A Disturbing Trend

I'm beginning to wonder about that myself.

Well, I actually think nudging is slightly less of a problem (as long as it's done responsibly and after an appropriate time frame) than writers arguing with rejections. I've seen two agents say that they had switched to a non-response policy recently specifically because authors were writing back and being dicks. I've seen plenty of others complain about the phenomenon (Janet Reid had some scathing fun with one on her blog this week, though that was on a query reject, not a full).

I think the general etiquette needs to just be if you get a rejection on a full, you write back and thank the agent for having read it and leave it at that. I can also see how even an author not being malicious can be difficult for an agent, and I know from experience how often sometimes you just want to say, "But you don't understand..." or even "Do you have any advice?"

I think a polite nudge three months down the line is okay, but anything expecting a response back when the full has already been rejected should probably be considered off-limits. Unfortunately, it only takes a minority of people breaking these rules to screw things up for the rest of us, and even more unfortunately, I have a feeling that the people who do respond to rejections with anything other than a thank you note are generally people who don't do the research to know better. How do you reach that crowd, you know?

kaitie said:

I think a polite nudge three months down the line is okay, but anything expecting a response back when the full has already been rejected should probably be considered off-limits. Unfortunately, it only takes a minority of people breaking these rules to screw things up for the rest of us, and even more unfortunately, I have a feeling that the people who do respond to rejections with anything other than a thank you note are generally people who don't do the research to know better. How do you reach that crowd, you know?

Click to expand...

This is really true, especially the part about reaching the crowd that doesn't do their research. In my mind, I always tend to think of querying writers as this fairly small group of people who visit AW and querytracker and other such sites, but in actuality, there are so many people querying who just find names and start sending emails.

No response=no was never my favorite response style--no closure!--but I understand why agents do it, and I even understand why they're starting to do it on fulls. If that's what works for them so they can dedicate the appropriate amount of their energy to clients, then that's what they should do.

I certainly have fallen into the frustrating situation of emailing back and forth with rejected writers when I really need to be focused on other things, but I can't see rejecting fulls via the silent treatment. Do people really do this? Besides the obvious questions of courtesy, isn't it better to send a quick pass than deal with multiple nudges, spread over the course of several months?

Going the other direction, I don't expect a response to rejections (although a, "thank you for your time" doesn't bother me, either), but I think it is polite to send a brief note if a professional editor or agent has offered actual feedback. It's also good business sense, as a personal response indicates possible interest in a future project.

It takes time, many rejections, and some common sense to shrug off rejections. Non-responses hurt more, because they leave an element of doubt.

For whatever reason, that particular agent at that moment didn't respond to your query. Or they had a partial, and couldn't fall in love with it. Or they had a full and couldn't sell it. And rather than tell you, they dropped you. Life goes on. There are other projects to try. The important thing is to realize when something is becoming a personal brick wall that you cannot breach...yet.

I've been lucky. Some experiences in the art world taught me when to back off. I would love to have my art represented by a certain gallery in New Mexico; it's one of the top five in the U.S. for my type of art, they do great business even in a recession, and being with them opens serious doors for an artist. I've been trying for ten years. I'm closer now than I ever have been, but it required focusing on other credentials that might prove I'm a good business risk. I have never whined at or argued with the gallery owner, in my several attempts to jury in. She'll either thaw, or I'll find another gallery in the same area that will love my work.

Not long ago, a husband and wife art team began a critical art blog in my hometown. Some of their postings were hilarious, spot-on, and deeply philosophical. Because they didn't pull their punches, they made enemies. Over six years, the blog's tone devolved into incoherent and paranoid rants about specific local artists and galleries that were 'dragging them down and shutting them out'. The economy soured, the writers vanished, and their blog is only a placeholder now.

The really sad thing is that my hometown would be a terrible market for their art and writing. They had a magical-realism graphic novel that was amazing. I and several other artists gave them names of other galleries in other states, along with publishers, but these two were so driven by one unrealistic goal that they've probably lost everything.

Choose your battles.

While a writer my wonder, especially when the rejection on a full is a one-page form letter, no agent is required to give a detailed explanation. A simple "thank you for your time" is always appreciated, by everyone, even busy agents.
Leave it at that and go on. I did and I don't think about it any more.
It does no one any good to harp on the rejection.

Once again, the insecure ruin the process for the responsible. *sigh*

And history repeats itself yet again. It's very sad.

While I do find the idea of a cold shoulder reject to a full unnerving, I really don't get authors who yell at agents or editors. If you think said individual has sub-par intelligence* for not falling in love with what is certainly the most brilliant work in English, why would you want them representing you? Why would you waste your time spewing angry e-mails instead of more fiction?

If I get specific comments, I always send a very brief thank you to the agent/editor in question. Unless it's a short story, in which case, on the cover letter to the next story I have ready to go, I put "Thank you for your helpful comments on X story. I've included Y, an N-word science fiction story about Z."

*For the record, I don't think this of agents and editors. All of those that I know are awesome, and I'm always a little stunned to find people who think that they're denizens of the underworld.

