) is good for about a week. That means you give the other agents about five days to read.

There's a reason for this: I don't want to sit around while a potential client shops my offer for more interest and more agents in the scrum. My assumption when you query me is that if I offer, you want me as your agent. I understand you've done multiple submissions and support that. I hope you get multiple offers too.

I've seen authors query additional agents with "hey I have an offer but I didn't get a chance to query you yet so can you get back to me in a week" leaving the agent who offered (and read the manuscript in a timely manner) sitting around tiddling her winks.

If an author says two weeks, I say "you've got one" and if the author says "I need two" I say "you've got one" and if the author then says "well, I still need two" I say "the offer expires in a week. Use that information as you will."

And just so you know: that happens with offers from publishers as well. When I get an offer for a book I have time to notify the other editors, but it's days not weeks and if the other editors don't get back to me in time, it's toodle-loo.

Hermina Boyle asked:

1) Wouldn't you be telling agents at the 'sending out full manuscript' stage that you are sending fulls out to other agents?

a) Wouldn't some agents prefer to have an exclusive review and would pass on your manuscript if they knew it would be considered by other agents?
b) Telling an agent that others are considering your full would also bump up the priority on your manuscript, I think?

1: yes, you can. I don't ask about other agents reading until I get to the point of considering representation. Multiple submission is the norm these days.

1a: Exclusives Stink. Don't grant them. If an agent wants an exclusive, say no.

1b: no, it doesn't, at least not with me. That strategy is used too often by the unscrupulous (which of course you are not) to be effective any more.

And E.M.Goldsmith screwed her courage to the sticking place and asked:

At risk of being chased back to Carkoon, if any of these scenarios occur, would it be bad form to email Janet and ask if she knows the agent? Just to make sure the agent is, you know, real and not some jellyfish with a reputation for hanging writers and their dreams out to dry? Or is that a no-no.

No no no. No No NO. Really no. If I learned that some agent with a blog was privately emailing readers with assessments of other agents, I'd make sure my colleagues knew and we'd spend about a week laughing at such hubris.

Here's the reason why: I don't know who will be the best agent for you. I can give you questions to ask, but the answers are what you need to assess.

The best source of information on what agents are like with clients can be found on AbsoluteWrite. There's also information like this on QueryTracker. Other authors are your best source on this.

(Any comments trashing Absolute Write will be deleted. Calm, reasonable discussion is ok, of course, but venom is verboten.)

And Colin Smith really likes to stir the pot, he does:

"Okay, Janet, Jessica, Barbara, you've all offered representation, and I really don't know which to choose. So tell me, why should I pick you over your other two colleagues?"

I'm not saying I WOULD do this, or that this would be the right thing to do. But it would be fun to see how agents would vie for a client like this.

You might be surprised to find two of the three of us telling you that the third is the best fit. I've been in scrums where that has happened.  And if it was between BaPo and me, hell I'd call her and we'd discuss who wanted it more. If she did, I'd yield. Honestly Barbara is such a brilliant agent, and so good at her job I think you'd be insane not to choose her if she offered. Of course, don't tell her that, and if you quote me I'll deny it completely.

BJ Muntain asked

When you say "my conclusion is you signed with someone you preferred more than me"... What's the difference there if I were to give you time to read my manuscript and make an offer, yet chose another agent anyway? Then you'll *know* that I chose the other agent over you. And if I do, for some reason, wind up looking for an agent again, wouldn't the result be the same?

The difference is I had a chance to get in the game. That's a fair fight. Maybe I suggested editorial changes and another agent said it was fine to go on submission now. I can certainly see why I'd lose in that choice.

I don't mind can live with losing in fair fight. I don't like not being allowed to play.

John Frain asked:

So help me understand the difference between:

Option 2) Dear You, another agent just recognized my brilliance and wants to rep me. You have 7 days to come back with a better offer

(Five days later after you offer)... Sorry, I'm sticking with agent 1, but thank you for getting back to me.

versus

Option 3) Dear You, another agent just recognized my brilliance and wants to rep me. To save you the time of reading my manuscript, I'm withdrawing it from consideration at this time. Thank you for your interest.

In both options, if I have to go back a year later and query again because things didn't work out, it seems you'd remember me as something less than Shiny Prospective Client because in both cases you're not the one I wanted the first time around.

