Rejections III -- Update

I wrote and posted a blog five days ago on rejections. Specifically, I mentioned an award I had submitted to and was waiting to hear the decision, fearing the inevitable rejection.

The e-mail rejection arrived today.

Amazingly -- and quite gratefully -- I don't feel bad about it. I must be getting old. (Stop laughing out there. I see you.)

Though I edited some of it down, back in late June I submitted the first 5,000 words of An Untidy Affair, a detective novel with private eye David Blaise, for the 2016 Eleanor Taylor Bland Crime Fiction Writers of Color Award, which is sponsored by the national office of Sisters in Crime. This is the third year for the award, which grants $1,500 to its recipient.

The winner this year is Stephane Dunn, whom I don't know. But congrats to her. I'm sure she is more than deserving.

The award is named after Eleanor Taylor Bland, a pioneer in crime fiction who passed away six years ago. As it says on the SinC website, the goal of the award is "to support the recipient in activities related to crime fiction writing and career development." I can use some support in both those areas. And it is all the more important given that the latest survey of SinC shows fewer than 5 percent of its members are black.

I knew it was a longshot but I had nothing to lose. And I'm sure the organization, of which I have been a member for nearly a decade, would have preferred a woman, since the stated goal of SinC is the advancement of female mystery and crime writers. But one of my favorite things about Sisters in Crime is that the organization supports and promotes female writers but doesn't discriminate against us Mister Sisters. I am proud to be a member of Sisters in Crime and currently serve as vice president of the Speed City chapter of SinC. Speed City covers all of Indiana and our next short story anthology, The Fine Art of Murder, comes out in early October.

But rejection is common in writing, as it is in more creative areas. So I'm okay. I will just keep on keepin' on. There are more novels and short stories to write and more agents and publications to submit to.

So watch out world. I'm still coming for you.

Thanks for reading.

Rejections III

It's been a while since I have touched on this subject. Probably the last time was in 2010. But that's not to say it hasn't happened or deeply touched me since then because it has. Query letters to agents and publishers, a manuscript submission, awards and contests -- lots of rejections.

I am thinking about it now because I am expecting another rejection soon, perhaps as early as Monday. I submitted the beginning of my detective novel An Untidy Affair for an award. I should probably hear by Monday. It's not for a publication, but there is a cash award. Hooray. The submission was some time ago and I have managed not to think about it much until now.

 Now I know this is getting the cart before the horse. (Where have I heard that before?) But while the submission was strong -- it's a good book and even in rejection at the end of last year, a publisher said it was a good piece of work -- but I'm sure the competition is strong. And I guess it is easier to be pessimistic at this point so I won't be as disappointed when the news comes. (Kind of like Donald Trump has started to say the November is rigged just in case Clinton beats him.)

The novel reached the quarterfinals in the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award contest back in 2010, so I know it has potential. That was the reason I submitted it to this award.  (No, I'm not going to say which award right now. You will have to wait.)

Since in the publishing industry luck is nearly as important as talent, wish me luck. I already have the talent part handled.

Thanks for reading and don't give up.

Query shark

I have decided to again test the waters of the Query Shark.

I know I have blogged about literary agent Janet Reid before. She has a very popular following on her blog, Query Shark. On that site, aspiring authors like me send her their query letters for critique. Some of the letters she publishes -- names and identifying characteristics removed -- are reasonably good but most as bad, for a variety of reasons. Often she asks for the author to re-write the query and re-submit. Occasionally, she publishes a letter and a request for additional material.

The site is a great learning tool.

Getting on her site is harder than getting an agent through a query letter. She has said she only picks about one in 100 to critique, which is only 1 percent. (Nationally, agents reject all but about 2 percent of queries.) But I thinks she must have been getting lots of poor queries this year because her stats are way down.

I submitted to Query Shark some time ago. I haven't looked but it was probably the query for An Untidy Affair. And while she sent an e-mail acknowledging that she got the query, in the end it was neither good enough nor bad enough for her to publish with a critique.