I honestly don't think it is a "trend".

Mind you - fulls take me a hell of a long time to get to sometimes - and there have been rare occassions where they are lost in the shuffle somewhere (either because I labelled it wrong in my email, or because I requested it and never got it, or -- who knows) -- but I am definitely not TRYING to ignore people.

And I know a LOT of agents - and I don't know any who are no-response-means-no on fulls.

I think the problem is more that a lot of writers, particularly those who have done no research believe that a) their book is the best thing in the world (and potentially that everything else out there is crap--I honestly wonder if these people actually read at all), b) that the industry is set up to screw the little guy, and c) that anyone rejecting their book is doing so for any reason other than because it might just not be very good.

I've heard people mention it before, and it's completely true, though thankfully you don't see it that often around here, but a lot of people just don't take criticism well and would rather believe that the fault is anywhere but with themselves.

I should also probably clarify that the two agents I'm thinking of were referring to partials and I'm not certain if the same would apply to a full or not.

With more and more agents going the email route instead of snail mail I can understand not responding to queries but if someone requests a full MS then I believe they should respond even if its a form rejection. Otherwise they will get emails from the author wondering what happened to their full MS.

I just don't understand the bitter responses to ANYTHING.


The only thing I have ever sent back to any agents was a thanks, and that's been in reply to feedback on partials or fulls that were read and passed on (or raised). I always try to be polite. It doesn't take any time! Not only does it show respect for the agent's effort, which I really DO appreciate, I think it shows that I take MY JOB seriously.

Badmouthing at any stage of this game just makes it look like you don't care.

ETA: Referring to authors who are damaging anything.

I haven't heard of no replies on fulls, but dude--I'm a bit busy WRITING to listen to everyone in the wide, wide web.

I edited agin as popmuze wanted to stay on topic.
All my fulls have been responded to and I think most litagents are the bomb. Anyone working in this industry is pretty cool. We all toil ridiculous amounts of hours for low pay and minimal fame. I think we need stars somewhere on the streets of NYC. Hollywood ain't got nuthin on us.

Jennifer_Laughran said:

I honestly don't think it is a "trend".

Mind you - fulls take me a hell of a long time to get to sometimes - and there have been rare occassions where they are lost in the shuffle somewhere (either because I labelled it wrong in my email, or because I requested it and never got it, or -- who knows) -- but I am definitely not TRYING to ignore people.

And I know a LOT of agents - and I don't know any who are no-response-means-no on fulls.

Click to expand...

Thank you for this.

Personally, I'd like to see the stats that seem to indicate this is a trend. Because I seriously doubt it is. No response on queries is one thing; no response on partials/fulls is quite another.

I've had one partial out since August. Nudged twice --he gave me a eight week hope-I-can-get-to-it. Nothing. And I've had a full out since September but I know she's swamped so I haven't nudged.

The second one doesn't bother me. The first one I'm curious about. Still, c'est la vie.

As long as a firm deadline is attached, I see no problem with silent rejections. If the agent says up front, as many magazine editors do, "If you haven't heard from us in X months, it means no", then what's the problem?

I actually think the majority of people who requested manuscripts from me this time around did give a time frame, generally within six to eight weeks. Now, not everyone made it within their given time frame, but I did think it was nice to know what to expect.

I think for me it partly depends. I'm someone who doesn't mind getting a form rejection on a full, particularly if it's someone who requests them in lieu of partials--I know that the whole thing probably wasn't read and the person decided after page 12 they didn't want it, and if that's the case I don't expect a lot of feedback. That's the kind of information you have to go searching for, though. So personally, I'd rather see a form rejection than no response at all, but I know a lot of people get really frustrated by that as well.

ETA: I have gotten non-responses on fulls before, though I don't know if that was standard for those agents or if it was just a case of something odd like a manuscript going astray. Considering the nudges, though I'm guessing it wasn't the latter.

Right at the top of the list entitled "Bad Career Moves for Writers," next to getting into a sniping contest with your editor because you can't handle criticism, is losing your gourd at a prospective agent. For me, it equates with the absolute stupidity of a prospective NFL-caliber athlete suing the NFL to get around their two years of college first rule. (yes, Maurice Clarett did that--right before he started getting sent to prison)

In order to be dealt with as a professional, you have to first ACT like a professional. Even if an agent rejects you with the rudest, most cold-blooded email you've ever received in your life, the only thing you're going to gain by going off on them is a bad reputation and a negative label. Before I signed with my agent, my manuscripts went through the gamut of rejections from polite, regretful rejections with feedback off of partials, to "no-response means no" rejections off full manuscripts that I sent snail mail--and only one of the last.

I don't think agents rejecting fulls with no-responses is the trend; I think authors acting badly is the growing trend. That's what I'm hearing more about lately.

I think if I sent an email full and didn't hear back after a nudge, I'd be disappointed. I think if I sent in a printed full and didn't hear back, I'd be pissed. A printed full has cost the author 20 or 30 bucks minimum, and deserves a reply.