And there's a SONG. Dude.

It begins:


The list

Intro: D A D A G

      D
I'm sitting in the minivan, it's about 1 am
  A
I can't believe I'm hanging out with Margo Roth Spiegelman
       D
She hands me a grocery list, and I say: 'what is this?'
       A                             G                   
She gives me a hundred dollars and says: that should cover it...


More here: http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/tabs/h/hank_green/the_list_crd.htm

Margo Roth Spiegelman and The Omnictionary

So, I was Googling "Margo Roth Spiegelman" to check the spelling--for those of you who've read Paper Towns, you'll know this is the love object of the protagonist--a girl who mysteriously disappears and who is known to use a site called Omnictionary.

One of the comments on the last post had to do with catfish. "It's either that" (put up with swearing in books) "or feed them to the catfish," Ally wrote.

"Or, if you're Margo Roth Spiegelman," I was going to reply, "feed them to a catfish, throw the fish into a girl's car, and lower the seat until it explodes."

Snarky (Agent Man) and I were en route to a Saints game (er, superbowl) party this last Sunday and I find that Snarky's giggling next to me. "What is it?" I ask. "Catfish," he replies, holding up the book. And soon I'm laughing like an idiot in public again because of this work.

But. Here's the thing. I've always wished for a book that would mention a web site and then actually create it.

And...

The Omnictionary exists! Most of its posts have to do with Margo, but it exists! It's so cute! I'm so delighted.

You can find the Omnictionary here. 

Critique Partners, the Cursing, and You or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the F-Bomb

I have a sincere and humble question. I am in the middle of writing my first MS, A Contemporary Romance, about a Philadelphia Irish Catholic Family and their summers on the Southern New Jersey Shore, I say South Jersey as not to be confused with "the Situation" going on with the Northern Jersey Shore. Us Philadelphians cringe when people confuse our beaches with theirs.


Anywho.


I digress.


So, my Irish Catholic cops swear, curse like truck drivers, it's a part of who they are. Now, my crit partner feels I shouldn't have them cursing at all, imply it in narration, with body language, and the like. As an agent and in the know, what is acceptable when it comes to the f-bomb and other four letter words? Do I mask them with words like mother-flipper, shut the front door, shugar, but that feels like such a cop out. *Sigh*

Sincerely Friggin Frustrated,
Charli

*

Dear Charli,
I would not recommend that your characters Shut the Front Door, and I can see why you'd be friggin frustrated.

Rather than make them sound silly, I think it would be best to reserve your F-bombs and the like for truly important moments. That is, cut out some of them. Use them only when truly necessary. Like explosions and exclamation points, such words lose their emphasis over time.

If an agent/editor likes your story (and doesn't think it ridiculous for too many such words), he/she can ask for more/fewer of them.

Are we talking four F-bombs a page? Forty?

I think you should limit this to one every few pages--less often, if possible. But I am somewhat on the prim and proper side of things.

Male editors/agents will probably be more okay with this than I will.

But I think most of us forgive such things if we are really drawn in by the story. Prove that you can do the highbrow literary [stuff] in the first few pages, and we'll forgive (nearly) as many such phrases as you like.

All best,
AG

PS: "Cop out"! Ha ha ha...just got that. Clever. :)

Small, small, cramped publishing world

I've just returned from a party in Brooklyn Heights (aka the part of Brooklyn you live in when you can afford Manhattan but would rather include the coolness factor of a Brooklyn address) where there were probably 100 people crammed into the tiniest three-bedroom I've ever seen. (We're talking 950 square feet, max, most of that hallway.) While leaning backwards over the stove, trying to make as much room as possible as people passed by (and we were stacked five deep in a hallway four feet wide) without setting myself on fire--after all, I've long hair and the burner knobs were at my back--I realized I was standing next to two people who work under the same publishing umbrella as Macmillan. Henry Holt, actually. (There was also someone who'd just had his second interview to work for one of the higher-ups at Penguin.) This is the thing: work in publishing in New York, and every time you go out, you better look presentable--you never know when you'll run into someone you'll send a manuscript to someday.

Amazingly, the Amazon-Macmillan upset sounds like it was far more exciting for the outside world--our speculation, our fruit baskets--than it was for those on the Macmillan inside. Their "buy" buttons are activated on Amazon. They were scared, briefly, but now don't--as a lot of us outside do--feel triumphant. It's back to business as usual.

Strange.

The Forest of Hands and Teeth

When you wake up and your very first thought is of the book you're reading...well, then, you know it's good. I've just finished The Forest of Hands and Teeth. Does it have problems? Um, yes. I'm amazed no one took the author aside and said, You know, if you keep using "the ocean" as your hit-us-over-the-head obvious symbol for "hope outside the current situation"--and don't insert any other such symbols--and repeat it every other page--you're going to annoy some readers.

This is one situation in which I'd like prefer an e-version of a book--just to search it and see how many times the phrase "the ocean" pops up. Oh, goodness gracious. It gets a bit ridiculous.

That said, the book is really compelling--the protagonist lives in a village in the center of a forest, with only a fence to protect them from the Unconsecrated (aka all of the zombies and former-humans-turned-zombies that inhabit the place). The Sisters, a sect of religious/political women who set rules for the village, have told everyone that there is nothing in the world beyond their walls--except, you know, monsters that will eat you/turn you into them. But then the protagonist sees evidence of a young woman from another village, who the Sisters go to great lengths to hide. And thus the story really begins.