So, I will try again, this time with The Last Tontine Survivor, though probably not until next week. Before I do submit, I plan to read through all her requirements and blog posts again. If I'm going to be rejected, I don't want it to be because of mistakes others have previously made -- and on things the Query Shark has already chomped on. After I read through the blog again, I'll make one last re-write of my query and ship it on.

Given the work I need to finish first and the amount of Shark prep I need to do, I probably won't submit until some time next week, undoubtedly just before I head out for a vacation.

Reid's comments are helpful but she still breaks some of her own rules. But her main rule is that the query be well-written, readable and interesting. All the other rules are subject to breakage.

Therefore, I will do the best I can and let it fly, and not worry about the rest.

Thanks for reading and don't give up.

Querying agents, Part II

I was wondering whether any other you had an useful suggestions on how to pique a potential agent's interest in representing me. Yeah, I know. Write something interesting and worthy of being read. All that goes without saying. I need some help in attracting them in the first place.

I always read up as much as possible on an agent before I query them. I visit their website, read anything I can find of their writing if it is relevant, read comments on them by others. But is there something I'm missing?

Agents mention different things about what catches their eye in a query letter. But even that can be random.

One agent who blogs alot states repeatedly about the three rules she needs to see in a query letter. But she also shows a query letter that she loved -- she went on to request a full manuscript -- that broke all those rules.

That makes it hard to discern what an agent may ultimately want.

So, as I am completing a list of agents to query, any advice from any of you would be helpful. Thanks in advance.

And thanks for reading.

Query News, Part III

Since last fall, I have concentrated on writing a novel for National Novel Writing Month (then changing my mind), doing a final re-write and edit of The Last Tontine Survivor for the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award, starting a short story for an anthology, re-writing another short story for a Writer's Digest contest and, finally, doing a final read-through and edit of An Untidy Affair for a contest with a publisher. Sounds like I have been busy, and I have been.


But as I sit and think about it, all that work had another purpose -- distracting me from doing something I need to focus on but generally don't enjoy doing -- sending out query letters for my novel.


I now have two really good works I feel comfortable with querying in their current forms. And I have queried Affair before. Since it is under consideration with a publisher, I will hold off on querying it for now.


Which brings me to Tontine. It's Tontine's time.


A month ago, back on Feb. 22, my blog posting titled "Nervous Nellie" included the pitch I used for Tontine for ABNA. Though I was eliminated from the contest based on that pitch, I still will use it as the basis for my query letter for the novel. I think it conveys the story well. But in case I'm wrong, I will only send out a limited number of queries with that letter. If I don't get any bites after sending five to seven letters, I will strap it and start with an entirely different letter for Tontine.

I truly don't know what it's going to take to pique an agent's interest but I know it won't happen as long as I stall trying. I can keep busy with contests but unless I win, it won't get me closer to publication. So it's Query Letter Time.

This evening I will put in some serious effort in compiling an agent list. By the weekend, the letters should start heading out. Rejections, and the accompanying depression, will probably start next week.

Just wanted to prepare you.

Thanks for reading and keep writing (and querying).

Eliminated, Part II

What I hate about being eliminated in ABNA's first round is that I have no idea why. Could be a poor plot and a badly written pitch, or I could just put it down to bad luck. I don't know. But a couple of hours ago, a friend whose debut novel was published nine months ago to wonderful reviews reminded me that her novel was eliminated in the first round a few years back. You just pick up and move forward.

So I will pour over the pitch again, shorten it to query-length -- about 250 words as compared with about 300 -- and start querying agents.

Then, perhaps, I will get some answers.

As for now, I am playing sad music, as is fitting my mood, and preparing for what's next.

Thanks again for reading.

Eliminated

Didn't make the cut this year in the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award, though it's the best novel I have entered in the three years I have tried. But a friend from my critique group advanced to the second round. I'm happy for her.

So, it's on to querying agents.

Thanks for reading and don't give up!

Trying to set a new personal best

Yesterday, I embarked on a quest to set a new personal best. Personal best, you say! Of what?

