take two

[colealpaugh]

"If the agent requested a partial or full but ultimately passed, definitely mention this to them when you query for your new project.

But whatever you do, wait three to six months after receiving a rejection from an agent before querying them with a new project." -- from Nathan Bransford's blog

If this came from anywhere else, I'd say it was crazy. Why point out how they'd already R'd your writing? If Nathan says it, then it is so...but I know I'm going to have a hard time when/if it's my turn to start doing this.

Thoughts?

[socact]

Hmm, I'm going to ignore this advice. Is that wrong?

[KTC]

Because if the agent requested the full or partial...they saw something promising in your query. If they requested a full or partial, they liked something about your query enough to request. If you mention that in your next query they'll think, 'hmmm. I remember that query. Sounded like a good story. It didn't quite work for me, but they made an impact on me. Ultimately, it wasn't for me...but I definitely saw something in their writing. Maybe I should request a full on this one.'

The advice seems right to me.

[colealpaugh]

Because if the agent requested the full or partial...they saw something promising in your query. If they requested a full or partial, they liked something about your query enough to request. If you mention that in your next query they'll think, 'hmmm. I remember that query. Sounded like a good story. It didn't quite work for me, but they made an impact on me. Ultimately, it wasn't for me...but I definitely saw something in their writing. Maybe I should request a full on this one.'

The advice seems right to me.

Yeah, I get it...but I keep coming back to all the agents who say they can tell within the first few pages (if not the first few paragraphs) whether or not a writer has it.

It seems like you'd be adding a negative to your query, and not a positive.

If an agent reads a full and was sold on the writing, but the story didn't grab them, why wouldn't they be asking "Got anything else?" at that point?

I want to be convinced because of the source, ya know?

[blueobsidian]

Yeah, I get it...but I keep coming back to all the agents who say they can tell within the first few pages (if not the first few paragraphs) whether or not a writer has it.


But if they requested more information from you then they probably DID see something in you. They don't request fulls or partials from writers who can't put together a query. Just because they didn't believe they could sell that particular novel (or they thought the writer's talent wasn't ready, or whatever the reason) doesn't mean that they don't believe the writer has it.

[Izz]

What Kevin and blue said.

[colealpaugh]

But if they requested more information from you then they probably DID see something in you. They don't request fulls or partials from writers who can't put together a query. Just because they didn't believe they could sell that particular novel (or they thought the writer's talent wasn't ready, or whatever the reason) doesn't mean that they don't believe the writer has it.

I guess I've looked at the typical query letter as a selling point for an idea much more than a selling point for quality of writing. Believe me, I wish my first MS lived up to the query.


Ugggh, I guess this also means another one of those prayer cards is in my future.

[socact]

I still struggle with this advice. I think it would depend on what the agent had said to me about my full or partial ms - if he/she liked the writing but not the story, then I would mention it. If he/she liked the story but hated the writing, then I'd skip any mention of the previous ms and hope I'd improved my craft the second time around.

I also don't take everything some of these agents say as gospel - every agent, like every writer, is different. I've read a lot of Nathan's posts, and while I think he offers tremendously helpful advice, there are a few things on there that I found myself second-guessing. Now, if I were querying him, of course I would utilize every single piece of advice he mentioned, to the letter.

Does this make sense? I think this is a good question, OP, and I'm glad you brought it up.

[myrmidon]

I queried a great agent back in 2007 with an old draft of my book (back when I thought it was finished), he requested a partial within a week. He got back to me within a month or so with a pass, but through a conversation that kind of naturally occurred via email he nicely left the door open for future work. Since then I did a MAJOR rewrite of the work and when I finished I emailed him, reminded him about the project (that he'd looked at it and rejected it in 2007, but that I'd recently completed a major rewrite, in part based on some of his feedback to me) and asked him if he'd be interested in seeing it again.

He got back to me in about four days with a nice email that included the words "I'd be happy to take a look at this again." He has the full now.

So, if an agent has already liked or been interested in your work - enough to look at a full or partial, I say absolutely go back to them and see if they're open now. Especially if you had any kind of civilized dialogue about the work after the rejection.