Oh, and there's a love subplot too, but it's pretty lame.

That said, I read this in 1.5 days, rather enjoying myself as I did. Proof that you can love works, just like you can love people, without them being perfect. And yes, I would have said yes to this. With edits.

* * *
An addendum, from the comments. Tahereh mentioned that the whole book is so hopeless, it's a rather difficult (unpleasant) read. I agree.

Um, SPOILER ALERT! So:

I also really disliked that whole bit about how she should have seen that Travis was better than any ocean. Isn't that like saying, "That's okay, girls--give up your dreams. Didn't you know that you can find everything you possibly want in your husband/boyfriend who was about to let you marry his brother? [I would argue that means He's Just Not That Into Her.] Who needs the world out there--be locked with him in a house/fortress/tree house/canned goods storage unit! Let him make inane comments about photographs and don't let it bother you! Waste a ton of valuable weaponry/communications devices shooting at Unconsecrated even though there are more than you can ever take down! And--most of all--never tell the reader if you're sharing a bed or *sharing a bed* with the totally built-up love interest--for months! [Goodness, their scene locked among the *nuns* was hotter than those--what--four months?] Ocean, smoshen. Stay home, try on dresses, and cook."

Uggh.

In the spirit of Paper Towns...

I used to drive with my eyes closed, and my best friend would tell me when to brake, turn, put on the gas, etc. Very crazy, but fun.

 
Whoa!...I call for a "crazy things you did in high school" comments section. Post anonymously, if you must. 

And....go! :-D
So. You know how it feels when you're in high school and you have nothing better to do than break into the Kmart parking lot, steal some carts, and then race them (with your friends in them) around while super hyper off of SURGE soda, and you can't stop laughing because of the wild absurdity of it all, the relief that your friends are finally getting along, and the crazy, scary, spinning, exuberant life that is the high school social scene? All while planning how you're going to tell your crush about it the next day at school?

That's what it feels like to read John Green's Paper Towns. I could not stop laughing. This book rocks.

Stick it to the Amazon Man! Err...I mean...buy books.

Hi Gatekeeper, a quick question:
I remember a recent post in which you mentioned Barnes and Nobles not being your favorite place to buy books. I'm determined to buy a few Macmillan books today, and was wondering about your opinion on a pro-author/industry bookshop or online store. Thanks!



I like this--you're  not only buying Macmillan, but doing so at a non-coporate store. Score!

Here's an excellent resource--it'll give you a map and information of all of the indie bookstores near you. 
Rachelle Gardner does an excellent job of summing up what happened with Apple, Amazon, and Macmillan this weekend

Update on Toddler Amazon

It would appear, as Amazon said, they will "have to capitulate." (Subtext: Poor little Amazon! Big bad Macmillan has a monopoly!)

When and how, we don't know yet.

But can't you just picture it like one of those Breyer's ads with the kids trying to sound out "mono-diglycerides"?

Toddler Amazon: Capi-cap-it-ooo...

As it currently stands, Toddler Amazon will not have its ($9.99) cookie until it eats its ($14.99) Macmillan broccoli.
"Kindle is a business for Amazon, and it is also a mission. We never expected it to be easy!"

--Amazon's letter to consumers

Um, puke.

What mission is this? Bankrupting other booksellers? Pricing that erodes the value of books, that can only be matched by corporations able to take a loss?

The irony of it all: in addition to wanting a cookie NOW, toddler Amazon (TA) is displeased that the cookie companies (Macmillan) "hold a monopoly" on the product, and dare decide the conditions under which it will be sold.

No cookies till you eat your broccoli, TA?

Boo-hoo!

Macmillan isn't proposing anything that would lessen Amazon's profits--the opposite, actually. They just want the ability to set the price on some ebooks--not all, some--as high as $14.99.

Would Amazon, if it affected their profits, complain that authors "hold a monopoly" on their work? Probably: it's not that different from what they're saying now. After all, Macmillan holds the work of author + agent + editor + publishing staff. *Shouldn't* they own their years of work and considerable investments of faith, talent, capital, love and time?

And for Amazon to ask consumers to (informally) boycott Macmillan's work in protest!

Gatekeeper has lost her appetite.

For the next five minutes, at least. After all, there *might* be some dark chocolate with tonka bean just out of arm's reach...

Hmm. Yes. Over and out. :)

Have your Twilight--and eat it, too

You know what makes for a rockin' Friday night? Candy.

We made a quick (and necessary, I assure you) trip to Dylan's Candy Bar, a three-story candy emporium wih clear-plastic stairs filled with sugary goodness. In additon to bathtubs filled with gumballs, three-foot lollipops, plush Hershey kisses bigger than four average breadboxes, and a selection of candy-print jammies, I spotted these.

TWILIGHT conversation hearts. Sweet.

