How to use this Page

awesome story. I always get teary when they talk about Gracie's death too.

Nice work, you really nailed George, and hi cigar, too!

love this, I agree with FrankenBarry, really nice job on George Burns, looks like Benny too, but George has that extra something.I always love your writing too.

Great caricatures of Burns and Benny.

It is so interesting that I came across this today, for just yesterday I was telling my husband about the rivalry between these two ---trying to make each other laugh ---but I couldn't remember which one was always able to keep a straight face.

So, it was Benny who, on a Johnny Carson show, told the story that he and Burns were staying in the same hotel. Jack called Burns and asked him to come to his room. He took off all his clothes except socks and a hat and stood on the bed. When he heard a knock on the door, he simply said, "Come in" to the shock of the maid that Burns had sent to the room, knowing Benny was up to something.

I really enjoyed your drawing ---and my trip down memory lane.

If the literary agent is worried about his reputation over this, the simple answer is: don't.

Speaking as a writer who's going to be researching agents when my book is finished, the opinion of a blogger whose proposal was rejected will mean absolutely zilch to me. They don't know you, they have no reputation, and the fact they're whining about a form rejection says more about them than it does about you.

Now, if I see authors you're representing bitching about you, that's a different kettle of spam.

Rejection is part of business. ... If you are too thin-skinned to take it, change professions.

Now that I've said that, let me observe that some form rejections are pretty thoughtless. I've been a bit spoiled by nice personal notes, but I've had my share of "form rejections." Some are neutral, not-for-us kinds of things. Some are just clueless and rude. Do what we writers must do: Have someone review your form letter.

Ask Miss Snark to post it here. We'll review it for you. We're experts. We see more types of rejetion letters than you do!

I'm not joking. Some people just don't understand that a form rejection can be as rude as a nasty personal letter. It's all in the tone and appearance.

I'd be happy to rate your form letter. ... So would dozens of others experts who haunt Miss Snark's blog. Even Bill E. Goat would review your form letter!

Best,

Sha'el of the Pixies,
Suzarian of Fairie,
Queen of Goats

While I've perused the Rejection Collection now and again, it gets dull after a while when you read several authors' long-winded rant and realize they're all ranting about form letters. Author responses to seriously unprofessional rejections are funny. Author responses to standard form letters that we've all seen many, many times before just aren't.

So if there are authors out there ranting about agents who sent form letters, those authors need a few lessons in how this industry works.

Not to mention thicker hides.

Authors who already know how the system works won't be the least bit affected by the rants of authors who don't. In fact, most experienced authors, published or not, will look at those rants and think, "Geez, get a clue."

To follow on bill, I'm thinking that if I see an agent whining about someone with no reputation whining about a form rejection, that does reflect badly on the agent.

Someone who is unprofessional enough to post things like that with their name attatched is probably too unprofessional to produce a truly professional piece of work that you would be likely to accept. I think it's a self-contained problem.

sha'el, I just got a couple of forms that fall into the category of thoughtlessly rude (one of them said something like "Agent So-and-So is currently looking for new clients, but only on work she feels is well-written and engaging").

Interesting, Elektra. Writers beg agents to give some indication of the writing. I've seen suggestions that agents have two or three different form letters for perceived quality of the submission: close, nice but not exceptional enough to catch my attention, wake up and smell the coffee - your writing stinks.

Now, in your case, the letters probably WERE rude (I know you're a professional writer). But what if they were the type of form feedback being clamored for? If this agent was really trying to be helpful. How would the recipient know?

P&E has nothing against form letters. In fact, we view those as necessary in an industry where agents and publishers alike sometimes have hundreds of query letters and submissions arrive weekly. In fact, we view personal letters as being more cruel. Some are much too vague in trying to convey a sympathetic no. Others mixed up information in sending a rejection so that it appeared the agent or publisher hadn't actually read anything. In fact, the best ones have been brief and conveyed only that the submission wouldn't be a good match for the agent.

It's better to let the writer join some critique groups if the writer wants feedback. Then the writer will be among other writers who are also readers. If other readers don't like what a writer has to offer, then maybe it's just not ready.

