Quality of slush pile items

[MadScientistMatt]

I've sometimes heard various comments about what sort of manuscripts are submitted to publishers and how a lot of them are somewhere between unreadable and unprintable. I thought I would ask here for firsthand descriptions of how common some of the mistakes are. About what fraction of the slush pile tends to be written with poor grammar? Contain little if any story? Be about something your employer is not in the business of publishing? Any other very common problems with manuscripts?

[Jaws]

It's been a looooooong time since I've been in charge of the slush pile—over a decade now. The following story is true. Only some of the names have been changed to cover my a**, and a few of the numbers have been rounded off.

At [academic publication for lawyers], I was in charge of the slush pile. Keep in mind that every person submitting a piece for publication held, or was in the last year of study for, a doctoral degree. There were 16 slots available for publication that year. We received almost 950 submissions. Nearly 100 violated substantive guidelines printed in the front of each edition; for example, we stated explicitly that we didn't publish unsolicited book reviews, or case comments. Over 300 were not in editable English (remember, this is doctoral candidates and above). Thirty or so were too short for an academic journal of this nature, which would have been readily apparent by reading a single issue.

Thus, slightly less than half of the submissions didn't even get read, because they essentially rejected themselves. My experience in commercial publishing indicates that this was an unusually small proportion; I don't know that anyone would be willing to divulge numbers, or even keeps them, but at colleagues' imprints (my imprint was about 80% solicited works) they talked about the rule of threes:
Divide the slush pile into three. Two thirds are so objectively and obviously unsuitable for publication by this publisher that they don't even get read.
Divide the remainder of the slush pile into three. Two thirds will take themselves out of the running within ten pages for mechanically poor writing combined with poor reasoning.
Divide the tiny remainder of the slush pile into three. Two thirds will take themselves out of the running quickly because they're warmed-over rehashes of already-published material well known to any competent editor or professional in the field.
That leaves a little under 4% to get serious consideration.

[Birol]

MSM,

A friend and fellow writer recently pointed me in the direction of an anthology that she thought would work for a short story I'm currently shopping around. I read the guidelines, read what they were looking for, and decided it was worth a shot because this friend was right; it did sound like a good fit. The guidelines clearly stated that if your manuscript was between x-and-y length, to send the entire manuscript on, but if it exceeded y, query by e-mail first.

My manuscript exceeded y, so I sent a polite query. In just a few hours time, I had a response rejecting my manuscript based on the length. The rejection included the following comment: "I do appreciate your querying first, as stipulated in my Guidelines. You'd be amazed how many others don't think the rules apply to them."

To me, the fact that the editor felt the need to thank me for actually reading and following the guidelines said a lot about what she was receiving. Poor woman.

[mistri]

When I used to read a slush pile, I'd be delivered a pile of 10 - 30 partial (and a few full) manuscripts once a week or so.

I'd go through them and do a few things:

1) Was there anything I'd specifically requested, or any authors I'd read before, or that I wanted to read again, or were there any agented MSs? These would get put to the top of the want-to-find-time-to-read pile.

2) I'd take a quick flick through the cover letter/first page of each one, and pull out and reject the obvious ones that wouldn't be suitable - whether it was because the covering letter was written in crayon, because the work was a genre we didn't cover, or because the writing was that bad on the first page.

3) Then I'd be left with the rest (half maybe?), which I'd go through one by one, looking for something to spark my interest. Competent writing was not enough - most competent MSs were rejected for being dull and lifeless - I was looking for something that would make me really turn the pages. At this point I'd read as long as the book carried my interest for - whether that was the entirety of the partial (unlikely) or just a few pages in. I wanted to give the book the same chance a reader would. I rejected plots where coincidences, misunderstandings and cliches abounded, and authors who were incapable of constructing a sentence.

When I first started at the company I requested to see the full MS something like 1 in 10 times. Later on, I think it got to about one in thirty. In two years I managed to buy four authors out of the slush pile, but this was for Harlequin, who are always actively looking for new authors, so I suspect this is higher than normal.

[MadScientistMatt]

I would like to thank everyone who has responded so far.

Jaws, that's quite startling to hear of so many bad submissions at a magazine where articles are normally submitted by lawyers who are well educated and make their living with writing and interpreting rules. Quite an eye-opener.

Birol, that is quite an interesting insight. A personal thanks for paying attention to the guidelines...

Mistri, thank you for you inside account. Quite useful. Even though the book I am working on is nonfiction, I will be sure to try and keep it from becoming dull and lifeless.

These comments have been quite encouraging, actually. The statistics about how many manuscripts are recieved versus how many a publisher actually prints sound a lot less like difficult odds with some information about why so few are accepted.

