Patricia J. Parsons

Book publishers, Pitching books, Publishing

The ‘Dreaded Rejection’: Scourge of the writing-publishing cycle

Posted on 24 Jun 2014 by Patricia J. Parsons

[The following piece is an excerpt from my upcoming book Who Will Read Your Book?: The Unknown Writer’s Guide to the Realities of Writing & Publishing]

We’ve all been there: we’ve all been rejected for something. Perhaps you didn’t get into your first-choice college or university. Perhaps you tried out for a play and didn’t get the part. Maybe you applied for a job and didn’t get it – even after a fantastic interview. But that’s life, isn’t it? Why then do writers seem to feel especially slighted when agents or editors pass on their work?

My own work has been rejected numerous times by agents, publishers, and I suppose by readers who decided not to buy the books for whatever reason. But I’ve also had successes – that first publisher said ‘yes’, I received the odd royalty cheque so some readers have said ‘yes’. What do these rejections look like? And how do you cope?

In my view, rejections come in three packages: the total-lack-of-response rejection, the form-letter rejection, and the almost-form-letter rejection. Let’s look at each one in turn.

The total-lack-of-response rejection

I think this is the most frustrating kind of rejection – because you’re never sure when it has kicked in. In my experience, this happens most often with literary agents. Publishers will usually at least send you a form letter. When a publisher’s or agent’s web site says, “If you haven’t heard from us within three months, you can consider that we’ve passed on your project,” I see red. Although it is true that publishers are swamped with queries and manuscripts from wannabe writers, it seems to me that the writers who took the time to contact them at least deserve a form-letter rejection. After all, if you’re a publisher or a literary agent, you signed up for this.

Providing even a form rejection would allow the writer to move on. This kind of rejection is especially galling when they have also asked that you not submit to more than one publisher at the same time: the multiple submission. The time it then takes to move on is unacceptable. This is just disrespectful.

The form-letter rejection

The form-letter rejection is so ubiquitous that some writers paper their walls with them. In the old days (and still today for some dinosaurs of publishers and agents), the submission requirements would indicate that you were to provide a SASE (self-addressed-stamped envelope) with your submission so that they could send you a photo-copied form rejection. Not for a single moment did I believe that if they really intended to accept my manuscript they would object to footing the bill for a stamp, or even better, a telephone call.

These days, the form-letter rejection is really in the form of a form-email. It goes something like this:

“Thank-you for your query. While we feel that it might be a worthwhile project, we don’t think it is right for us. Good luck.”

What’s interesting about this, is how when tweaked a bit, it can make you believe you have received a personal note of rejection, when it’s really a form. But don’t kid yourself.

The almost-form-letter rejection

Just a tweak here and there, and you have the and the almost-form-letter rejection, which sounds like a personal note, but is what the agent or publisher always says to soften the blow. In fact, that is the purpose of this kind of a rejection: to make you feel less bad about being rejected. Here are several I received from agents about a current book project:

“Dear Patricia Parsons: I appreciate the intention of this work but regret I simply don’t think I would be the best match. Best of luck. Sincerely, RR

Or how about…

This isn’t right for me, but thanks and good luck. Best regards, MH

Or…

Dear Patricia, Thank you for the opportunity to review your project. While I appreciate that you thought of me for your work of nonfiction, I’m not sure that this project is the best fit for me. Thank you again, and best of luck in finding the right literary agent for your work. Best, Maria

So, the work just wasn’t a good fit. I feel better now. Not really. There is nothing in any of these to suggest that the work is good, bad or indifferent. And I wouldn’t expect it to say that. What you need to understand about these rejections is that they do not reflect any kind of assessment of the value or quality of your work whatsoever. They simply mean the agent doesn’t want to represent you.

Occasionally, you do receive a much longer letter from an acquiring editor whose interest was, at least, momentarily piqued. These are much longer letters that often even suggest other publishers or agents that might be a better match or who might actually be looking for your kind of work. If you don’t receive a note that is longer than three or four lines, understand that it is what they always say – even if the work is a piece of crap and they think so.