To me, I didn't waste your time in Option 3 and I didn't actually reject you as I did in Option 2.

For starters there's no "better offer" --all offers here are for the same thing: representation. Second, as I said to BJ above, I'd rather lose after being in the game, than not be in the game at all.

Three and most important: your job is not to worry about wasting my time. In fact, please stand up, find a nerf bat and bop yourself on the noggin six times for that statement. I am in charge of my time management. YOU ARE NOT.

My goal is to find great novels to sell and make authors rich and famous. Your goal is to write that novel. If I think you're brilliant, at least let me tell you so.

Then John Frain doubled down with this:

Okay, so we can pretty much agree that the obvious answers were 2-2-2. Not much mystery there, right?

So let's play contrarian for a moment.

Anyone in business has this happen to them. A company is told they have to go out to bid on a project. They know who they're going to choose. They decided before the bid process. But procurement requires them to get three bids.

So they put the job out to bid, even though in reality they really don't. What they effectively do is make two companies jump through hoops, spend resources of time and money, and then award the contract to the very people they originally planned to. Because they chose Option 2.

That seems to be the accepted way here in America.

I propose that unless you're actually entertaining a reality where you might choose someone else to award your business, it's unethical to go out to bid. If you already know you're going to award your business to a firm (let's call this firm Dream Agent, Inc.), then you're being unethical by requiring two other firms to go through the process of responding under the assumption that they have a chance to win the bid. You should instead award the business to your selected firm (Dream Agent, Inc.) and if other firms come calling, then be real about it: tell them not to waste their resources on a bid they can't win.

A couple years down the road, when the contract comes up for bid again (or, say, you have a different manuscript to offer) and you're no longer happy with Dream Agent, Inc. then you can go out to bid with those other firms and tell them they have a realistic shot at winning your business. This would be Option 3 as I read it.

I think both Option 2 and Option 3 are both polite and ethical depending on the reality of your situation. I also believe the earth can be flat or round and Schrodinger's Cat has 18 lives depending on where I find myself at the moment.

John, your logic lapse here is epic. I mean EPIC. As a writer, you're not sending out requests for bid and awarding a contract. That implies a certainty that simply isn't true.  As many of your fellow blog readers will attest: querying is not a sure thing. A requested full is NOT a bid. (I got an email last week that said "I've chosen you to be my literary agent" and after I laughed, I sent a rejection note cause that kind of naivete is just plain worrisome in a potential client.)

I signed three new clients last year out of  THOUSANDS of queries and almost a hundred requested fulls.

I turn down publishable work.

We're not getting bids on fixing your furnace here. I think the nerf bat might need a couple more applications.

MaggieMcT said:

In the example given if I know that there is no possible way I would go with anyone but the offering agent, I would not be comfortable playing games with the other agents.

I can't discourage you enough from this kind of thinking.

Until you've actually talked with an agent, heard her ideas for revision, and for the rest of your career, there's no way you should decide she's the only one you'll sign with. And honestly it's better for you to hear MANY opinions on these topics. At this stage, you guyz don't know enough about the rest of the process to know if one agent's answers are the right ones. The best way to figure that out is to hear many answers not one. Some of what we say will be new to you.

And it's not "playing games" to do this. Multiple offers is a daily occurrence here. Frankly, I'd much rather sign someone who has had multiple offers and made a choice than someone blindly assuming I'm all that and a bag of chips. REALLY.

On Tuesday, the topic was what a publisher pays for and what an author pays for:

Lucie Witt asked:

Hybrid publishing is interesting. When established authors write novellas and self pup connected to their published works, or put free short stories on their websites, I always wonder if they have to get publisher permission or run it through their agent? (Tiffany Reisz is an example - she has an eight book series but puts free stories on her blog that generally take place between books)

It depends on her publishing contract. My clients who do this talk to me about it first so we can stay on the right side of our contractual obligations. That means there's no one right answer.

E.M.Goldsmith asked:

I have seen that some publishers, even a couple big ones like Tor/Forge, are open to unagented submissions. I would not do this myself, but what happens with the author that splits the difference and goes to a traditional publisher directly without an agent? Can they get an agent with publishing deal in hand or do agents become wary of these writers? Does publisher treat them differently than a writer with an agent. What if their sales are middling or low? Does that hurt their chances of future representation or publication? Do they really save anything financially by going it alone? I imagine they really don't. But I could be wrong.