[Medievalist]

You've got to read Slushkiller (http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html#40616), from Teresa Nielsen Hayden, an editor at Tor. Read all the comments too.

[Lauri B]

We have published 2 manuscripts in the past five years that have come out of the slush pile, and done quite well with them. By and large, though, what we get in the slush pile is pretty bad and often really weird.

What I find maddening is that few people spend the 30 seconds it takes to read what we publish, what we'll accept, and how we want it. I feel a kinship with the editor Birol mentions--it's great to receive something from an author who follows our (pretty mellow) rules.

We've had a lot of phone calls lately from people who want to chat with me about publishing their great book idea. Our receptionist is ready to kill, kill, kill. . .

[MadScientistMatt]

Lisa - thanks, that's quite an interesting read.

Nomad - Thank you. I have a few more questions. You mentioned publishing 2 manuscripts from the slush pile - sorry if this is a stupid question, but does the slush pile include all unsolicited manuscripts and querry letters, or just the manuscripts sent without a querry letter? Also, would you have any examples of how really weird some of the slush is that you would like to share?

[MadScientistMatt]

Wow, those comments on Slushkiller have some real stunners. Particularly the would-be erotica writer who had clearly not done any sort of research...

[Lauri B]

Lisa - thanks, that's quite an interesting read.

Nomad - Thank you. I have a few more questions. You mentioned publishing 2 manuscripts from the slush pile - sorry if this is a stupid question, but does the slush pile include all unsolicited manuscripts and querry letters, or just the manuscripts sent without a querry letter? Also, would you have any examples of how really weird some of the slush is that you would like to share?

Our slush pile consists of unsolicited manuscripts, since the queries are short and easy to read (and make decisions about) quickly. The 2 manuscripts were unsolicited, complete manuscripts that came through the mail--oh, I just remembered a third one, actually. We have a few very specific categories that we publish, and each one of these books helped establish the category. They were just too good to turn down.

For about a month this winter for some reason we had a run of unsolicited submissions from people who were counseled by their therapists to write memoirs of their terrible childhoods. I'm sure it's very therapeutic for the author, but I don't know why they were sending them in to us. I also recently received a manuscript for a picture book about the love story between a garbage can lid and (I think) an empty box, and I often get submissions from people who have written poetry about their dying pets. We don't publish picture books or memoir, or poetry for that matter. We're really a very practical publishing house.

[maestrowork]

Nomad, I have a proposal for you: "How to sell your Picture Book about garbage can love affairs, or poetry about pets in 20 days."

Instant best-seller, I think, with built-in readership.

[Lauri B]

Nomad, I have a proposal for you: "How to sell your Picture Book about garbage can love affairs, or poetry about pets in 20 days."

Instant best-seller, I think, with built-in readership.
Great idea! Now to make that pitch complete, you'll call me out of the blue and ask me over the phone if I'll publish it.

[MadScientistMatt]

Thank you for clarifying that, Nomad. Would you say a querry letter is normally the best way to pitch a nonfiction work, then?

And that definitely gives me a much better picture of some of the weird things that can land in a slush pile. I have to wonder how some of the patients expected a cover letter to go over if it mentioned something like "My therapist suggested I submit this book to you." Unless of course it went on to say, "Because he enjoyed reading it," although that still doesn't sound like a very professional thing to say.

[mommie4a]

Re: Birol's experience. I had almost the exact same experience and the editor read my shorter than the guidelines suggested work. She said thanks, but no thanks, but please submit if other work of yours meets our criteria. I find those responses to be above the call of duty and appreciate them very much.

Re: query letters about nonfiction books. I shopped a query around to one agent and one editor a couple of years ago and each one responded personally. The agent had just gone out on her own and wrote glowing comments about my query but felt that shopping the book wouldn't be worth it for her. She told me that because of the idea (advice on how to give gifts to kids) and my development of the idea, she thought I should go directly to some small to mid-size publishers (Nomad being one of them I must confess). We exchanged a couple of more emails and I thanked her profusely (not obnoxiously though, I think) for her input. How kind of her to give me that time and feedback.

The editor was less enthusiastic. I followed up her response because I thought that while she raised a good point (she thought everything I wanted to write about could be found on the web - and I thought, what can't be found on the web?), I thought maybe the problem was that I had not delineated or distinguished my idea well enough. So I emailed her back and asked her if she wouldn't mind being more specific re: what sites she finds to be as complete as what I was proposing. She bristled a bit, said that there wasn't anything really, but that when she needs advice about buying for kids, she goes to Amazon, puts in some ideas and that generates enough gift ideas for her to choose from.