(But not as sweet as my bag of white-chocolate-covered "polar" gummi bears. Sounds gross, but seriously--magically delicious.)
Rather enjoying A Great And Terrible Beauty by Libba Bray. It's "read 200 pages in an afternoon, eat dinner, then read some more" good.
An explanation, now that it seems things are up and running (sweet! But it was so hard--had to disable javascript on the phone's browser, among other things--you'd think such blogging was illegal or, at the very least, frowned upon): I'm catsitting for the cutest rotund feline ever, and was too lazy to bring the laptop.
Gatekeeper here, on a phone-of-moderate-intelligence, kickin' it in an apartment without a computer
(I know, *gasp*) bringing you breaking publishing news.

You know I love you when I type paragraphs on keys the size of apple seeds.


As many of you have probably heard, Publishers Marketplace released a special notice this evening.

Amazon, as you know, has been insisting on selling all of their Kindle ebooks for $9.99 (*cough* doing everything but stating a desire to bring down publishing single-handedly *cough cough*), a practice that would eventually train consumers to believe that this is the value of books--electronic, paper, and otherwise--something which is unsustainable for a number of reasons.

Well, Macmillan decided to fight back. (Hurrah! I'm totally going to send a fat fruit basket on Monday. Nothing says "stick it to the Amazon man" like a de-prickled pineapple.) And what does Amazon do?

Not just refuse to sell any of their products, but make them disappear. Remember what happened to Kindle edtions of Orwell's books last summer? Yeah. That. Flash...and gone.

Now, right when I heard this, I immediately forwarded the email to friends and colleagues. Who promptly freaked out. I talked them down. Those of you who know Snarky Agent Man, he was one of those calls. About to go into a performance (cultured snark that he is), I only had a moment to make my case for my reaction: glee.

Check it: if other publishers follow suit, Amazon has one of two choices: have no books from major publishers to sell (oh, snappity! What's that? No $9.99? Oh wait--nothing's $9.99 WHEN THERE'S NOTHING TO SELL). OR Amazon could apologize profusely and HOPE publishers agree to do business with them.

Really painted yourself into a corner this time, didn't you, Bezos?

*

Amazon has begun to seem like a spoiled toddler in the grocery store.

"Mommy/Macmillan, I want a cookie!"

Mommy/Macmillan: only if the cookie company is compensated fairly.

"But I want it NOW!"

Don't give in, M/M. Don't give in.
Gatekeeper via phone-of-moderate-intelligence. Testing, testing...
Many thanks to Josh, who shared this with me.

This funny little video is (in addition to being amusing) a good example of why you need an agent you can really speak to--there are some elements of fiction-writing that defy description, and if you find someone with not only the ability to know what needs to be fixed, but how--and how to communicate that to you--you're well on your way to an excellent working relationship.

As you can imagine, you won't find that with everyone.

Enjoy. :)

On a sad, related note, JD Salinger died yesterday. One more ghost on the bookshelves.

I'm convinced the writers are invoked when we read their works. I recently watched The Way We Live Now on Netflix, got all excited and told my roommate about it, did some research on Trollope, reserved his book from the library--and, not hours later, got an email from the very-awesome Center for Fiction that they're offering a collection of Trollope seminars. Coincidence? I think not. 
I'm a Cowardly Lion, but knowing that others are messing up even worse than me gives me courage.


Listen. Realistically, if any of the mistakes below had been written brilliantly, warmly, and/or even just especially vividly, I would have instantly forgiven them.

It should be noted that most of our incoming mail doesn't "sound" like it's coming from humans, but from copy-paste machines.

But I do think writers get scared and, like retreating snails, huddle within their shells and never show us anything interesting. You've heard it before: In your writing, go for the jugular

Get fierce, you. I know many of you are polite members of society. Well, in your writing, you don't have to be. Get out there and do something you only wish you had the bravery to do in real life.

It's scary to come out, to splatter your sentences, your heart, across the page--and only then bring it back in. But it's scarier to not get your book published--isn't it?

New query (and general writing) tip: when you feel that you've written wildly and then reined yourself back in (versus when you've written politely and then added wildness)--then, and only then, do you know you have a good draft.

This is your competition: edition 3,478 (or so)

You know how I always say that the scary-scary odds--You're more likely to get hit by lightning/sing in a Broadway play than get published--are somewhat misleading? Well, they're skewed by--you guessed it!--those who don't do research.

Today, in our query pile of 32 emails: 

One author asking to be excepted from the submissions process. Couldn't we just Google him instead?

Two JFK conspiracy books.

One author who CCs--yes, that's the one where we see all of them--all of the agents, and simply addresses the thing, "Dear agent." At least capitalize "Agent"!

One Eat, Pray, Love knockoff that insists nothing like this has ever, ever been written before. If you're a writer and haven't heard of a book that Britney Spears has (she was blurbed in the UK edition)...well...

One, "Dear Agent, can I get a do-over?" with regard to a query sent last week.

....and my favorite:

One email to our Submissions account--it's Submissions@--asking if we accept e-mail submissions.
Just began Paper Towns by John Green.

So far, a big fan.
It must be noted, with sweet appreciation, that several of you were shocked by the behavior of fellow writers--and you must know that the examples below are hardly unusual: writers are in  a very difficult situation, having just spent so much time (perhaps years) on a work, and--how terribly frustrating if no one will even read it! I'm sure the rules for querying seem unclear; every agent wants something slightly different, and there must seem to be requirements that are both arbitrary and unfair. So, I do understand where that anger is coming from.