Rejections.

I sent out a batch of query letters yesterday for AN UNTIDY AFFAIR and will now see if I can top my personal best set on Sept. 13, of last year when I got four (4, IV) rejections on the same day. That topped the previous best of three set one week earlier.

While this is probably a worthy goal, I, sadly, will probably not top it anytime soon because my querying strategy has changed since last fall. I am sending out fewer queries at a time and if all the responses are negative, then I re-write the query in hopes of drawing more interest.

I send four queries yesterday throughout the day as time permitted, and will ship off three today. And that is it. Seven. Then, I will wait to see what happens. If nothing good happens, then I know that letter doesn't work and I will to try again with another letter. And then I will ship off another batch of seven.

For this letter, I used my novel's background as outlined in my Publishers Weekly review. It was good and generally well-written. I adapted parts, of course, but the overall structure was the same. Now I will see if that helps. Plus I made a brief mention of being a quarterfinalist in this year's Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award. Time to see if that horse has any legs.

Well, that's it for today. I have a couple of other topics I want to discuss next week. But for now, have a great day and keep writing.

Thanks for reading.

Query rejections

I got into a heated discussion with my wife a couple of nights ago. We were in the car and she was talking about her work, and I could feel the anger rising up in me as she talked. I couldn't believe she was being so stupid and short-sighted. Or, to be accurate, I thought her position was stupid and short-sighted.

She is a senior vice president for her employer and two positions reporting directly to her are vacant. This is a serious problem for her because the positions are critical and until they are filled and the people are fully functioning, doing her job will be much harder for my wife.

It's an employers market and she says they have more than 300 applications, and most are qualified for one of the positions. But no more than half the applications will ever land on her desk at any point and fewer than 20 applicants will get any sort of interview.

She says she has dozens of cover letters to review and she makes up her mind in seconds whether consider or reject the applicant. And one of the deciding factors is whether there is a mistake -- ANY SORT OF MISTAKE -- in the cover letter. Spelling, grammar, a typo -- doesn't matter. The person is rejected. They could be perfect in every other way, could be perfect for the job, but she rejects them.

"Why would you do that?" I asked. "You have made small mistakes before."

She said there has to be a method for quickly getting through the applications and cover letters, and that is one method she uses.

The reason I got so hot under the collar was because just the day before I was reading some agent who said a tiny mistake in a query letter isn't a good thing, of course, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're going to get a rejection.

After listening to my wife, whom, by the way, is a beautiful woman I'm most proud of, I wasn't so sure the agent was telling the truth. In fact, I thought they were lying.

Agents get dozens of query letters a day, hundreds a week, much like the hundreds of applications my wife has. And agents must weed through them. And I suspect a small error will get you bounced. Agents can't possibly have the time to seriously read all those queries. They have to find ways to get to the bottom of the pile.

Knowing I could be rejected for as minor a problem as one misplaced comma is a scary thought. All prospective writers pour over their letters looking for something to give them a slight edge. But I hate to think that an otherwise wonderfully written query letter could sink the chances for a brilliantly executed novel because the writer had a little typo. It puts even more pressure on you to have the perfect query. (As if you don't have enough pressure.) But anyone can make a mistake.

Life just doesn't seem fair.

Thanks for reading and don't give up. See ya next time.

Who's Lookin'? Part II

This is my last post of the year and I thought it appropriate to look back at some of my stats for my blog. It is my 96th posting this year, which tied the record set in 2008 as the year with my most blog postings. I had wanted to reach more than 100, which in itself is rather modest, but it's not to be this year. While I am okay with the number of postings in 2010, I want to stretch a little more in 2011.

I first wrote about my stats three months ago shortly after I first realized there was a way of keeping track of some of my page views. I think the stats have been available to each blogger only since May or June.

I was a little depressed by the numbers -- still am -- but I am grateful I have any numbers at all. After pouring over the statistics, I have no greater understanding of what it all means than I did back in September.

Yet, I do find some of it quite interesting.