Well, after that, I realized I would be seen by her as a pest, I was very lucky that she stuck with me for two or three rounds of email (I had a personal reference to her) and I thanked her profusely for her time. If I had to do it again, I don't know if I would have followed up, but again, because of the personal connection, I kind of thought at least one followup question was ok.

Due to other events in my personal and professional life, that nonfiction book's proposal is behind me on some shelves, about 80% ready to go to an agent in NYC who will read it whenever I'm ready (we've been communicated for over two years and she's been a big cheerleader of my work).

The lesson to me is that when an agent or publisher indicates that they take email queries for nonfiction book proposals, send the best query you can produce. If they take snailmail queries, do the same. But never lose sight of how big the field is and how busy they are. Be polite, be specific, be professional. And pray.

Hope this helps. Thanks for letting me share.

[DaveKuzminski]

Even though the book I am working on is nonfiction, I will be sure to try and keep it from becoming dull and lifeless.

Hmmm, you could put a car chase in it. ;)

Otherwise, I've heard that around 95% of slush disqualifies itself. It's the remaining 5% that's well written, but then has to be winnowed down to what the publisher believes is marketable at that point. Having briefly managed a publication some years back, I can attest that the slush is just as bad in the short fiction market as anywhere else. The publishable material will literally jump out at you from everything else before the end of the first page.

[MadScientistMatt]

Mommie4a, thanks for your story about the querry letters. That does help.

Dave, that's an interesting thought. :) My book is basically a how-to guide, but it's actually one I could probably fit a car chase into somewhere.

[Lauri B]

I think a query is the best way to go, but if you don't have any other writing credits (and even if you do), you need to have at least half of the book written. There's no way I'd offer an untested writer a contract without the finished product in my hands--which is why submitting is such a Catch 22: you want to write a book about a particular subject but you don't want to spend the time and energy writing it if you can't sell it. So you write a query about it and get a good response, write the requisite several chapters and submit, and often you'll learn that there's not a big-enough market, or the idea isn't really worth an entire book, or whatever the reason. So the work hasn't resulted in a sale. However (and as a writer, this is what I would tell myself), you learn a lot about a particular subject so even if there's no book in the material, you can sell it a whole lot of other ways.

Anyway, the bottom line is that yes, it's hard getting picked out of the slush pile, but one of those three books that we pulled out of the slush pile to publish is one of the best-selling books we've done. All three have led to other projects with the same authors, and great, long-lasting relationships have been developed. So keep submitting.

[Savannah907]

This has been a very beneficial thread. Thanks for the original question, and also to the individuals that contributed comments and information.
Great job, everyone! I feel like I learned a lot.

[MadScientistMatt]

Thank you, Nomad. I was planning to finish the manuscript completely before sending out any querry letters. At the very least I know a few friends who will be interested in reading the complete work. I have already done some degree of research to make sure there is a market and actually have a competing book sitting at my desk right now which I have examined to see if I can write a book that can improve on it.

[book_maven]

Never mind.

[pepperlandgirl]

When I interned at Red Hen Press (a small, non-profit publisher) last year, I found the slush pile to be the most disheartening thing ever. For starters, we shouldn't have even had a slush pile, because they did not accept unsolicited manuscripts. They never have and they never will. But we all know there are some people who can't be bothered with guidelines, so they sent them in anyway.

I think I died a little after going through the slush pile. The letters were the worst. Most of them were completely inappropriate. And sad. They made me sad for the people writing them. Spent 10-20 years on their novel (and judging from the first page of the MS, they could have used another 10-20 years). Those were the ones I remember the most. Other people sent poetry printed on papers with crazy floral designs. Really, really bad poetry. Other people sent recipes. Some people sent checks (never understood that). Of all the queries and envelopes I found exactly one that I would even, for a momen, consider passing on to the editors--if they were accepting unsolicted manuscripts.

[MadScientistMatt]

Thanks for sharing that, pepperlandgirl. It sounds kind of sad to hear about some of those submissions. But I guess it would be the worst submitters who would have failed to notice the guidelines.

[skylarburris]

I've sometimes heard various comments about what sort of manuscripts are submitted to publishers and how a lot of them are somewhere between unreadable and unprintable. I thought I would ask here for firsthand descriptions of how common some of the mistakes are. About what fraction of the slush pile tends to be written with poor grammar? Contain little if any story? Be about something your employer is not in the business of publishing? Any other very common problems with manuscripts?

For my publication, I would estimate:

Poor Grammar -- 30-40%
Little if any story -- 10% (lack of character development is a more common problem than lack of plot)
Not in the business of publishing (or exceeds length restrictions) -- 25-30%

(Yes, my numbers don't add up to 100. There's overlap!)

The most common problem I encounter, which is not listed in your question, is that the work is overly didactic / obvious with regard to the moral it is communicating.

