Queryshark says not to tailor your query to each agent because it isn't worth your time. Thoughts?

I think getting the agent's name right and indicating you at least have a clue who else he or she represents is probably an indication that you're not just shotgunning every agent in sight, but yeah, I never got the utility of trying to convince a hundred agents that you are a long admirer of each and every one of them and have been following all their Twitter feeds and love all their clients' books, etc.

Always use the particular agent's name. (No "Dear Agent" or "To Whom it May Concern".)

If you've put them on your list because they've expressed specific interest in the type of project your querying (i.e. you looked through #MSWL and saw that Agent Z is looking for a noir circus superhero novel set in Asia and that's what your book happens to be) then you can add a single line to say "I saw you were interested in Particular Thing and my book is Particular Thing." (Same goes for if there was a recent interview etc. that you read that they mentioned an interest in something that happens to be what you're querying.)

When I was querying, I had two letters I used (one about 250 words and one significantly shorter), but I didn't feel the need to tailor them to each agent. (My request rate was about 1 in 10, which is the lower end of the spectrum, but I was satisfied with the folks who did request pages so I didn't want to change what was working for the agents I was really interested in.) But I also didn't have a query that offered comparisons of my work to others in the market (which is where a lot of the custom tailoring can come into play).

Best of luck with your search.

I don't know exactly how it was worded, but in the main, I would agree. A good query letter representing your work is the most efficient thing, and I can see where efficiency and professionalism is a better hook than detailing how much you like a prospective agents's blog, podcast interview, client list, etc.

Now, that said, none of this gets anyone off the hook for researching agents in advance to be sure you're sending queries to agents/agencies who are a) interested in the type of manuscript you've written and b) open to queries. Also, you still have to spell their names right.

You'd be surprised how many people think "Dear Agent" or "To Whom It May Concern" is okay.

I think it's up to you. I tailored about 15% of my query letters. I couldn't find anything specific on the rest of the agents, so I didn't bother adding anything.

My success rate with the queries I tailored was much, much better than my success rate with the queries I did not tailor. (My tailoring was just adding a sentence of "I am querying you because you mentioned wanting to see more diversity in books, and my book features a racially diverse cast of characters.") That got me a 7 out of 9 hit rate.

So I'd tailor when possible, but if you can't get much information about what the agent is specifically looking for, I wouldn't stress too much about it. In the end, it's still the story that will hook them more than any personalization.

I always tailored my queries to each agent, but usually just in the cover letter, or if I was sending an email, the first paragraph. Everything else I left the same - story synopsis, bio, etc.

That being said, some agents ask for a "long" synopsis, meaning a synopsis that includes the ending of the book, and some agents want the first five pages of the manuscript, while some want ten and others want fifty. Some even ask for the entire manuscript.

There were some agencies that wanted the query to be 100 words or less. I ignored that and just sent what I had, because there was just too much vital information for me to whittle down to 100 words. The query for my fourth book was over 700 words long, not including the manuscript pages, and I landed an agent, so it really depends on quality more so than quantity, anyway.

So I guess the bottom line is: use your own judgment, but don't blow a chance with a fabulous agent because you didn't follow their guidelines.

Agreed: always follow guidelines first and foremost.

But to chime in on the original question, I was with Aggy B. in not tailoring to each agent unless I'd actually met them or knew that my manuscript was what they were looking for. Partly, that's because I couldn't figure out how to personalize or when to personalize (especially without making the letter sound weird). Partly, it's because my default mode is formal when writing to people I don't know (especially in business relationships).

I think people overstress the importance of a query.

If your novel is great, and you do a good job of showing what's unique and sellable about your novel in the query, agents will at least have a look at the first pages. They're not in the business to reject queries, that's just something they have to do because they can't possibly represent everyone.

Plus, if you edit 20 different versions of your query there's a much greater chance of mistakes slipping in.

Focus your energy on writing a great novel. Write a query good enough to show that the novel might be great, or is at least worth a look.

The agent isn't trying to sell your query after all. The novel's the thing.

You have to personalise each query to some degree: as has already been said, you need to make sure you get the agent's name right, for example. If there's an agent you're really interested in because you saw them speak at a conference, and during that speech they said they wanted books of a particular type and that's exactly what you've written, then you should tell them that. But I don't think it's necessary to write a separate query for each submission you make.

Old Hack said:

...

get the agent's name right, for example.

Click to expand...

+1

...and also "I heard you like <genre> from your <twitter/website etc>" works.

There seems to be a lot of queriers who don't read guidelines. A hint that you have read and not sent blindly netted me the most *personalised* rejections!

My suggestion is to first write a query letter which seems to cover all the ground which most agents need to know. Make it the very best you can, using all the creativity you'd use on your book. The query is part of the writing job, just as much as any other task. It deserves a serious commitment.

Then carefully read the submission guidelines for each agent. Read any interviews which they may have given. Try to imagine them as real, unique people. You're looking for a business partner who will work with you for many years. A careless "any agent will do" attitude will not serve you well if you get an agent who is wrong for YOU.

Then think about personalizing the query. Chances are it will not need much beyond getting the agent's name right, but there may be some common ground you share with that agent. Perhaps an unusual hobby, or background. Can you (perhaps) mention it in your short bio?

Finally use one of your greatest gifts, your empathy. Put the targeted query aside for a short time. Then reread it, trying to see it through that agent's eyes. How would you, if a busy agent perhaps reading the query along with dozens of others on your lunch break or home commute, react? Is there some fine-tuning you could make?

