Positive Thinking? October 16, 2010

I’ve been chatting with a fellow novelist and my cheerleader about what happens next now that agents are reading the full manuscript. I had a certain way of looking at “what if” and while it was different from my novelist friend’s, I thought there was no harm in it.

Except, now I think there might be.

What I was referring to (in my mind) as a fear of jinxing things–because, let’s face it, I am a little superstitious at times–may have really been a fear of disappointment. I was afraid to talk about how well my manuscript is doing, and what may come next, because doing so would guarantee all the agents will reject the book. Sounds like a valid superstition to me, except…

It also says I don’t believe in my writing. If I *KNOW* my book is good enough to be published, then I should be confident that someone will see it too. If I believe every agent will eventually pass on my manuscript, then I’m saying I don’t have faith in what I’ve written; that I don’t think it’s good enough to be published.

If the above paragraph is true then I have no business querying agents and wasting their time. I HAVE TO BELIEVE IN WHAT I’VE WRITTEN. So, with that in mind, I am moving forward from this point with my head held high and a stereotypically-determined glint in my eye. I believe in my book, dammit!

So far, so too do a number of agents.

I have EIGHT fulls and one partial out with agents right now. That’s right.

EIGHT.

FULLS.

I am going to start investigating the sorts of questions I should ask WHEN an agent calls to offer representation. I’ll let you know what I find.

C.

*I believe in my manuscript, dammit!*

Self-Doubt October 10, 2010

Okay, I’m going to be honest with you.

The query process for Nikko’s Bond is going so un-freaking-believably well I should be doing cartwheels around the equator. Seriously. Remember how deliriously happy I was when an agent asked for a partial back when I was querying Firestorm? Well, what’s going on here makes that milestone look like soggy leaves clogging a storm drain.

Why then, am I not driving you nuts with constant posts about it?

(And why does my house smell like banana bread after I cooked chicken? Although, that’s a matter for another time.)

I have two reasons for not blabbing all over the interwebz.

1) Apparently it is poor form to post one’s rejection/request stats. This makes sense. After all, let’s say you post that you’ve sent out 5,000 queries and only two agents have asked to see partials. If there’s an agent considering asking for more material, and they wander over to your site and see those stats, they may start to question their own interest. And how many agents want to be the 5,001st agent queried? Sure, they know we query widely, but to be that low on your list isn’t going to endear you to them.

2) I’m having trouble accepting it for what it is. I feel like I’m fooling people with my query, and that the agents who ask for more are getting the manuscript, reading it, and reacting with OMG-one-night-stand remorse. (I have nothing to base this on, as I haven’t heard back from these agents, but it’s pretty much what’s going through my head.) But then I look at my submissions to these agents and I am forced to acknowledge that I sent more than just a query to several of them – so they asked to read more because they liked what they already read. At which point my sex-guilt analogy kicks in again and I am left wondering if the requests (especially ones that come after a nudge on a query) are the equivalent of pity sex.

Then I wander over to sites like QueryTracker.net and discover that some of the agents who asked to see more have stats like:

427 queries received. 9 requests for fulls.

1049 queries received. 43 requests for partials.

Surely these stats should be enough to banish the doubts I have about my writing. Surely! But no, here I am wallowing in misery because I am afraid to get excited about the level of interest in my novel.

Have you faced feelings like this before? What do you do when you feel this way?

C.

Adventures with WEbook October 9, 2010

Time for another WEbook update!

I know, I know, you’re so excited you can hardly breathe. But relax, sit back, and hold onto your toque (a little Canadian humour for you – you know who you are – *eyes “knitted beanie”).

Firstly, the vampire stories both tanked. I was expecting that, given how sick of the undead blood suckers people seem to be. I was expecting to see a difference in stats between the first and third person POVs though, and that didn’t pan out.

My tentative first page for the sequel to The Firestorm Conspiracy also failed to advance. I was saddened by this as I had hoped the idea was decent – and now I am scrambling to find an alternate plot in time for NaNoWriMo.

My historical romance and my avian sci-fi (which was more like fantasy) were eliminated. The historical was pretty much thrashed from the moment it was posted, but I’d hoped the sci-fi would’ve made it as I was thinking it might turn into a short story or possible spin-off novel.

On the plus side, Nikko’s Bond (which is also meeting with a lot of agent interest) has been elevated to the second round. I’m excited to see how it does in the 5-page round. It’s under review by a “publishing pro” and should start posting ratings in round two later this week.

Job Hunted is now firmly ensconced in round three (HOORAY! I am so proud of this baby!) and I am awaiting the review of the 5-page sample by an agent. I’m VERY curious to see how the rating of the 50-page sample goes – I’m not an expert rater, so I have no idea what to expect.

The entry that surprised me the most was my romantic comedy. It flew through the first round. I honestly expected it to tank. I mean, it was a piece of fluff, right? Well, apparently it is appealing fluff. I based it on a short story I wrote a few months ago, but now I have a problem – the short story got resolved in six pages and there’s not enough to stretch it into a novel. I have not submitted a 5-page sample for this one yet because I have no idea what the next four pages should be.