[Torgo]

Bad grammar (by in-house standards): 80%
Bad grammar (by everyday standards): 30%
Little or no stories: 20%
Unoriginal stories: 60%
Original but bad stories: 10%
Good, original stories, but badly written: 9%
Inappropriate submissions: 5%
Insane people: 5%
Depressing submissions: 75%
Amusing submissions: 10%
Submissions we might like to take further: 1%
Of that 1%, submissions that are published: 3%

[MadScientistMatt]

Thanks for the new replies. Torgo, it sounds like you are an editor somewhere, but I seem to have missed your introduction. Would you mind telling us more about yourself?

[Julie Worth]

Bad grammar (by in-house standards): 80%
Bad grammar (by everyday standards): 30%
Little or no stories: 20%
Unoriginal stories: 60%
Original but bad stories: 10%
Good, original stories, but badly written: 9%
Inappropriate submissions: 5%
Insane people: 5%
Depressing submissions: 75%
Amusing submissions: 10%
Submissions we might like to take further: 1%
Of that 1%, submissions that are published: 3%

This is helpful and amusing. I feel a certain affinity for the 5% insane group—considering how I quit a highly paid job to do this.

Anyway, a question as to formatting. One day I decided, for no particularly good reason, to submit paperbacks rather than manuscripts. So far I’ve had one rejection—from an editor at Penguin. He didn’t mention any problem with the format, so I thought I was on to something, rationalizing that some editors would actually prefer a nice little paperback for evaluation, since it’s so portable (and easy to dispose of). But now it occurs to me: I am in that 5% insane group, aren’t I?

[Torgo]

Sorry, I didn't introduce myself. I edit children's books for a living, and have done for some years now, but would rather not go into any more detail.

[Torgo]

Format is only a problem if you've made the book difficult to read. You should follow the submission guidelines if they are given, but otherwise it's mostly common sense. I suggest single-sided, double-spaced though, it does make things easier. If you submit an actual book, that should be fine. You sound 1000% saner than the average unsolicited to me.

[maestrowork]

What is "depressing submission" I wonder...

[Julie Worth]

Submissions we might like to take further: 1%
Of that 1%, submissions that are published: 3%

It can’t be that bad, can it? I’m guessing, but let’s say this publisher gets 50 manuscripts a day, every day, five days a week, for fifty weeks. Which is 12,500 over the course of a year. One percent of that is 125, and three percent of that one percent is less than 4 books. But, if this is one of the bigger publishers, I’ll bet they’re putting out hundreds of children’s books. Hundreds and hundreds.

[Jaws]

It can’t be that bad, can it? I’m guessing, but let’s say this publisher gets 50 manuscripts a day, every day, five days a week, for fifty weeks. Which is 12,500 over the course of a year. One percent of that is 125, and three percent of that one percent is less than 4 books. But, if this is one of the bigger publishers, I’ll bet they’re putting out hundreds of children’s books. Hundreds and hundreds.
But not "hundreds and hundreds" from the slush pile, and in any event you're probably underestimating the number of children's book manuscripts that come over the transom every day.

The publisher I worked at in the late 1990s was a specialty nonfiction publisher, but I bet the numbers aren't that far off. The annual list was approximately 125 titles at that time. On average, about 25 had not been specifically commissioned by the publisher, and over half of those were academic works that weren't really "over the transom."

[mistri]

When I worked at M&B we only got 10 - 30 manuscripts a day, most days. However, we only published between (as far as I remember) 0 - 12 new authors a year (usually towards the lower amount), as most of our books came from already contracted authors. And this is a publisher that's well known for looking at unagented stuff and searching for new authors.


(Harlequin as a whole, of course, may take on more than 12 new authors a year, but I'm just talking about the UK editorial operation).

[maestrowork]

It can’t be that bad, can it? I’m guessing, but let’s say this publisher gets 50 manuscripts a day, every day, five days a week, for fifty weeks. Which is 12,500 over the course of a year. One percent of that is 125, and three percent of that one percent is less than 4 books. But, if this is one of the bigger publishers, I’ll bet they’re putting out hundreds of children’s books. Hundreds and hundreds.

They get more than 50 ms. a day. And don't forget, these are "new authors." You're not counting the known authors and the ones who are already under contracts...

[Torgo]

My numbers don't quite stack up, actually - I estimate we publish one thing out of the slushpile every two to three years. Hundreds and hundreds of books, yes, but as Maestrowork says, the vast majority are by established authors.

On the other hand, everything gets read - and if something is worth publishing, it's worth publishing.

[Julie Worth]

I estimate we publish one thing out of the slushpile every two to three years.

My God. <opens veins> There is no hope.

[soloset]

My God. <opens veins> There is no hope.