Does this sound like too much work? Consider that you have written a book which MAY reach many thousands of people, all over the world, for many years to come. It may provide inspiration and joy to all those people, help build your reputation as an author worth many people's time and money. Doesn't getting the right query to the right people deserve the effort?

I think that Janet is an expert on the things Janet wants in a query. I think the basics of her approach are transferrable to a majority of agents -- most of whom are deluged with query letters and unsolicited manuscripts. For example, I think she's dead on that the letter should start with a hook rather than an introduction to the writer. I think she's dead on that they need to be kept as short and fast moving as possible, and I think she's right in the fact that both you and the agent enjoy shelling won't do much to entice the agent to read if the hook and story idea does not.

I don't know if she's right about leaving out the bio stuff unless it's significant to your qualifications (for non-fiction). I think "Thank you for your time and consideration." Is a perfect way to end almost any proposition letter.

After a while, all that personalization stuff seems fake and forced, like you're looking to create a connection where one does not really exist. I used to have to do that in sales a lot -- try to find common ground. It's all bullshit. Tell your book's story, as quickly and as well and you can; if you do that, the rest will follow.

whiporee said:

I think that Janet is an expert on the things Janet wants in a query.

Click to expand...

QFT. And she's addressed the fact that she's not like all other agents in various places in her blog.

Many things transfer well, but if the agent you're querying says that they want a logline, or if they say in their guidelines or in their blog that they don't want the pitch part of your query letter to be more than one paragraph, it's probably a good idea to tailor it to what they say they like.

For me, in the absence of specific information about what the agent likes in terms of query format, I've been sending my "Janet Reid" style query with (when the information is available) a line near the end of the query about why I think this particular novel might interest this agent, or why I am querying them.

You say you're a sucker for romantic subplots.
You say you like stories about outsiders.
You say you have a weakness for stories with dogs in them.
You say you like fantasy in settings that don't feel just like the middle ages.
You rep so and so, and that's the style of fantasy I'm striving to write.
I was at a writer's conference where you gave a talk about X that was really interesting and helpful.
I follow your blog, and I really appreciate the advice you give to writers.

I don't think it hurts to let an agent know you've read their web site and/or blog and gave the query a bit of thought, rather than just shooting a form letter out by the dozens.

Sometimes, though, there's really no information at all, and I'm just just shooting in the dark. With those, my letters tend to be fairly generic. Take these thoughts for whatever they're worth, since I'm still querying, and haven't gotten past the polite "not quite form rejection" on a couple of fulls yet

I found my personal response rate and feedback from agents improved after I'd spent time selecting them from their potted biographies, stalking them round Twitter, flicking through the books they represented in the library and bookshop and tailoring my queries. Because of the personal feedback I knew they were reading a good portion of the three chapters.

Stalking them allowed me to point out the areas of my story that I thought might interest and intrigue them. (no directly just by highlighting it). It also allowed me to add a bit about why I had selected them specifically.

I found just checking names and submission details had a far poorer return on my time.

Perks said:

You'd be surprised how many people think "Dear Agent" or "To Whom It May Concern" is okay.

Click to expand...

There are some bigger agencies who ask you to do that, because it allows their readers to pass the query or submission onto what they feel is the most relevant agent.

I've phoned a couple up to be given that response. (one gave me a personal rejection from a specific agent so they weren't just fobbing me off).

pedroj012 said:

Basically what the title said. Are there just different camps on this?

Click to expand...

There are many ways to query and what works for some won't work for others. After all, mass mailings to "Occupant" generate enough sales that companies keep doing it. Of course, a 3 in 100 response rate is really good for mass marketing.

There are ways to better your odds...

Jeff

Perks said:

I don't know exactly how it was worded, but in the main, I would agree. A good query letter representing your work is the most efficient thing, and I can see where efficiency and professionalism is a better hook than detailing how much you like a prospective agents's blog, podcast interview, client list, etc.

Now, that said, none of this gets anyone off the hook for researching agents in advance to be sure you're sending queries to agents/agencies who are a) interested in the type of manuscript you've written and b) open to queries. Also, you still have to spell their names right.

Click to expand...

This.

WeaselFire said:

Of course, a 3 in 100 response rate is really good for mass marketing.

Click to expand...

I'd be ecstatic about a 3 in 100 response rate.

caw

I spent years applying for university teaching positions that I had to research extensively. There was a lot of wining and dining and schmoozing with people only to be rejected via form letter, and my pride couldn't take it after a while. So when it came to querying, I couldn't do the whole dance of "I think you'd be perfect for me because of X, Y and Z" again. I got their names, requirements, and genres right, and added something about a title they repped if I genuinely liked it. That was it. Either they liked the book or they didn't.

Turned out getting an agent was actually easier than getting a tenure-track job in my field (never happened). If I were doing it again, I'd probably use the MSWL website to research individual agent wants and preferences, but I still wouldn't commit that much time to following each agent on social media, etc. I haven't seen any correlation (for me) between personalization and positive responses.

What is the MSWL website?

I would personalise with the caveat -- only if I truly had to something to personalise with, not just "because"

So if I'd met them, interacted with them, they'd said they wanted a book like mine or I absolutely fell in love with a book they repped.

If I had nothing specific to put, I wouldn't sweat it -- I'd just send