That said, if every writer were kinder--if the average kindness-o-meter were of a warmer, less-chilly temperature--we agents could be nicer, too.

I've mentioned before that, when we fear for preserving the civility of inboxes, we are reluctant to include details that are footholds for the angry. ("You say my dialog is weak? I say it's better than The Da Vinci Code! Who are you to tell me...?!") This benefits, as a whole, no one--I doubt even the writers feel better about themselves after composing such things--upsets agents (we are, though many forget it, human too--and I certainly want to write more, but fear angry correspondence), and--it makes the climate much less friendly, much more guarded, with regard to our openness.

So, yes. Be a union, writers: don't let the few ruin it for all of you. Get together (online, if you must), have a tea party discussing decorum and correspondence, and--well--decide to be nice.

How Not to Communicate With Agents--a game!


Here's a re-post of a phone call we received about a year ago--and a "spot the errors" game.

There are twelve things wrong with the phone call--see if you can spot them all! Comment with your guesses.

We've received more than our usual due of crazy callers this week, and rather than type up transcripts of that misery, I'll repost my favorite. And yes, this really did happen. The moment I hung up, I jotted down every sentence I remembered.

At my company--as is not uncommon with small agencies--generally whoever's closest will answer the phone. This results in the occasional Angry Writer telling me (an agent) that I'm not qualified to answer their question about whether we represent books about aliens on skateboards with guns and how it relates to their own personal alien abduction. Am I eagerly waiting for their queries? You betcha!

Tips/answers to follow.
*



Her: "Hi, I'm _____________ from ____, Kansas. I need a literary agent! That's you! Are you taking new clients? You probably aren't. You probably can't help me. I already published my book. It's a murder mystery. My friends say it's the best thing they've ever read. You can trust 'em, they read a lot. Anyway, they say I should turn this into a movie. I really wanna take a bite outta that. See, it's a great book. People die in real original ways. I sent off packets to a buncha agents. Publish America took it! Real easy. Now it's a book. I want it to be a movie. I found you in LMP" [clearly pleased with self for using the term as if familiar with it] "and now I need an agent. You probably only get movie deals for people you publish, huh? People who--wait, what do you do, anyway? You send things to publishing agencies?"

Me: Houses. Publishing houses.

Her: "Yeah, publishing agencies. So, can you take on my book?"

Me: It's not quite right for us. See, we don't do mysteries...

Her: 
"Well, you're probably not qualified to tell me, but what agents are right? See, I've got my LMP..."

*

Found the twelve mistakes? Comment with those you've spotted...
From The Onion:

Frantic Steve Jobs Stays Up All Night Designing Apple Tablet
All of you Twitter-ers will be thrilled: for the first time in my life, I used Twitter for news about--what else?--the Apple Tablet. I typed in "Tablet," concluded that the announcement hasn't come out yet, and minimized the window. Twenty minutes later, and--5,681 new tweets!

Goodness. I can't help but picture a Central Park crammed with very loud cartoon birds.

But it's scary and interesting, this Twitter-as-news.

But--before you say anything, (I'm looking at you, Ms. @totallythebomb.com), I'm a much better Twurker (Twitter Lurker) than contributor. For now.
My cousin, who is just-now seventeen, is my go-to guide for what her friends like. I think it's adorable that they've chosen, instead of the usual teen driving-around-and-looking-for-stuff-to-do thing, that they prefer chatting at Starbucks over lattes. (It'll stunt your growth! I want to yelp, but I won't, because I'm Cool Cousin Gatekeeper.)

Anyway, I love taking her to Barnes and Noble (not my favorite place to buy books, but there's one everywhere, and we're just browsing, anyway) to see what she likes, what she thinks her friends will like, the authors she thinks are up-and-coming.

Meg Cabot is more than up-and-coming; she's arrived. (She also has a most amusing, spunky blog.) My cousin suggested All-American Girl, which I was enjoying a great deal. I didn't read the cover; I simply jumped in. (I hate knowing what will happen before it does. I should note that, when reading manuscripts, I read the query and then dive in--the synopsis is only there if I find myself reading lots but seeing nothing happen--and wondering what will, and when.)

Anyway, so it was amusing enough that I didn't mind that it was typical girl fare: younger-sister woes (she loves her popular sister's boyfriend who is, like she is, "of artistic temperament"), typical parental punishment, and good descriptions of life in DC. I get to page 100 or so, fully amused, and then--what's this?--is she--oh goodness!--she's going to--no, she wouldn't!--but, yes, she is!--look out!--get away from there! He has a gun!--I can't look!--OMG! She just saved the life of the president!


Yes. I talk to protagonists the way some people yell at televisions. (Speaking of, I'm trying to think of a particularly clever black-and-gold, perhaps football-shaped, treat for Super Bowl. Any suggestions?)

But this presents an interesting question. Page 100 seems rather late for the promised plot to kick in. If most manuscripts I read did that, I'd probably find myself rifling through the synopsis: Does anything happen? Okay, well, when? And then I'd be evil and skip ahead. Or perhaps go CTRL-F and search for words that pertain to the promised plot. (Before you think me truly awful: many agents would, if a manuscript didn't hold their attention, simply send the work back--perhaps noting that more needs to happen sooner.)

But--as we saw with The Help--readability trumps all.