ACK! Don't feel like that, I'm sure there is hope. <waits for it> Uh, guys? A little hope here?

From what I've read, "slush pile" and "query letter pile " are two different animals. Right? Right?

[chippewapublishing]

I've sometimes heard various comments about what sort of manuscripts are submitted to publishers and how a lot of them are somewhere between unreadable and unprintable. I thought I would ask here for firsthand descriptions of how common some of the mistakes are. About what fraction of the slush pile tends to be written with poor grammar? Contain little if any story? Be about something your employer is not in the business of publishing? Any other very common problems with manuscripts?

That is a great question! Many manuscripts we receive barely even make it to the review process because the author does not follow the submission guidelines. This might count for as many as 40%. Not following the guidelines includes incorrect formatting, incorrect length, etc.

Next is the story itself. In most cases, a story that has an exciting plot has decent grammar. We will look at the story line first and if the characters are strong and the plot is exciting, then we look at the grammar. A story that does not move the submissions team in the first few paragraphs will not make the cut. This accounts for about 20% of the stories.

Next is the grammar. At first we thought we could help writers become better by helping them write better. We quickly ran out of time and we no longer approve stories where we would need to be the teacher. These denials are about 20%.

The bulk of the stories are denied because either the author did not follow directions or the story just isn't good enough.

Do you want to get accepted? Move me! Make me laugh, make me cry. Frighten me or keep me on my toes. Make me run into the bedroom to find my lover. If the story doesn't do any of these things, it doesn't have a chance. :-)

We also tell you why the story is not accepted. Authors will not get a "not for our audience" letter unless it is really not for our audience.

Rebecca
Chippewa Publishing
http://www.chippewapublishing.com

[Liam Jackson]

ACK! Don't feel like that, I'm sure there is hope. <waits for it> Uh, guys? A little hope here?

<Opens a vein>

Not on my watch, you don't! :box:

There IS hope for new authors. There's a lot of invaluable advice buried within these tales of woe. However, too many are focusing on the bad news.

It's akin to looking at a big red traffic sign for the very first time. All we see are those huge letters, "S-T-O-P" and we forget the sign is only there to provide direction. From the moment we first lay eyes on that evil red bastid, it's no longer a traffic sign. It's a "STOP" sign.

Same principle applies to the messages on this thread. Most of the posters in this thread who point out low success rates for first time authors also point out WHY the failure rate is so high. They're not telling anyone to stop or give up. They're providing direction. The route isn't easy, folks. That's true of nearly all worthwhile pursuits.

Take what is useful, lose the rest. Just don't S-T-O-P.

[Torgo]

Liam Jackson is absolutely right. Remember, you're competing against a lot of really bad manuscripts. A good manuscript is a lovely thing to find in the slushpile.

[Lauri B]

Of course there is hope. Of all of the authors on our list, I think only 3 had been previously published (in the book trade and not self published). I never hold against someone the fact that they might not have had a book published before submitting to me, although I DO want authors who have been published somewhere (magazine, newspaper, trade journal, whatever), and/or are experts in their field, and most importantly, have a GREAT manuscript. Two of our most successful books came from the slush pile. So don't give up hope, and don't submit rotten stuff. Two maxims to live by.

[Paolo]

You've got to read Slushkiller (http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html#40616), from Teresa Nielsen Hayden, an editor at Tor. Read all the comments too.

My first post on this forum attempted to figure out why I haven't recieved my SASE response note from TOR. After seeing a picture of a TOR slush pile (http://www.sfrevu.com/ISSUES/2002/0208/Event%20-%20Tor/20020416%20Tor-NYC%20053.jpg) , I understand why.

My submission is below that envelope on the right below that other envelope on the left behind that other package....

[Fractured_Chaos]

I know this is a tough industry to break into, and the numbers just prove that.

But you know, I find those numbers very comforting.

I have a good grasp of the English language. I'm intelligent enough to follow the guidelines, I can tell a pretty good story, and I've learned -alot- from the rest of the members here.

So, even with those odds, I am feeling enough confidence to know I can at least get my foot in the door, so to speak. :)

[Paolo]

I know this is a tough industry to break into, and the numbers just prove that.

But you know, I find those numbers very comforting.

I have a good grasp of the English language. I'm intelligent enough to follow the guidelines, I can tell a pretty good story, and I've learned -alot- from the rest of the members here.

So, even with those odds, I am feeling enough confidence to know I can at least get my foot in the door, so to speak. :)

I agree with your sentiment for different reasons. I've done the math based on reams of anecdotal evidence and come to the conclusion that the numbers don't really matter. How you feel about the numbers is a completely arbitrary decision. The factors involved are so subjective, and include so many divergent sets of eyeballs - from armor clad editors to tender little interns - that solid good attitudes like yours are all that matter. I want a 'tude like that too! That's a wordy way to say "if you don't mind, It don't matter".