Um...I have trouble believing this person is really an agent. They sound more like a writer fishing to find out if agents have a hidden "blacklist" website out there.

Dear Anon. of the last sort:

I have no trouble seeing her as professional. We seldom realize what the true weight or effect of our written word is.

Elektra's naughty agent is of the rude sort, and probably intentionally so. But ... one never knows. They may be clueless and rude. Or just rude. Or just clueless. see?

I'm working my cute little pixie fingers to the bone trying to finish a (yes they WANT TO SEE IT! Yipee) journal article that summarizes a longer bit of research. So there's this sticky, puzzling aspect to Mr. I Am Almost God's life. I email a historian from MY-church-has-a-really-long-name for information. She, kind soul that she is, refers me to Wickedpedia. Umm this is on the far edge of clueless ... but nice. See?

(She followed that up with an apology and an invitation to speak at a conference later this year. She's a nice person. She isn't mean. We all do clueless things. see?)

I was serious when I said our mystery agent should post her form letter. What better way to see how people are reacting to it?

It is important for her to know that. Why? Well, I've gotten "write something else for us" letters. They fall into two piles: 1. your letter is so nasty, the only thing I'd ever write for you is a funeral notice; 2. Humm, how nice. When I'm finished with my nutzoid 19th Century prophet, I just might....

My reaction is to what's printed in an email or form letter or personal not, not to a voice from which one can measure tone and intent.

She should post it. We're meanies, but we will tell her. Well, some of us are meanies. I'm ALWAYS nice. ALWAYS.

Last anon, the writer is a lit agent or at least someone with an email address from an agency I know.

So do agents have some sort of hidden blacklist site? I'm curious.

Miss Snark: Thank you for the clarification. I suppose the agent must be relatively new, then, and thus hasn't yet developed the alligator-hide-in-lieu-of-skin s/he needs. (That will come, I'm sure; prolonged exposure to nitwits speeds the growth of such.)

H.R.H. Sha'el: You're quite right that the diversity of reactions people have to a given piece of writing can shock the person who wrote it. Probably that's all that was happening in the case of this agent. :-)

A hidden black list site? How interesting. ... I don't think so, but they do gossip.

Be nice to agents, even if you think they're lily-livered (what is that anyway?) pusillanimous, frog-eating, Absinthe imbibing, goat-haters. ... Because they gossip.

Don't you? Booksellers and historians do. Goat-herds do. Agents do too. They sit around tables in dimly-lit bistros and tell stories about slush piles, query letters and rude authors.

And NEVER spill a latte' on an agent. That's very bad form.

It's odd that a literary agent would ask Miss Snark what she should do rather than ask, I don't know, someone at her/his own agency, but I suppose that is another matter.

I don't at all condone spouting off publicly about how horible rejection is and how it absolutely can hurt you at times. But I can see why others would.

For fun, I think the agent in question should write a quick query letter, for any type of project, and send it out to twenty-five agents/editors and see the responses she/he gets.

Only then will this agent understand the frustration level: a seven month wait for a photocopied, coffee-spilled on, form rejection letter from someone who has scribbled your name at the top, and mispelled it at that.

It simply breeds frustration. To want to make a website listing all these writers as "clients from hell" might not be helpful.

Instead, possibly the agent could remember that for HER agency, she can get things done quicker/better/nicer, even for rejection, and take satisfaction that she is honorable and respectful of writers, when, sorry, a lot of people in this business are not.

BTW, I'm not a bitter, unpublished writer, either. I have a great agent and a YA novel coming out this summer. But I'd be lying if I didn't say that at times, this business has broken my heart.

I think this agent is divinely sneaky. And efficient.

She's getting the message out to a whole lot of would-be writers at once (and who else reads Miss Snark's blog?) that people who take form rejections to mean anything other than 'no thanks' are way WAY too tied up with themselves.

Sneaky, and snarky.

I hope that next time I say something really ummm ummm not as bright and scintillating as it should be, that I'm thought of as brilliant too.

