Young Writer In Need of Recommendations for a Change In Attitude About Agents

Agents don't exist to judge others. They exist to sell manuscripts to publishers. A necessary first step is finding manuscripts to sell. That's all they're doing when they're looking at a submission: deciding whether they think they can sell it or not. It's not a judgement from on high--it doesn't necessarily mean your work isn't good if they reject it, just that it's not something they think they can place at the moment.

If you don't want to work with an agent, though, you can research publishers that take unagented submissions. There are quite a few out there.

Here's my advice: get to know some agents.

You need to break through your own stereotypes, so get to know those people as people. Read their posts here on AW. Start following their blogs. Interact with them on Twitter.

Maybe, eventually, if you think you can get over your attitude enough to be valuable, volunteer to intern with one.

Most agents I've interacted with are genuinely lovely people who really really love books. Like any other diverse group, you'll get some agents who aren't lovely people, but that's a product of agents being human, not agents being agents.

Good luck, and good on you for recognizing that your perceptions are not lining up with reality.

eta: Oh, and as to your final question -- no, agents don't exist to judge others. They exist to get really excited about books and help those books they're really excited about succeed. Most of their job isn't reading slush, it's helping books they LOVE get out to publishers and then readers, and doesn't that sound like an awesome job?

It's entirely up to you whether or not you work with an agent. Not working with an agent doesn't mean you need to self-publish. You can submit directly to some publishers.

My agent hired me because she thought people would buy my book...which in turn would give her a pay out for her investment in me. Rejections are a fact of life. Agents aren't sitting around cackling and waiting to reject. They're sitting reading through piles of chaff waiting to find something that sings to them...something they can believe in...something they can sell.

It's only natural that most of what you hear about agents is negative. On the internet, anyone can complain about anyone. It's the modern day complaints department. But agents aren't bad people. YES. They will reject. They will reject excellent work they don't think they can sell. They will reject excellent work that's not quite there, or that they have trouble loving for some reason or other. They'll reject shit that's just not ready because some people think their work is so precious they just have to spew for a few weeks and they have a bestselling novel, if only an agent can look at it. They will reject crap from writers who try their very best to write the next great American novel but in fact will never write a publishable novel. We hear all the negative feedback from jilted writers...both wonderful ones and subpar ones who will never improve. You can't listen to the complaints department.

You need to decide if you want an agent. Then you need to submit to agents who are interested in the type of novel you are going to market to them. Then you need to hope for the best.

But if you can't respect agents, then don't bother wasting their time.

Whatever path you choose, good luck.

Hi, theotter, and welcome to AW. Kudos to you for reaching out (and admitting your biases).

First off, I would say that reading and responding to queries is actually one of the smallest parts of an agent's job description. Agents spend most of their time--or at least most of their business hours--reviewing contracts and royalty statements, processing their clients' money, keeping their clients' books moving smoothly through the publishing pipeline, and managing the submissions they've made to editors. In other words, I think most agents would say that their job mostly consists of being their clients' business manager. They don't think of themselves as judges or gatekeepers.

That said, when you're in the query trenches, it can certainly be daunting. As writers, we sometimes turn agents into rock stars (and some agents, unfortunately, let that go to their heads). It took me four years and four manuscripts to finally land an agent, but I never felt like I had to kiss their feet to get them to pay attention to me. Over time, agents started to recognize my name because they'd requested manuscripts from me in the past and could tell my writing was getting better. (Case in point: my now-agent read and rejected two of my previous manuscripts before she offered on the fourth.) I developed a rapport with several agents as we e-mailed back and forth, and that helped me decide which agents I wanted to work with (i.e., which ones were nice and took the time to respond to me personally) versus which agents I never really connected with.

I honestly believe a good agent is a professional writer's greatest asset. She goes to bat for me when problems inevitably crop up and is the first to reassure me when I start to doubt myself. Plus, I get to draw on her experience as I negotiate the battlefield that is the publishing industry, and as a relative newcomer, I find that expertise invaluable.