Though readers in the U.S. continue to make up the majority of my page views, there has been some slippage since September, when 67.6 percent of page views came from the U.S. Today, that figure is just 54.5 percent. Tied for second place are Canada and the Netherlands with 5.5 percent each of my page views, up from 4.3 percent for Canada back in September and 4.6 percent for the Dutch.

Alone in fourth place is Germany, with 5 percent of my page views. Germany wasn't even in the Top 5 back in September.

My most popular month was October, but there was a drop-off in November and into early December when I had less time and opportunity to blog. It has picked up in the latter half of December and I hope I haven't lost many readers.

Although I haven't the foggiest reason why, I seem to be popular all over the world, except in Africa and Antarctica. Apparently, I haven't reached people in some of the hottest places on the planet and in some of the coldest.

No big surprises in my most popular blog postings. (Well, I'm kinda surprised because my two most popular postings are among my oldest.) Just as last September, "Querying agents," from June 18, 2008, and "What's in a name?, Part II," from Jan. 4, 2008, are in a virtual tie for first place in page views. They make up 20 percent of my total page views, though that is a drop from 25 percent back in September.

Coming in at No. 3 is (not surprisingly) "Finding an agent? WTF does it take?" from Sept. 13, 2010. I think the title and the subject matter caught people's attention.

But the fourth-place favorite surprised me. It is "Being a picker at Amazon," which was only posted 10 days ago. In fact, that posting is my No. 1 posting for the month of December, easing out both my top-ranking posts from 2008.

I still haven't the slightest idea what people in Russia, Brazil, the Ukraine, Argentina and Poland find interesting about my blog. But I hope all of you out there keep reading. And it would be nice if you'd comment now and then.

Have a Happy New Year. I will see you in 2011.

Thanks for reading and keep writing.

Synopsis

In preparation for another flurry of queries going out, I am (again) re-writing my synopsis for AN UNTIDY AFFAIR. I have two versions. One that is one-page long, which I will probably lead untouched, and the other that is five pages long. Haven't decided whether to re-do them both.

It is amazing. As much as I dislike writing a query letter, I dislike a synopsis even more. The one upside is that I not only can but must provide the ending.

The synopsis isn't just telling the novel like you would to a friend or relative. Like the query, it is an enticement -- a selling tool -- to get someone to read the entire manuscript.

And, I fear, it is in the enticement area where I fall short.

There is so much that you must get right. The style and format must be right. Failure there suggests that you are not a serious writing or that you are unprofessional. That is likely to kill you with at least 50 percent of the agents who see it. But not with all agents.

Because even with imperfect formatting, the synopsis will rise and fall on how well it sells. And while formatting can be complicated and its requirements often conflicting, it is something that can be learned easily. Not so with synopsis as a selling tool.

Unlike the novel, with its peaks and valleys, I see the synopsis as being mostly peaks told in a compelling way. But, I think as a result, so much of the writing that gives the novel texture and depth is left out. It's a straight sales job. Bam, bam, bam.

Anyway, I was working on it last night. I want to hit the ground running at the beginning of next week. I assume a lot of other writers will be doing the same thing but I am hoping I will still be able to stand out from the pack. Hasn't happened so far but since there will always be a pack, I will have to deal with it.

So there is a little of what is going on in my mind. I am looking for a great 2011.

Thanks for reading and keep writing.

Being a picker at Amazon

I perhaps used a poor choice of wording in a post last week because a number of people wrote to inquire about how I am feeling since I had mostly been offline for a while. Given my past health issues, which I have written about on this site, the concern was understandable.

So, let me just say, I am feeling fine. No problems. In fact, I have lost a little weight, about five to seven pounds. And the reasons for the weight loss and for why I have been too busy to post on my blog are the same -- Amazon.

November was a busy writing month for me, though I wasn't able to post much on my blog. I finished THE TONTINE, my National Novel Writing Month novel, but had to juggle how and where I was writing because my laptop crashed at the end of October. As a result of the crash, I have only finished two freelance assignments since then.