So, you might wonder why editors and agents do this. Sometime editor Jenn Glatzer put it this way: “…when…we…would like to be honest with the writer, some of us bite our tongues anyway. The reason? Not all writers know what it means to be a professional. And not all of them can take criticism. Whenever I sent constructive criticism with a rejection, I knew there was about a 75% chance I’d hear nothing back (which was fine), a 5% chance I’d get a quick “thanks for your consideration anyway” (which was nice), and a 20% chance I’d get an argument (which was not fine).^{^[i]}

It would never occur to me to respond to an editor in any way – especially not in an argumentative one. In the future, I might want to submit a different project for one. The second reason I wouldn’t is that it would be a waste of my precious writing time. Just don’t do it. (Go to the endnote and read her entire blog post – it’s worth it.)

If you want some more information and another perspective on interpreting what publishers and agents really mean in their rejection letters, you’ll enjoy reading the Writer’s Relief online post titled How to interpret rejection letters from literary agents and editors.^{^[ii]}

If editors or agents are truly besotted by your work, they’ll say so, and they’ll ask for more. Continued rejections, however, should make you re-examine your work before running screaming into self-publishing. Once you’ve determined that it’s truly your best work, then go for it — take control and self-publish.

[i] Jenna Glatzer. Why you get form rejection letters. http://www.writing-world.com/life/form.shtml

[ii] Writers’ Relief. How to interpret rejection letters from literary agents and editors. http://writersrelief.com/blog/2011/01/how-to-interpret-rejection-letters-from-literary-agents-and-editors/

Book promotion, Self-Publishing

Who will buy your book?

Posted on 17 Jun 201417 Jun 2014 by Patricia J. Parsons

Someday I hope to write a book where the royalties will pay for the copies I give away. — Clarence Darrow

Oh how I empathize with Clarence Darrow. I cannot tell you how many books I’ve given away over the years, and these days of the hideous deluge of ‘free’ eBooks as promotional tools makes the problem even worse. I often wonder how many of other writers’ relatives and friends actually buy their books.

My family, for example, largely feels that they are entitled to receive free copies of my books. Well, with the most recent one, I decided that this wasn’t going to happen anymore. Even my 91-year old mother didn’t get a copy (to be fair, I really didn’t really want her to read it – to much *sex*). The only family member who actually received a hard copy (and that was after he downloaded and paid for an e-book) was my 25-year old son who was one of my final editors. His keen eye and firm grasp of the English language made him an ideal beta reader for which I paid him. The least I could do was to give him a copy of the book when he was home from London last weekend.

Then there are all those other copies we give away. And this refers equally to my books (and your books) published by traditional publishers and the self-published ones. These are the review copies.

There is little doubt that review copies are important, however, it can get out of hand. In addition it seems to me these days that we need to be vigilant that a so-called reviewer does not feel obligated to be a bit less critical of a book that he or she has received gratis. (Although some bloggers seem to think that a free book might end up as a more critical review. Not sure why.)

When I wrote the piece When is a book review not a book review? I was thinking about these kinds of issues. So, we need to consider carefully how many books we give away for free in the hope of acquiring a positive review.

And then there are those free book giveaways that started this rant. There is little doubt that giving books away can help you to accrue new readers: sometimes, readers who would otherwise pass over your books might try them and like them, then return to buy future offerings. So that seems like a good investment in marketing. We need to be very mindful, however, that if as writers we don’t value our work, we can hardly expect others to value it either. In fact, many readers are just as likely to troll the online bookstores seeking only free books, never returning to your work when the book is not free. There is no actual hard data on either of these situations although you’ll find plenty of anecdotal stories extolling the virtues of giving away your work.

It would be my greatest wish that writers value their work. I often wonder if writers who don’t value their work know in their hearts that it isn’t really that good. There is a difference, however, between the writing a book specifically for yourself and to give away to others, and one you hope to sell. This is the kind of book you may write simply hoping that a few others might benefit from it in one way or another.

It is quite a different matter to work hard on a piece of writing that you hope readers, unknown to you at this point, will buy, read and appreciate. This is the kind of work that we have to stop giving away so freely.

So, fellow writers, keep a very careful count of how many copies of your work you give away and the return on that investment. I’d love to know how it has worked for you. Perhaps we can build a database of information. There are marketing reasons to give your work away, but that needs to be balanced by a sense of value. Tread carefully.

