#queryfail - Grow up, people!
Last Thursday, some agents and editors on Twitter got together and did the first round of what they called Queryfail. Essentially, they devoted their day to posting snippets or general comments about the queries they read that day to show why the queries were rejected. Most left out anything that could be used by an outsider to pinpoint who the query belonged to. There appeared to be one or two who ignored that, but such things are beside the point. For the most part, the agents would give specific examples and move on. A few made snarky comments, but those tended to happen later in the day, and I, for one, would have said much worse if I'd been in their shoes.
By the following day, people across Twitter and various blogs complained about #queryfail. They bitched about the snark, the (few) identifiers, the theft of material, and most often about the agents/editors who participated.
We'll start with the snark. Most of it came from the people following the stream rather than from the agents themselves. Having said that, I felt in most cases the agents were kind. They tried to convey what certain choice phrases made them think. And, honestly, it was the only part that helped me to some degree (more on this later).
The inclusion of personal identifiers. Rare. I think there was ONE that mentioned a person's last name. Not their first, just their last. I looked the name up on HowManyOfMe.com and there are over 3700 people with that last name in the U.S. (as a comparison, there are less than 340 people in the country with either my maiden name or my current last name). So, while it personally identified ONE of those 3700+ people, sorry, it didn't point a direct finger.
Material theft. People claimed that posting part of the query letter constituted theft. First, I'm fairly certain that unsolicited mail can be used for any purpose the recipient wants (including toilet paper). Strange how writers are more than willing to post the entire content of the rejection letters they receive online, but the agent who they send the initial query to isn't entitled to do the same with any or all of the query. Pot, meet Kettle. Get over yourself and have a nice day.
Participating agents/editors. At least one received a "threat" to contact her boss about #queryfail. All of them have been vilified to some degree on various blogs. Enough, people. You are (for the most part) adults, start acting like it. Having a teensy portion of your query letter disected on #queryfail is just the tip of the iceberg on how critics will rip you apart once you are published. And hell, they'll rip you apart for the same thing that made you successful. If you are in the process of querying agents, you need a thicker skin than that, because it isn't fun. As a fledgling author, rejection letters, no matter how much you think you are prepared for them, are like a knife in the gut. At least #queryfail gave the authors of those letters mentioned some specific feedback on what they are doing wrong.
The biggest problem I had with #queryfail was that having researched agents and querying, most of the things mentioned didn't help me. I know not to send pictures or gifts (much less perverse ones - eww). I know I'm supposed to sell them the book, not me as a person. I know that braggart lines like "this is the best book you will ever read" are stupid. I know that mentioning book covers, movie rights, etc. are also putting the cart WAY before the horse. What I wish I'd seen on queryfail are more of the intangibles with examples "Somethign from the letter" doesn't show me the author's voice. Or the hook didn't hook me. Or the blurb was too generic. Or something that identifies why those who follow "the rules" are still rejected. I also wish all the non-agent/editor commentary had disappeared since it was the opposite of helpful. (Ask questions for clarification, but don't jsut clutter up the feed.)
I hope they do #queryfail again. More than that, I hope a time comes when agents & editors don't get so many crap queries that they feel a need to do something like this to educate people. It both scares me and gives me hope that perhaps the agents didn't get any decent-but-not-great queries on Thursday. Scares me because I feel bad for them if that is truly what they deal with on a daily basis, and gives me hope because maybe, just maybe, the day an agent gets my query, they will have waded through so much crap that my query will look like a bright ray of sunshine and a hot bubblebath rolled into one.
By the following day, people across Twitter and various blogs complained about #queryfail. They bitched about the snark, the (few) identifiers, the theft of material, and most often about the agents/editors who participated.
We'll start with the snark. Most of it came from the people following the stream rather than from the agents themselves. Having said that, I felt in most cases the agents were kind. They tried to convey what certain choice phrases made them think. And, honestly, it was the only part that helped me to some degree (more on this later).
The inclusion of personal identifiers. Rare. I think there was ONE that mentioned a person's last name. Not their first, just their last. I looked the name up on HowManyOfMe.com and there are over 3700 people with that last name in the U.S. (as a comparison, there are less than 340 people in the country with either my maiden name or my current last name). So, while it personally identified ONE of those 3700+ people, sorry, it didn't point a direct finger.
Material theft. People claimed that posting part of the query letter constituted theft. First, I'm fairly certain that unsolicited mail can be used for any purpose the recipient wants (including toilet paper). Strange how writers are more than willing to post the entire content of the rejection letters they receive online, but the agent who they send the initial query to isn't entitled to do the same with any or all of the query. Pot, meet Kettle. Get over yourself and have a nice day.
Participating agents/editors. At least one received a "threat" to contact her boss about #queryfail. All of them have been vilified to some degree on various blogs. Enough, people. You are (for the most part) adults, start acting like it. Having a teensy portion of your query letter disected on #queryfail is just the tip of the iceberg on how critics will rip you apart once you are published. And hell, they'll rip you apart for the same thing that made you successful. If you are in the process of querying agents, you need a thicker skin than that, because it isn't fun. As a fledgling author, rejection letters, no matter how much you think you are prepared for them, are like a knife in the gut. At least #queryfail gave the authors of those letters mentioned some specific feedback on what they are doing wrong.
The biggest problem I had with #queryfail was that having researched agents and querying, most of the things mentioned didn't help me. I know not to send pictures or gifts (much less perverse ones - eww). I know I'm supposed to sell them the book, not me as a person. I know that braggart lines like "this is the best book you will ever read" are stupid. I know that mentioning book covers, movie rights, etc. are also putting the cart WAY before the horse. What I wish I'd seen on queryfail are more of the intangibles with examples "Somethign from the letter" doesn't show me the author's voice. Or the hook didn't hook me. Or the blurb was too generic. Or something that identifies why those who follow "the rules" are still rejected. I also wish all the non-agent/editor commentary had disappeared since it was the opposite of helpful. (Ask questions for clarification, but don't jsut clutter up the feed.)
I hope they do #queryfail again. More than that, I hope a time comes when agents & editors don't get so many crap queries that they feel a need to do something like this to educate people. It both scares me and gives me hope that perhaps the agents didn't get any decent-but-not-great queries on Thursday. Scares me because I feel bad for them if that is truly what they deal with on a daily basis, and gives me hope because maybe, just maybe, the day an agent gets my query, they will have waded through so much crap that my query will look like a bright ray of sunshine and a hot bubblebath rolled into one.