So to make some extra money for Christmas, I took a job working in a warehouse for Amazon. (Actually, it's called a Fulfillment Center. Creative, huh?) It was a seasonal position and I thought it would also be part-time. It wasn't but more about that later.

Amazon has two facilities in central Indiana and I would imagine there are hundreds of millions of items in them -- for virtually anything you'd want to buy online. The logisitics of the place truly amazed me. I was quite impressed.

When you go to Amazon and buy that CD, DVD, video game, book, fuzzy Teddy bear or large, ugly, black, metal jewelry holder that looks like a music stand, it is in one of more than 10,000 (and perhaps a lot more) merchandise bins in the warehouse, and someone has to go to that bin to pick it up and start it on its individual journey to your door.

At Amazon, that someone is called a picker. And for several weeks, I was a picker.

Now that doesn't sound too bad and it isn't. You generally don't have to search. There is a scanner that tells you exactly where to go and when to go there. It also tells you when to put all your merchandise on a conveyor belt and send it on.

But like I said, there were no part-time positions, which I was hoping for. All jobs are for 40 hours a week (four, 10-hour days), except that this is their peak time of year. So there was an additional mandatory day of overtime. And, as they need, they add on one, one-and-a-half, or two hours to your daily shift.

So I worked 11 or 11.5 hours a day, five days a week, walking (conservatively) around 16-17 miles a night. I burned enough extra calories to loose weight. Plus I worked a nightshift, which started at 6:15 p.m. and ended at 6:15 a.m. And you had to work fast. The average hourly pick is more than 80 items an hour, which means you had to locate an item, on average, every 40 seconds or so. (There are pickers who average 125 picks per hour.)

I was so tired that the only things I could do were work and sleep. By the end of my shift, my feet and legs would be killing me. I could fall asleep at home in the middle of a conversation, which happened. I had hard time remembering which day of the week it was and didn't remember the date. I had little idea of what was happening in the outside world, except that it snowed sometimes overnight on the car. And it was cold. I wanted to quit at the end of my first week but didn't.

We were told they hire several thousand temporary workers at Christmas and retain only a couple hundred. They start laying them off as the work slowly dwindles. I got the call over the weekend, thank goodness. It was a tremendous relief!

So that's why I haven't been writing, or reading, for the last several weeks. But I am getting back into the swing.

I'm revamping my query letter for AN UNTIDY AFFAIR and will push forward with it in the coming year. And until I hear something on AFFAIR, I will be re-writing THE TONTINE, preparing to hit the streets with it by mid-year.

The writing life goes on. And so do I.

Thanks for reading.

Sorry I have been away

Sorry I have been away for a while. Will explain soon.

But I got a rejection today from a query I sent three months ago. So, there are still coming in.

More later. Keep the faith and keep writing.

Thanks for reading.

4 Golden Rules for Being a Writer -- Now wait a minute

I was reading an online edition of Writer's Digest this week and happened upon an article by author Anne Fortier, who wrote JULIET, a novel about a young woman who discovers that she is descended from Shakespeare's Juliet. Great premise, by the way.

Fortier's article, "4 Golden Rules for Being a Writer," appeared on Chuck Sambuchino's blog. (The blog address is below)

http://www.guidetoliteraryagents.com/blog/The+4+Golden+Rules+Of+Being+A+Writer.aspx

Now I originally agreed with Ms Fortier's suggestions until I started to think about them in greater detail. And the more I thought, the more I started thinking some of her suggestions were something out of a Hans Christian Andersen fairy tale. (Fortier is originally from Denmark, which is a beautiful country.)

Her first rule, Start at square one, essentially says forget about networking.

"The world is full of people who know people who know an agent. But you can save yourself a lot of time and disappointment by ignoring them. Because the truth is, no one really knows anyone, and even if they did, it is probably not going to help your chances one bit," she says. ". . . if you run around looking for them, chances are you will still end up back at square one, wondering why you just wasted six months on hearsay."

I'm sorry but that's crap.