Long post short: some agents are jerks (or, worse, incompetent buffoons), but most agents are savvy businesspeople who love books as much as you do.

theotter said:

I have a full manuscript and have edited the socks off of it multiple times but I am yet to submit to anyone for two major reasons. For one, rejection terrifies me. I spent so long on that thing I'm not sure how to handle the rejection, but I know that inevitably I will be rejected and I will have to deal with it, it's just one of those things that's inevitable but you try to put off for a while because you know it will hurt.

Click to expand...

As you say, your work is bound to be rejected. It just is. It's nothing personal: it's just that not everything that's sent in to agents and editors is good enough for publication; even if it was, there is only ever a limited number of publication slots available; and even when those slots aren't already all booked up, many submissions are sent to the wrong agents or publications--for example, romances which are sent to agents who only represent writers of non-fiction will get an automatic rejection.

Remember that it's your work being rejected, not you.

And remember that if you're not ready to cope with rejection just yet, that's fine. There's no law which says you have to submit your work anywhere. It's ok to spend a few years working on your craft before you send your work out. I wish more writers did this, to be honest.

For another, and this is the part I am truly ashamed to admit, I don't feel a mutual respect towards agents. I have this ridiculous, more than likely straw man and unfair image in my head of a bunch of agents sitting around at starbucks or wherever privileged people go these days laughing at how awful people's submissions are and sending smugly pseudo-polite rejection letters back.

Click to expand...

I know quite a few literary agents and they've all got to where they are because of their talent and hard work. They didn't become agents because they have "privilege", or an unfair advantage, but because they love books, and they love working in publishing (they wouldn't do it for the money...).

I've never been an agent, but I have spent years as an editor and so have sent out my share of rejection letters. I've never had time to compose the "smugly pseudo-polite rejection letters" you describe: most submissions get a form rejection and that's it. The only personalised rejections I ever sent out were a genuine attempt to help people: still, several writers took exception to them and sent me abusive letters in return. One started stalking me. That was scary.

Again, I understand that this is unfair, immature, and not reality, but it seems so weird to me that someone's entire life is built around judging other people's work. With critics, at least reviews take thought and effort to create.

Click to expand...

You have a very skewed vision of what literary agents do for a living.

Only a very small percentage of their working week is spent reading and rejecting submissions. Most of the time they're working for their author-clients: getting them new deals, making sure the contracts they sign are as good as they can be, making sure their publishers adhere to those contracts, making sure their author-clients get paid promptly and appropriately. Good agents work their socks off for the authors they represent: they champion their works, give emotional and professional support, and are genuinely nurturing and perceptive.

I know that I can't go on having this attitude towards agents. They are a necessary part of the publishing process, and everything I've read has lead me to believe that "self-publishing" means spending the rest of your life trying to be a walking commercial and advertising yourself to garner and audience because no one will hire you.

Click to expand...

You could continue to have this attitude, but it won't do you any favours, I'll admit.

Please don't be put off by my skewed view on reality. One, I tend to be an extremely cynical person because it's better to be pleasantly surprised than disappointed in people, and two, as I have stated before, I am young and immature. Please prove me wrong. Tell me that agents aren't just some necessary evil and that kissing the ground that Satan walks on isn't what it takes to be a writer. What would this post look like from the perspective of an agent? What would their side of the story be, and what fulfillment do they get out of a line of work that mostly consists of judging others? Thank you for your time

Click to expand...

I'm not going to work on convincing you that you're wrong. It's up to you to change your own opinions and to do your own research.

If agents really are as bad as you seem to think (and if you're genuinely convinced of this, why are you even asking us these questions?) then why do you think so many writers think they're necessary?

I think you'd find it helpful if you started at the beginning. Find out what literary agents do for their author-clients instead of accusing them of doing nothing more than judging and mocking people.

A good place to start might be Carole Blake's book, From Pitch to Publication. Carole is a friend of mine, but I liked the book before I knew her, which makes me feel ok about recommending it. The book is a little dated now but it will still give you a very good idea of what literary agents do for their clients, and all they achieve. You could usefully read a few agent blogs, of course; and interact with agents on Twitter and on Facebook, so that you can see they're just like us. Real people.

Good luck.
http://absolutewrite.com//www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/

I ran across this tumblr post awhile back and bookmarked it, because I thought it was a really good reminder of the "other side." Agents and editors and publishing houses all NEED fantastic stories to publish and fantastic authors to write those books, and you might just be the "solution" that they're looking for right now.