The following is how I'm measuring progress. If you've submitted your manuscript, you're far ahead of the game. Most people don't even do that. Submitting is the only way to know for sure and it takes a carefully prepared ego to do so productively. Sure, it's personal, but only to me. To everyone else, it's words on the paper ( to paraphrase Teresa Neilsen Hayden). I'll know it's working when the manuscripts go out and the letters come back.

Ok, I enjoyed your post. Hope to see more.

[Torgo]

Everything Teresa Nielsen Hayden says is excellent advice. Nobody needs to worry about the quality of the slush-pile - if you have written a good book, you're even further ahead of the game.

[aboyd]

My God. <opens veins> There is no hope.I was going to come in here and post my own slushpile stories, presuming it would be a real eye-opener to writers. However, having read the previous stories, I guess my story is more here for reassurance.

I used to publish a poetry magazine (and a magazine for Webmasters, but let's not talk about that). The poetry magazine used to get about 250 submissions (800-900 poems) per issue. In an issue, I'd publish maybe 20 poems from 10-12 poets. That may seem bad, but it's about 4%, which appears to be lots better than what I've read in this thread so far.

I got almost everything I published from the slushpile, and the slushpile was mostly generated from my listing in Poet's Market. I think the breakdown for me was about like this:

10% heinous errors -- sending me something supposedly unpublished but which I had seen in print elsewhere, sending me novels, etc.

50% bad bad bad bad. These poets couldn't spell, couldn't write, were attracted to cliche like magnets to metal, and/or were writing poetry for therapy, not for publication (read: their poems mattered to themselves, but would garner a collective "meh" from the rest of the world).

30% had potential, but poor execution. They had a kernel of truth, a seed of originality that made me pay attention. But then it was all squandered by a lackluster closing, or a long, boring ramble in the middle, or some other foolish thing. Maybe a quarter of these I would have published if they could have edited the thing down to only the best parts. But poets are persnickety, and even hinting that they should revise something "true to their heart" was blasphemous. So I usually just rejected this batch.

6% were competent, but really not for me. Back when I was publishing the magazine, I was a young Christian man with the standard plethora of repressions: no sex, no drugs, no paganism, no "shaking your fist at the sky." At one point, I got an exceptional story about a couple having wild sex in their own vomit. It was hilarious, over-the-top, and disgusting. I still remember it to this day. At the time, it was shocking and scandalous, and I wanted no part of it. I'm still not sure I'd run it, but I do know that it was extremely well-written, and beyond funny. Stuff like this got the "I'm sure this will get published someday, but not by me" response.

4% were good enough to publish, sometimes with trivial edits.

I have 2 side-notes. First, there really are blacklists. Some of the people in that first 10% (the heinous ones) would land on mine. Someone who repeatedly sent stuff completely at odds with my guidelines would eventually get flagged as a waste of time. I kept a database and did bother to check it. So at my most busy point, I had a list of a couple dozen poets who I wouldn't even look at -- their works went right back, unread. I did trade blacklists with 1 editor, once. It didn't expand my own blacklist much, as she and I had blacklisted essentially the same people.

The second thing of note is that sometimes people would remove themselves from the last 4% (the ones I wanted to publish). Usually over edits. I would reply to the submission with a comment such as, "I'll happily publish 'great poem number 4' if you will add a comma after line 5." And they would write back full of vitriol, "how dare you even speak such a thing!?!" So, uh, OK, not going to publish that, then.

Does this make editors seem lame and terrible? I don't mean it to. I really just wanted to publish good poetry, and everything I did was in pursuit of that. I was very willing to work with writers who seemed competent and courteous. In fact, I treasured them, as they were more rare than I expected.

-Tony

[arrowqueen]

I really like 'insane submissions,'

I think that's the one to aim for.

[jamiehall]

This is a really informative thread. Could it be made a sticky?

[Memnon624]

I read slush for my old agent a couple years back, filling in until she could get someone hired and trained. In the 9 months I spent as her 'slush monkey', I found exactly one manuscript out of a good 1000 queries and partials that I felt comfortable passing along to her. It was extremely depressing.

The bulk of the submissions fell into two groups: those who could write but couldn't tell a story, and those who could tell a story but couldn't write (at least not in such a way as to be easily fixed without a total page-one rewrite). Then, there were the wholly inappropriate queries: some were full of typos and basic grammar errors, others tried to play coy with what the book was about; a few were bald-faced efforts to get me to visit their websites, as they were too busy to bother with this query letter business. One rambled on for 6 pages. Another thought it would be beneficial to include nude photos of herself (along with a plea to write her book for her and we'd split the profits). The absolute worst came from a lawyer (no offense to lawyers out there) who thought finding an agent was like hiring a paralegal -- he wanted the agent's phone number so he could call and explain to her how she should market his brilliant, Grisham-esque thriller . . . and to discuss her salary requirements.

