What do you mean I have to blog today?

Wow, this is new. For once, I don't have anything to say. Blame it on a day spent building databases on Excel. (Hint: if you ever want to see me run for the hills, screaming like a mad woman, tell me I have to work on excel. Worse, tell me I have to set up the template for new databases.) So, I've got nothing for today. There's been no real ground-shaking news in the industry. Sorry, but the continuing drama of Borders and B&N is important, but it's getting boring as well. So, what to do today?

I think I'll do a riff on yesterday's open thread. But, instead of just throwing the blog open for any question or comment, I'm going to change things up a bit. If you have a query you are about to send out but would like some input on before it goes, post it (remember, queries should be one page. Some agents give the general guideline of 250 words). If you want to post the first page of your current project, do so and we'll critique it.

Why am I limiting it to one page? The first is that blogger does have a word limit. Second, anyone who has read slush will tell you that if the first page doesn't grab them, they usually won't read any further. This is especially true with short stories.

If you want to practice your elevator pitch, here's your chance. Don't know what an elevator pitch is? Well, it's that 30 seconds you get to tell an agent or editor what your book or story is about. You have to let them know genre, that the work is finished or not, what it's about and what makes it unique. And you have to do it all in the amount of time it takes to wait for the elevator to get there.

So, that's the blog for today. I promise to have a working brain -- or at least a reasonable facsimile of one -- next week.

Hooks with no worms -- hopefully

No, we aren't going fishing. If we were, there would be worms and minnows and the appropriate lures for lake fishing. Unlike our resident monkey who likes to try to spear fish and throws nets at them, I enjoy sitting on the bank of the lake with a cold drink at hand as I wait for the fishies to come see what's on my hook.

But that's not the kind of hook I'm talking about this morning. No, I'm talking about that elusive and oh-so-important hook that we need in our query letters and even in our face-to-face pitches with agents. Sarah in her post Wednesday how we need to be prepared to pitch to an agent or editor should we have the chance at a con or workshop. So, here's your chance to practice.

Post in the comment section the following: a one sentence description of your novel or story and then a one paragraph description. For the latter, think about the TV guide descriptions you see for your favorite show. Be sure to include the title and genre as well. I'll be checking back during the day and will post comments and suggestions -- as will other members of the MGC I'm sure.

So the floor is open. Don't be shy. Most of all, have fun!

If It's Sunday, We Must Be ....Where?

I'll admit it. This morning I'm mentally lost, or at least in a fog. Part of it is because I'm hurting (nothing major, just annoying) and didn't sleep very well. Part is because my mind is on a project I've been working on with deadlines looming faster than I'd like right now. More on that as the time gets closer -- assuming I have any sanity left. I know, I know, the state of my sanity has always been questionable. What can I say? I'm a writer. ;-)

As I started pulling the blog together this morning, I came upon something I think every writer should be aware of, especially writers who have had or currently have or are considering signing a contract with Bloomberg Press. Three days ago, the Authors Guild posted a letter to its members warning them about the impact of a contract amendment being sent to Bloomberg authors by John Wiley & Sons (JW&S has aquired Bloomberg). The basic import of the letter is that the contractual amendment sent by Wiley would change the royalty system of some contracts from being based on retail price to net price. This could, according to AG, decrease royalties up to 50%. More than that, according to AG, Wiley would be able to keep a book in print with a "lowball print on demand royalty of 5%of net proceeds." Wiley has responded, claiming AG's representation of the letter and contractual amendments included in it is misleading at best and that the royalty changes will benefit the authors involved. Sorry, but I don't buy it. Any way, you can judge for yourself. Here's a copy of Wiley's letter. Read it and judge for yourself. For me, the most troublesome part of the letter is the inclusion of the print on demand language which reads, to me, as their way of keeping a book "in print" so the rights never revert back to the author. Your thoughts?

In other news around the internet, agent Rachelle Gardner says to get to a bookstore. I happen to agree with her. I've blogged before how, as writers, it's important that we read. But it is as important that we take time on a regular basis to visit our local bookstores. Not only does it allow us to see market trends and talk to other readers and pick their brains about what they are reading and why, it allows us to connect with the bookseller. That connection can lead to a recommendation of OUR book to a reader who is looking for something new and exciting. So, the next time you have a few minutes on your hands, get thee to your nearest bookstore.

