Why are we authors such assholes?
I have a new rant. This rant is also about Authors, and the ego of authors.
I was perusing RejectionCollection.com today while waiting for the email to come in saying that I could work on the database project for work. Writers are getting GREAT rejection slips. They are recieving rejection slips that are form based, and getting some that are personally written.
And they go nuts over it. Some of the authors are even going so far as to say that the agent wouldn't know good writing or a good story if it hit them between the eyes. Or blaming their rejection on the young college student they imagine is going through the slush pile. And they all have one thing in common - they think what they have written is the best thing ever put on paper. That there couldn't possibly BE another story out there, or other writing, that is better.
Come on people *rolls eyes*. Get with the program. This is stupid. Why is it stupid? Well, first, if the agent is a good agent who has a track history of sales, then OBVIOUSLY THEY KNOW GOOD WORK WHEN THEY SEE IT, and you saying otherwise is stupid. If they DONT have a track history of sales, or any proof that they know what they are doing, then you are still stupid because you submitted to a sub-par agent. An agent who couldn't make sales even if they did accept you.
Then there is the claim about it being rejected by a college kid. Most agencies don't do this - most agencies read the queries themselves. The agents make money when they find an author that sells. They pay their bills and feed their cats from that money. It's in their best interest to find authors that write well, and are publishable/sellable. When they have someone going through that slush pile, that someone is looking for the basics, not the nuances. Look - the college kids/assistants are looking for things like:
Is it the correct genre?
Is it to the correct agent? (no blind sided queries that are obviously mass submissions)
Is it in the proper format?
Did the author pay attention to the guidelines and send what is required? Or did they just send the whole damn manuscript.(In the opinion of many agents, this is a big no-no. If they didn't ask for the whole thing, don't send it.)
Is there any sign of an amatuer (purple paper, perfumed paper, colored ink, bribes, etc)
Are there spelling mistakes/grammatical errors in the submission? ( A sure way to tell that the author didn't spend enough time on their submission, and therefore doesnt think much of the agent)
Then there are those authors who say things in tune with, "How can they tell from the first 2 pages if its good or not? The character was better on page 8!"
Agents AND editors have to think like readers. When YOU walk into a bookstore, you pick out a book - what do YOU do, before deciding to plunk down 8 bucks? You read the first few pages. Hell, maybe you don't even get that far, maybe you only read the synopsis on the back cover. By that you can figure out if you want to buy it or not. You don't sit down and read the entire thing. You most likely dont even read past the first three pages. So, since that experience is what causes you to buy, and buying pays the publisher, and the publisher pays the agent, can you tell me how you expect an agent to apply DIFFERENT rules? If the same process that a reader goes through is the same process that the agent and publisher go through, and your agent and publisher decline, what do you think the reader will do? Most likely, decline.
Rejected Authors keep saying how 'the publishing industry is going to hell' or mutter something about how there is a whole bunch of crap on the bookshelves at Barnes and Noble, how come their superb perfect novel is getting rejected? Buying books is SUBJECTIVE to the reader. Different people get turned on by different things. For instance, I cant stand westerns, nor can I stand romance. But there are some people who LOVE romance, and despise horror. Still there are some that like horror, and like Dean Koontz, but call Stephen King's works crap.
Getting an agent is getting a reader. Plain and simple. Your agent needs to LOVE your work. They need to rave about it, like you do to your friends and family when you find a book that is just awesome. If your agent doesnt love your book, they wont be able to sell it. Period. So your agent is really your first BIG reader. Your first real objective reader, who wants to be entertained. You have 1 page, and 1 idea to impress your readers with. Make it good. If its NOT selling, then examine your hook and examine your first few pages. Change them around and spice it up. Don't sit there and bitch about how agents don't know you're-the-next-stephenKing/DanielleSteele/DeanKoontz/etc etc. Don't get mad at the assistants and start calling them names.
I have a new rant. This rant is also about Authors, and the ego of authors.