Meet an agent.

They are people, and can be just as insecure as writers.

It's interesting that you feel critics legitimately have something to say, but agents exist just to judge people.

Agents exist to find stories and writing that excites them, and that they think they can sell to others. They aren't in the business because they love saying "No." They have to say it a lot, but nothing makes them happier than finding a book that moves them, that they can say "Yes" to.

These are people who love books, love reading, and most of all, love writers. They have to. After all, day after day, they work with writers, listen to them, help them develop their books for sale. Agents are not the enemy.

Do what's right for you, but if you go the self-pub route just because you think it will avoid rejection, you are setting yourself up for a nasty fall. If you think getting a "thanks but no thanks" email from an agent is bad, try reading a 1* Amazon review.

OMG LONG POST.... (pew pew pew)

First, writing is 99% rejection, 1% acceptance. So, if this terrifies you, then I'm not sure what to tell you at this point--other than, "You're not alone." But I'm not sure that will mean a whole lot.

Second. Ego will kill you in this business. The "You just don't get me, man" is ego. It's good that you're self-aware at least. Removing the ego looks like this: "Not everyone will like my story and characters, but the one thing that most published writers have in common is that they know how to tell a story in a way that others will read it, understand it, and connect with it."

It's not about anyone 'getting you,' it's about learning a craft that takes years (sometimes decades) to fully come into its own. Imagine your most cherished, beloved writer who can do no wrong and has inspired you to become a writer. Do you think that writer reached a point where he/she said, "Well, I'm done. I know it all?"

Nope. Even John Gardner talks about walking into bookstores, picking one of his books on his shelves, and making edits. Yep, even he's not happy with things.

As for agents, I'm 100% sure that none of them are giving any effs about people not appreciating them or liking them. I don't think they lose any sleep over it. Why? They're probably too busy reading. They read for a living. They build their businesses up one sale at a time. One client at a time. One query letter at a time.

As others have stated, their job is to sell the book. If you have a book that they think they can sell, they may bring you on board. (I say "may" because some agents will love your book and adore it, but might be looking to round out their client list with an urban fantasy YA writer [and that's not you]). So, sometimes, it's about logistics.

You get a story rejected from a magazine? Feh, sometimes, it's because your story wasn't any good. But sometimes, it's that your story was 7000 words and they only have room for ONE MORE STORY that has to be 5000 words or less. Bzzzz. Sorry. It's not that they don't "get" you, it's that they're business people.

As for rejection letters. Since Miss Agent at X_Company reads 200 queries in a week, she might not have time to compose a thoughtful, 2000-word response to you. If it's good, or if you get "close," then you get a "warmer" rejection. Sometimes, it's personalized. Sometimes, it has feedback. And some of us writers actually LOVE getting the feedback. Why? Because we want our writing to be the best it can be. And we want to succeed. And that means addressing any big issues that are making people stumble.

Do you know the difference between a Writer (with a capital "W") and a novice writer? A Writer will scour rejections for anything that can help him/her improve. And most of the time, if we find that kernel of critique, we nod and say, "I kind of knew something was off there." A novice throws it away, sulks, threatens to give up and says things like, "Nobody gets me. These people are stupid. I'm brilliant. I shouldn't have to change ANYTHING."

Agents want to eat, same as writers. They want success. This means getting clients that they think will sell. Sometimes they are right. Sometimes, they are wrong (e.g. Harry Potter went through several rejections.) If you are a debut writer, your manuscript needs to be as print-ready perfect as you can possibly make it. You aren't George RR Martin who can write a "decent" copy and then have your editors do a LOT of heavy lifting. Nope. You're the new kid and you're untested and you're a risk right out of the gate. Nobody wants to hold your hand and teach you the difference between they're, there, and their. Or, help you do something about the 4,506 adverbs that you have in chapters 1 and 2.

