29 ways NOT to submit to an agent

Old Hack · Mar 6, 2013

Literary agent extraordinaire, Carole Blake, has written an article for Bang2Write in which she lists a few of the problems she often sees in submissions, and explains why they're problems.

There's an added bonus in the form of a letter from a disgruntled rejected writer, which might make you realise the standard of the slush pile.

The comments are good too, and Carole's taking part in the discussion.

Siri Kirpal · Mar 6, 2013

Sat Nam! (literally "Truth Name"--a Sikh greeting)

Vote that this be stickied.

Blessings,

Siri Kirpal

mellymel · Mar 6, 2013

I agree. Sticky this!

Chris P · Mar 6, 2013

Haha! Very nice! I can see well-meaning but ill-informed "experts" advocating guerrilla (or gorilla) querying techniques.

More serious question about #7, and related to a misunderstanding I had in another thread. If the agent passes on project #1, does that mean she gets crossed off my list for project #2 unless she's stated I could send other work? I know it would be bad form to send an unsolicited query for project #2 the next day, but I can't believe a "no" once means "no not ever."

Nekko · Mar 6, 2013

Thanks Old Hack!
Great advice.
Read some and thought "duh, who would do that?", I have bookmarked the link for future reference. (Need to follow rules number 5&6 first!)

Old Hack · Mar 6, 2013

Chris P said:
Haha! Very nice! I can see well-meaning but ill-informed "experts" advocating guerrilla (or gorilla) querying techniques.

Funny you should say that.

When I was still a full-time editor I once received a banana in the post. A few days later, I received a photo of a gorilla from the same person.

When their ms arrived a few days after that, I was already primed to reject it.

Kayley · Mar 6, 2013

Chris P said:
More serious question about #7, and related to a misunderstanding I had in another thread. If the agent passes on project #1, does that mean she gets crossed off my list for project #2 unless she's stated I could send other work? I know it would be bad form to send an unsolicited query for project #2 the next day, but I can't believe a "no" once means "no not ever."

I read it as "don't send the query letter again for the same project", not "don't every query me again." I could be wrong with that interpretation, though.

Chris P · Mar 6, 2013

Old Hack said:
Funny you should say that.

When I was still a full-time editor I once received a banana in the post. A few days later, I received a photo of a gorilla from the same person.

When their ms arrived a few days after that, I was already primed to reject it.

Good thing they gave you warning. Hate to have a bad query take you by surprise.

Chasing the Horizon · Mar 6, 2013

Chris P said:
More serious question about #7, and related to a misunderstanding I had in another thread. If the agent passes on project #1, does that mean she gets crossed off my list for project #2 unless she's stated I could send other work? I know it would be bad form to send an unsolicited query for project #2 the next day, but I can't believe a "no" once means "no not ever."

I'm sure #7 just means not to send the same project more than once. After all, if we couldn't query the same agents on our next project, those of us who query widely would be completely screwed because we already queried every reputable agent in our genre on our last book.

Chris P · Mar 6, 2013

Chasing the Horizon said:
I'm sure #7 just means not to send the same project more than once. After all, if we couldn't query the same agents on our next project, those of us who query widely would be completely screwed because we already queried every reputable agent in our genre on our last book.

I figured so. That would shorten my list CONSIDERABLY.

kkbe · Mar 6, 2013

I'd add to that list, "Don't query until you've run your QL through the gauntlet, aka QLH." Doing so would probably make most (if not all) of those 'don'ts' moot.

Heck, maybe that s/b #1.

Susan Coffin · Mar 6, 2013

Old Hack said:
Literary agent extraordinaire, Carole Blake, has written an article for Bang2Write in which she lists a few of the problems she often sees in submissions, and explains why they're problems.

There's an added bonus in the form of a letter from a disgruntled rejected writer, which might make you realise the standard of the slush pile.

The comments are good too, and Carole's taking part in the discussion.

It's all common sense. I can't even believe anyone would do the things she says not to do, but they must.