Well, I must dive back into the edits. Tomorrow is Sunday and I want to get the manuscript back to my editor by Monday.

C.

Fulls = Hope for Love September 19, 2010

An agent reads a query and wonders if the book is something he or she wants to read more of. In my mind this is kind of like saying, “Hmm,” or “Ooo.” They are hopeful, but still somewhat reserved.

At this point, the author’s heart rate accelerates because a request for a partial frequently follows.

When an agent reads a partial, one of two things happen: he/she decides he/she doesn’t want to read more (for a number of reasons, some include a feeling of regret), or he/she loves what he/she has seen so far and becomes desperate to read more.

Honestly.

The agent thinks he/she is falling in love. They have a moment of *squee* and they have visions devouring the remainder of the manuscript and wailing because there’s no more.

When the request for a full comes in, the author gasps, re-reads to make sure it isn’t a prank or typo, and happy dances even if strangers are watching.

What I keep forgetting is the agent’s reaction. I know how I feel when emails fly into my inbox, whether they are rejections, or requests for partials and fulls. I can’t help but think the agent is like, “Meh, it might be good, better ask for more pages,” but that’s not the case. Agents are too busy to ask for something “just in case,” or because it’s “all right.” When an agent asks for a full it’s because what I’ve written is singing to his/her soul.

Love.

My book.

Love.

Honestly.

Now how cool is that?

C.

Query Fun September 12, 2010

Some of you may be wondering why I’m not giving you a blow-by-blow description of my querying tactics and their success (or not) given that I write something every day. I have two reasons for this: one, I don’t want to jinx things (yes, good things come to those whose query letter rocks), and two, if an agent decided to cruise by my blog and saw I had 465 rejections (which I don’t! At this point the number is sitting at 15, so neener, neener, neener!), they’d probably wonder what was wrong with my book and run away screaming.

So, you’ll have to bear with me and have faith that I am having a tonne of fun querying (I am, I love it), and I am seeing the types of results authors want to see. I am not dejected, bitter, or even ambivalent. I am excited, happy, and enthusiastic. I promise, that once things are over (for good or ill) I will fill you in on my query saga. Until then, imagine me sitting by my inbox, hitting refresh every five seconds, and squealing whenever mail arrives.

Life is grand when you’re submitting your work to agents.

C.

Finished! September 5, 2010

My current WIP is a WIP no more!

The query I began polishing during WriteOnCon is coming out of storage in preparation for launching at unsuspecting literary agents. *squee*

Have I mentioned I love querying? I do. There must be something wrong with me because I find the whole process exciting. Seriously. I love searching for agents who I think will like my work, reading up on their interests and acquisitions, and then tailoring a letter designed to knock their socks off.

I love tracking my queries in my spreadsheet. I love tracking them in QueryTracker too.

I love, love, love querying!

Rejections don’t bother me. Again, I am serious. Unless an agent replies with, “You suck and shouldn’t be allowed near a keyboard ever again,” I choose to look at my query like it’s my husband. I love him dearly. Do I expect every woman we meet to fall instantly in love with him too? Uh, no. *eyes crowd suspiciously* There’s nothing wrong with my husband, but that doesn’t mean EVERY woman will want to spend her life with him. The same holds true for my query – I love my book, but not everyone else will (my cheerleader read it and says it’s super awesome, but she gets paid to say that, so don’t take her word for it – go out and buy it yourself once it hits store shelves). I need to find an agent who LOVES my book. If that’s the first agent I query, or the 139th, it won’t matter so long as they feel about my story the way I feel about my husband.

Anyway, I must be off – I have agents to query!

C.

Query Tweeting Ethics August 31, 2010

I stumbled onto a highly-charged Twitter topic earlier today. It seems several agents have posted recently about the practice of posting comments about (and sometimes snippets of) queries on the social media site. I decided to check out author/agent Mandy Hubbard’s blog post (http://mandyhubbard.livejournal.com/241005.html) on the topic to see what was up.

I follow a couple of agents who sometimes use the #queries hashtag, and I’ll admit to laughing at some of their comments, but also being made a little uncomfortable by others. So, with my mixed emotions in mind, I dove into the debate.

I understand that writers need to develop a thick skin – the industry is about rejection at all levels – but it angers me that people are using that as an excuse to publicly ridicule their fellow authors. If I submitted my query for public critique, then yes, I would expect to see it ripped to shreds around the web. However, if I send a business letter to someone I hope to establish a contractual relationship with, I do NOT expect to see commentary or quotes from my letter being mocked online.

Some agents offer query critiques, either on their blogs or on separate sites (Janet Reid’s Query Shark site is a fabulous example), and the queries posted there are done so with the express permission of the author, not at the agent’s whim when sorting through his/her slush pile. I understand the desire to receive feedback on a query – even if it’s only 140 characters on Twitter - because form rejections really tell us nothing, but when it’s done to get a laugh at someone else’s expense it’s not cool.

For me, the issue boils down to one of ethics.

Do agents have the right to post or mock business correspondence sent to them? What do you think?

C.

