Did I misunderstand the process...?!

MarkEsq · Jul 11, 2006

Ok, so I know this should be good news but I have two questions. Before I get to them, here is the email I received today from an agency that, according to this esteemed web site, is very legit (PMA Literary & Film Management):

"After a preliminary review and having thoroughly read your 52 pages, I’d like to request that you send the rest of the manuscript at your earliest convenience.

A couple of things to note: prior to sending it, please correct the spelling and grammatical errors that may be strewn throughout the work. Although I cannot provide editorial commentary at this time, there were glaring mistakes on pages 33 and 37. It is up to you to find them and correct them, along with any other mistakes White Shoe Bondage may have. Remember, all work delivered to us must be in impeccable condition in order to be considered for representation. We trust that you will make the best presentation possible."

1. My book is non-fiction, so it's not written. My understanding was that non-fiction books are sold to publishers based on proposals and maybe a sample chapter or two. In other words, I don't have a complete manuscript to send him. Am I off base??

2. Is his tone a tad.. abrasive? I concede that the manuscript should not have had typos in it, but "spelling and grammatical errors that may be strewn throughout the work"?? Or may not be... is this boilerplate language? I don't know, something about it rubbed me wrong, but I'll get over it if I can figure out whether or not I am supposed to send him a completed manuscript.
Should I write the rest of it? Tell him it ain't written?! Heeelp!

scfirenice · Jul 11, 2006

Ghee. I'm with you. I was under the impression that they didn't WANT it finished so that they could make changes at the foundation level, I sent a proposal like yours and no one asked for the completed book. I don't know. Maybe JamesA will come along, he knows things. I don;t even know what to tell you.

As to the second. I think they are a huge agency and expect the best product you can give, that they asked for more with the errors is huge.

JennaGlatzer · Jul 11, 2006

Hi Mark! You're not off-base. Nonfiction is nearly always sold based on proposal. Is that what you sent? A full proposal? Or just the sample chapter/s?

MarkEsq · Jul 11, 2006

Thanks for the replies.

Jenna, I sent a full proposal, all the bells and whistles, with a sample chapter that included the foreword. The email is from a "submissions assistant" not one of the agents there, but I can't imagine he doesn't know how it works. What do you think I should do?
Right now, I see my options as (1) writing the dratted book as quickly as I can, and (2) just telling him it's not done and risking his wrath and a lost opportunity. Is there a third and all-round pleasing option?!

aka eraser · Jul 11, 2006

I'd try #2 with a dollop of confidence. I'd tell them the book is not completed and that you'd intended to sell it based on the proposal/samples. I'd suggest that if they need more before committing themselves to you and the project, you'd be willing to provide another 30-40 pages (2-3 chapters) within whatever (short) period of time you think you could handle - say, a couple-three weeks.

This would fly more easily if you've got a track record of sorts, newspaper or magazine work that indicates you deliver publishable prose on time.

Lauri B · Jul 12, 2006

Regarding whether or not the person responding to your query seemed harsh:

I think you should consider yourself lucky that the person is still interested if you included "glaring mistakes" that were strewn throughout your sample chapters. She or he might have been exaggerating, but let's just say she isn't. Your proposal sends some mildly negative messages to an editor or agent: you are either incapable of writing a clean manuscript (you didn't realize you'd made all those errors and that might mean working with you will mean lots and lots of clean up); you were careless (you didn't check to make sure your proposal/sample chapters were as error-free as possible, which doesn't say much for your reliability); or you didn't care that you sent in a manuscript with a lot of errors (which brings up a whole bunch of other issues). That said, maybe she was having a bad day and her idea of a manuscript riddled with errors meant not using the third comma in a list. So no, I don't think she was particularly harsh, since it's your responsibility to send in your absolute best effort, which at the very least should be a manuscript without typos.
I think Eraser gives very good advice, regarding how to keep them interested in your project without racing to finish the manuscript. Good luck!