For me, just reading the slush pile at a literary magazine showed me what it might be like to "judge" as an agent. When your editor plops 250 short stories in front of you and says, "Hey, I need the best 15 by next week," you realize that there is no way you're finishing every single story. That you don't have time for "halfway decent with potential." It has to be as close to Ready as it possibly can be. It has to grab you within the first 2-3 paragraphs. Keep your attention the entire way through, and not give you ANY BIG REASON to stop reading.

This is all with a batch of short stories. Imagine novel-length manuscripts.

As others have stated: research agents. Follow their blogs or twitter. Sara Megibow has a great twitter feed. She will tweet about a query and why she accepted/rejected (w/o naming names, of course).

(There's an example.)

Does she do this to be mean? And frighten people away? Perhaps it looks this way to the novice writers. The Writers look at this tweet and say, "Okay, I know how to tweak my own query letter now. I know what to avoid the next time I write one."

Also, here's a number or two for the Nelson Agency: In 2012, they had 36,000 queries (query letters) come through their office. Of those 36,000...

98 people were asked to send the full manuscript.
Of those 98...

7 were offered representation.

That's in one year. That's how competitive this schtick can be.

The bottom line? You can't make it personal. The writing process itself can be intimate and flowery and full of the beauty of all creativity...

But the business end? The selling of it? That's all numbers. And hooks. And queries. And efficiency. It's not that agents don't want to give someone a break. They also want to make a living themselves and build a successful business. Why do you think the agent(s) above only accepted 7 new writers in a year? And how good did those writers have to be to make the cut?

Note: There is no "snark" or nastiness in my tone. All professional. And this person behind the creepy zombie baby avatar wishes you the best of luck. But finishing a book? That's really just a part of getting published. And if you can figure out how to write a novel, well, you can figure this stuff out as well.



Other site of interest: http://nelsonagency.com/pub-rants/
*This one actually has an article about what the submission inbox looks like. Good timing there!

KTC said:

YES. They will reject. They will reject excellent work they don't think they can sell. They will reject excellent work that's not quite there, or that they have trouble loving for some reason or other. They'll reject shit that's just not ready because some people think their work is so precious they just have to spew for a few weeks and they have a bestselling novel, if only an agent can look at it. They will reject crap from writers who try their very best to write the next great American novel but in fact will never write a publishable novel. We hear all the negative feedback from jilted writers...both wonderful ones and subpar ones who will never improve. You can't listen to the complaints department.

Click to expand...

Quoting what Keith said here because it's crucial to remember if you're ultra-sensitive to rejection. An agent's rejection is NOT a referendum on the quality of your work for all time, and no agent claims it is. It's simply their judgment on whether they think they can (and want to) sell this particular book at this particular time. Think of it as the rejection of a sales pitch, not of you as a writer.

When I was 18, few folks outside the publishing world had the slightest idea how to submit to agents. I sure didn't. Since the info wasn't on the internet, it took a while to hunt down; aspiring writers would often start with a workshop and get tips on submission there.

Everything's so much easier now, which is wonderful in many ways. But I think it can also generate anxiety like what you're describing, as the internet spreads certain misconceptions and resentments.

One way to allay that anxiety, if you haven't already, is to go to a workshop or build a network of betas/critique partners. Make sure they're honest and tough. Chances are, you'll get a range of responses, and you'll learn to take the advice that works for you and disregard feedback that's destructive or irrelevant.

The trick is to retain a basic confidence in your writing ability even as you absorb criticism. That ability includes your capacity to be flexible, revise, and work at your craft.

Like agents, I deal with many unsolicited book submissions (for review) and must often say no. While I do act as a gatekeeper, I can tell you I have never had the slightest desire to crush someone's hopes and dreams, and the only people I've ever made snarky comments about (because yes, I admit I have done that) are those who write angry rebuttals to my rejections or call my boss to complain about them.

If you're polite and businesslike, and you work on your craft before submitting, I'm pretty sure no agent will judge you. They may say no to your book, but that's a whole different thing.

And if they say yes to your book, the fight isn't over, because editors can say no to it, too. Rejection never ends for a writer. Learning not to let it crush you is absolutely crucial.

ETA: Hope this doesn't come across as a plug, but my agent does this video series with other agents (and authors) where they answer writers' questions. They're goofy and down-to-earth, and it gives you a sense of who some agents are IRL.

