More on agents

[Mike Dennis]

I have a theory that there are two kinds of agents (not counting the huge William Morris-type outfits). The first kind believes there really is talent out there worth finding. She doggedly sifts through piles and piles of poorly-written stuff until she becomes overwhelmed and just gives up. "Not currently seeking new authors" is a common mantra for this type.

The second kind believes there is talent out there, and after sifting through the slush pile, does not give up. Instead, she hires a reader. This reader is usually fresh out of college, armed with an English degree and plenty of attitude. He yearns to make it either as an agent or somewhere in the publishing business. Right away, he attacks the job with gusto.

But something's wrong. He quickly realizes that his future in the business will be dim if he starts recommending stuff to the agent that she doesn't like. After all, what can end a career faster than having your boss think you have no taste?

So this eager reader now becomes a professional rejector. You can see it now, can't you? The agent sticks her head in and says, "Anything worthwhile yet?" To which he replies, "Nothing yet, but I'm still looking!" In fact, he quit looking long ago, instead merely returning the manuscripts unread with form postcards attached.

I've met dozens and dozens of published authors over the years, some of them very famous, and I've always asked them one question: "How did you get your first agent?" I can say that not one of them was united with their first agent through the "carefully-constructed query letter plus sample chapters" routine. Every story was different, but each one involved luck, connections, or a combination of both. In one case, the author married his agent.

I have no doubt that people, maybe people on this forum, got their first agent via the standard query-letter route, but I think there's a message here. In general, agents really don't want to know you if you're unknown.

[Dana King]

Anecdotal evidence is always dangerous. Writers like to claim agents don't pull anyone out of the slush pile; it's all contacts and juice.

Agents deny this. Agents who aren't taking submissions have all the work they can handle; it would be foolish of them to post that notice otherwise, because they're not making any money if they don;t sell anything, and they won't sell anything if they don't take at least some new clients.

Agents have the more convincing argument, since the great majority of writers who claim it's all luck and connections don;t have agents. A certain level of sour grapes has to be taken into consideration.

[Mike Dennis]

Right you are, Dan.

[Mike Dennis]

Agents have the more convincing argument, since the great majority of writers who claim it's all luck and connections don;t have agents

And of course, the great majority of agents claim it's all talent and perseverance. So who's to say? I would also venture to say that the great majority of published authors might claim it's all luck and connections.

There were no sour grapes in my theory, Dana, although it may have sounded that way. I've had agents before. I was only zeroing in on the near-futility of the cold query, especially when stacked up against all the effort that goes into it: endless articles, books, and writers conference workshops on "how to write the perfect query letter", as though it were a science capable of producing empirical results.

And this is to say nothing of the hours of slaving over every word and nuance in the query, getting the font right, and so on.

[John McFetridge]

But something's wrong. He quickly realizes that his future in the business will be dim if he starts recommending stuff to the agent that she doesn't like. After all, what can end a career faster than having your boss think you have no taste?

This can also apply to agents submitting to publishers.

There's no doubt about it, it's tough. I started with a small press that looked at unagented submissions. I was on a panel last week wth Stuart Neville (whose first novel The Ghosts of Belfast will be out soon and is getting great buzz) and he was contacted by an agent who read one of his short stories on Thug Lit.

No one wants to know you if you're unknown, it's true. But what else can you do?

[Jon Loomis]

In my case the luck+connections thing is entirely true. Every cold query I sent out was rejected--only a few with so much as a personal note. It took me 18 months and dozens of rejections to find my agent, and when I did it was through a friend's referral. Once I signed and finished the revision she wanted (all of which were spot on) it only took two months to sell the book. So, lucky I had a friend who was willing to refer, lucky my agent was taking on clients, lucky she liked the book.

[Mike Dennis]

Right on the money, Jon. Had you cold-called her, she would've added another form card to your rejection pile.

[Jack Getze]

You're right, Dan. I don't think many agents are looking for good literature. An agent wants to take clients who will SELL. That's their business, right? That's probably all that matters to most -- finding something that will sell quickly; i.e., they think they know where the novel fits.

[John McFetridge]

It's a trucky business, though, Jack. I can always tell if I like somethng or not - sometimes I can even figure out why I like something. I think most people in the business can, too.

Bu I could never figure out what will sell next year. I could look at what sold last year and come up with something similar, but that's about it.

It's hard to tell what's a hula hoop and what's a frisbee. You know, the hula hoop was a smash hit when it came out but you hardly see them anymore and the frisbee (came out about the same year) wasn't an instant hit but has sold steadily since.

Sometimes I think too much of the publishing world (and movie and TV world) is looking for the next hula hoop instead of the next frisbee.

[B.R.Stateham]

Gret analogy, John. I'm with the frisbee kind of thinking.

[Jack Getze]

I like the analogy, too. I believe, clearly, the vast majority of agents are looking for a hula hoop.

[Jon Loomis]

I think they're looking for both. The big one-time strike is great, but as an agent you'd also want to have a stable of good, steady earners (somebody's gotta make the mortgage payments on the house in the Hamptons)—and you'd be looking to build careers, because it's very much in your interest to do so. What you wouldn't do is represent a book or author you didn't believe had the potential to be a commercial success, either short term or long term. Since you're not psychic, you go with what you like and what you're pretty sure you can sell--which are probably close to the same thing. If you're right enough of the time, and patient enough, and good enough at the triage process of taking care of your earners first, you can have a great career.

[Eric Christopherson]

I've had two agents, both via the traditional cold query. If you ask agents, they will tell you they read the queries and sign up authors that way all the time.

There was a poll conducted at Backspace earlier this year (its findings can be attacked based on self-selection bias, I suppose, but my sense is nearly every site member with an agent participated) and 65% got their agents via cold query; only 16% by referral.