I do know several agents who've taken on clients who had deals in hand. The earlier in the process that happens the better. That means you don't say yes to the publisher till you secure an agent.

If that happens to you here's what you do: Query as you would normally except your subject line changes: RE: Query for Title -Publication offer from X Publisher received.

In the query you'll tell me which publisher and editor has made the offer and what your time line is. A lot of publishers will give you some time to secure an agent. They LIKE working with agents (surprised to hear that?)  

I respond to those queries as soon as I get them. I don't know how other agents handle it.

On Wednesday we talked about how to reference #MSWL in a query

#MSWL is a Twitter hashtag for manuscript wish list. It's a way for agents and editors to talk about what they really want to see right now.

Amelia Creed said

PS: I've noticed my queries with #MSWL in the subject line not only get a faster reply, but they tend to have a higher success rate. Of course, the sample's a bit too small to give a definitive answer.

I don't participate in #MSWL so I don't have any stats to offer, but this makes sense to me. I know I jump on things I'm looking for much more quickly than I do the general incoming queries. In my case "things I'm looking for" means history and biography. Queries for non-fiction get read much faster than queries for fiction.

On Thursday we revisited the evergreen topic of waiting time: specifically how long should you have to wait if you're a client.

I advised writers to get off the rodent wheel, but Amy Schaefer took issue with that:

Janet, you're missing the fact that the rodent wheel of panic is where writers get their ideas. We are champion over-thinkers for good reason. Sure, the anxiety-related side effects are horrendous, but it's worth it for that aha! moment we need on every page. 

Well, ok then. I always thought you got your ideas on the Wells Fargo wagon,

or  from those helpful souls who offered them to you if you'd do the writing and then you'd split the profits.

And this from Bethany Elizabeth gave me the chills:

It's such a real issue at my workplace that new hires are required to take a class on badgering. Yes, a real class. We learn how to badger. Aggressively.

Well, to be fair, first you start out as passive aggressive. One email, two emails, then a phone call (this can vary by urgency). Then another email with the first two emails attached. Then you go to their office or wait outside a meeting. Then you send them ANOTHER email and cc their manager.

Please don't come to my office! YIKES!

And please don't email anyone you think might be my manager. (I don't have one)

Donnaeve said

"At the beginning especially, I would like an agent who will email/text me periodically just to say "Hi, how's it going?"

Hey Colin, that happened all of twice for me in that first year when my debut was on submission. A "you haven't jumped off a bridge yet, have you" kind of email. And then a "hang in there!" I was, by the fingertips. :)

But more to that, I think agents tend to leave clients alone for the most part - unless they call to tell them they've sold the book, or want to discuss contract terms, or are discussing the next project. There could be other little biz tidbits they might contact you with, but honestly, you can count on months of nothing...b/c we're supposed to be producing the next magic thing they can sell. A "check in" email even once every three months could be perceived as "are you done yet?" or "Can you write faster?" Least that's how I'd view it.

This is one of the reasons Twitter and Facebook are valuable to me: I can talk to my clients very informally, or listen too, just as informally. Twitter was how I knew not to bug one of my clients: she posted pictures of the 48 inch snowfall in her front yard.

Or that a client's beloved pet has died. Or when there's a reference to a big life event, happy or sad.

For all it's crazy, Twitter has real value for that kind of low-key connection.

On Friday we have the writing contest. Results to be posted on Monday.

S.D. King asked:

Colin, on the spread sheet, what are the extra winner columns for? I am guessing that finalists can enter their entries? Perhaps this could be a shared Google Sheet where others could edit?

The extra winner columns are because there are multiple winners sometimes. Finalists do not enter their own entries. This is not a shared sheet with multiple editors. I like Colin. Multiple editors is a recipe for crazy. Please do not ask me for specifics on how I know this.

Thanks to all the blog readers who provided questions and comments for the round up this week. Even you who needed a nerf bat applied to your noggin. It's always interesting to see what you're thinking.  I appreciate your willingness to swim with the shark!

Subheader noms:

It's just like life: into every hashtag, a little dross must fall.--DLM

Been coming here for years, been writing for decades, been a smart ass know it all, all my life and today, I learned something. --CarolynnWith2Ns

The Slush Pile Café--E.M. Goldsmith

 HELLO. My name is unagented writer. You killed my query. Prepare to sigh.--Christina Seine