I think she was hurt by what she read about herself. I think she didn't intend to upset anyone beyond saying, "no." And I think she felt put upon and abused by the unintended responses to her form letter.

We can't control the reactions of others, and neither do we need to slap back.

She has my profoundest Pixie sympathies. I still want to see the form letter.

Sorry to weigh in late here, but the whole wananbes ranting foolishly about rejection letters thing has been rather famously covered by a well known Tor editor: http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html

Agent:

Don't sweat it. Writers make themselves look like morons, not you.

Smart writers vent to one another and our friends (who care) when we get a rejection. All it really means is our feelings were hurt. Those of us who can get over it and keep writing might eventually succeed.

Those of us who give up after multiple rejections... just leave more room for the persistent (and, of course, talented) to get accepted.

In any case, YOU don't look bad unless you snipe back. But sure, put those writers on your own little List of Horrors. Share it with friends or fellow agents, if you want. If those horrors wrote a great novel, though, wouldn't you change your mind?

The absolute best response to a rejection letter is here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU4S2BIqoHY

If the agent can't take rejection, then get out of the business. She can hand it out, but can't take it herself. That's pretty funny! So I guess writers have to take it because they are the ones who slaved over their books for years--they are the ones with the talent and the creativity--but agents who spend ten minutes on the book are allowed to comment on it but writers can't comment back. Huh!!! Did she even think twice about asking such a rediculous question.

"We don't want clients who are going to fuck us"...unlike say Xavier Hollander...OK as you were!

Sounds like someone needs to visit the Nitwit Lounge and see a demonstration of Miss Snark's special vegetable chopper.

My husband isn't even a writer and he wouldn't do anything this stupid. He laughed his ass off at your headline. Now he knows why I'm always quoting you.

Before your agent finds out through someone who knows someone, I would fess up in a second email 0- and then a call if needs be - about what you did, how it happened, and why you've realized it was a dumb mistake. After your agent reads this, you'll know everything you need to. Did s/he see the proposal in the first place, will s/he still represent you, and if so, will s/he represent this new project.

Unless, of course, there's more to the story than what you've shared, and you meant to say that you not only heard nothing back after one email, but after a succession of emails and even a call. This happened to me, but I emailed several times, then called several times, then found a new agent. If you seriously only sent one email, then Miss Snark was right about the nitwit of the year award. Sorry.

The reason your agent may have put your query aside is that you might not be contractually free to submit another book proposal. Many contracts stipulate that you have to turn in your current book and have it accepted before you're free to submit another book proposal.

Does the writer have any concept of a contract? That piece of paper with words printed on it he/she/it signed?

I'll bet he/she/it didn't read it!

it's nice to know that whatever dumb-ass things i do between now and december 31, 2007, i sure as hell won't risk the title of "nitwit of the fucking year" being given to me on a silver platter.

Somebody just got a new hole in their derrière.

I'm still stuck on the submitting a proposal for book #2 when book #1 isn't finished yet. Once you've got book #1 finished, then you can have multiple projects in the pipeline, but until then, it seems like as agent, editor or concerned blog reader, I want to know that you can finish a book before I'm willing to deal with the prospect of your starting the next one.

On the other hand, it seems more acceptable to submit a query on book #3 while book #2 is being written, assuming that book #1 was done on time and with decent quality.

Um--how about finishing the first project and really making your name mean something w/your agent and publisher and publicity people? I know it's flattering that 15 people want to see your proposal but you are shooting yourself in the foot. Doesn't your current publisher have first right of refusal? You should work hard to make your first book a success and get in good w/all involved. That way, you will get a bigger advance for the 2nd. And you have to be loyal to your agent unless they have given you are reason not to be. Geez.

a quick courteous email with 'just touching base' as a subject header works wonders nineteen times out of twenty. assuming you're communicating with someone you already have a professional relationship with, that is.

i also suggest doublechecking and maybe resetting your internal clock before taking anything resembling a radical step. when they're in waiting-to-hear-back mode, writers' internal clocks tend to rack up imaginary time the way that funky clock on the old stove in your grandmother's kitchen does.