I discovered Sturgeon's Law applied to slush piles more than anything: 99% of everything is sh*t. But, if you can write AND tell a good story, can follow basic directions, and know how to do simple research, then you're not competing against the 99% . . . your competition is the 1%, and your odds just increased ;)

Scott

[Jamesaritchie]

The one thing I've found that does not apply to slush is the 1% rule. You read everywhere than about 1% of novels are publishable. From my experience, this is nowhere close to the truth.

This may or may not be a good rule overall, it's impossible to say, but at the publishers I've read slush for, the number of publishable novels that come through slush is 1 in 2,200.

It does, of course, depend on genre. The larger the genre, the more novels it must buy, good, bad, or indifferent. But overall, it's 1 in 2,200 through the slush.

I don't think anyone who hasn't read slush can begin to know how bad most of it really is. Bad grammar is prevalent, but bad grammar is usually just symptomatic of bad everything. Bad story, bad characterization, bad pace, bad flow, unconcealed polemics, thinly disguised memoirs, sentences, paragraphs, and sometimes whole chapters that make no sense at all, etc. Most of the novels in the average slush pile would still be horrible, even if the grammar and punctuation met every rule known to Strunk & White, Fowler, or any other grammarian you can name. Perfect grammar does nothing to help bad novels.

It's sad. Most, probably all, of these writers believe they written a good, publishable novel. Their friends have usually told them they have. Their critique groups have usually told them all is well. Their beta readers have said they really like the novel. Often, hired editors have given the green light, and the cover letters say so. So they believe. They wait with great anticipation, with fear, with high hopes, with fantasies of success playing out in their heads.

And you can't even read the thing. And when you can't read it, you have to send a rejection slip that dashes hopes and dreams and fantasies. Then you have to go read a bunch more slush that's just like what you rejected.

[badducky]

I heard a story about a guy who sent his high fantasy tolkein rip-off in an actual hand-carved trunk with costume jewels and gold coins inside and on paper with rainbows on it and sparklies.

The editor had to pass that one around.

Not because it was a good query, but because it was legendarily bad. It was so bad, and the presentation so elaborate, that it entered a new dimension of slush.

Is it true? Is it only a myth? This I do not know. Alas, I fear that it is probably true.

[dantem42]

My aunt used to be "first reader" at publisher The Mystery Guild, which meant she was the final filter before things went to the Editor in Chief. She had a bunch of readers under her who handled the monster slush pile there (at that time, they allowed unagented submissions). She basically had these people take the best five percent of the slush pile and give them to her, which worked out to something like twenty or thirty manuscripts per month. Of these, she would probably pass on six or seven to the Editor in Chief.

It sounds daunting, but my aunt was my biggest mentor while I was writing my suspense novel, which my agent managed to sell after a year's work. What she told me is that if you're good, you're not competing against most of what's there. Ninety-five percent of what's sent out by wannabe authors isn't worth a ream of blank paper. You're really only competing against the minuscule number of manuscripts that are worth publishing.

The key is knowing whether you're that good or just self-delusional. Luckily, my aunt would have told me in no uncertain terms if she thought I was writing dreck. She even passed it to her friend, the former Editor in Chief, to make sure she wasn't wearing blinders just because I'm her favorite nephew.

She also pointed out that many of their best first-time authors came through the slush pile, including well-known mystery/suspense writers Faye Kellerman and Marilyn Wallace.

[Jamesaritchie]

I heard a story about a guy who sent his high fantasy tolkein rip-off in an actual hand-carved trunk with costume jewels and gold coins inside and on paper with rainbows on it and sparklies.

The editor had to pass that one around.

Not because it was a good query, but because it was legendarily bad. It was so bad, and the presentation so elaborate, that it entered a new dimension of slush.

Is it true? Is it only a myth? This I do not know. Alas, I fear that it is probably true.

Never heard that one. I have received queries and manuscripts tied in fancy bows, on pink paper, etc.

[Will Lavender]

I heard a story about a guy who sent his high fantasy tolkein rip-off in an actual hand-carved trunk with costume jewels and gold coins inside and on paper with rainbows on it and sparklies.

The editor had to pass that one around.

Not because it was a good query, but because it was legendarily bad. It was so bad, and the presentation so elaborate, that it entered a new dimension of slush.

Is it true? Is it only a myth? This I do not know. Alas, I fear that it is probably true.

