How to avoid the slushpile

[J Riff]

That's actually part of what I was wondering about .. it's about 4 or 5 separate lines of addresses - and it's such a tiny little box. I will fake it.

 

[R M Tobias]

If I could shine to hope torch a little.

Surely there are far more published manuscripts deserving of it then there are published manuscripts that are not.

The overwhelming majority of rejected manuscripts are probably rejected with good reason. The shame of it is amongst them there is probably a small percentage that are good enough but just get lost in the pile.

Anyway, with that in mind, if you work hard with whatever talent you have you greatly increase your change of success, thats my belief anyway. If you can look at your work and be proud of it, then others will be too.

 

[RJM Corbet]

Oh shame, poor suffering agents having to work actually reading a few lines of the submissions from the writers who put the food on their tables. If they're so busy and overburdened they should either get more staff or get out of the kitchen. Yeah it's business, yeah it's business -- getting rich off the back of artists and holding a monopoly on 'industry standards'. Consider yourself highly blessed even to receive the common courtesy of acknowledgement of receipt of your hard work, and rejection slips cost money, you know. Life's so hard for an agent. Stop defending them, everybody ...

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Oh shame, poor suffering agents having to work actually reading a few lines of the submissions from the writers who put the food on their tables. If they're so busy and overburdened they should either get more staff or get out of the kitchen. Yeah it's business, yeah it's business -- getting rich off the back of artists and holding a monopoly on 'industry standards'. Consider yourself highly blessed even to receive the common courtesy of acknowledgement of receipt of your hard work, and rejection slips cost money, you know. Life's so hard for an agent.

They don't suffer, but they do work very hard and quite a bit of that work goes for nothing since they work on commission and the reputable ones don't charge reading fees. Very few of them are rich -- off the backs of artists or anyone else. They are just ordinary working people who try to run their businesses in the way that is the most efficient for them and the most likely to make them a decent living.

They don't suffer any more than the rest of us do, doing our jobs. Or less. Or deserve less consideration from people who have no claim on their time.

If they're so busy and overburdened they should either get more staff or get out of the kitchen.

And pay them how? With publishers cutting their lists, there are only so many books they can sell and hiring more staff isn't going to help them to place any more books or earn any more money they can use to pay that sfaff. I would imagine that some of the smaller agencies are going out of business as it is. Which is bad for writers. Because when only the big agencies are left, they'll only be looking for books with the potential to become best sellers. The midlist is shrinking now, but when most of the one or two person agencies go out of business, the midlist will disappear.

 

[RJM Corbet]

All the same Teresa, writers and manuscripts are their business, not such a terrible chore ...

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

It can be a terrible chore, reading through all of the really, really bad ones in the hope of finding something good. And reading through the bad writing is the part they don't get paid for. Just like any other job, there are parts that are less rewarding, parts that are more arduous, but people in other professions at least get paid for doing the parts they like least.

So why do agents even do it, when they are over-worked and most of them don't get rich? For much the same reason that most writers work long hours for less than stellar pay writing, I imagine. They love books and want to be part of the industry. They don't hate writers, they don't enjoy crushing their hopes, and it isn't all some malicious game or power trip. There are more profitable ways of mistreating other people. Actually, so far as I know, there is no money at all to be made in persecuting writers.

Of course turning agents into the bad guys is a good way of deflecting the truth: When our manuscripts are rejected again and again, in all but the rarest cases, it's usually for a very good reason. That reason may have nothing to do with the quality of the manuscript (although usually it does) but neither is the reason the agent's (or the publisher's) whim, although it certainly might be their miscalculation. Like the rest of us, sometimes they make mistakes. But in all but the rarest cases they know what readers are looking for. If they are too stupid about that, they go out of business.