Agent Janet Reid has an interesting post about how to format an electronic query. As someone who learned to type on -- gasp -- an IBM Selectric typewriter (yes, kiddies, there was a time when computers weren't in every room of the house) old habits about the formatting of a business letter die hard. But Ms. Reid's example and explanation hit home. That said, the caveat of this is to read the guidelines for the agency or publisher you are querying and follow them...no matter how strange or out of date or silly they might seem.

On the topic of following guidelines, agent Jennifer Jackson has two recent posts that show the importance of not only reading the guidelines but following them. The first post encourages us, as writers, to be persistent. Just because an agent turns down our first submission to them, it doesn't mean that agent won't like something else we've written. So, when you have another work ready, query them. This is especially true if you received an encouraging rejection letter from them on the first project. However, don't -- let me say that again, DON'T -- query that agent three or four times in a week on the same or different projects, especially if the guidelines tell you to submit only one project at at time. Submit, my children, wait for a response, wait a few weeks or more and then submit the next project.

Ms. Jackson's second post also concerns guidelines, this time highlighting some of the more odd comments she has seen included in query letters. Comments that shouldn't have been there had the sender simply taken time to read and follow the guidelines. For example, "...if I don't hear back from you within three days, (I'll assume) you aren't interested." WHAT?!? If you can show me any agent's guidelines that says you'll hear back within three days of submission, I have a book or three ready to send. Seriously, the query letter is meant to show us in our most favorable light as writers. Statements such as the ones Ms. Jackson highlights do the exact opposite and are so easy to avoid -- if you read the guidelines.

Finally, for those who write series, and even for those who don't but who have words or names or other conventions in their writing that might not fall under the standard style sheets currently used, agent Jessica Faust recommends you keep your own style sheet and even send it with your pages when you submit them. While it might not keep the copy editor from changing things, it will help. Along those same lines, agent Nathan Bransford recommends for those writing a series that you keep a series bible to help keep all those pesky details, names, places, and descriptions straight from one book to another.

So, any thoughts on these recommendations? Any news from the industry you want to share? The floor is now yours.

Odds and Ends and All Things In-between

It's dark outside and yet there is one bird singing its heart out -- and driving my cat crazy at the same time -- and refusing to let me sleep. Not that sleep is necessarily a good thing right now. Why, you ask? Well, I'm in the process of trying to do edits on a book that needs a couple of scenes added and several others modified and that means I have to listen to certain music. We've discussed in various posts in the past our writing processes (See Kate's Thursday post on her own process). Part of mine is listening to music, usually music chosen by the novel or short story I'm currently working on. For this particular novel, it's ABBA, specifically the soundtrack to Mama Mia. Try going back to sleep with a very loud bird singing outside AND songs sung by Pierce Brosnan and Meryl Streep running through your head. (And apologies to anyone out there who happen to like the way those two sing.)

So, instead of facing the prospect of killing the cat for trying to tear down the curtains and blinds to get to the bird that refuses to be quiet AND more ABBA running through my head, I crawled out of bed, made coffee and started trolling through the blogs looking for inspiration for this morning's post.

In the vein of Sarah's post this week, there's been a lot written about how to promote your book and yourself over the last week or so. Most of the posts ask the same questions Sarah touched on, so I won't recap them. However, a couple looked at the use of the internet as a social medium and how attempts at promotion can have adverse effects on your career. For a prime example of how this can work, check out Jason Pinter's Huffington Post piece about how a blog entry about his first book led to an immediate termination from his job with a large publisher. No warning. No counseling. No two week notice. Just a "pack your things and get out."

Agent Jessica Faust wrote about "The Internet and Your Career" on Wednesday. She ponders the question of whether or not we should have public and private blogs/facebook accounts/twitter accounts, etc. I happen to think she's right, at least for those of us trying to really break into the business. As she puts it, "Do you really want your future agent, for example, to see your spring break photos, your daughter’s first trip to the potty, or hear about your rather extreme political views?" That said, I don't think it is as critical once you are an established author. However, agents and editors do read blogs. They google our names to see what is out there. If they don't like what they see, they may pass on a novel, no matter how well-written it happens to be. So, the moral of the story is, in my opinion, separate your personal from your professional and think before hitting the "Enter" key.

For more on this, check out this post by agent Lucienne Diver.

