Rejection
A rejection showed up in today's e-mail. This one was worse than many others. No salutation - not even the ubiquitous "Dear Author". Just started right in. It was clearly a standard form rejection. (Again, I understand the practical need for such, but refuse to excuse the banality of them.)
Here is an excerpt:
"While we at XXX Agency have every confidence of your ability and talent as a writer, your query does not meet our current needs.
"We wish you all the best in your pursuit of representation and publication."
There are several problems with this pat and condescending response:
1. If you actually do believe in my abilities, but I just don't happen to fit your list, then give me the name of an agent whose list you think I do fit. Anything less is bullshitting on your part.
2. While I realize that some writers do just cluster bomb agents at random with queries for books about polar bears in Antartica, I do not. I also choose to believe that I am not unusual in doing research on what agents have sold, what they claim to "like" on places like Agent Query and Publishers Marketplace, and query accordingly. Therefore, if I am sending an agent a query, it is because a book on her list bears a resemblance in genre or style to my own. To just say it "doesn't fit" means that: a) the information these agents are posting about themselves is rife with lies, b) aliens have taken over the bodies of these agents (or left them; your choice) and the current personality inhabiting the agency is different than the one who posted the information, or c) the wee college intern looking at the slurry of queries was busy changing the mix on his iPod and clicked "pat rejection" when he got to my query.
3. Please don't wish me well. It's condescending. You don't want me. That's all I need to know. You telling me that you will pretend for a nanosecond to give a shit about me or my book just rubs salt in the wound. Most of you are New Yorkers and would never apologize in person, so please don't have a Miss Manners Moment via e-mail.
Here is an excerpt:
"While we at XXX Agency have every confidence of your ability and talent as a writer, your query does not meet our current needs.
"We wish you all the best in your pursuit of representation and publication."
There are several problems with this pat and condescending response:
1. If you actually do believe in my abilities, but I just don't happen to fit your list, then give me the name of an agent whose list you think I do fit. Anything less is bullshitting on your part.
2. While I realize that some writers do just cluster bomb agents at random with queries for books about polar bears in Antartica, I do not. I also choose to believe that I am not unusual in doing research on what agents have sold, what they claim to "like" on places like Agent Query and Publishers Marketplace, and query accordingly. Therefore, if I am sending an agent a query, it is because a book on her list bears a resemblance in genre or style to my own. To just say it "doesn't fit" means that: a) the information these agents are posting about themselves is rife with lies, b) aliens have taken over the bodies of these agents (or left them; your choice) and the current personality inhabiting the agency is different than the one who posted the information, or c) the wee college intern looking at the slurry of queries was busy changing the mix on his iPod and clicked "pat rejection" when he got to my query.
3. Please don't wish me well. It's condescending. You don't want me. That's all I need to know. You telling me that you will pretend for a nanosecond to give a shit about me or my book just rubs salt in the wound. Most of you are New Yorkers and would never apologize in person, so please don't have a Miss Manners Moment via e-mail.
posted by The Rejected Writer | 6/15/2006
6 Comments:
Brother,
Fake civility does, in fact, burn my toast. I went through the identical thought process with my first auto-reply rejection.
But what's the alternative?
The alternative is no response at all.
They aren't going to critique our queries. If they did, we'd just bitch about their critique.
The most obvious alternative is, when insincerity beckons, to follow the advice of Peter Rabbit's mother (paraphrased):
"If you can't say something you actually mean, keep your damn mouth shut!"
I share your dislike of insincere praise. If the form letter contains no information about the quality or otherwise of the writing or the suitability or otherwise of the query, why can't it simply say "Dear Author, We do not wish to represent your book."
It seems to me that the form letter system does neither the writer nor the agent any service, because it makes no attempt to differentiate between those who are at least trying to take a professional approach and those who carpet-bomb agents at random. It's no wonder that the volume of submissions is so high when the instructions for a washing machine manual come back with a form letter saying "We have read and enjoyed your submission.....".
Just one note: from an agent's point of view, the person who pays their mortgage is the publishing company acquistions editor, not the writer. It's the publishers who write the agents cheques, not the writers. Hence the distribution of power, and it will stay that way for as long as the number of writers exceeds the number of publishing company slots.
anon, with all due respect, your last bit is incorrect. the money (cheque) may come from the publisher, but it's the author's money. any agent who does not know this will soon be in jail. the cheque is made out to the author, but contractual arrangements are made such that the agent may handle the cheque in order to be paid.
the agent is always and undeniably (from a legal standpoint) an employee of the author. any agent who says otherwise is selling something (and it's something that doesn't smell so good).
I never understood why some writers feel a lengthy personal reply is required for a simple yes or no question. A query is nothing more or less than, "Wanna see it or not?"
That said, it never fails to entertain (and, on crankier days, annoy)how many agents and pubbers who feel justified imposing two pages of query/submission rules fail to demonstrate the writing capabilities of a sixth-grader when it comes time for a reply. My personal favorite was from a New York agent. It came on XEROXED letterhead--I apparently didn't rate wasting the real deal. The letterhead didn't photocopy well and was blacked out in areas, part of the address was cut off, and the entire rejection was askew on the page. A five-year-old with one arm and astigmatism could have done a better copying job. The "form" mistakenly thought my first name was "writer," then regurgitated an entire page of generic reasons why they *may* have shredded my query.
I'd like to see is a two-page list of requirements WRITERS impose when accepting replies from agents or publishers. heh.
I do fail to see a problem with "civil" replies. This individual doesn't know you from Adam and didn't ask for you to write them in the first place. Your query probably contained equal civility to boot. So what if they treat you with the same common courtesy they'd extend a bum on the street? Beats a giant "NO" stamped in red ink across your returned query, or a personalized note stating, "your work stinks and I hope it rots in the pile of garbage it deserves."
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home