Cabot's excellent in terms of readability. I found myself getting to page 225 in one evening. That sure says something. Especially when there's an episode of Desperate Housewives just begging to be watched on Hulu.

But not every writer--not even every publishable writer--can manage to entertain with small plot potatoes for 100 pages.

So: survey time!

Comment anonymously, if you like.

On what page does your plot--the part that would be promised on your book jacket--kick in?

Squee! Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

A writer just offered to introduce me (online) to one of my favorite YA authors, like, ever. Heart! Pounding!

I was never one for holding signs and screaming for, say, 'N Sync or Hanson or whoever my friends were swooning over.

But this author? Oh. Wow. Yes. I would stand in Times Square for (now-defunct) TRL if she were on it. I'd wait in line for tickets, perhaps for hours in the cold. I'd chat with other line-sitters: Didn't you love [that book]? OMG that book rocks my socks. Did you hear that she...?

This is beyond exciting.
I know I've mentioned, several times, several of my favorite podcasts: today, I practically begged one of our authors to try to get herself on KQED's The Writer's Block (this week, lovely poet Kristen Tracy--and I'm not usually a fan of poetry--but listening to these poems made doing laundry, my least favorite chore, significantly less painful), and this morning, my commute was marked by a pleased smile at listening to the most recent New York Times Book Review Podcast (both are also available free in the iTunes store).

But if you're a hardcore "must read it and not hear it" type--or if you don't own an ipod or want to put on your laptop speakers while, say, cooking--you may as well just go to the search page for Motoko Rich (this link will auto-update). She must simply live, breathe, eat books--I can't believe how much she writes, and so quickly!--and, well...what a nourishing life that must be. Vitamin B? Plenty of books. Stress-relieving, too.
Am I a little delighted to see Kathryn Stockett, a first-time writer, unseat Dan Brown with The Help?

Are you kidding? I'm thrilled! Were I in a swivel chair, I would spin it around a few times--whee!--for emphasis.

This is proof that word-of-mouth, readability and reader lurve can trump anyone.

Go to, new writers. Go to.

A Note on (Relative) Anonymity

Some of you know who I am, from my early, innocent days: Read my blog! This blog talks about books! Ask me questions! Here, have a pie chart! (Or this one--on YA!)

It began as a quick way to post data--I didn't want to buy a domain, didn't want to mess with HTML, didn't want to do much more than post images and have them, very quickly, visible to all.

But then, of course, it grew.

For aforementioned reasons--most of them having to do with writers not always being nice--I've gone a bit underground. Granted, a bit. I'm aware that, if you have certain pieces of information, it's quite possible to figure out who and where and what I am.

But. It would be wonderful if you'd keep my identity a secret, if you know it. Make it a bit of work for the new readers.

However, if you ever need anything--if you have questions about publishing, need an agent's opinion for something, if you have a book and think I'd be a good fit--you are always welcome to email me at AgencyGatekeeper@gmail.com.

I like writers, I like readers, and will always respect your privacy and not post anything without your express permission. Do know I'll be happy to hear from you, and will respond, as soon I can, kindly.

On Responses to Query Responses

I noted, last week, that sometimes we don't open the responses to our responses in the query pile--mostly because some of them are, well, rude.

In the past week, we received 13 replies to rejections.

5 were kind.
5 were neutral.
3 were, quite simply, rude.

6 were professional.
4 had obvious, objective errors.
1 pitched another book. Not recommended. If you're going to submit another work, it's best to do so separately--otherwise, we will associate your new work with the fact that we just said No to you.

Here's the best:

Thanks so much for your prompt reply and for your advice! I went out and bought the book you recommended.

Best of luck to you too!

Here's one in the middle:

thank you. i'll check them out

Here's one that is not advised. The writer has spliced his comments in with my email:

Me: You write well,
Him: Not well enough, apparently.
Me: I'm afraid that this is not quite right for us.
Him: It's "not quite right" for 304 other agents either...

304?! Wow. Don't I feel special. I wonder how many got this response. 

Also, when an agent takes the time to mention that you write well, it's generally considered, well, kind. I understand the frustration, but will I ever look favorably on another query from this guy? Probably not. 
Allow Gatekeeper and Pandora to make you a mix tape.

A few months ago, I was defrosting in the Starbucks near Columbus Circle, sipping a peppermint mocha and reading a stack of pretty YA novels. To my left, a couple on a first date. The guy tells the girl a story of a guy who killed himself after a bad first date. A pause. "I'm socially adept, I promise," he says.

To my right, a man dancing. At first I think he's waiting for a beverage, but then I realize he's in his own world. He's squeaking on the wet tile, muttering the names of artists of all types. Then--with such relish I can almost hear him now--he busts a move and says, "Fats! Waller!"

I went home and downloaded "There's Honey on the Moon Tonight," which is really rather excellent.

But, for free: go to Pandora. Click Create New Station. Type in "Fats Waller."

Sweet beats.

So. Here's proof that Gatekeeper can, even without loving certain books, want to read them to the very end. This happens, sometimes, with manuscripts too--even if I know they won't work, I just want to keep reading.

This is Possessions by Nancy Holder, and its readability score is very good (A-). Writing is a B+, concept originality B, follow-through (exploration of said concept), B+, characters A, relationships between characters, A-. Overall awesomeness, B+.