I knew I was going too far with the damn gold coins...

[jamiehall]

You've got to read Slushkiller (http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html#40616), from Teresa Nielsen Hayden, an editor at Tor. Read all the comments too.

There's also Marvin the Misunderstood Manuscript (http://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com/2004_02_01_scrivenerserror_archive.html#1075737301 99787039), written in reply to Slushkiller.

[DamaNegra]

http://bp1.blogger.com/_SFx7gWX9RoU/RhZMt4si-bI/AAAAAAAAADA/dkbRgtJ3XKM/s1600/DemotivatorApr07.jpg

I just found this funny and had to share :D

ETA: got it from 101 Reasons to Stop Writing.

[Chicken Warrior]

Wow, very interesting and somewhat discouraging (but probably helpful) thread. What constitutes an 'original but bad' story?

[dantem42]

Wow, very interesting and somewhat discouraging (but probably helpful) thread. What constitutes an 'original but bad' story?

Generally means the underlying premise is solid and original -- the basic elements of what happens in the novel -- but some other problem cropped up as a deal killer. Bad writing, bad characterization, bad plot transitions, on and on. The difference between concept and execution. I've run into things like that in doing a number of critiques.

[Jamesaritchie]

The nice thing about the mass of horrible writing in slush piles is that it makes good, original writing much easier to find. And looking at it this way puts a positive spin on things. Yes, it's almost all bad, but if yours is good, it will stand out.

[Bufty]

To those of you who have read slush piles -do you pick the top one every day or just close your eyes, reach out, pray and grab whichever manuscript your fingers touch?

[Jamesaritchie]

To those of you who have read slush piles -do you pick the top one every day or just close your eyes, reach out, pray and grab whichever manuscript your fingers touch?

I usually take them off the top, but I confess that I will sometimes reach for one that looks different. Maybe a white envelope in a pile of manila ones. Or one that looks neater, more professional.

[Deirdre]

To those of you who have read slush piles -do you pick the top one every day or just close your eyes, reach out, pray and grab whichever manuscript your fingers touch?

Since I'm working electronic submissions, I work from oldest first.

[Torgo]

Wow, very interesting and somewhat discouraging (but probably helpful) thread. What constitutes an 'original but bad' story?

Suppose you have an idea for a 10-book series of mysteries set in the world of bathroom furniture supply. It's quite probable that nobody else out there has something quite like your magnum opus SINK TRAP (aka: U-BEND, I BREAK). There's a reason for that.

[drachin8]

I was thinking "original but bad" was more along the lines of "an interesting new take on something with great potential but horrible execution".


:)

-Michelle

[Julie Worth]

...I confess that I will sometimes reach for one that looks different. Maybe a white envelope in a pile of manila ones.

No more manila for me! I'm going out and buying big white envelopes. The purest white. I'm going to put Vatican stamps on them.

[scarletpeaches]

Vatican stamps, eh? Hmm...

[Torgo]

I was thinking "original but bad" was more along the lines of "an interesting new take on something with great potential but horrible execution".


:)

-Michelle

That too.

[dobiwon]

What I find gratifying is the number of replies here from readers, editors, and publishers. The fact that all of you go into such detail and offer encouragement can only serve to motivate those of us who are still among the 'trying'. Thanks to you all!

[Jamesaritchie]

No more manila for me! I'm going out and buying big white envelopes. The purest white. I'm going to put Vatican stamps on them.


The ones with the zig-zag green stripe are even more impressive. That stripe means "First Class," and just looks cool.

As for stamps, if you really want to get my attention, stick something like an 1867 Lincoln on there. Trust me, I'll give your submission loving care.

[lkp]

Well, you'll give my envelope loving care...

[Julie Worth]

As for stamps, if you really want to get my attention, stick something like an 1867 Lincoln on there. Trust me, I'll give your submission loving care.

I was thinking of doing that for the SASE--an inverted Jenny, maybe.

[arkady]

It sounds daunting, but my aunt was my biggest mentor while I was writing my suspense novel, which my agent managed to sell after a year's work. What she told me is that if you're good, you're not competing against most of what's there. Ninety-five percent of what's sent out by wannabe authors isn't worth a ream of blank paper. You're really only competing against the minuscule number of manuscripts that are worth publishing.

The key is knowing whether you're that good or just self-delusional.

Ah, but there's the rub. In the absence of the critical eye of your aunt, how can the rest of us -- having passed our manuscripts through the usual approval process of crit groups, beta readers, SYW and the like -- know into which category we fall? Does that latest form rejection mean "close, but not quite" or does it mean "you couldn't even write a newspaper headline?" Or something in between?

[waylander]

If you are getting some personal comments from agents or editors then that's a clue