Agents don't judge others, they judge manuscripts. You don't get rejected, your manuscript does. This also applies to agents.

And here's the thing, how can you blame agents for judging manuscripts when YOU judge every book you read. Or try to read.

And who knows, you may not be rejected at all. Some first novels are grabbed by the first agent who sees them, and by the first editor the agents send them to.

CrastersBabies said:

OMG LONG POST.... (pew pew pew)

First, writing is 99% rejection, 1% acceptance. !

Click to expand...

For some, sure, but not for many selling writers. Those are ridiculous numbers, and I seriously doubt if anyone could make any money at all with a 99% rejection rate, let alone earn a living.

Numbers are nonsense, anyway. There are no numbers, and there are no odds. Writing is always about the individual, never about any group or average. The individual is all that matters, and an individual with talent, intelligence, and a good work ethic is not going to be rejected 99% of the time, ever, or anywhere close to it.

That self-awareness is you hiding. We trick ourselves with self-awareness. We think that if we acknowledge our faults, we can cover them and not address them, like the fat kid who makes fun of himself first so the others don't-- but it doesn't change his weight.

The "I realize I'm immature" bit won't mean anything until you become mature. Agents are an important part of the process, because they help publishers stay sane-- and if anything, increase our chances of getting published. Can you imagine what the odds would be like if it were only the publishers receiving the queries and doing the rejections? They'd get fed up in about a minute and reject half the stuff the agents accept, would be my guess. How many books have been sold on the relationship of the agent with the publisher, or the charisma of an agent really selling an author's work?

I hated rejection when I was your age-- but getting rejected is the only way to fix that. If you want, you can start your rejection softly. Give your manuscript to friends and family-- when they don't have time to get around to it, that's rejection. They are telling you it sucks, but nicely. Then you can move on to mean beta readers.

Life will help you with this, too. I've had everything from manuscripts to query letters to articles to college admission to asking a girl out rejected, and not only has it made it easier, a lot of the time it worked out for the best in the end.

I agree. The only way to get better with rejection is to practice at it a bit. And to remember that taking rejection as an opportunity to make your work the absolute best it can be.

First off, yay for coming here and admitting you have a problem! You've come to the right place, as there are many agents, agented writers, and people who know agents here who can clarify that agents aren't soul-sucking monsters out to crush our dreams.

To share with you my own experience with agents...I've been agented and I also spent the better half of last year interning for an agent. My internship has allowed me a peek into his workflow and his attitude towards writers and their MSs in general, and I can tell you this much: He loves his job. In fact, he's rarely ever as snarky as I get, even when the MS is terrible (when I say terrible, I mean it's sexist, racist, or homophobic etc). He remains respectful about writers' works and is always professional when discussing them. I have never once felt like he takes joy out of rejecting MSs, and why would he? He's on the lookout for new writers to represent and sell their books so he gets a nice commission, right?

The agency he's in also regularly holds chat sessions with all the interns to talk about agenting and stuff, and from what I've seen, agents did not arrive on the scene privileged. They have to work from the bottom up. Many of the agents at that agency started out as interns or assistants, and some were unfortunate enough to get stuck with bosses who didn't treat them so well and they've had to claw their way up the ladder. So they've fought hard for their positions and they're not about to waste it by rejecting willy-nilly.

As for rejections, yes, chances are you will receive those. The good news is, it doesn't have to hurt that much. With practice, it gets better. I query expecting rejection, so when I do get good news, it's completely awesome and unexpected, and when I get rejected, it's just meh. (Of course, this is different once you have an agent and are on subs to publishers. Those rejections still sting for me. But by then you will have an awesome agent fighting your corner and you won't feel so alone. )

Putputt said:

As for rejections, yes, chances are you will receive those. The good news is, it doesn't have to hurt that much. With practice, it gets better. I query expecting rejection, so when I do get good news, it's completely awesome and unexpected, and when I get rejected, it's just meh. (Of course, this is different once you have an agent and are on subs to publishers. Those rejections still sting for me. But by then you will have an awesome agent fighting your corner and you won't feel so alone. )

Click to expand...

This is pretty much my outlook. Of course, I'm now getting fed up with that. I might change my goal to getting rejected by every agency in the UK...