While I don't think you can hang your hat on such long chances, there are numerous examples of people who connect with an agent or publisher through social and professional contacts. I know of two people who just this year got agents through knowing someone who knew someone. In both cases, the aspiring authors were prepared for an opportunity if it came. So when it did, they ran with it.

Ms Fortier's second rule is Do your homework. She is right about this.

Not only should your manuscript be "finished, brilliant, formatted correctly, and edited to near-perfection . . . the same goes for the query letter," Fortier says. "Invest the time and do a proper job; this is the most important page of your entire manuscript."

I think this is where I somehow must be failing. Yes, as you know, I have honed my query to the best of my ability but apparently something about it doesn't entice agents. Not sure what, so I continue to work on it. But it is a tight, 250 words. And I think she is right on this point. It is probably the most important page you will write.

Rule No. 3 is Pitch your book before you write it.

"What I mean by this is that you can save yourself a lot of time and headaches by thinking ahead to your query letter as early as possible in the writing process. Once you've done your homework and know what a query letter needs to accomplish, you are very likely to look at your finished manuscript and groan," she says. "So, make a point of thinking through the story early on, with the pitch in mind."

I agree in part and dissent in part.

I agree you should think your story through but she seems to suggest that you should write out an outline before you start. I know I lot of writers who do outline but just as many who don't. And there are successful writers in both camps. It is through hard work and the re-writing process where you keep your novel being "a rambling, pointless, dead-boring excuse for a book." And if you do that, it won't end up being "un-pitchable" as Ms. Fortier suggests. You should think ahead but you also must allow the story to develop. In the end, you could end up with a better story than what you originally considered.

The last rule is Don't jump the gun. "The book world looks pretty darn big from your office chair, but it actually isn't. So, once you have compiled that beautiful list of desirable and reliable agents (once again: by doing your homework), make sure you don't waste it. Don't send query letters to more than one agent at a time," she writes.

That is insane. There can be scores of agents who potentially may be interested in your book. But the response time for most agents is between two and eight weeks for queries, or so they say. Some answer in minutes while others never respond. If you send out only one query at a time and wait for a response, it could take you more than a year, at the earliest, to get through your list of potential agents.

Sambuchino says carpeting the industry with a query doesn't work and he is probably right. He suggests sending out a small number, say, seven, and if that doesn't work, there is probably something wrong with the letter. You can then hone the letter without having invested too much time in a letter that doesn't work.

That is reasonable.

But I agree with Fortier when she says, "Don't test the water by sending your second-best. Be patient. Finish the book. Write the most attractive query letter ever. And then sleep on it. And sleep on it again. Remember: an agent is not some opponent you need to blitz; an agent is someone who would like nothing more than to be your ally. All she/he needs is a good reason."

As with most advice, you have to take from it what works best for you. In that way, you will be prepared when opportunity comes knocking. And even if you fail to accomplish your goal, you can be comfortable in knowing you did your best.

Thanks for reading and, above all, don't give up.

Query advice

In my every-other-Wednesday critique group, two of the other writers last night passed around query letters to critique. One we went through one as we sat. But the other one we took home to read and will critique once we see each other again.

After reading the letter, I decided to write the author privately.

It must be stated that I'm not the best source for what is an effective query letter. If I were, I wouldn't have the tons of query rejection responses sitting on the hard drive of this laptop. But I think I have a handle on what is not a good letter.

Unfortunately, the query letter I took home wasn't very good.

The person who wrote the query is an excellent writer. I have read numerous examples of their writing and find it well-crafted, thoughtful, tight and entertaining. The writer is a great storyteller, with great imagination and color.

But to my complete surprise, none of that was displaced in the query.

It was flat and unfocused. I wasn't sure who the main character was (except that the author only mentioned one character by name but I still wasn't sure if they were the main character), and there was no conflict in the letter. The author also failed to clearly identify the genre and didn't mention the word count.

Nearly nothing in the query would entice me to read the whole letter. If I didn't know the writer, I would have stopped reading after the first paragraph.