I started this last night, got to page 250, slept, and finished it on the subway this morning. It's about a haunted girls' boarding school. Some parts are kind of ridiculous (50,000 dollars for a single Halloween party? Seriously? And it didn't even sound all that cool) but the relationship between the protagonist and Julie, the best friend she is trying to save, is quite good. There's a moment when she tells Julie her suspicions of Queen Bee (though I do hate it when young female characters adopt mother-age terminology) evildoing, and Julie tells her that it's a pathetic attempt at trying to retain her friendship--like something out of a bad movie.

Again, nothing really to sink one's teeth into--after all, it's a story of ghosties, not vampires--and parts felt a bit thin.

But it's good fun.

The wind is currently howling and we just heard a ghost-like story in the office. I'm clutching my coffee tightly. Mmm. Coffee and ghosties and queries. Cozy.
Does anyone happen to know how to add the "become a follower" button without displaying said followers?

For purposes of privacy and anonymity, Gatekeeper is reluctant to post such things.

That, and I'd like to you to all imagine that there are 10,000 loyal followers/readers each day. :)
Many thanks to Shannon at Book Dreaming for the kind mention!
I really hope your high school friend doesn't have a high school sense of humor. I'd have been so tempted to translate 'your father smells of elderberries' into Urdu for you. No? Oh, maybe that's just me then.

Well, I haven't heard back--so maybe she did!

Oh dear.

E-Readers

Here are links to the newest ones announced (officially or unofficially). Publisher's Marketplace did a big piece, which Agent Rachelle Gardner analyzes brilliantly, but--for those of you without a PM membership--I'll include links to the products mentioned.

I'm most excited about the Copia--in addition to having the best website (in my opinion), they seem to have done the best job using the device to create a social reading experience. See http://www.thecopia.com/index.html.

Also announced: a Samsung with a pen (finally! Annotation!), the Entourage Edge (a two-screened device--one for reading, one for web browsing), the Skiff (large, thin, touch-screened), an Audiovox device (promises easy synchronization and books through BN.com), and the Alex (a number of social media features, plus a dual screen like the Nook's).

Unfortunately, it's proving difficult to find out whether it's possible (as is possible with the Kindle) to simply attach a manuscript as a file and e-mail it wirelessly to any of these devices--which is 99 percent of how I'd use one of these devices. (Me, I like paper books.) Does anyone know?
I suggested this to a writer recently--a lovely writer who has become a lovely correspondent. She just wrote to say that this was most helpful. Yes, I was joking about the beverage. But rest is absolutely sincere.

Print it out. You *must* print it out. Then make yourself a glass/carafe/pitcher/bucket of your favorite drink, position yourself over a surface that is not white carpet, and have at it, big red sharpie in hand.
New poll! So that I'll know whether to start saying things like, "Dude, you must go see _______ read at McNally Jackson!"--if it will be useful--let me know if you're locals.

Poll at right. :)
When you like a full and are actively considering signing a new author, do you:

A) Always garner the opinion of a colleague

B) Sometimes call the author right away to make an offer

C) Play a few rounds of mini-golf and make a trip to the cigar bar to think about it while pretending to own the world for a while

D) Other

If A), does getting another opinion usually take longer than your own read (and do they read the full MS)? How much time does that tend to add to the process and do you, in turn, do a lot of reading for your colleagues?




Depends.

First, C, though usually not involving cigars. If I put it down and keep thinking about it, then I know I really like it and didn't just get caught up in it.

I almost always send an email like, "I really enjoyed this--I'm getting second reads." That way, if a Sneaky-McSneak Caffeinated Other Agent wants it (I just saw someone get an offer within two days of querying!) the writer knows I'm interested and have half-tossed a hat into the ring. So, yes. I specialize in fedoras cut in half. Though I prefer the newsboy cap.

A can take anywhere from a day to months--everyone maintains very long queues, and I can bug all I like, but that won't necessarily hurry the process. Sometimes they read the full thing, sometimes just enough to get a sense of it. And yes, of course--I read for other people, too.


This is the mosaic for the 23rd St stop on the R/W trains--hats! 
Gatekeeper is feeling a bit genius-like.

We got a wonderful memoir in from an author who spent part of her childhood in Pakistan. I can't say more, but--wow. It's awesome.

I text my high school friend, "Hey, how do you say 'I so enjoyed reading this' in Urdu?"

A moment later, a speedy, caffeinated cross-country text: apparently it's Aap ki kitaab bahot khoob hai.

Me: Dear [Author]...
Hi! I was just wondering if there is any particular reason why an agent requests a partial ms or a full ms. Does it have anything to do with how much they enjoyed the sample or does it simply depend on the amount of work they have on their plate? Is it any more promising if a full ms is requested, or does it not make much difference? Also, if the agent does really like the ms, but thinks it could do with some tweaking, would it be simply rejected or would the agent give them the opportunity to do the tweaking and to then re-submit? Thanks for answering so many questions! You're amazing. I don't know how you find the time! :)

1. Partial v. full. I can only speak for myself. When we were accepting mostly paper submissions, I wanted partials, so that the submissions didn't grow and eventually take up a good portion of the office. If we were ridiculously interested, we'd ask for more than that. I think a lot of agents still use this system. (Full=more interest.) Now that we do most submissions electronically, it makes more sense to just ask for the full thing at once--I'd hate to be loving a story, get to page 50, and then have to wait to read the rest. 

