Yesterday, someone left me a comment on a back post about agent follow-ups, but I wanted to answer more publicly, since we haven't talked about this particular issue in awhile.
If you've been around here a long time, you know my stance on agent proactivity. Different agents have different strategies for following up with editors, and, frankly, some of these strategies are really, really ineffective.
Here's the thing: editors have developed a habit of hiding their heads in the sand. I can speak on behalf of not all editors, but most. We have so much work--so many deadlines to meet in-house, and so many proposals and manuscripts to read--that if an agent doesn't follow up about a manuscript there is a 9/10 chance we're not going to read it (certainly not going to buy it).
When an agent doesn't follow up, they're demonstrating a number of things, the foremost being that they don't EXPECT the book to sell. "Oh nope, this is no hot property, take all the time you need" is the message we get. And honestly, it takes 15 minutes for an editor to know whether they want to read more or not--not 4 months, or 6 months. Sure, we need a kick in the pants to pick the manuscript up. But if you wait 4 or 6 months to give us that kick in the pants, we'll never, ever, ever get herded into, say, auction on that book.
Furthermore, let's think about this from a practical standpoint. My assistant vets each of my proposals as they come in, and flags ones she thinks I should prioritize because they look interesting. Even if I haven't READ your proposal per se, my assistant and I have already both thought about it in terms of where it might fit (or not) on my list. Say I know right away when a proposal comes in that it's not a good fit. Am I going to pick up the phone and cold-call your agent and be like, "Yeah, no"? Umm, no. As a head-hiding editorial type, I flee confrontation on pain of death. Am I going to *seek out* an uncomfortable rejection phone call? Uh, no. So if you don't call me and ask, you're never going to hear my simple answer one way or another.
Can you blame me? Seriously? I mean, who here ENJOYS saying no to salespeople?
Furthermore, there is a particular type of agent whose business MO is the famous "throw-it-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks" technique. That means they take on tons of stuff that may or may not sell, preferring to take a risk on an unusual book than not give it a shot. The catch is that these agents tend to put less work in per title--survival mechanism; how else would they get their work done? This scheme works a lot better for nonfiction, where proposals are concept-driven, than it does for fiction, where drum-tight prose and very particular editor targeting with a pitch are key. The bad 'uns among this lot are the worst culprits for never, ever, ever following up. Often, I quietly feel bad for their authors. Bad enough to face unsolicited conversation by picking up the phone and rejecting the book (if I even remember to)? Uh, no. Sorry. My comfort over yours. I mean that in the nicest possible way.
I get tons and tons of novel manuscripts--tons. I get probably 100 manuscripts (or more) for every novel I acquire. Not exaggerating--when I'm at work later, I'll check my submission log for exact numbers, but I remember pretty well where I was at last time I looked. Also, I know where I'm at: since I work at an indie, I'm hardly the top of the totem. I'm usually on either second or third round submissions, depending on what the novel is about. That means that editors higher up on the totem probably get 2 or 3 times as many submissions as I do--every agent is pitching every literary debut at a particular handful of editors (I could probably tick off their names here). Those poor ladies and gents are also getting hit up by the bum agents who try casting everything at the wall to see what sticks, and then never follow up. Only they have to see a lot MORE of that stuff. So of COURSE I wouldn't blame them for not replying.
As for an agent who tells you that an editor hasn't responded, that's as good as a pass: you have one of two situations here. Either you have a lousy agent, who never followed up, or you have a disorganized and rude editor, one you don't want to end up working with, anyway. The reason I say this is because, as mentioned above, when it comes down to it, it only takes 15 minutes to know whether we want to read more--longer, obviously, if we do, to consider the book, but still--and it's very easy to formulate a polite and helpful rejection letter that helps the agent understand why you're passing.
Yes, situations differ depending on your genre, as certain genre editors have their own traditions. And as I said, I can't speak on behalf of all editors--only most.
What does this mean for you? I know this sounds TOTALLY CRAZY--especially to authors who have been struggling to secure representation for a long time--but ask your prospective agent what their submission plan is like before you commit to working with them. Also, ask if you can call some of their other clients as references (or look up other clients on the internet and see whether they have glowing things to say, and/or whether this agent is well stocked on Publishers Marketplace deal searches, which are not always representative but can be of use). You DON'T have to commit to an agent just because they're offering representation. And I promise--a bad agent is MUCH, much worse than not submitting your book at all. If an agent submits badly, not only does it mean your book isn't going to get read or bought now, it means it probably never will. In publishing, you can't cross the same bridge twice.
Ok, rant over. Pant pant. Please consider the floor open.
Posts