The amazing upside in my situation, though I know it might not be everyone's, is that for this particular agent I didn't have to stress out about a query letter either - I just emailed him in a very professional way, briefly brought him up to date and asked if he was interested...so much easier than the blind query. I did end up pasting my revised book summary at the bottom, so he could refresh his memory about the material if necessary.

With everything I've sent out, I kind of just assume "rejection", but it's the easiest full I've ever gotten into someone's hands. And that is saying something. :)

[qwerty]

If it's a standard form rejection, I'd leave it buried and not draw attention to it.

If it's a personalized rejection with comments about liking your writing style or whatever, but the story didn't grab, it's maybe worth mentioning that on the lines of: I note you liked (whatever) about my previous submission and I hope this one will be of interest.

Having said that, I did have a personal email about a partial saying the writing was impressive but the story not meaty enough. Some months later I subbed what I thought was a more meaty novel and the agency took it on. But I didn't mention the fact that they'd rejected an earlier novel. So, I guess this one stood on its own without a reminder that a previous one didn't.

[Danthia]

I'd say that's how Nathan feels, and if he rejected a partial or full and you re-query him, tell him about it. If you're uncomfortable doing that with another agent, don't do it. Everyone has their own views and preferences.

[ChaosTitan]

A lot of Nathan's advice is solid, and I'm sure it's culled from his own preferences and experiences as an agent. If someone doesn't feel comfortable telling an agent of a past rejection, don't do it. I can't say I've ever done it, but it obviously works for some folks.


Why point out how they'd already R'd your writing?


Thing is, you don't know they R'ed your writing. Not unless you got feedback with the R that tells you why they rejected the manuscript. There are a host of reasons one might reject a story that has nothing to do with your writing ability.

[unicornjam]

If Nathan says it, then it is so...but I know I'm going to have a hard time when/if it's my turn to start doing this.

Thoughts?



I didn't know Nathan Bransford's words were gospel! I think that if you're re-querying him in particular, do it. But if you don't like the general idea of his advice, don't do it for other agents. I'm sure they have their own preferences.

[job]

"If the agent requested a partial or full but ultimately passed, definitely mention this to them when you query for your new project.


Couple of thoughts on this.

a) Agents pick up writers they've previously rejected all the time.

They may like the new project better.
They may have liked the last ms but thought it was unmarketable. This one, they know how to sell.
They might now have an open spot in their list.
The author may have learned to write better.

So an agent isn't necessarily going to toss a new query because they've seen your work before.


b) If the writing or the author's name is at all memorable,
(and let us hope the writing is memorable,)
the agent may know they've seen it before.

If the writer doesn't mention a former rejection, this comes across as disingenuous.

c) With luck, writer and agent will work together for many years. You begin this sort of relationship with as much openess and frankness as possible.

[colealpaugh]

I didn't know Nathan Bransford's words were gospel! I think that if you're re-querying him in particular, do it. But if you don't like the general idea of his advice, don't do it for other agents. I'm sure they have their own preferences.

Nah, he R'd me in 50 seconds.

I started this thread because the advice sounded off. But, just like a recent discussion in another thread, I'm just some dude writing all day long in a little house in the woods. Sometimes you go with your gut, and sometimes you recognize what you don't know. And of all the agents out there, Nathan Bransford seems to have a grasp on the minutia more than most.

If other agents are saying don't mention past R's on fulls and partials, then I'd take that into consideration. I jut haven't read that advice, yet.

[colealpaugh]

If the writer doesn't mention a former rejection, this comes across as disingenuous.



Yikes.

[Namatu]

If the writer doesn't mention a former rejection, this comes across as disingenuous.My thought on this is that it's only disingenuous if you're re-querying the same work (revised). If it's a new work, :Shrug:.

[job]

My thought on this is that it's only disingenuous if you're re-querying the same work (revised). If it's a new work, .

I guess it would only be disingenuous to the extent that either party would find it germane.

I'm all for discretion and prudent silence to the hoi polloi. But I'd advise approaching the agent-writer relationship in a spirit of straightforwardness, frankness and candour.