If I would you, I'd call my agent groveling for forgiveness. Someone earlier said to send an email, but you have way more explaining to do than an email allows. Then I would finish the first book! No publisher wants a one title author. They want a brand. If you can't finish the first book, then you have no right to be wheeling and dealing on a second.

How can this person, obviously lacking any common sense whatsoever, have acquired an agent without knowing ANY of the ropes?

As lovely as Nitwit's newly-ripped keister hole may be, you've got to grant a couple kudos for what must have been some damn fine writing.

Wow.
I need a nap.

If you (Nitwit of the fucking year) do not even know if your agent has seen your query, why the hell don't you find out before making a complete ass out of yourself?

Another reason why it's a good idea to send the first chapters is that, odds are, those are the chapters that people will read in the bookshop to decide whether or not they want to buy the book. Hence, the agent needs to know if they're engaging or not.

If you are't happy with the first chapters, they'll need rewriting anyway. But if they're funny, then that should be fine. I'm only guessing here, but I suspect that one reason why your book gets into 'full-tilt craziness' around page 50 is that it takes 50 pages to set up the situation enough that disrupting it becomes funny. In which case, without reading the first 50 pages, the agent won't fully get the joke.

Readers will read the first 50 pages first unless they're very eccentric, so go with those. Good luck...

Why do you want to do this?

When your book is published, do you think you'll be able to put a sticker on the front cover saying 'Readers are advised to read chapters one and two then skip to chapter ten where the action really gets going.'

Your prospective agent is a reader. If s/he isn't engaged by chapters one to three, how do you know a book-buyer will be?

I knew my book wasn't ready to send yet when I wanted to send the third and fourth chapter instead of the first and second.


I fixed up 1st and 2nd but then I realized that the second chapter was better.

It's chapter one now!

Maybe your novel just needs to start at Chapter 10. Just sayin'.

I've always believed this was a standard practice (Miss Snark's reply), and then the other day I receive this from an editor: "We would be interested in seeing a short excerpt that reflects the conflict within the story."

And that's exactly what I sent. But having worked as an editor, I don't think I would have requested material this way.

This is a ridiculous practice. I'm not suggesting you go against what they ask for, but the idea that starting at page one every time gives the reader a better understanding of the overall book is not always true, especially when you then cut them off at page ten. Guess that's what a synopsis is for.

It's this notion that books have to pack big thrills into the first few pages to get noticed that disturbs me. This is why we write books, because we have 300 pages and several evenings of someone's time to weave a rich tale that develops at a slower pace, instead of a 90-minute film with explosions before the title cards. We don't have to "hook" people in that sense. Not that it's an excuse to be boring, but the first couple of chapters might be a lot more expository than plotty or flowery.

I disagree about bookstore browsers, doubting most flip to page one to see if they like you. No, they peep a blurb, maybe the inside flap, and then probably scan some random paragraphs in the middle to feel out the prose.

I'd be sure your intro is strong and representative, but if the reader already knows what the story is about, I wish they'd let me send them a brilliant Chapter Three than a fluffy Chapter One, especially with nonlinear structure where the third is more like the beginning. This is a writing sample. Even an iTunes Store sample starts :30 into the song so that you can hopefully catch part of the chorus before time runs out.

This is sound advice for fiction, but what about non-fiction?

Since it is sold on proposal, many guides recommend you write the first chapter and then another chapter that reflects a different part of the book. I have seen agent websites specifically detail to carefully choose what chapters you send. My book has two sections, so I wrote chapter 1 and then a chapter of section 2.

If an agent does not specify when requesting two non-fiction chapters, can I still send these two separate chapters, or is this utter nitwittery?

G: I suppose you may be right for certain types of fiction. But I suspect that mystery/thriller/genre readers like to start with a pop. Myself, I do read the first few pages to see if I like the style, can get into the story, etc.

calling things "stupid ass shit" when they're stupid ass shit is one of the things i respect about miss snark.

i read this blog just for my daily dose of that.

