Comme si, comme ca
This has been a good week writing wise. In addition to writing every day, working on two short stories and my WIP, “…And the Angels Sing,” I got a request for chapters and a rejection. I feel pretty damn good. Of course, whenever I get a response to a query, I always promptly reach for the Lindt Chocolate Truffles, whether to celebrate or mourn—any excuse for chocolate. I expect if I ever get an offer of representation or an editor offers me a two-book deal, I’ll end up in the ER with an OD of Lindt’s hazelnut truffles (sick but happy).
Got to thinking about the rejections I’ve gotten over the years and how there seems to be whole genres of rejection letters, particularly the form rejection. There’s the clipped, blunt kind that makes me feel awful for wasting that agent’s time. There’s the nice, encouraging kind that, after the sting of the “no,” makes me think, “hmm, I may not be so crappy after all.” Then there’s the typo-filled, grammar-butchering kind, usually addressed to “Sir or Madam,” that gives me a good laugh.
I know I’m not alone in having been rejected by agents who use my SASE to shill his/her book on writing (the ultimate indignity would be a promo for a book entitled, “How to Write a Query That Will Sell Your Book!”). I’ve gotten rejected with my own query letter, the agent’s terse “no” scribbled in over my killer opening sentence. I even got a rejection in my SASE addressed to someone else. I imagined the scene at the agency, the rejection letters zipping down an out of control conveyor belt and the poor slob being paid $5.50 an hour to stuff the envelopes scrambling to put them in order. Bet he needed a double dose of Lindt Truffles after that screw-up!
I guess agents are a necessary evil in modern publishing and I do feel for the agents who get thousands of bad queries each year (a little bit, anyway). I’m sure they have to deal with their share of disgruntled writers who won’t take no for an answer. Maybe that’s why the form rejections are sometimes worded so bizarrely, so that there is no risk of offending the writer (and perhaps end up with a dead squirrel stapled to your office door) or, worse, encouraging them (and maybe getting a live squirrel instead).
Keep writing and remember, no power in the ‘verse can stop me (except a bad agent).
Got to thinking about the rejections I’ve gotten over the years and how there seems to be whole genres of rejection letters, particularly the form rejection. There’s the clipped, blunt kind that makes me feel awful for wasting that agent’s time. There’s the nice, encouraging kind that, after the sting of the “no,” makes me think, “hmm, I may not be so crappy after all.” Then there’s the typo-filled, grammar-butchering kind, usually addressed to “Sir or Madam,” that gives me a good laugh.
I know I’m not alone in having been rejected by agents who use my SASE to shill his/her book on writing (the ultimate indignity would be a promo for a book entitled, “How to Write a Query That Will Sell Your Book!”). I’ve gotten rejected with my own query letter, the agent’s terse “no” scribbled in over my killer opening sentence. I even got a rejection in my SASE addressed to someone else. I imagined the scene at the agency, the rejection letters zipping down an out of control conveyor belt and the poor slob being paid $5.50 an hour to stuff the envelopes scrambling to put them in order. Bet he needed a double dose of Lindt Truffles after that screw-up!
I guess agents are a necessary evil in modern publishing and I do feel for the agents who get thousands of bad queries each year (a little bit, anyway). I’m sure they have to deal with their share of disgruntled writers who won’t take no for an answer. Maybe that’s why the form rejections are sometimes worded so bizarrely, so that there is no risk of offending the writer (and perhaps end up with a dead squirrel stapled to your office door) or, worse, encouraging them (and maybe getting a live squirrel instead).
Keep writing and remember, no power in the ‘verse can stop me (except a bad agent).
posted by Janet at 5:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home