Snowstorm · Mar 6, 2013

Thank you for posting this list, Old Hack. I just can't comprehend some people!

Quantum1019 · Mar 6, 2013

Susan Littlefield said:
It's all common sense. I can't even believe anyone would do the things she says not to do, but they must.

Agreed. It would never occur to me to do any of those things. Writing/ publishing is a business. I wonder what the total amount of time is per year that agents waste dealing with childish stunts and silly shenanigans when they could be evaluating serious queries from writers who know how to act like adults.

Expat-hack · Mar 7, 2013

I'm just surprised that would-be-clients could find her at parties. I'm not invited to parties where there are literary agents in attendance. (Probably a good thing!)

Axordil · Mar 7, 2013

Along with some of the commenters, I thought the under-the-bathroom-stall-door was urban legend...oh dear.

Old Hack · Mar 7, 2013

Expat-hack said:
I'm just surprised that would-be-clients could find her at parties. I'm not invited to parties where there are literary agents in attendance. (Probably a good thing!)

Carole is a party animal. And many of the parties she goes to are thrown by writers' organisations like the RNA, which has parties full of editors, agents and publishers.

If there's a good writers' organisation or conference where you live, which focuses on the genre in which you write, it will almost certainly be worth joining, and attending some of the functions.

Axordil said:
Along with some of the commenters, I thought the under-the-bathroom-stall-door was urban legend...oh dear.

Sadly it's not. If you look for me in the comments-thread to the article I linked to, you'll see my own version of that story.

wampuscat · Mar 7, 2013

Sticky!

itsmary · Mar 7, 2013

kkbe said:
I'd add to that list, "Don't query until you've run your QL through the gauntlet, aka QLH." Doing so would probably make most (if not all) of those 'don'ts' moot.

Heck, maybe that s/b #1.

This is probably the best advice. (Or if you don't submit to QLH, at least have someone who doesn't know you critique it.) You can follow every generic, common sense rule on querying and still not get anywhere if your query isn't enticing.

wampuscat · Mar 7, 2013

itsmary said:
This is probably the best advice. (Or if you don't submit to QLH, at least have someone who doesn't know you critique it.) You can follow every generic, common sense rule on querying and still not get anywhere if your query isn't enticing.

Not to mention QLH often points out weaknesses in the MS that weren't noticed by the author or betas.

Ken · Mar 7, 2013

27. Do NOT slip your synopsis under the door of the ladies loo I am occupying. It happened. Once. I suspect that woman will never do it again.

... wonder what Carole did?

Axordil · Mar 7, 2013

Ken said:
... wonder what Carole did?

Were I in that...position...the temptation to crack wise about the manuscript's appearance coinciding providentially with the TP running out would be strong.

Old Hack · Mar 7, 2013

You could always ask her in the comments-thread following her article.

shaldna · Mar 8, 2013

Old Hack said:
There's an added bonus in the form of a letter from a disgruntled rejected writer, which might make you realise the standard of the slush pile.

The language pattern and terminology used in this letter marks it out as someone from my neck of the woods. Oh the shame.

Ken · Mar 8, 2013

... whatever it was it was justified.
What was that writer thinking?

Not sure if I'll post the question.
Kinda shy about that sort of stuff.
But I will check out more of the site.

Good tips in the linked to one here.

(That's one possiblity, Axordil :-D

29 ways NOT to submit to an agent

Such a nasty woman

Swan in Process

Likes metaphors mixed, not stirred

Back to purring

Such a nasty woman

Someday.

Likes metaphors mixed, not stirred

Blowing in the Wind

Likes metaphors mixed, not stirred

Huh.

Tell it like it Is

Baby plot bunneh sniffs out a clue

Too much lost generation as a kid!

Is this thing on?

Such a nasty woman

Recovering adjective addict

have faith, restart

Recovering adjective addict

Is this thing on?

Such a nasty woman

The cake is a lie. But still cake.