It might be worth remembering what Jules Renard once wrote:

“Writing is the only profession where no one considers you ridiculous if you earn no money.”

Now I think I’ll surf over to Amazon and set up a free book giveaway and see what happens!!

For a few different perspectives on this issue, here are some ideas from other sources:

Why Successful Authors Are Giving Their Books Away for Free http://www.huffingtonpost.com/simone-collins/why-successful-authors-ar_b_4115300.html

Why publishers should give away eBooks http://www.roughtype.com/?p=1573

Writing, Writing craft

Are you a writer or a ‘content creator’?

Posted on 4 Jun 2014 by Patricia J. Parsons

Content creation is the latest buzz-phrase of the social-media-obsessed marketing and public relations people among us. I’m going to suggest that large numbers of people who identify themselves as writers are not; rather they are content creators. Although there is nothing fundamentally wrong with being a content creator, it is disingenuous to suggest you are a writer, if you’re not. Let’s begin with some definitions for argument’s sake.

Wikipedia (arguably a good source for this definition since it is the mother of all content creation outputs) defines the concept as “the contribution of information to any media and most especially to digital media for an end-user/audience in specific contexts…”[1] [I added the emphasis.]

A more succinct definition is offered by the Pew Research Internet Project which simply suggests that content creation is “…the material people add to the online world.”[2] Further, they suggest that content creators make web sites, blog, post photos, contribute to online discussions, post materials to web sites etc.

What then is a writer? A writer writes. But, you might reasonably argue, a content creator also writes. Although that may be true, that does not make that person a ‘writer.’

Let’s look at an analogous situation: You are sipping a drink at a cocktail party and find yourself in conversation with someone whom you have just met. What do you talk about? Often, in these social circumstances, we ask, “What do you do?” This person says, “I’m a doctor.” What is the immediate image formed in your mind? That this person teaches Kantian ethics in a philosophy department of the local university? I doubt it. And that’s because in our North American society, the connotative definition of a “doctor” is that the person is a “medical doctor.” Although the philosophy professor might well hold a doctoral degree, it is unlikely he or she would say’ “I’m a doctor.” It would be misleading given our shared understanding of the connotative definition of the term. But what if that person says, “I’m a writer”?

Same scenario, different occupations. You are sipping a drink at a cocktail party and begin a conversation with a new acquaintance by asking, “What do you do?” That person says, “I’m a writer.” What image is conjured in your mind? Do you see a picture of this person toiling away in a cubicle coming up with pithy blog posts for a dog food company? Doubtful. Most of us would have a picture of someone who either writes for magazines or pens books of one sort or another. The person in the cubicle would more accurately be described as a “content creator.” So why is this important anyway?

In my view, writers do more than create content for a purpose – which is really what it’s all about in the PR and marketing circles (since I’ve been teaching PR and corporate communication strategy for a quarter of a century, I think I have the right to have an opinion on this). Content is written (or otherwise created as in the case of photos and infographics) for a specific audience for a specific purpose. That is different from a writer who has an idea, is passionate about it and moves ahead with writing the article, short-story or book – fiction or non-fiction. And if you are a content creator, please don’t pretend you are in the same situation – or have the same commitment to craft – as the struggling writers of the world.

So, I offer you the five tell-tale signs that you might actually be a content creator – and NOT really a writer.

You spend more time blogging, tweeting (or reading tweets), posting to Facebook, contributing to conversations on writers’ groups on LinkedIn etc. than you do on your private writing.
Every time you post on one of those aforementioned sites, you have a goal in mind: get more ‘likes,’ new followers, new friend, clicks through to the material you’d like them to buy/read.
You spend a lot of time thinking about how to find an idea that will ‘sell.’
You spend more time writing online reviews of other people’s books than you do on your writing in the hopes that they’ll someday review yours.
You don’t own a single reference book on writing process (grammar, style, punctuation, syntax, word choice, editing etc.)

Please don’t tell me you’re a writer – or pretend to be one in a writers’ group – if you’re really a content creator. That’s all.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_creation

[2] http://www.pewinternet.org/2004/02/29/content-creation-online-2/