2. Reject v. tweaking. It depends on how much we like it. If we love it but there are some edits that are necessary, we'll send those along. If we just aren't connecting with a story, we'll reject it (perhaps with suggestions, if any come to mind). It's mostly about whether we have a connection to the work or not. I've certainly sent substantial edits. 
Do you get a lot of the [responses like] "Dear Agent, Boy will you be sorry when MY BOOK becomes the #1 worldwide bestest ever seller and you can't walk three feet in NYC City without seeing an advertisement for the movie version starring Morton Downey Jr. and Harrison George"?


Yes. But most such responses are neither so specific nor so well-written.

Do agents ever attain a stage in their career where past sales alone generate enough more than enough income to sustain them indefinitely and they could, say, play golf four days a week and still come out ahead?



Oh yes. I imagine Mr. Regal, the agent for Audrey Niffeneger, can play as much golf as he likes this year.

I've actually never been golfing, but--like with many of the trappings of the people who own the world--I'm intrigued. So, yes. Someday I will have to give myself a field trip consisting of golf (I mean, really--who wouldn't want the freedom to go somewhere pretty, hit a ball with a big stick as hard as you can, and then tear after it in a souped-up golf cart?--I have driven one, and through a forest no less--not to worry, I didn't kill any endangered flora or fauna--and it was awesome), Hendrick's gin on a sailboat, and then dinner at a cigar bar/club with wooden mallards.

Think I could write that off as a business expense?
If you've gotten a nice personal rejection with feedback, is it bad form thank the agent (without asking about/contesting/arguing/groveling, etc.) for their kindness?

Goodness! It's only gracious. Especially since it's unusual, from most agents, to get anything other than a form. They took time to really think about your work. But you needn't get fancy.

Something like this is just fine:

Dear [Agent],


Thank you so much for your time and thoughtful response. 


Best wishes to you [for 2010/for the holidays/insert something nice here].


All best,
[You]

For the last bit, I've gotten wishes of warm tea (very nice--and personalized), the next bestseller on my desk (very nice too, though informal--not always advised), and "a pleasant and prosperous year" (good and multipurpose).

Do know that some agents, for fear of receiving unkind notes (especially from rejected queries--there's always the ever-popular Clearly you didn't even read my letter), probably make it a policy not to open those obviously from someone just rejected--the liklihood of their being gracious is rather low. (Do I smell a pie chart in the oven? Well...)

From this week, for example:

I was hoping that if you rejected the work, you would at least provide some kind of feedback. Even the smallest amount, would have been greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

The thing is, I had provided feedback--I'd commented on the concept, which was fabulous, and mentioned several lines I'd liked. You can bet that, if he queries again, I will be something less than ecstatic.

Most agents, I think, are reluctant to--but do--open emails from those freshly rejected.

Don't be offended if you don't receive a reply--it's pretty standard not to and, for that reason, you don't have to worry about taking up our time. Just know that your email was read and received, and we do appreciate your appreciation.
I just saw the most wonderful, brilliant, insightful editorial letter. Editor, I want to write, you are a genius. 
In my critique group many of my fellow writers all have author websites, but they are unpublished. I feel that unless I have an agent or a book to promote that its really in poor taste. Like, "Look at me, I am a writer, I wrote stuff but you can't buy it because I am unpublished." LOL. Do you really look at unpublished authors websites?


Sometimes. One of our clients did something rather clever--she mentioned in her query that the first three chapters could be found online, and then directed us to the link. I loved it from the very first page, asked for the full, and the rest is history.

In general, I don't bother to look, unless I'm seriously undecided about a query--or if it promises some sort of content that would help my decision. I suppose it's nice that you've thought about it, though--especially if the site is a nice, professional-looking one. You'll need one eventually; it shows forethought, I suppose, to have one now.
Just curious - does happen very often that you regret accepting representation of an author? Does it take a lot of due diligence to determine if you're a good fit for each other?


No. It's my personal policy to never, ever, ever accept anyone unless I am absolutely, positively sure that I'm head-over-heels in love with their work. Since I'm a young agent, I have to be especially careful: I'm still in the process of creating my "brand"; if I send out work anything short of spectacular, it could make an editor (who sees and dislikes it) take the following submission from me less seriously.

I've been known, if there is any doubt--and even if there isn't--to set something down (after reading the full manuscript) for a few days to think about it. If I forget about it quickly, and/or if my excitement about the piece diminishes after a few days, I know it's not quite right for me. It's easy to fall in love with something with a sense of immediacy--but ensuring that the feeling lasts takes some time, and is worth some waiting.

I haven't yet had the situation of "I have to get back to another agent by tomorrow, what do you think?!"--but I imagine I could know pretty quickly if something were right for me or not.