Also from Bookends, comes this post about query rejections. I don't know about you, but I hate writing queries. In my opinion, they are the most difficult part of the writing process. Ms. Faust's post points out why. Agents look at queries in a very subjective manner. For them to as for pages, the query has to feel special. One comment really caught my eye. To paraphrase, the commenter noted that if you try to be too special, too different, no agent will touch your novel because there is no way to sell it. (And, yes, boys and girls, agents are in this for the money. It's their job.) Somehow, you have to find that fine line where you balance between what is familiar and "safe" and what is different enough, unique enough to stand out and still be something the publisher will buy and the public will read. After all, the market will only tolerate so many sparkly vampires and emo werewolves -- thankfully.

So, what's the answer? How do you make your novel "special" in a query letter so it will stand out to an agent?

What do you think about public v. private/professional blogs and fb accounts? Why?

Sunday Wrap-up

What a strange couple of weeks it has been in publishing, whether you're a reader, a writer or work in the industry. The Kindle-Macmillan (now Kindle-Big 6) kerfluffle has dominated the news and rightly so. It has also become the third topic you don't talk about at the dinner table, especially if you have two or more writers, a reader and -- gasp -- a publisher present. Unfortunately, what folks from all sides seem to be overlooking is the fact that the Big 6's issue with Amazon selling e-books for $9.99 isn't really the central issue, imo. It's part of it, but not the real issue.

The real issue is control and the fall-out has been bad will toward the Big 6, Amazon and a bunch of writers who have been very vocal in their stand supporting their publisher -- understandable -- and badmouthing the reading public that they saw as feeling entitled and ungrateful - very bad. Even if you feel that way, you don't tell the folks who buy your books. It just makes them mad and buyers, when made mad, quit buying.

Let's look at the facts. To begin with, Amazon doesn't sell all e-books at $9.99. Never has and never will. Those books in question are the ones hitting the New York Times best seller's list. The same books that in their hardcover version are sold for $9.99, not only at Amazon but at Walmart, Target and a lot of other stores. Now, does anyone here not see a problem with the statement, paraphrased, that the $9.99 price for e-books devalues the hardcover book? Excuse me? How can it devalue the price when they are the same? Yet that's not something you see the supporters of the Big 6 and their new agency model addressing.

So the question becomes why. If Amazon is taking a hit on selling e-books for $9.99, you know it is on hardcovers sold for that very same price. And yet Macmillan says it pushed for this new agency model even though it would make less money so Amazon can make more. Excuse me??? Somehow that just doesn't ring true.

Okay, before you guys start jumping all over me and telling me I'm missing the point here, I know I'm simplifying things. But Macmillan isn't acting out of the goodness of its heart. Nor is it acting in the best interest of its authors. If it was, it wouldn't have lowered their royalty payments a few months ago. And again, I know they say they are going to change this...but you notice the open letter didn't say how or when -- or by how much. IF, and this is a very big IF, the price increase really did go to to the author -- without whom we wouldn't have the book in the first place -- I might pay more for an e-book than I tend to now. However, not more than the paperback price and especially not the same, or more, than the hardcover.

Things to ask yourself about this issue and then I'm leaving it until there is new information:

• how often do you buy a hardcover book these days;
• when you do buy a hardcover, do you pay full-price for it, or do you purchase it at a discount or as a used book;
• if you are looking to buy a hardcover book, do you comparison shop;
• would you pay the same for a softcover book as you would for a hardcover of the same book;
• would you pay the same for an electronic version of the book than you do for the softcover? More? How about hardcover prices?
• if hardcover prices return to suggested retail prices and not discounted prices for best sellers, will you buy as many books?
• now, for the big question, has your purchase history of e-books had an impact on the number of hardcover books you've bought and will an increase in the price of e-books make you buy more hardcover books?

For me, I'll keep singing the praises of Baen Books and others who realize they can sell e-books, released on or BEFORE the hardcover/paperback version of the book for a discounted rate and not savage the dead tree version of the book. In fact, many times the sale of an e-book leads not only to the sale of a dead tree version of that same book but also sales of dead tree copies of other books by that same author.

On a non-Amazon v. The Big 6 topic, agent Janet Reid has a great breakdown on what you need before you query. She has it broken down between fiction, non-fic and memoir. Go take a look and tell me what you think. The only issues I take with her list -- which is geared toward her own agency -- are where she says you don't have to have a marketing strategy for a fiction query nor do you need to be able to compare/contrast your book to others. Unfortunately, too many agents -- and publishers -- are now asking for your marketing strategy right off the bat. It's the same with the question of what books is yours like and what makes it different. In fact, there are agency that require you to answer those two questions on their online submission forms right now. So, what's the answer? Research. Find out exactly what the agency you're querying wants and the best way to answer it.