Codger · Jul 12, 2006

aka Eraser's got it right.

I'm assuming that the errors scattered rhroughout is an exaggeration.

If I were in this position, I think I'd call the assistant directly, and discuss their process - just to make sure that you're in agreement.

MarkEsq · Jul 12, 2006

Nomad said:
I think you should consider yourself lucky that the person is still interested if you included "glaring mistakes" that were strewn throughout your sample chapters.

Naturally I went back and read the cited pages looking for same alleged glaring mistakes. Didn't see one on either page. Now, I'm a journalist and lawyer so have a pretty keen eye and, I think, a better grasp of vocab and punctuation than most. But even so I called in my lawyer wife to find the errors and she was unable to see any either. Very odd. I think it's fair to say that, even if he and I may have a difference of opinion as to word choice or sentence structure, to rather boldy berate me for "glaring mistakes" was unfair. Hopefully, though, I will be able to establish some sort of relationship with the fellow and he can tell me what irked him. I'm more than curious...!
Thanks for the response, Nomad, I appreciate all the feedback and advice I can get.

the1dsquared · Jul 12, 2006

Mark, I have a couple of nonfiction books published. Neither was through an agent, but the acquisitions editor was concerned about appearances since the project had to be approved by a board and wanted it to be perfect.

Your email was good news, very good news. They are a top notch agency. Have a friend take a look at it and fix it before you resubmit. I have a partial at PMA now. I'd love to get the exact same email! Congratulations!

JennaGlatzer · Jul 12, 2006

Hi Mark! How odd. Yes, I'd write back and say that what he read was the complete proposal, and that the manuscript is not complete. I just interviewed Peter Miller this past week (here), so I know that they do sell most of their work based on proposal. Maybe this assistant is very, very new?

MarkEsq · Jul 12, 2006

Thanks Jenna!
This was my response:

"Thank you very much for your interest in my non-fiction book, White-Shoe Bondage. As far as sending you the complete manuscript, I cannot right now because it is not yet written. The proposal I sent is all that is complete so far -- my understanding of the non-fiction process has been that the proposal is all that is required at this stage. If you would like to see more before making any kind of commitment to the project I would, of course, be delighted to provide you with another sample chapter, if you would give me three weeks to complete it.
Please let me know how you would like to proceed, and if it would be easier to talk over the phone I would be happy to call you.
Again, many thanks for your time and attention."

JennaGlatzer · Jul 12, 2006

That sounds perfect to me.

Kristen King · Jul 13, 2006

That is quite odd. Sounds like you've handled it well. Honestly, I don't think the comment on errors was particularly abrasive, but I would most likely feel quite differently if I had received that feedback. :] It's quite different when it's your own work, isn't it?

Kristen

Jamesaritchie · Jul 14, 2006

Book

I usually have an opinion on everything, but this one is more than a little odd. My guess is that the agency simply assumed the book had been written because you included a sample chapter, and did not specifically say the book had not been completed.

While proposals are the standard way of selling nonfiction, many writers do write the book first, if only to prove to themselves they can do it, and I'd say this agency assumed you had done this.

Either way, I think you handled it perfectly.

How about letting us look at those two pages to see if we can spot any glaring errors? I've had the same thing happen. . .an agent or editor telling me to correct errors I couldn't find, and no one else could find. Sometimes it's the agent or editor who's wrong.

MarkEsq · Jul 14, 2006

Thanks James, I'd be delighted to post and get some fresh eyes on these two pages. Here is page 33 (note that there are some terms predefined, like "BigLaw"):

________________________________

She is Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty, trapped in the castle doing the handsome prince’s bidding in velvet slippers and a ball gown.
How did it become so?