G,

If chapter 1 is fluffy and chapter 3 is brilliant. You should kill off chapters 1 and 2 and start with 3.

Just saying

Julia, I'm not so much hung up about the quality or evenness of the writing, I'm more talking about how what comes first in a book is not always indicative of the rest of the work. I'd rather submit a "representative sample." I don't think as many people would've bought Dark Side of the Moon or 1984 after judging the opening minute.

g's statements are a reminder of why it is meaningless to pursue the purposes driving authorial intent.

sort of.

as a literary scholar, i learned that it is a pointless endeavor to try to understand or pinpoint what an author's intent is behind pursuing a particular theme or using a particular literary device.

g's comments illustrate an issue on the other side of the coin: an author who does not intend to introduce even the beginnings of a story's conflict in the first coupla pages and chapters but still thinks those introductory pages/chapters will be entertaining/interesting/whatever to the reader.

all's i







know is, as your typical reader at large, that when i buy a book, the first few pages should at least be related to the back cover's summary. if the back cover says something like "insecure jane, as the middle child of her family, is unhappy with her overbearing parents and bullying siblings until the day she meets mr. x who introduces her to glorious murder and mayhem," then, even if mr. x doesn't get introduced until page 2031, i still expect the first chapter or so to show jane in all her insecure glory or to accurately reflect that description of her family or show why an intervention of mr. x will be a welcome or unwelcome invasion into that existence.

the best books do that. case in point: henry miller's tropic of cancer. the opening chapter says, "people are like lice. they get under your skin and bury themselves there. you scratch and scratch until the blood comes, but you can't get permanently deloused." and the whole novel is totally fixated on this theme. awesome book!

----------------------------
re: g's reference to dark side of the moon

as in pink floyd's masterpiece album??

imho, that opening sequence for the first song on there is absolutely awesome and fitting for the entire concept of that album. i don't see how it can be considered extraneous or there-just-for-the-sake-of-being-there, filler music. most of pink floyd's albums in the post-barrett era are entirely mood albums; dark side is no different. and as a lover of all their albums, i can't think of a single one where a song detracted or didn't at least go along with the overall theme of the album. . . .

so i don't get it.

I'm not saying Dark Side's opening isn't fitting or brilliant – I think it's perfect – just that it's musique-concrete, sound effects and whatnot that doesn't precisely allude to the melodic brilliance that follows. Same with 1984 (Van Halen), it's a long, droning solo synth. Sorry, first examples I could think of.

Maybe your books starts off with some gimmicky medical report, or a written letter in a third-party voice. Stuff like that.

One thing worth remembering is that a writer's style is an important factor. I don't necessarily mean that all novelists have to be amazing stylists - but they do have to be able to string a sentence together, in a way that can be understood, can be read without pain, and will make readers want to read the next one. That, you can tell from the first chapter.

Presumably the agent will request the rest of the book if she likes the first three chapters, so she can see how the plot pans out if you get to that stage. But one thing she'll be checking out is simply whether the author can, at the most fundamental level, actually write. That'll be evident in the first chapters.

There's a reason why the agents ask for the first three chapters. Many writers waste these chapters trying to warm up into the story--they introduce all the characters, explain the backstory, might do a flashback or two, but never start the story itself. This is so common it's why writing books start out with advice like "Throw out the first fifty pages."

You don't need to start with a big bang in the first chapter, but you do need to show that the story is moving forward and something interesting is happening.

My friend is planning to do this. She told me, "I'm going to buck tradition and send the most interesting chapters; to heck with the rules." She fears that the first three chapters are rather dull and the action doesn't kick in until chapter 8 (which is her "favorite" chapter), so why not send her "best chapters" out?

I've given up trying to reason with her.

