Queries, e or snail?

As others have said before, consult the agency first. Most agents publish somewhere their preference. Always follow that, regardless of how you would prefer to handle it.

No means no. Whether it comes by post or by email, it isn't easier or harder to read "no."

Email can be faster. I had a query rejected within an hour of sending it. However, many of my e-queries, even two years later, have gone unanswered. I don't know if the response rate is higher via snail mail, but I suspect it is; it is just obviously not as fast.

I was picked up via email...

Personally, I prefer sending snail mail...probably because I love snail mail in the first place, but I say check to see if the agent even gives you the option of e-mail. Some agents don't accept e-mail queries. On the other hand, some don't accept snail mail. Kristin Nelson, for example only accepts e-mail queries. Check with what the agent 1) accepts 2) prefers, and go with that. If they say they are happy to accept either or, go with your own personal preference.

In addition, a lot of agents will send a rejection letter by snail mail but they won't bother to reply at all via e-mail.

Aways follow the individual agent/publisher's submission guidelines.

MM, I haven't read your query so I can't comment on its effectiveness. But if you're not getting any bites after a reasonable time passage, you might want to have the forum take a look at your query. There's always room for improving focus and clarity.

I also ran across a software program that let's you know if you email was opened. If nothing else, at least it would let you know the message is getting through. Here's the link: http://www.msgtag.com/home/ Good luck.
Joe

I prefer email for one specific reason -- more than a few times each year, my snail mail is delivered to another's box. Not everyone who receives misplaced mail takes it to the rightful recipient.

Along the same lines, do you think queries that include a synopsis and sample pages get a more positive response than just sending a query letter?

When an agent or editor requests a query letter it's unusual for them to simultaneously request a synopsis and sample pages. So, unless asked for I don't think the inclusion on any non-requested items elicits a more positive response. If anything it could be disadvantagious.

I sent the first 5 pages of LOTTERY pasted at the bottom of my email- the only synopsis was my 250 word hook in the query letter.
I will tell you that the agents I have talked with face to face are DESPERATE to find the next big thing and DO NOT just delete a query email unread. I will also say that they can tell within the first three sentences whether a novel is for them or not. It takes seconds.
I know that it's seductive to think it's the method you are using in your query that is giving you these rejections, but it may be your writing or your premise- Before LOTTERY I racked up nearly a hundred rejections over two projects - While I got a few requests for partials and fulls, it was still very demoralizing.
In retrospect now I realize what was wrong with my query but more importantly what was wrong with my premise AND my early novels.
It doesn't matter how long you've been at this game but there IS at some point a learning curve. Some people quit before that is achieved.

Follow agency /publisher directions.

If they accept both, keep in mind neither will give you an "edge" or is "better."

One is just faster than the other, is all.

The best edge is writing well to the point of blowing their socks off.

But send SOMETHING in.

Patricia,
Could you elaborate more on what you finally understood about your query? Do you include your platform on the same page as your synopsis or do you include a cover letter? Why do you think this book sold whereas the others didn't?

Any insight is quite helpful. I just got a rejection to a query based on my 140k word count. I write romantic historical adventure and I'm in the process of another edit. Do you think I should leave my word count out of the query or say that the word count is in editorial transition (something to that effect<g>).
Cinzia

ORION said:

It doesn't matter how long you've been at this game but there IS at some point a learning curve.

Click to expand...

In my case, it's been a learning precipice.

caw

MelancholyMan said:

That is an interesting statement and no doubt descriptive of the mind set, but it also a non sequitor.

If they are actually looking for the 'next big thing,' then they can't know whether or not it is 'for them' in three sentences.

Click to expand...

Maybe not in three sentences, but in three pages. Have you read Noah Lukeman's The First Five Pages? I think it might be worth a look for you.

I hate to take this stance because it sounds as if I'm sticking up for agents and the way they handle queries and such. Let me assure that's not the case, and that I resent the way most agents do business (there are always a few exceptions). In fact, although my thoughts are fleeting, I believe there has to be a better way, albeit more costly and/or time consuming. But, as they say, "it is what it is," and until we or someone else implements a better, more efficient system what choice do we have but to live by what exists.

With no sympathy intended, let's imagine we are agents and that each and every day we have a voluminous number of important things to follow up on and tend to, one of which is to read the 50 or so queries, proposals, partials, fulls, and other solicited and unsolicited items we receive by post or email. Where does the time come to read more than a few sentences, maybe the first paragraph, of each before we reach a tentative decision. If the first few sentences don't grab us and make us want to read on, why would we, and if we did, how would we have the time to do so and accomplish everything else that's on our plate? So, it is any surprise that so much of a writer's attention should be concentrated on the first few sentences and the first paragraph, especially when the writer is unknown or a first-timer?

What's the solution? I don't know of any, but wish I did.

I didn't send out a single snail-mail query. I figured an agency that's email-friendly for queries will be email-friendly for most things, and I definitely like being able to email my agent and know I'll get a quick response.

MelancholyMan said:

If they are actually looking for the 'next big thing,' then they can't know whether or not it is 'for them' in three sentences.

Click to expand...

Actually, yes they can. It's no exagerration that the majority of submissions (I've read it's somewhere around 90%) are just plain badly written. An agent can tell if the first three sentences are conjumbled run-ons with dark-purple prose. Rejection. Or if they can't say within a single POV or past/present narration. Rejection. Or there is something right away that an agent has clearly said in their guidelines they don't rep (graphic violence, for example). Rejection.

I honestly don't think all agents are looking for the "next big thing." I think most of them are looking for the next "book they can sell." No one can predict what will be a big thing, or what book readers will suddenly fall all over themselves to read.

Like any profession, they probably get quickly jaded and the whole problem gets reduced simply to what aligns with their sensibilities.

Click to expand...

Saying they get jaded seems a little unfair. I've heard dozens of agents say they do what they do because they love books. If they'd become jaded and started hating their job, they'd switch careers. It's happened.

Agents with an established list don't need to go sifting through their slush pile looking for new talent. But if they stumble across one in that pile, it's because the author took the time to make him/herself stand out. As writers, we need to get their attention by presenting a polished, well-written book and a shiny, interesting query.

As far as "what aligns to their sensibilities," why is that a problem? Agents are free to rep books they like and that speak to them, just as we are free to write books we like and speak to us. An agent who reps a book simply because they think it will sell and not because they love it isn't going to be very effective.

It starts to sound cliche after a while, but agenting is subjective. There's no way around that.

Whenever I fall into the trap of whining about agents not paying proper attention to submissions, I think back to my days of being an editor at my college lit mag. Even when dealing with one page poems and 5-10 page short stories, it was a very small perecntage of submissions that was actually worth reading to the end.

A non sequitur (note spelling) is a sentence that is unconnected to a previous thought. Like: I love ice cream when it's homemade, so creamy and sweet. My dog likes to run in the park.

I wonder, do you mean oxymoron, or perhaps contradiction? I think this clarification is important for your point.

When it comes to email or snail mail, I do whichever the agent or publisher prefers. Although things are changing, it's still overwhelmingly snail mail. I think some agents and publishers try to weed out the writers who are less serious and just query on a whim by insisting on snail mail. I think they figure that only serious writers will go to the trouble and expense of printing 50 pages, a query letter, and a synopsis, putting it in an envelope with an SASE and paying to send it.