Okay, guys, the floor is now yours. What do you think about all this?

Agents and Editors and Writers, Oh My!

Last week, I discussed the trek to hunt down and capture that most elusive of creatures -- the literary agent. For those of you who follow the blogs of agents and editors, you've seen that most of them have been out of the office this week. Here's hoping they've had a great holiday and come back recharged and ready to dig into their query files because there are a lot of us out there sharpening our pencils and flexing our fingers over the keyboards in preparation of resuming the hunt once more.

So, the New Year is here and you're ready to send your baby out into the wilds of the literary world in hope of representation. You've checked Preditors and Editors. You've looked at the RWA site (if you're a member) and confirmed that the agents you're considering aren't scam artists. You've done your final check of Writer Beware. So what now? Or, more to the point for some of us, you've read the rejections from the six agents you sent the book out to. What's your next move?

Honestly, for me, it's to look at the rejections and see what they say. I've blogged before about the different types of rejections, but Janet Reid says it much more eloquently than I in her post about her year-end stats. Out of 122 novels she did not sign, 9 weren't right for her but got a referral; 9 were sent back with detailed notes and an invitation to resubmit; 1 got a "not this one but send the next one" sort of comment. But -- and this is what's important -- she doesn't look at any of those 122 novels as failures. Here's what she has to say:

. . . more important than the numbers, it's what you do with them. There are two ways to look at these results: you, the writer, made progress toward your goal, or you didn't. If you didn't, you use the information you learned in the process to figure out what to change so you'll make progress the next time. If you define failure as not achieving your goal, even good progress is defined as failure, and that's just a recipe for total frigging insanity. If I were a writer looking at those stats, the first thing I'd want to make sure is that I'm writing something fresh and new. So, how do you know that? You don't just write something and assume its fresh and new cause you've never seen it used. Nope. What you do is what Joe Finder did when he started his writing career. He read 200 thrillers. He researched what his genre looked like. . . . If I were a writer looking at those stats, I'd make sure I had fierce beta critics on my team. Fierce critics who would make me want to bathe in medicinal scotch at the end of their critique, but critics who would identify structural problems or voice problems, or plot problems. If I were a writer looking at those stats, I'd say "Good. Now I know what the challenges are." And then I'd make my 2010 resolution: Get Fierce.

I've had rejections with referrals. I've had rejections asking me to send the agent/editor my next piece because they like my writing but feel that my current offering just isn't right for them. Those are wonderful. Those I celebrate because they are successes. They mean my work doesn't suck big time. Even the standard three line rejection is a success because it means I sent the piece out, something I wouldn't have considered doing a few years ago. What I don't like -- okay, I'll be honest, what I hate -- are those agents and editors who accept e-mail queries and do not respond if they are rejecting you. Just, "if you haven't heard from us within X-days/weeks/months, assume we passed." Sorry, it doesn't take but a couple of seconds to send a standard rejection via e-mail. Oh, wait, maybe this should have gone into John's post yesterday about rants. Moving on, people. There's nothing to see here. Ignore the woman frothing at the mouth.

Back to the topic. You also have to know what is selling right now. That's not to say you have to write sparkly vampires and emo werewolves because every teen girl is reading Twilight and the like. First off, they aren't. But, it does mean that if you have something that isn't fresh and well-written, probably also well-researched, it is going to be a lot harder getting your foot in the door if it doesn't follow the current trend. But then, following the current trend means, in many ways, that what you write has to be fresh, have some new twist on it because, by the time it makes its way through the dusty halls of publishing, that trend is now forgotten. Also, when submitting to an agent, you need to know what they are looking for. It might surprise you.

For example, Lori Perkins would "love a Gone with the Wind that's about Scarlett's battle for self in a paternalistic society undergoing sweeping change, not Rhett or Ashley's adventures. I can't tell you the number of books that have come in with male protagonists. The only things that are selling right now are paranormal romance and young adult fiction. I personally love vampires, zombies, the vampire zombie Apocalypse, and kick-ass female characters. Female-centered erotica and erotic romance are always considered as well."

So you've made your new list of agents to send your book to. You've checked their guidelines and punched up your query letter. Stamps are on the envelopes and you've hit the send button on those electronic submissions. Now what? Well, if you're like me, a lot of angst, even more prayer and then you force yourself to sit down and start the next project. I know, I know, easier said than done. Especially for me. Ask Sarah and Kate...they have to put up with my angsting each time I send something out. But that is the life of a writer, or so they tell me ;-)

In keeping with the tradition, my resolution this year is to be more "fierce" in my writing. One short story a month -- sorry, Sarah, I just can't quite get to the one a week yet -- as well as the novels I'm working on. Not only will I write them, but I'll send them out. GULP. What's your resolution for the New Year?

