So I saw this in Publisher’s Weekly online yesterday and bookmarked it to blog about, but then Janet Reid beat me to the punch.
Recently, funny things have been happening in my slush pile. I find myself receiving well-written, correctly formatted, professional-looking query letters from bad writers. Imagine my chagrin: one minute I’m intrigued by a smoothly crafted query letter, the next I’m staring down at a crackpot writing sample.
I wondered how long this would take.
I will always and forever remember a story my dad told about Hardee’s barbecue sauce and a taste-tester he met. The point wasn’t to make a standout barbecue sauce. The point was to make the barbecue sauce as inoffensive as possible to the largest number of people.
So I’ll call it the Hardee’s BBQ Sauce Query.
One comment on Janet Reid’s blog summed up my thoughts quite nicely:
Post Summary: In the 21st Century, people can Google query on how to do something and find carefully composed instructions. Thus, the prior vetting process is no long efficient for the Literary Agent.
My 2 Cents: Awesome. Adjust or die.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Lovely! That’s right, I am taking exquisite glee in the fact that the fill in the blank query letter instructions (“and don’t forget the hook!!!”) they’ve been forcefeeding aspiring writers with for so long is backfiring on ‘em.
Schadenfreude. It’s not just for breakfast anymore.
November 19th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
That cracked me right up.
November 19th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
It’s a very good point. How does an agent know if a book is as good as the query? Why not just request a partial from everyone?
Or what if you have the reverse? Someone who can’t write a query to save their life, but can write wonderful books?
And how long before you have to have an agent to get an agent, to get a publisher, to get a reader. The whole system gets a little goofier every day.
November 19th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Also, I’m not really sure that books ought to go through their first level of the vetting process with: “It’s like the Terminator meets The Secret Life of Bees” anyway.
November 20th, 2008 at 11:39 am
.
I have a question for y’all.
I have a very hard time being strictly professional in my queries. They are always well crafted, but I can’t always quite stick to the rules. As the prefab query gains traction, do you think this will become more help and less liability?
November 20th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Funny boy.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
.
Um, no. I’m quite serious.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
See, that’s what you get for being droll 75% of the time.
Could go either way, I guess. The article said that particular agent has been skimming the queries and going straight to the writing sample. I can’t think but that he’s representative of others who won’t actually say so.
On the other hand, most of the agents I’ve seen want query letters and nothing more. I’ll start being suspicious of this trend if more agents start wanting to see writing samples with the query letters.
I DO think this attitude about query letters has a long way to go before it tips, though.
November 20th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
.
It’s hard to know how my own querying habits serve me. I can’t tell if a new query makes more difference than a different editor. And I don’t see, oh, Bennington or Iowa funding research to double-blind editors and agents to see what difference there may be.
November 20th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Yeah, the whole query process was a bit wonky (tee hee Hardees BBQ Query) and I’m not surprised some are taking this approach with so much emphasis being on query letter perfection. I see it even in writing forums. Must write query. Rewrite query. Polish query, etc. As evil as they are, I think synopses are better to get an idea of the story along with some writing samples in the submission.
I’m with Zoe though. How long before authors are going to need an agent to get an agent? I do wonder if agents are getting more inundated with submissions or less. One things for sure based on Bransford’s recent blog, agents are a little nervous now with economic publishing cut backs.
One interesting thing I do notice is some agents have ‘day jobs’ since things are getting/have been so bad.
November 20th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
I think what has always given me such trouble with queries is:
Advice A by Workshopping Agent: Don’t make it like a back blurb.
Advice B by Workshopping Agent: Make it more like a back blurb.
Huh. Well, agents have to eat, too. This isn’t going to be an easy ride for any of us.
November 21st, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Thanks for the link. Like RJ, it gave me a little evil joy reading it.
November 25th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
I often have a schadenfreudish-anticipatory moment (I’ll have to look up the rules for putting all that in one hugeongous German word) when I see forums where aspiring authors get feedback on query letters. I think a similar phenomenon’s seen in job applications: a boring but boilerplate-correct letter accompanying a nightmare of a resume.
Speaking of…. I love the slush pile in Foucault’s Pendulum. Half the pile is conspiracy tomes about the Knights Templar, Rosicrucians, or Masons. Apparently you can always identify the crazies, not necessarily by the quality of the writing but by the subject matter : )
November 25th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
If I didn’t already love you, I’d be crushing on you like crazy right now. That’s one of my mostest favoritest books EVER by one of my mostest favoritest authors EVER!!!
That’s so painful. I never look. I’m allergic to emotional gore.
November 25th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Eco ecco echo!
That, and I don’t really believe in writing by committee. Makes more sense to show it to one or two select people.
November 25th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
.
Great. Another book I own but haven’t read. When am I supposed to have time to write?