Of course, Chapter 14 is always the exception to the rule. ;)

About the Dark Side of the Moon comparison, I think there are two things that differ:

1. An album of music is not the same as a novel. Even a concept album, which has a focused flow, still has separate songs that can stand outside of the album. People's first exposure to DSOTM could have been hearing "Money" on the radio, and they'd decide to buy the album based on that. However, very few people get exposed to novels on the basis of overhearing a chapter in the middle of the book. Perhaps a short story, and if you were querying a collection of short stories you might send a story from the middle of the book... but then, if you're querying short stories, you need all the luck you can get.

2. Dark Side of the Moon was Pink Floyd's eighth album. They had a fan base who was willing to listen to their new stuff and get into it. As beginning writers, we don't have that. If a new Stephen King novel starts with a long confusing experimental chapter, King's readers will read through it eagerly, to get to the good stuff. As a new writer, you want to put the hit single first.

Heidi the Hick said: "I knew my book wasn't ready to send yet when I wanted to send the third and fourth chapter instead of the first and second."

Seriously; the fact that my first chapter of my superhero-antics masterwork isn't representative bothers me muchly. It's something I'm fighting. Don't go down like a lily-livered cop-out...inflict damage till you're out!
Okay. I just mean, this is not a good thing. And I know where you're coming from, but it's not good.

Listen to Miss Snark!

UNLESS YOU ARE WOODY ALLEN!
then you can marry young girls. Or,
since you are a proven comic genius, you can play a japanese detective movie out of order, backwards, sideways and any way you can arrange the scenes.
DUB idiotic dialog into it and call it WHAT's UP Tiger Lily!

But if you have no track record, no published novel. Then Listen To Miss Snark.

Alternatively, you can pick up a book and read three chapters out of order to see if it makes any sense!

It doesn't, it won't and it can't

And music is not prose. Poetry is not music. Prose is not poetry.
Is is not not is (as the poet says)

Listen to Miss Snark!

in g's defense, dark side of the moon is a good analogy for what s/he was trying to explain. i totally understand what s/he was trying to say. i mean, it was a totally bull-shit argument --

but i still give it, eh, 2 out of four stars.

Good points, Andrew; they are very different case studies, and music definitely isn't sold the same way. Maybe my iTunes analogy was more appropriate (if it's an unfamiliar artist).

I agree that your style/tone/skillz should be apparent from the beginning. I've really learned how challenging it is to maintain that voice consistency over a several-year project (when in first-person character, I mean, not just the writer's own generic POV).

So if a reader senses competence and enjoys my narrator's style in the page-one sample, they'll just have to trust that the plot is coming. I direct videos for a living, and look to books (and my own non-screen writing) to slow things down and dig deeper at my own pace.

I think too many literary novelists these days think it's necessary to put something stunning and shocking in the first chapter or even sentence, to entice the reader. I'm kind of getting tired of reading books that start with statements like "When I found the body, it was still warm." Yeah, whatever.

But when I browse a book, I do look for evidence of the writer's strong voice in the first paragraph. Nothing much happens on the first page of Jonathan Franzen's The Corrections-- a prairie wind blows, a clock strikes--but he manages to describe it in such a way that you will know instantly whether you like his style or you don't. I suppose an agent should be able to tell the same from your first chapters (even first page).

Now, as a person who sometimes reads books for professional reasons that I wouldn't have chosen if left to my own devices, I know a great novel CAN have a flabby, uninspired beginning. Indecision is one title that comes to mind-- I was ready to put it down after the first chapter, but I ended up loving it. I guess some agent was more perceptive than I.

But... I know a woman who self-published a really, really excellent novel. An excellent novel with an awkward first chapter that didn't represent what was great about the book. I can't help thinking that if she'd changed the beginning, her two-year agent search might have paid off.

That's a good point, Fuchsia. Perhaps beginning novelists think the only way to attract an agent's attention is with shock and awe, and either put an attempt at shock in the first paragraph, or are tempted to show agents the sixth chapter when the REALLY shocking stuff happens.

Yet agents have seen all the shocking stuff. When they read the first chapter, they're looking for whether you're able to competently write a first chapter. If they like the first chapter, then they'll read the whole thing and get the Chapter 6 shocker.

To get this done, the first chapter doesn't have to be mind-blowing. It just has to be good.