How will you reach your readers, your audience if your MS stays saved in a dark digital recess of your hard-drive?
How will you know what needs fixing?

Any contact I have had be that with an agent or publisher has been one of growth. Rejections have come with ideas and the odd sentence that has helped to build the work, allowed me to see it in a different light. Or... (and these are the best) their reply lets you know that you are actually quite good at organising words in a particular storylike fashion! A rejection is only that, not the right fit, it didn't work for me. Which means it will work for someone else, or it will be the right fit else where.
The first time is always the worst

As others have said, rejection is simply part of the process - unless you want to go it alone, though even then you risk other forms of rejection.

When it comes to agents, you have to remember that there are a multitude of reasons beyond 'I don't like this' that an agent might pass. They might have a similar book already, or think other agents would know better editors to submit it to, or simply have closed their list but not announced it...

And you really want someone who loves the book on your side!

I've had two agents, neither of which worked out for me. That said, I never had an interaction with either of these people that didn't teach me something.

If you can tell yourself that yours is an endless series of teachable moments, that you're in this simultaneously to learn craft, voice, and the business, you'll get past your immaturity as a writer. I believe when you're truly ready, you'll know.

Your calendar age, of course, time will take care of all by itself. Trust me on this.

"What would their side of the story be, and what fulfillment do they get out of a line of work that mostly consists of judging others?"

Okay so, I'm not an agent, but I love my agent and so I will gladly defend her and also put words in her mouth. I THINK, if asked, she would say (as others have said):

"I don't get fulfillment 'judging others.' I get fulfillment reading writer's words, looking for those authors who thrill me, who I want to champion and who's work I want to see in print so I can share it with the world.

"Nothing makes me happier than to discover a query that tempts me to read more...except perhaps matching my authors to their perfect editors. I also adore encouraging my authors to work on that next spark of an idea while I fight tooth and nail to protect them from bad contracts and wrest another dollar from a reluctant publisher.

"Fulfillment for me is being a champion for my authors, so they can focus on writing the next book that will thrill me all over again."

Let me ask you one question. Let's say tomorrow someone hired you to be a literary agent. Is this how you would spend your days?

"...sitting around at starbucks or wherever privileged people go these days laughing at how awful people's submissions are and sending smugly pseudo-polite rejection letters back."

Click to expand...

Or would you be the "nice" agent? The one who gave everyone a fair shot and genuinely wanted to see people succeed?

If you would choose the second route, what makes you different from any other person in that position? "Agent" isn't a state of being. It's a job and agents are just people.

Consider everyone you've personally known throughout your life and think about their characters, their hopes and dreams, their strengths and weaknesses. That's a cross-section of humanity right there. The people you knew as kids are still the same people. Name any profession and within it, you'll find the same mixture. I suppose whether you find this encouraging or terrifying depends on the situation.

What would their side of the story be, and what fulfillment do they get out of a line of work that mostly consists of judging others?

Um, they get paid? They can feed their families? They can go through the dross and find a pearl of a writer, and help them get paid and feed their families? They can be an advocate to a client who lives on the other side of the world and will never ever get to New York? They can see a book in a window or reviewed in a paper and say, "I helped that happen"?

They're good things. But they are grown-up pleasures.

Late to the party here, but I've been recently thinking about the same thing, mostly with writing but also in my every day life. I remember being younger (about your age) and worrying a lot about rejection in general. I wish that I could help to explain how things CAN change as you let go of that worry. Not everyone is going to like you or your work, you can't control that. And you can't control agents opinions, the only thing you can do is work on YOU. I would worry less about why someone would be an agent and focus on your work. Haters gonna hate!

(also, I don't think agents are required, not when there's so many other outlets for publishing, but I bet they sure are helpful!)

Judgment is part of life and art. Always has been, always will be. Betas judge, agents judge, editors judge, publishers judge, book bloggers judge, pro critics judge, contest judges judge, and every single one of your readers will judge.

Don't have to like it, do have to learn to accept it with grace.

As for agents, I never encountered a malicious one (hurried/harried, yes, malicious/sneering, no), and mine is, absolutely, the sweetest person I know.