 

[chrispenycate]

As regards a chore…

I'm in the music business, wouldn't want it otherwise, but details like eating and paying the rent mean I frequently have to work with artists who are, to be diplomatic, not the world's greatest. Since I am not the producer, I am getting paid, unlike the agent we've mentioned who only gets something if (s)he manages to sell the product. Still, I promise that working with substandard artists who expect modern technology to correct all their imperfections tarnishes the listen experience for weeks after; nothing seems as good as it ought to be (in exchange, working with really good musicians doesn't make the others sound worse by contrast, but enhances music in general, so it balances out.)

I'm sure those primary readers, the ones who got into the industry out of pure enthusiasm for literature and now work separating the totally hopeless from those worth handing on for more experienced judgement, find their desire to read a good book when they get home considerably damped; and as they're there because of that obsession, are they not worthy of a decent wage?

 

[RJM Corbet]

Yes, I do follow you, and I do realize that the article that started this thread is largely, though not entirely, tongue in cheek, and that you advised people not to read it at all in case they take it too seriously. Also, with e mail submissions being accepted -- by still perhaps only 50% of literary agents? -- a lot of it, such as the paperclips and the black ink don't apply.

But some of it does stick.

I have just changed my manuscript to courier in case someone thinks: 'Oh this guy's submitting in verdanta. He's obviously a goon who doesn't know anything, sent to test me and waste my time.'

And even if someone starts reading with that attitude, its a psychological barrier to acceptance, you know? I've received one rejection, and two 'no response whatsoever'. It's the latter that I have my beef with.

Of course, in the end, the cream rises to the top, and conversely, all the presentation in the world, and all the attending cocktail parties and knowing who's who in the zoo won't get you anywhere if your manuscript's plain lousy.

But I stand by my point that a little courtesy -- acknowledgement of receipt of a submission, a rejection rather than empty silence, and so on -- would go a long way? Obviously there will be a lot of extremely bad submissions. But there are also dyslexic writers on this site, battling against great odds, yet never doubting victory is near. People really work hard. Is it too much to ask an agent to read the first paragraph of a submission?

Thank you, as an experienced author, for your (free) help and advice in these forums Teresa. You are part of what makes the Chrons such a valuable site

Edit: sorry Crispen, your post landed while I was writing mine. Will read it now ...

 

[RJM Corbet]

Sorry for double posting ...

... I'm sure those primary readers, the ones who got into the industry out of pure enthusiasm for literature and now work separating the totally hopeless from those worth handing on for more experienced judgement, find their desire to read a good book when they get home considerably damped; and as they're there because of that obsession, are they not worthy of a decent wage?

True, but it goes for any job. If you work in a peanut butter factory you're not going to take peanut butter sandwiches to work?

 

[Anne Lyle]

Actually, so far as I know, there is no money at all to be made in persecuting writers.

Oh, I think there is. It's called Publish America

Of course they are nice to the writer first, before fleecing them and failing to promote or distribute their over-priced drivel...

@RJM Corbett - the horribleness of the slushpile is, I think, largely responsible for the predominance of query letters as the preferred "first contact" format. It only takes seconds to skim a query and determine if the writer a) is literate and b) has an intriguing premise that's worth further consideration.

The two-man agency I'm with goes even further, by staying closed to querying for months at a time. I shall have to ask JB sometime if he has a ballpark figure for the number of queries they received in their last two-month open period, but I would expect it to be in the thousands. From that they signed eight new clients straight away (many like me with deals on the table already), and are still considering some of the writers whose partials and fulls they requested.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I have just changed my manuscript to courier in case someone thinks: 'Oh this guy's submitting in verdanta. He's obviously a goon who doesn't know anything, sent to test me and waste my time.'

Courier is a proportional font, which makes it easier, once the book goes into production, to calculate the eventual page count. I have no idea what arcane means they use to do this, but I know it depends on a proportional font. Verdana is a sans-serif font, which has problems of it's own. So if you use the wrong font you create an inconvenience, which says that either you don't know how to format correctly, or you don't care. Either way, the impression is that you are not approaching your writing in a thoroughly professional way, which is a harbinger of further problems along the way.