I e-mailed them suggesting that they clearly identify the main charcter, show the challenges they face and the forces standing in their way. And I hope my comments weren't too harsh. I didn't mean for them to be.

Being in this group has helped me tremendously. I hope I was of help to this author. I haven't heard back from them. So only time will tell.

Thanks for reading. And never give up.

A brief pause in querying

I was interviewing a successful businessman last week for a series of freelance articles I am doing. And one of my favorite quotes from him was, "You can't just hope for things to happen."

I'm sure that's one of the reasons he is successful because he has faced -- and continues to face -- serious challenges. He owns an auto dealership, and it's a Chrysler dealership, to boot. And he is a minority. But he is doing well and is quite successful.

I have been so busy with this freelance project that I haven't spent as much time as I'd like researching agents and querying them. In fact, I haven't sent a single query in about two weeks. Now that's sad.

(I have gotten one more rejection from the last batch I sent out last month.)

Though he was talking about success in general and not about me -- he knows nothing of my aspirations of being published -- this businessman reminded me that complacency can quickly set it -- that merely hoping for an agent can take over for actually doing the work at finding an agent.

Merely hoping isn't taking over in me but I know I can backslide. So while I still have a busy week, I will get more queries out this week. I still have a list of about 10 or 12 agents I really like but haven't tried to contact yet. Plus there are more out there I haven't even discovered yet.

The query is done. Time for it to start flying -- but only a handful at a time, of course.

Thanks for reading and don't ever give up.

50 percent

In the first two weeks of this month, I went on a tear and sent out 30 query letters. And today, I got my 15th rejection letter. So I am at 50 percent.

Normally, I get about 50 percent replies, so I suspect I probably won't hear from any more agents unless I send follow-up letters to agents I didn't hear from. I generally only send a follow-up if the agent is on my A-list. And come to think of it, I don't think I have ever gotten a reply from a follow-up e-mail.

(I am a little loopy today because I went to the dentist this morning and had two teeth extracted. The numbness is gone but I'm on painkillers and am having a little trouble with focus. So that's my excuse for poor writing today. I will have to think of another excuse for all the other days.)

Ten days ago, I was talking to an editor at Writer's Digest who said it is a mistake to send out more than a handful of queries at a time. If all of them are rejected, you know it is the query that is the problem. You won't have wasted a lot of time and you know to work on the letter.

He said I should take a step-by-step approach. Get past the query stage, then the partial stage, then the ms stage. By then, I should have an agent.

An online friend who is very good at query letters -- she's my own Obi-Wan Kenobi -- re-wrote my letter this morning and sent it back to me. She also suggested only sending out seven at a time. So that is my strategy at the moment. Seven-at-a-time. But this time, I am going to start with only my A- and B-list agents and see what happens.

Well, my meds are really kicking in at the moment so I will go before I forget how to spell my name. (It' Michael, by the way.) Since I didn't work today and I have a large freelance project in the works, I will be very busy for the time being. Not sure when the next batch of query letters will go out. But perhaps I will get a few requests for partials before I hit the 50 percent rejection mark again.

Thanks for reading, especially you folks in Russia this month. Now get back to writing.

Who's lookin'?

Fellow blogger Anne Gallagher pointed out something to me last week and I have been fascinated by it ever since. On blogspot, there is a category on your dashboard called "stats". By clicking on it, you can view general statistics on who is looking at your blog and from where.

I was a little depressed at the numbers at first but got over it once I realized this feature apparently only goes back as far as May or June. (I think June.) But there is some interesting information, although I have no idea what it all means.

I am an aspiring author in the American Midwest blogging, well, about myself, mostly. I wouldn't expect to have much appeal to someone outside the country, and certainly not outside of English-speaking countries. I only write in English. (Don't get me started on how hard it is for me to learn another language.)

But only 67.6 percent of my pageview hits are from the United States. I have hits from five of the seven continents of the world. Apparently, no one in Africa or Antarctica has read me.

After the United States, some 4.6 percent of my pageviews come from The Netherlands, followed closely by 4.3 percent from Canada (which doesn't completely surprise me) and -- get this -- 4.1 percent from Bolivia. Who in the world in Bolivia is reading me?