Be Vewy, Vewy Quiet. I'm Hunting Agents

Stop running for the nearest hidey hole, agents. I'm not hunting you THAT way. No, like many others out there, I'm looking for an agent to represent me. It's a daunting task, especially right now when the publishing business is in such a state of flux. There are times when the hunt makes me want to throw my hands up in the air and stop writing. That lasts for about 5 minutes, the length of time for my bruised ego to pick itself up and ping Sarah or Kate who will commiserate for a few minutes and then tell me to get back to work. Then there are those wonderful notes from agents who, even though they are rejecting me, have a word of encouragement, a recommendation or even a note to send them something else because they like my writing but this particular project just didn't sing loudly enough for them.

Which brings me to the point of this post. Maybe there's something in the water or in the phase of the moon, but it seems like there's been a spate of author's doing their best to sabotage their attempts to find an agent. For those of you like me who are still on the hunt, here are a few hints from some agents and others who have blogged on the issue this past week.

Rachelle Gardner has this piece of advice:

What trait can stop you from getting an agent?
In a word: Negativity.
If you're negative about the publishing industry; if you complain about agents and publishers and the unfairness of it all; if you're resentful about bad books being published; if you speak disparagingly of specific publishers or editors or agents... you can be pretty sure most agents will not want to work with you.

Jennifer Jackson had this to say:

Query letters in which you tell me that your book can't possibly be appreciated in the mere five pages our submission guidelines request so therefore you have sent me many unsolicited chapters do not endear you or your novel to me. They tell me you have no respect for the other writers submitting. I have news for you. Some of them are better writers than you are. Some of them are worse. Many of them may not be writing something I want to read. But they are all just as special as you are. They have worked hard and finished their novel. They are amazing for doing that. Each and every one of them. Don't you think I know that five pages isn't enough to fully appreciate a story? Certainly anyone could agree with that sentiment. But that's not the point of the query package. It's a presentation. An invitation to read. To be enticed.

She goes on to thank those authors who take the time to read the guidelines and send only what is asked for.

Lucienne Diver adds this: There is still an etiquette, there are still boundaries and procedures, and while doing your research means you’ll be targeting the right people with your work, it should not get to the point where you feel you know them so well you can bypass those procedures. Remember, they don’t necessarily know you. . . .

She previously posted "Querying Dos and Don'ts", but adds another several things to her list:

-don’t call the agent or editor by his or her first name unless you’re truly on a first name basis

-spend at least as much time on your query letter as you would on a cover letter to go along with your resume

-spell check and proof read

-make sure you’re following guidelines and do not direct the pros to a separate website to view your work; everything we need to make a decision should be included with your query

-be sure the pro can respond to the e-mail address you’ve used if sending an electronic query (Note: this seems obvious, but I’ve had responses bounce because the address is no reply or because there’s an anti-spam process I’m not going to take the time to complete.)

Another site to check out is Lauren Dane's Writerly Wednesday. Ms. Dane is right when she says:

This is a profession. You are not so special you can simply toss off a nasty note to an editor who rejects you, or talk about it on a blog, blaming that editor for not seeing your brilliance – and expect anything positive to come from it. This is a community. You don’t have to like every part of it, you don’t have to take any crap from people either, but how you handle yourself, how you respond is as important as your writing. There are a hundred other writers happy to take any space you leave at an agency or publisher with your bad behavior. Personal relationships are important in publishing just like many other professions.

Be a professional. Do your bitching behind closed doors, lick your wounds and move on.

That being said, how do you deal with rejections?

Me, I kick and scream and feel sorry for myself. BUT, and this is a very big but, I stay away from the REPLY button on email until my emotions are under control. I rarely send thank you notes because, frankly, agents have enough email and snail mail to contend with as it is. However, I make exceptions for those who have been particularly supportive or helpful. I want them to know how much I appreciate them going the extra mile even if they haven't offered representation. I also make note of those agents who, even though their websites say they are open for new clients, habitually send rejections less than an hour after receipt -- especially when the queries met all published guidelines.

One last question. How do you go about choosing what agent to query and how do you then prepare for that initial and oh-so-difficult introduction by mail (or email)?