I would imagine that agents have also heard (as I have heard) writers say that it doesn't matter to them what agents want, because they think such-and-such a font looks better and that is what they will use. So using a font like Verdana is also a hint that you might be one of those writers who are going to be difficult and argue with them about every little thing. Will an agent turn down a book solely on that account? I don't think so. But you don't want them to start reading your manuscript already unfavorably disposed, because if they reach a point where they are unsure whether it is worth their time to keep on reading, that could just be the thing that tips them in the direction of a "no." They might stop reading just short of the page or paragraph where your story really takes off. It's such an unnecessary risk.

Yes, with electronic submissions an agent or editor could reformat the submission. I do that all of the time with the manuscripts I receive as a freelance editor, but I'm not doing this with the volume of manuscripts that agents and publishers receive, so it's no big deal. And when it comes down to it, why should the person at the receiving end have to do it, when the writer could do it and save the other person the extra step?

But I stand by my point that a little courtesy -- acknowledgement of receipt of a submission, a rejection rather than empty silence, and so on -- would go a long way?

I agree that it is only simple courtesy to acknowledge receipt of your submission. With an electronic submission, I can't think of any reason why an agent or publisher couldn't have an auto-response set up to do this. (On the other hand, I know so little about how email works, someone may come along and give us a reason.) With print submissions, if the writer has included a stamped and self-addressed postcard with a manuscript or sample chapters, it seems easy enough to drop the postcard in with the outgoing mail.

I also agree that at least a form rejection should be sent, unless it is understood from the beginning that if no response is received after x number of weeks the submission has been rejected. Otherwise, some sort of form rejection should be sent, either electronically, or in the case of print submissions in the SASE the writer has considerately provided.

Is it too much to ask an agent to read the first paragraph of a submission?

But what makes you think that they don't? I hope you aren't basing this on Kent's tongue-in-cheek article?

I have heard the same writers who complain about long response times complain that an agent or editor obviously didn't read their submission because they replied too quickly. It seems that when a rejection is involved, some reason will be found for believing that the submission did not even receive a glance.

When I sent out the synopsis and sample chapters for my first book to an editor at the house that eventually became my publisher, the postcard came back within less than ten days, which was about the minimum time that I would have thought a package could reach New York and a postcard come back to California (postcards are slow), and not allowing any time for the editor to get around to reading what I sent. But the postcard had writing on it. As I read that writing, I began to hyperventilate. The editor said that she had liked my submission, and could I please send the rest of the manuscript.

If that response had been a rejection, I imagine I would have wondered if she had read past my synopsis. How could she do that and reply so quickly? But since she wanted to read more, that thought never entered my mind. I simply concluded that my submission had arrived at just the right moment when she had very little else on her desk and she did read it all, despite the quickness of her response. You cannot really tell what kind of reading the agent or editor who sent a rejection gave your submission, not unless you are standing beside them and looking over their shoulders.

 

[RJM Corbet]

I do know, its a satisfying feeling to get a notice of acceptance by a magazine, and then take the cheque to the bank -- on publication in the case of a magazine -- then keep the story in your scrapbook.

And a magazine rejection is just: Oh, uh huh -- wrong magazine, try someone else.

A book is different. For a start you put a lot more work into it -- years, often -- and then have to submit through an agent, not directly to the publisher.

Perhaps I'm out of touch. Definitely. Not perhaps. Still, it's the nature of the publishing business, and that's not going to change.

Thanks Teresa

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

You're entirely welcome.

But you do know that it is a decision on the part of the individual publishers to stop accepting over-the-transom submissions and only go through agents or other contacts? I don't doubt that agents are more than happy with that arrangement, but they never had enough power to bring it about.

And I am sure that it was the sheer volume of manuscripts being produced now that brought about these changes -- not all of which took years or even very many months to write. You and I may take years to write a book, but some new writers will dash off something in six weeks. Blame them for clogging up the pipeline. Yes, they have the same dreams that you and I have, but they don't have the same dedication, the same work ethic, or the same love for books and writing.