I also have 13 page hits from China and 10 from Russia. What in the world am I saying that would interest someone in those countries? Is it the Secret Police? I don't know. They aren't leaving me any comments.

Some 28 percent of all my pageviews have come in the last month. But that doesn't mean my September posts are what people are looking at.

Two posts make up one quarter of all my pageviews -- and they are both from 2008, more than two years ago. My No. 1 most popular post (at 12.7 percent of all pageviews) is Querying Agents, from June 18, 2008, followed closely by What's in a Name, Part II, from Jan. 4, 2008 (12.3 percent of all pageviews).

They also have the most pageviews in the last month. But at No. 3 in pageviews this month is Finding an Agent? WTF does it take?, from last week. I was clearly frustrated when I wrote that one. But in terms of overall hits, that post from Sept. 13, is only tied for eighth in overall pageviews.

Now, what does any of this mean? I really don't know. But I hope to figure out why people are reading certain things and hopefully address those concerns more often. But it would be helpful if some of you people in Israel, Brazil, Italy, Denmark and Japan would leave me a comment from time to time.

I am glad, however, that people are reading. I hope you keep doing it.

Thank for reading everyone out there. Now get back to writing.

Query News, Part II

It's been quite a week in the Query Wars. Two weeks, really.

Since the Friday before Labor Day, I have sent out 29 query letters for AN UNTIDY AFFAIR, some with partial pages attached and some without. Twenty-six were e-mail submissions, two were submissions through the agency's in-house process via their website and one went by snail mail.

No requests for additional pages, a partial or the entire manuscript. There have been 12 rejections, including one in the return envelope through the U.S. Postal Service.

This week was the big week, of course. I got four rejections on Monday, more than on any single day since I started sending at queries for my first book, FIGHTING CHAOS, three years ago. Tuesday saw two additional rejections, none Wednesday, one on Thursday and none (so far) today.

Totally, my response rate is just over 40 percent. But it may increase in the next week or so and in about two weeks I will send out reminders to selected agents. In the past, that has also generated a couple of responses.

I was reminded this week, more than once, actually, that all it will take is for ONE agent to love my book. I can't do much except send out queries until I find that ONE.

Enjoy the weekend. I will be attending a book fair tomorrow at the Hancock County Public Library and, hopefully, signing some copies of my story in BEDLAM AT THE BRICKYARD.

Thanks for reading. Now go out and write something good.

The 27

I planned to blog today about an op-ed piece John Grisham did a couple of days ago for The New York Times. It was about being a writer. But just now, I changed my mind. I have taken a couple of blows in the last couple of days and, against my better judgment, I decided to say just a little about it.

The main story in the current issue of "Writer's Digest" is called 27 Agents Looking for New Writers. Sounded good to me. I'm new.

I looked them all up and, not surprisingly, they don't all represent the sort of material I write. But a sizable portion of them do.

Since last week, I have queried five of them, including one already today. I will query a sixth one later today.

And while as a group they may be looking for new writers, many of them obviously are NOT looking for me. I've gotten three rejections so far, all saying basically the same thing. Nothing personal but I don't want you. (One form rejection was badly written. If I were her, I'd re-write my rejection form letter.)

I know it's not personal but when the rejections are coming in waves, it is a little harder to take. Agents as salespeople and are rejected by publishers all the time. They, apparently, don't take it personally. But they also didn't write the manuscript.

So, I am going to lick my wounds for the moment and go for a walk. It's wonderful outside -- warm and sunny. Then, later today, I will get back to work. It is what a writer does.

And I am a writer.

p.s.

And I ate steak. I only had a light lunch earlier but this afternoon I was hungry -- and a little depressed. So I ate steak.
I took Angela to dinner Saturday night for her birthday and brought home a doggie bag that contained part of my steak. It was 3 oz. So to make myself feel better, it's what I had this afternoon. Helped a little.

mbd
Thanks for reading and don't give up.