I reject works without any objective flaws all the time. All agents do. But--just as with writing, and anything that requires some aesthetic sense--one is naturally an expert on the areas (ie, I don't like alien books, therefore I'm very unlikely to be an expert on them or know what a book needs) that come naturally.
I'm bugged, in the very best sense--not the "Here, have this plant that keeps emitting strange electronic beeps and looks suspiciously like a hidden, wireless mike" bugged (not to worry, I kill all houseplants and would quickly notice); quite thankfully it has nothing to do with the six-legged kind, prominent in the city that they are; and--most of all--it does not have to do with the annoying sort that relate to (in my mind) 1) screaming children kicking my airplane seat, 2) broken library systems that call in patrons when books are not ready, and/or 3) lines at Trader Joe's that extend around the store. (Who knew its wine store was a club? There was practically a velvet rope, last time I tried to enter the Manhattan location, and there was certainly a Hawaiian-print bouncer.)

No, this is the productive kind of bug--the, "Write this, right now" bug-as-verb.

I do hope you have several friends willing to do the same for you, even if you disagree.

In my case, my disagreement is hearty: I'm flattered, but will not, as my roommate, agent friend, correspondent, reader and professional correspondent suggest, consider writing a guide to modern etiquette anytime soon. (And, for those of you who expect me to eat my words, I assure I've just had a very satisfying carbalicious lunch, washed down with a diet book manuscript, and am no longer hungry.)

But. One point of etiquette that has come up and that is relevant to a meeting I have this week: one of the most important skills you can gain for your social life as a writer--especially as a writer who would like to stay on good terms and/or in touch with an agent--is to accept rejection gracefully.

How best does one do this? Well. Keep in mind that the subject is uncomfortable not only for you, but for the agent(s) involved. The moment we sense you'll ask for more--or bring it up again--we put up immediate anti-awkwardness force fields. If we sense you'll contest our details, we'll send a rejection that doesn't give any jumping-off points. (Really, a code word must be invented that means "I am a nice author and you can tell me anything you like about my work without fear of tantrums/retribution/karma/anger/further emails on the topic.")

Consider a rejection the same way you would an invitation that you did not receive. Let's say a friend has thrown a party and invited several people you know--but not you. Perhaps there is a matter of space, finances (perhaps it's a sit-down dinner), or other factors that make the number of invites finite. Truly, you'll never know all of the factors involved. Maybe there's someone in town--someone you threw a pie at at the last party, or who you do not get along with, and the hostess wished to avoid that awkwardness (and the cleaning of crust from the carpet). Maybe it's a special-interest society meeting--one that is too embarrassing to bring up. (A support group, say--you wouldn't go around asking people, "So, have you ever________? Okay, come join our group"--but would, instead, invite those you know to be in this category.)

You could run yourself in circles wondering why your friends got invited and you didn't.

But would you ask the hostess? Most likely, no. What good would it do? You'd feel awkward. She'd feel awkward. And the awkwardness would lead to fewer invitations in the future.

Try as I might, I did not find anything in the Emily Post about this, though I did find very amusing note-formulas for the rescinding of invitations. (More to come.) I do wish Ms. Post addressed more of the issues of etiquette in messy situations--her book seems mostly to address what to say and do when everything goes perfectly.

So. Let's say you are rejected by an agent but have reason to be in touch with them in the future. What's the best thing to do?

As harsh as it is: it's probably best to wait and see if they bring it up. They may ask how you're doing with the book they saw--which is an invitation to say, "Oh, yes, it's doing marvelously"--and if it's doing terribly, put it as delicately/optimistically as you possibly can while still being truthful--but not an invitation to ask, "So, why did you reject it?"

They may ask you about the subject matter: "Oh, Author, I have always been curious about the lions you mentioned. Will you tell me more about your safari?" which is, you guessed it, an invitation to discuss lions, maybe tigers, maybe bears--but no rejections.

Any further questions, if you need to ask them to proceed, should be asked over email--not over the phone, and certainly not in person--especially if you're at a restaurant, have just ordered, and it will be a long time before the bill. You must realize that, with all indelicate questions, it's somewhat impolite to ask in a situation that requires an immediate response. It's only fair to give one time to think.

By the same token, if you've submitted your work to someone--and if you know them socially, to some degree--it's best to let them bring it up. Don't pester them with, "Have you read it? Have you read it? Huh huh huh?"--tempting as that may be. Send it to them, assume it got to them, and then wait for their response. I've just sent a piece to a friend of mine. It's probably taking it a bit far--then again, he's doing a favor for me--but I fully plan to avoid all mention of books, writing, and editing with him until he happens to get back to me. I'll also not do that thing--so typical of our generation of chat-ers--"Hi! How are you?"--and then wait for a response. Were I him, I would know that that meant, "Hi, how are you? Have you read it yet? Do you like it? Do you think I'm going to be a big famous writer with an international book tour someday? Do you? Do you really? Oh good."

So, in sum: don't talk about it. Let all of this business chat be over email. If you meet them socially, stick to lighter topics. Keep your spirits up--much more attractive in writers and people in general. Be hopeful, never defeated. And always remember that there is no last chance. There are always more agents out there who will look at your work.

But an ongoing connection is invaluable. Whatever small advice you might have gotten by asking for it is not worth jeopardizing that agent's sense of comfort with you.

In other news, I've had Blossom Dearie's "I Won't Dance" in my head since breakfast:


For heaven rest us, I'm not asbestos...



Indeed, you're not. You're lovely. Be kind and gracious, and agents will think so, too.
The DIY Book Tour: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/17/books/review/Elliott-t.html.

Most amusing. And practical.
I love reading books of diet rules while eating lunches that break all of them.