At one point at this Spring's 2011 Insider's Guide to How to Get Published I feared that a few writers might actually flay our lovely yearbook editor for not providing them with the definitive, catch-all answer to securing a book deal. In fairness to Jo, her talk was on How to Assemble a Book Proposal and not on The Definite Failsafe Guide to Avoiding Rejection.
I understand the vexation of course. why would anyone ask you to run a gauntlet after completing a marathon? and yet that's exactly what agents do demand. every single agency site now seems to offer up their own particular rules applying to how you should submit a query to them. why do agencies do it? to distinguish the professional from the riffraff? to test your mettle? or simply a personal preference of someone who, more than likely, is no longer even with the company?
let's look at it from the agent's point of view. they have thousands of submissions each year, and it seems reasonable to ask you - the individual - to take the time to demonstrate that you are serious and not a time waster. what they ignore, or simply don't care to entertain, is that you are repeating this exercise countless times. and now from your point of view. you are exactly that - one person. with commitments and responsibilities. why should you be faced with this extra administrative task that is time-consuming, frustrating and often disheartening?
is standardization across the board the answer? or personalization?
what would standardization mean? the negative impact of one size fits all? or a professional standard to which all agents could buy into? some common ground on which they could all unite. a template they could direct all writers too, found on the writers' & artists' website.
what might personalization entail? an agency may very well specify that they are interested in literary fiction but, as anyone in publishing knows, choices at the early stages are often subjective. I once worked with an agent who was specifically interested in international women's stories but had a real aversion to magic realism. she could have been sent a script by isabelle allende, and would have turned it down. what if agents and editors had personal profiles on the writers & artists site listing their preferences? i'm not talking crime fiction or science fiction here but more subtle preferences i.e, a love of urban literature or time slips or confessional narratives. now surely that would be a more effective and satisfying way of finding a match?
what would you rather? should Writers' & Artists' be launching a campaign on your behalves for Standardizatin or Personalization?
(Editorial Manager)
Hi - my first comment on here! I've just completed a fairly intensive 'trawl' of literary agents and whilst I can see how it's disheartening to see a variety of submission criteria there did seem to be a common element with most (the 1st 3 chapter thing in particular) so to some extent it is standardised to some degree already.
I have to agree with Kushdie's comments in general - you're surely looking for someone you can relate to pretty well and so it's a bit like going to a dating agency almost? lol
Once I got into a rhythm in my very cursory search for likely agent 'mates' I started the rejecting process based on what submissions they didn't want and so I DIDN'T shortlist agents who wouldn't take on SF&F work ('cos I love it!) but did look more seriously at those who had authors I admire on their client list, as my own criteria to sift in or out. I'm a newcomer to all this so standarisation is good to some extent, but I'm not a clone and neither should my potential agent be one. Now all I have to do is see what they want and whether I can deliver that, provided they're showing me that they can and are already dealing with people who are at least a little like me.
And I'll go one further than John Wilson and say that, as well as mutual respect, there has to be some smidgeon of mutual attraction in there, so personal really is right up there too.
Agents need to be likeable, communicative, distinguishable from the crowd and human to authors, and they won't achieve this by getting into uniform and making authors fill in application forms.
Hi All,
I think personalisation. I have enough rejection letters /emails to make me stop and ponder why my work has been rejected. My conclusion is that agents have a tough job and can only engage full heartedly with publishers about a book if they can emotionally engage with the book themselves (as well convince themselves of the book's commercial potential).
So, its personal.
Nicola, I agree with your conclusions.
All the best