As noted in the Foreword, a management theorist named Dr. Rensis Likert identified four categories that explain how supervisors manage their workers. Now, and as anyone with an ounce of common sense knows, sociology (which, in part, captures the field of management theory) is often the academic analysis of the obvious. No surprise, then, that Dr. Likert designates the Exploitive—Authoritative management system as the loser and identified the Participative—Group system as the winner when it comes to employee satisfaction and productivity. No surprise, either, that experienced men and women with law degrees and on the hunt for subordinates also recognize the obvious: that an opportunity to contribute to a powerful law firm, backed up by the chance to make mucho dinero, is attractive to law students. This recognition is reflected in the promises made to prospective employees who are all young and ambitious, and easily tempted by significant “economic rewards,” especially when there are apparently earned through a participative process where even the newest lawyer feels like an essential part in the process and practice of BigLaw.
In portraying themselves as participative and generous, then, law firms and law schools employ a four-step process to draw new associates into the BigLaw web. First, while still in school, law students go through on-campus interviews that are carefully organized by both their schools and the firms and, as explained below, are little more than a blind-date in which only the student is blind. The second stage is known as the ....

___________________________

Page 37:

This system of prejudging is potentially rather awkward in the interview for both sides, that is for the student who suspects he has substandard grades and for the interviewers who know he has substandard grades. For there they must sit, chatting amiably with each other for twenty minutes, all pretending the young man has a chance in hell of working at that firm. Occasionally, a brave student will actually ask what the grade cut-off is in order to assess whether he is wasting his time. The response will vary, though those elusive numbers will never be revealed. If he makes the cut-off, he will be told he has nothing to worry about on that score (the vagueness of the response depends on whether he comes across as an ***; the lawyers won’t want to give true but misleadingly hopeful information to someone with adequate grades that they don’t want to hire because he’s an ***). If his grades are too low, he will be assured that there is no firm grade cut-off and that other factors are taken into consideration. This, of course, is a lie.
One result of this approach is that the firms, especially those in the secondary markets (the big cities that are not New York, Los Angeles, Washington DC, and Chicago), all end up competing for the same few students. As an example, look at the Dallas firms interviewing at Duke Law School. A dozen law firms will come to campus to interview maybe twenty students. Typically, the firms that are big and important enough to interview in Durham will only want to hire those in the top quarter of their class. Thus, only five of the hopeful twenty will stand any real chance of getting an internship, and at least one person with good grades will be an *** and excludable on those grounds. Twelve into four obviously doesn’t go, which is why those four have more power than they realize. And this is also why the real on-campus recruiting....

_____________________________

Thanks folks!

Kristen King · Jul 14, 2006

MarkEsq said:
Page 33:
No surprise, then, that Dr. Likert designates the Exploitive—Authoritative management system as the loser and identified the Participative—Group system as the winner when it comes to employee satisfaction and productivity.

Page 37:

One result of this approach is that the firms, especially those in the secondary markets (the big cities that are not New York, Los Angeles, Washington DC, and Chicago), all end up competing for the same few students.

On page 33, you need en dashes ( – )rather than em dashes ( — ). CTRL+hyphen will yield the en dash in MS Word (and in Word Perfect, too, I think). In Mac platforms, it's some combination of the open apple key and/or OPT in conjunction with the hyphen that does it.

On page 37, it's Washington, DC with a comma. To avoid confusing construction, reorder as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington, DC.

I didn't spend a whole lot of time on this, so it's possible that there's something else, but these are the two that jumped out at me. Hope that helps!

Kristen

JanDarby · Jul 15, 2006

The mistakes I noted were here:

This recognition is reflected in the promises made to prospective employees who are all young and ambitious, and easily tempted by significant “economic rewards,” especially when there [should be "they," or "these rewards" not "there"] are apparently earned through a participative process where even the newest lawyer feels like an essential part in the process and practice of BigLaw.
...

And here in the second section:

This system of prejudging is potentially rather awkward in the interview for both sides, that is for the student who suspects he has substandard grades and for the interviewers who know he has substandard grades.

This sentence doesn't read properly, although I can't figure out the exact grammar reason. Perhaps just: "that is" is not a conjunction. Should be more like the following, if I'm understanding you correctly:

This system of prejudging is potentially rather awkward in the interview for both sides, BECAUSE the student suspects he has substandard grades and the interviewers know he has substandard grades.

