Jan Fields ([info]cute_n_cranky) wrote,
@ 2009-04-06 08:32:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Though I was late to both parties, I read all the comments on both Queryfail (a Twitter event where some agents vented about the horrifying things that found in the slush on that specific day) and Agentfail (where some writers vented about what giant poopyheads agents were). Both events made me a little sad though both were totally understandable.

They were both *begun* in the spirit of "education." Some of the agents thought writers would read queryfail and learn from it. But really, the writers who did the bulk of the really really wretched queries (and it was generally those that were poked at) aren't reading a lot of writerly educational stuff online. If they were, they wouldn't have done really "not done" things. So although a few writers might have spotted a trend they could learn from, mostly it looked like venting.

I understand venting. I've read through what amounted to slush piles for contests and been horror stricken. Most...not a few or even many, but MOST...of the entries were not only unpublishable but I could see no way to fix them. They have fundamental issues that showed the writers were no where near ready to submit anything. And I expect slush piles all over look like that. When you've read a few hundred of these in a day (and I did)...you start to get angry. I think it's the pain of feeling like you're being punched in the brain over and over and over and you want it to stop. All they need to do is learn to write before they start submitting -- right? Right? Oh and read submission guidelines -- they're short, couldn't the writer put that much effort in?

So yeah, I get the venting. But I also get it on Agentfail...I even get the anger. This business can make a person angry no matter what role you play in it. There is a tidal wave of submissions crashing against every agent or publisher and most of them are from people who need to stop, drop, and learn. But that isn't going to change. And that tidal wave, honestly, is actually the root of all the problems. Not disorganized agents. Not elitiest editors. Not gatekeepers or guard dogs. The problem is the tidal wave and I have no idea what could be done about it.

There have been a number of times when I've said I would quit this business if I just knew how. But I really do love to write. I love to communicate with print. I love to explore and play with words. I love to learn new things about the language. I love to hear from readers. But I hate the process of seeking publication because it's frustrating and disheartening.

When I started in this business in the early 1980s my writing sometimes just sucked...really. And I got long kind rejection letters filled with suggestions and help because that was a time before the tidal wave. Editors could do that and in their hearts, most editors would still like to. Editors haven't grown colder since then, they've just drowned.

I suspect agents are similar. They aren't cold hearted (mostly), but we are drowning them. And I don't think it's going to stop, which makes me sad. We're going to see more and more policies in place to try to survive the flood of bad, bad, bad writing. And those policies are going to make more and more writers mad. And we're going to get more and more "us" vs. "them" going. I don't see how we can prevent it.

But I'm sad about it. I'm sad when I drop a submission into the mail, knowing waits are getting longer and...who know? I may not ever hear back. I have to admit, discouragement is a serious problem for me. I'm finally at a point in my life where I'm truly and justifiably confident in my writing and it's the place where I'm throwing submissions into a hurricane.

Folks say you have to love writing -- I do. You have to write even if no one ever reads it - I can't do that. To me, writing is only halfway there. Writing is communicating, connecting, making the reader think...without a reader, I'm just having mental self-serve sex and that's not okay with me.

But even though everything about this business makes me sad, I'll keep at it because I don't think I can walk away. And I promise not to carry my torch and pitchfork to the gates of the castle because I'm not angry with agents and editors. I know who started the problem.



(3 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]dlgarfinkle
2009-04-06 01:56 pm UTC (link)
I understand agents' anger and frustration. I understand venting with other agents in a coffee shop. I don't understand venting in public on the Internet, especially when that includes mocking queries and quoting lines of queries and even making fun of the writers' names.

I understand queryfail meant well originally but quickly got out of hand. What I don't understand for the life of me is the plan to have another queryfail day in a few weeks. I imagine smart writers who want to deal with professionals who are advocates for writers will avoid the agents who participate in the next queryfail day.

I also find joy in writing but write first and foremost to be published. It's a heartbreaking field. Good luck to you. And me!

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]cute_n_cranky
2009-04-06 02:43 pm UTC (link)
That's one spot where Queryfail was advantageous where Agentfail wasn't. Queryfail put the names of the agents with their remarks so you got a sense of the agent's personality and really how they see authors...so for some, it did mean very clearly being able to mark some agents off as people to submit to because they were folks you don't want to work with. Now that's not what agents were hoping for...though really, with the flood being what it is, I'm not sure they really care if 50% of us mark them off our lists...even if a huge portion of the 50% can actually write.

Agentfail, on the other hand, mostly managed to make agents who are trying feel bad while making other agents feel more vindicated in doing those sorts of things because writers are ______ <-- fill in the blank for desired negative word.) And it didn't even help writers since we didn't learn WHICH agents are saying "no answer means no" on requested material and didn't learn which agent could be preshopping material and then rejecting it because they didn't make a quick connection with an editor.

In Queryfail, we at least got a sense of some agents to avoid. Agentfail may have made some folks feel better (offering a place to vent amoung peers since we're told that any public complaint about treatment by agents and editors will lable us "whiners"...and, well, it did. Lots of folks jumped on the "whiners" name calling thing about the agentfail comments) but it didn't overall give any useful info.

It showed agents that writers really really despise the "no answer means no" thing but if agents didn't already know that, they're pretty out of touch. And I'm not even sure that agents LIKE that policy...it's just a way to deal with the worst of the flood the fastest.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]susanwrites
2009-04-06 05:14 pm UTC (link)
There is much about this business that makes me sad too, and yet, sigh, and yet, I cannot walk away.

(Reply to this)


(3 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…