So I just had a really interesting discussion with an editor at a major house about agents. She wanted to know why I don't want to work with an agent. So I told her. The moment I hit the send button, I worried that I went too far.
We had an interesting back and forth. I always let editors have the last word of course, but I'd like to share with you all how the conversation went.
She strongly strongly encouraged me to work with an agent and even after hearing some of my horror stories, she said, "Keep an open mind. The publishing world is vast and I'm sure there is someone out there you'd enjoy working with."
I told her that if an editor wants to buy one of my books, but would rather not deal directly with a writer, I'd be happy to hire a literary attorney to speak for me and negotiate for me.
She said she doesn't mind at all communicating directly with writers, but she prefers writers to have agents when they approach her because it cuts down on the amount of reading she has to do and "there are only so many hours in the day."
So the reason she wants writers to have agents is because it makes her life easier.
You gotta love that. She didn't try to convince me that I would benefit from having an agent, but that the editors benefit, which of course I already knew.
I'm supposed to give away all control and 15% of my earnings to make her life easier. you know, because compared to writers, editors have it so rough.
(She offered to read my manuscript, but it was clear she didn't like breaking her rule because she's afraid of opening the floodgate.)
I don't blame her. If I could make rules which would make my life easier I'd do it too. Since writers are fungible, why not create a policy which randomly keeps out a good number of them?