Publisher News August 17, 2010

Penguin UK is accepting unsolicited queries for three months (August-October). The Penguin group of publishing houses only accepts agented submissions, so to be able to submit without an agent is an awesome opportunity. Like Catch-22, it may actually be the perfect means of landing an agent.

Except (don’t you hate exceptions?), it could also be a move that annoys any prospective agents should you fail to get an offer from Penguin. You see, agents don’t like to hear your ms has already been shopped around and rejected by the very editors they planned to submit to. In some cases, agents can be quite editorially hands-on, and their expertise could mean the difference between a manuscript that is rejected and one that’s purchased. If you’ve already submitted to that publisher (and they rejected your ms) the agent has to cross it off his/her list.

On the other hand, if you submit to a publisher and they make you an offer, you can go to your top agent picks, and they’ll more than likely be interested in taking you on as a client and helping you out…

So, what to do? What would you do? Submit to the publisher and hope to land an agent, or lose out on the chance to submit directly to them and gamble on finding an agent first?

C.

WriteOnCon Day Two August 11, 2010

*faints dead away*

I have been go-go-going since I got up in time for Natalie Fischer’s live query chat at 8 a.m. PST this morning! I received some fun PMs from other WriteOnCon attendees, viewed some informative and entertaining vlogs, read some in-depth and educational articles, and attended chat after chat after chat.

The live events today were amazing. The day began with Natalie Fischer going through a collection of over 80 queries. She explained her thinking about each – whether she would read more, or reject (and why). She ran out of time on the chat, and spent an additional hour going through the rest on Twitter. It was a very enlightening look at not only how hard an agent’s job is when evaluating queries, but just how subjective the process is.

Shortly after the chat/twitterfest, Natalie returned to the chat room to field questions about agenting, publishing, queries, and the market for an hour. Again, highly engrossing!

Technically there were three hours between Natalie’s chat and the one with Jennifer Laughran, but it didn’t seem like it. I spent the time catching up on all the early morning posts as well as staying on top of things in the forum.

Jennifer is a literary agent, and she spent an hour and a half chatting about everything under the sun related to kidlit. It was a humorous conversation, and I succeeded in asking 3 or 4 questions before time ran out. Anyone working with agents from Andrea Brown Literary is VERY fortunate.

Because Jennifer went for 90 minutes, I only had to wait 30 minutes until the panel discussion with Joanna Stampfel-Volpe, Suzie Townsend, Mary Kole, and Anica Rissi. Joanna, Suzie, and Mary are literary agents, and Anica is a senior editor with a children’s book publisher. Holy cow, was this an amazing chat! Sometimes the discussion flew by so fast I had to scroll back to see what I’d missed. I kept hoping for lulls so I could catch up! The focus of the panel was “voice” and it was eye-opening to watch these publishing professionals tackle a VERY tough topic to pin down. Really, really amazing.

The final live event was a presentation followed by Q&A on building an online presence by author Daisy Whitney. I’m still catching my breath. Seriously. I am soooooo glad these chats were recorded and can be watched again. There was no way I could type fast enough to take notes – so I didn’t even try.

I’m not sure what I expected from this conference, but so far it has performed well beyond my imagination. The community of writers on the forums is amazing, the articles and vlogs are intense, and the opportunity to dialogue with industry professionals has been incredible. There’s still one more day to go, yet all I can think is, “I hope, hope, hope they do this again next year.”

WriteOnCon is EPIC!

C.

I <3 The Query Shark July 24, 2010

I’ve mentioned the Query Shark (http://queryshark.blogspot.com/) on my blog before – she’s the agent who posts and critiques queries sent to her by writers who want to improve their query letters. The caveat being she’s ruthless and doesn’t pull her punches. To be perfectly honest, this woman makes me laugh out loud:

oh my garamond. You do understand I operate in a for-profit business, right?

Unless fiery autumnal hues is the name of the protagonist, it doesn’t belong in the first paragraph. And fiery autumnal hues is just plain bad writing.

So, the stranger, I’m guessing he’s not the protagonist? Too bad. He’s the only interesting one here. Why is he hell-bent on this seeming wicked deed? Oh he just wants to kill her isn’t a really compelling motivation (not that I haven’t experienced it myself quite recently.)

I’m sorry, but wtf? The Happiest Place on Earth, last time I looked, is Disneyland’s claim. In other words, not art school.

And why does he need to go through all these places for a weapon? I can buy a gun on any street corner in Brooklyn, why is he having such a hard time?

I know where I work. I know my name. Start with what matters: what your book is about.

And we’re done right here. Why? Unless the ex-girlfriend died from reading too many romance novels, it’s most likely you mean heroin, not heroine. There’s a pretty big difference.

This is the worst abuse of logic I see in query letters: My book has horses, people like horses, people will like my book. Not only is that not true, it’s so clearly not true, it’s one of those phrases that triggers the rejection button.

The Query Shark knows query letters: what should be in them, what shouldn’t be in them, and what she wants to see in them. Anyone who wants something other than a form rejection would do well to study all 167+ entries before writing their own.

That, and it’s a terrifically hilarious read.

C.