I was perusing RejectionCollection.com today while waiting for the email to come in saying that I could work on the database project for work. Writers are getting GREAT rejection slips. They are recieving rejection slips that are form based, and getting some that are personally written.
And they go nuts over it. Some of the authors are even going so far as to say that the agent wouldn't know good writing or a good story if it hit them between the eyes. Or blaming their rejection on the young college student they imagine is going through the slush pile. And they all have one thing in common - they think what they have written is the best thing ever put on paper. That there couldn't possibly BE another story out there, or other writing, that is better.
Come on people *rolls eyes*. Get with the program. This is stupid. Why is it stupid? Well, first, if the agent is a good agent who has a track history of sales, then OBVIOUSLY THEY KNOW GOOD WORK WHEN THEY SEE IT, and you saying otherwise is stupid. If they DONT have a track history of sales, or any proof that they know what they are doing, then you are still stupid because you submitted to a sub-par agent. An agent who couldn't make sales even if they did accept you.
Then there is the claim about it being rejected by a college kid. Most agencies don't do this - most agencies read the queries themselves. The agents make money when they find an author that sells. They pay their bills and feed their cats from that money. It's in their best interest to find authors that write well, and are publishable/sellable. When they have someone going through that slush pile, that someone is looking for the basics, not the nuances. Look - the college kids/assistants are looking for things like:
Is it the correct genre?
Is it to the correct agent? (no blind sided queries that are obviously mass submissions)
Is it in the proper format?
Did the author pay attention to the guidelines and send what is required? Or did they just send the whole damn manuscript.(In the opinion of many agents, this is a big no-no. If they didn't ask for the whole thing, don't send it.)
Is there any sign of an amatuer (purple paper, perfumed paper, colored ink, bribes, etc)
Are there spelling mistakes/grammatical errors in the submission? ( A sure way to tell that the author didn't spend enough time on their submission, and therefore doesnt think much of the agent)
Then there are those authors who say things in tune with, "How can they tell from the first 2 pages if its good or not? The character was better on page 8!"
Agents AND editors have to think like readers. When YOU walk into a bookstore, you pick out a book - what do YOU do, before deciding to plunk down 8 bucks? You read the first few pages. Hell, maybe you don't even get that far, maybe you only read the synopsis on the back cover. By that you can figure out if you want to buy it or not. You don't sit down and read the entire thing. You most likely dont even read past the first three pages. So, since that experience is what causes you to buy, and buying pays the publisher, and the publisher pays the agent, can you tell me how you expect an agent to apply DIFFERENT rules? If the same process that a reader goes through is the same process that the agent and publisher go through, and your agent and publisher decline, what do you think the reader will do? Most likely, decline.
Rejected Authors keep saying how 'the publishing industry is going to hell' or mutter something about how there is a whole bunch of crap on the bookshelves at Barnes and Noble, how come their superb perfect novel is getting rejected? Buying books is SUBJECTIVE to the reader. Different people get turned on by different things. For instance, I cant stand westerns, nor can I stand romance. But there are some people who LOVE romance, and despise horror. Still there are some that like horror, and like Dean Koontz, but call Stephen King's works crap.
Getting an agent is getting a reader. Plain and simple. Your agent needs to LOVE your work. They need to rave about it, like you do to your friends and family when you find a book that is just awesome. If your agent doesnt love your book, they wont be able to sell it. Period. So your agent is really your first BIG reader. Your first real objective reader, who wants to be entertained. You have 1 page, and 1 idea to impress your readers with. Make it good. If its NOT selling, then examine your hook and examine your first few pages. Change them around and spice it up. Don't sit there and bitch about how agents don't know you're-the-next-stephenKing/DanielleSteele/DeanKoontz/etc etc. Don't get mad at the assistants and start calling them names.
Look at where the blame really belongs for a non-selling manuscript: In the mirror.
posted by DanStrohschein at 11:17 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home