Or simply break it into two simple sentences. Or a semi-colon between the two sentences. Or "at least when" in place of "that is."

Minor issue -- add a comma between Washington and DC, just like you'd separate a city and state.

JD

Kristen King · Jul 15, 2006

JanDarby said:
This system of prejudging is potentially rather awkward in the interview for both sides, that is for the student who suspects he has substandard grades and for the interviewers who know he has substandard grades.

This sentence doesn't read properly, although I can't figure out the exact grammar reason. Perhaps just: "that is" is not a conjunction. Should be more like the following, if I'm understanding you correctly:

This system of prejudging is potentially rather awkward in the interview for both sides, BECAUSE the student suspects he has substandard grades and the interviewers know he has substandard grades.

Or simply break it into two simple sentences. Or a semi-colon between the two sentences. Or "at least when" in place of "that is."

I prefer the "because" construction JanDarby suggested, but the sentence is not currently incorrect, per se, so I'm doubtful that that was the "glaring mistake." If you are in love with "that is" and want to be extra safe, you could put that whole part in parentheses (common in medical, scientific, and techincal writing with "that is" and "i.e."), but like I said, it's not incorrect.

MarkEsq · Jul 15, 2006

Thanks guys, very much indeed. As you said, not exactly "glaring" mistakes... I hope I get to talk to someone in person and find out what was going through his/her mind.

Kristen King · Jul 15, 2006

For me, the en dash thing and the comma thing were pretty glaring because they leapt out at me without my even reading the excerpts you posted, but I doubt they would be worthy of mention in a sharp reprimand. :] Edited to add: However, whereas the "there" thing is clearly a typo, misuse of a type of dash and the absensce of the comma could indicate to an agent or editor that you have failed to grasp those two rules, so it might warrant a "glaring mistake" reprimand. I'm not saying that it should, but it could depending on who you're dealing with.

When you ask them (and let us know what they say, please!), I'd advise that you not mention what you found unless they explicitly ask you. It's like when you get pulled over.

Officer: Sir, do you know why I stopped you?
Driver: Yes, because I was speeding.
Officer: Well, actually, it was because you have a tail light out, but now that you mention it...

MarkEsq · Jul 26, 2006

How long

Ok, so I emailed the submissions assistant back on July 12 (see above posting for content of my response). Given our relatively quick exchange, I rather expected him to have gotten back to me. How long do I wait before sending another, extreley polite of course, email asking what's up? I know they can be slow, and I know I can be impatient (like all of us waiting for agents, I guess) so I need perspective from y'all.
Many thanks,
Mark

Kristen King · Jul 26, 2006

Did they acknowledge your July 12 message in any way?

kk

MarkEsq · Jul 26, 2006

Kristen King said:
Did they acknowledge your July 12 message in any way?

kk

Hey Kristen,
No, they didn't. I'm imaging some spotty assistant seeing my email, realizing he'd goofed, and burying all the evidence of my existence so as to avoid embarrassment in front of his boss. How's that for paranoia?!

Kristen King · Jul 26, 2006

I've never had quite this same experience, so I'm not really sure how to advise you to move forward. If it were me, I'd plan to wait until August 12 and then e-mail again, but in the meantime I'd ask for advice here. :]

Kristen

Tish Davidson · Jul 26, 2006

I'd give it two weeks and then send a polite e-mail asking if the material was received. This time of year people tend to go on vacation, and when returning and faced with a thousand e-mails, it is easy for them to become delete key happy.

Did I misunderstand the process...?!

Clever title pending.

professional multitasker

wishes you happiness

Clever title pending.

Fish Whisperer

I Heart Mac

Clever title pending.

Dave Diamantes

wishes you happiness

Clever title pending.

wishes you happiness

Clever title pending.

Clever title pending.

Clever title pending.

Clever title pending.