 

[Anne Lyle]

Courier is a proportional font, which makes it easier, once the book goes into production, to calculate the eventual page count. I have no idea what arcane means they use to do this, but I know it depends on a proportional font. Verdana is a sans-serif font, which has problems of it's own. So if you use the wrong font you create an inconvenience, which says that either you don't know how to format correctly, or you don't care. Either way, the impression is that you are not approaching your writing in a thoroughly professional way, which is a harbinger of further problems along the way.

That's one of the many reasons I love Scrivener. I can write in any font I like - sans-serif is generally nicer on-screen - then export it into whichever format the submissions guidelines specify. "Standard manuscript format" (Courier with italics converted to underlines, double-spaced) is a preset, but I have a custom export for my publishers, who prefer single-spaced Times (with normal italics) in the first instance, as it's easier to read on an ebook reader.

 

[Ursa major]

To be fair, changing the font with any WP package is easy, so I can't see why aspiring authors find it difficult to change their submission to meet the stated requirements of an agent or publisher. (What is easy, but also unnecessarily time consuming, is for the receiver to have to change much of what they receive electronically - not so easy with paper submissions - all of it eating into the time they have to read the contents, i.e. the part of the process in which all of us are most interested.)

And it isn't as if we don't have to keep a copy of what we sent to particular organisations, even if we later want to change text within the scope of the partial (or full); so there should be no problems even if each submission is formatted in a (slightly) different way.

 

[RJM Corbet]

It's not about changing fonts, it's about agents having all these little hidden rules, like paperclips, not staples, in case they wound their precious fingers, not putting your address at the top of your letter -- stuff they DON'T tell you in their submissions guide.

I know it's 'tongue-in-cheek' -- but not entirely so. I don't have a problem with paper clips or courier script, if they ask for it in the submission guide -- what I have a problem with is that they judge by such petty issues, and may not even read your writing because you staple your submission instead of using a paperclip.

 

[Boneman]

Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men... or some such. Generally, I've found most agents guidelines pretty clear, but on two occasions, I rang the agent's office, apologised for 'my' confusion and asked for clarification. I have no idea who answered the phone, but I figured they were employed to do that, was dealt with quickly and curteously. It was (to my mind) something that others had asked before, as they didn't have to ask anybody.

I saw a clip (might have even found it here somewhere) where JK Rowling is talking to Oprah about rejections etc, and she took obvious satisfaction that a publisher kept her manuscript for 6 months, but when Bloomsbury made the offer, the other publisher did, too. She went with Bloomsbury because they'd liked the work, said so, and made an offer quickly. I imagine that second publisher employ someone to kick the a***s of all involved, every day.

I've had terrific rejections and curt rejections and complete silence. Those are listed in my order of preference. You just try not to take it personally, and move on. Remembering that one day you'll be talking to Oprah about the ones who turned you down...

 

[Ursa major]

I think, RJMC, you're confusing reality with the light-hearted text quoted in the original post. If an agent puts something in their submission guidelines, I think it's fair to say that they're the things you shouldn't get wrong. Other things -- double spaced, printed (i.e. not hand-written) on one side only, 1" or larger margins (left, right, top, bottom), Courier**, loose leaves (with or without rubber bands), etc. -- are just about universal (unless - as Anne has pointed out - the agent/publisher specifies something else).

And while, an agent's fingers may only seem important to them, the attention that wounds on them need eats into the precious time the agent would be spending on reading our partials.


** - Times New Roman is also widely accepted. (As it happens, I think the only font Angry Robot Books mentioned in its recent Open Month was Courier: they didn't want to see it.)

 

[RJM Corbet]

Wise words, Boneman, wise words ...

 

[Ursa major]

The main thing, though, that it isn't a problem. If an agent really is ridiculously picky -- there must be one of these (probably unsuccessful) people somewhere on the planet -- you won't want to work with them. And because they're ridiculously picky, they won't want to work with you (or any of us, for that matter).

The same applies the other way: if an unpublished author flounces about being precious, no publisher or agent is going to have to put up with him or her much beyond first contact.