Congratulations on the request for the full. The fact that this happened so quickly is promising. Whatever happens, congratulations on reworking the entire manuscript from third person to first. No small accomplishment!
Agents no longer giving feedback when rejecting fulls??
- Thread starter Transatlantic
- Start date
I don't do it often, but I recently gave an author feedback on a full that I requested. The critique was extensive (I REALLY thought I was helping her). The result was some pretty nasty blowback from her (all of it innaccurate), which she shared with this forum. It may be one reason why agents don't do it. However, I AM going to take HER advice and answer with a simple "not for us" from now on.
Gah. That's unfortunate. Sorry that there are bad apples out there spoiling it for the rest of us. I can't blame you, if that's the thanks you get.
- Joined
- May 10, 2011
- Messages
- 2,181
- Reaction score
- 135
Now this is so rude, I don't even. This isn't some random query. A "nope thx bye" would do just fine. Though I think I might have an illusion of full requests being more important (from an agent's point of view) than they actually are.
I must say I always got my full Rs (so far) and most of them had small explanations attached. At the same time, I have a nagging suspicion the majority of those replies were a product of good old copypaste. Never mind, though, I just want a definite yes or no response. Even if it's just one word. Easy to please, that's me. Funny that the longest and most personal reply which was obviously about my ms and not any kind of form response came from the hottest rock star agent out of the bunch. I think it was an "almost there" case.
This. So much this.
Nah, I'd still query them. Though I will say that nothing turns me off like a "dear author" letter. I do take those off the ol' query spreadsheet. I once got a "dear author" letter from an agent who I read in an interview as saying a "dear agent" email turned her off. I'd rather receive nothing at all.
Last edited:
I have to say I'm slightly surprised by this thread. I'd say at least two-thirds of the agents who requested partials or fulls from me gave feedback (anywhere from a line or two to a page), and several others gave feedback on queries+pages, too. Maybe I've just run into some particularly kind agents, or maybe simply ones who were interested enough to want to see what I wrote next.
(And while I'm not at all offended at form rejections, I would be annoyed about a form on an R&R, or a no-response-at-all on a full.)
(And while I'm not at all offended at form rejections, I would be annoyed about a form on an R&R, or a no-response-at-all on a full.)
It's nice to get useful feedback, but at the end of the day it isn't their job. In my experience, the more I try to be helpful, the more it invites arguments.
Many agents get hundreds of submissions per week. It's almost impossible to even read them all, much less analyze and give thoughtful feedback. They could never do a thing to serve their existing clients.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
The thread is about fulls, requested by agents. They're not getting hundreds of those a week unless they're deranged or not real agents.
Yup.
And within the broader context of an agent's work day/week, he/she can't possibly give meaningful feedback to everyone. Especially when it invites an argument who thinks he has been wronged, which happens often.Yup.
How very curious.
I've never even met an argument that thinks he has been wrong.
LOL, Medievalist, let me try that again.
"Especially when it invites an argument from an author who thinks he has been wronged, which happens often."
"Especially when it invites an argument from an author who thinks he has been wronged, which happens often."
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
Yup.
They should be able, which is different from willing, to give feedback in some form to people they request fulls from. There aren't that many of them.
Not their job, cornflake. Their job is to serve the clients they've already committed to. And they're not interested in debates with those who can't take no for an answer.
If you want a professional critique, there are tons of freelance editors out there who can do a good job for you. More than any freebie you will ever get from an agent.
If you want a professional critique, there are tons of freelance editors out there who can do a good job for you. More than any freebie you will ever get from an agent.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
You don't understand, cornflake. Publishing is a buyer's market. The reason why agents don't critique the writers they reject, is because they're busy serving those they accepted.
i guess the truth is i would prefer to hear back, but I'm also feeling the writer is at least partially in the "beggars can't be choosers" position. That's not some self-doubting excuse or whine, just......i intend to start off querying one agent......then i go down the list. That said, the agents i want were selected for things like track record, "fit," etc. over if they will give feedback to partials or fulls.
Would I LIKE the feedback? Yes.
Would I use it as selection criteria? No, they have pretty free reign in my case I guess.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
Oh, I think I do. It's alienating potential clients to not respond at all (we're not talking about editing [and judging by what I've seen reported on the forums, no, there aren't tons of freelance editors who can do a good job; there are freelance editors who can do a good job and a bunch of hacks who think they can edit because they like to read.] but about responding to submissions specifically requested as a second or third step in the process.
It doesn't take all that much time to write a couple of graphs to someone.
This, again, is analogous to a real estate agent's business. Real estate agents are really busy, yet they make the time to respond to potential future clients whom they've made some contacts with. If they spent all their time simply servicing their current clients, they'd soon find themselves with a lot of free time.
I know that agents receive many submissions each week, but I find it extraordinary for you to claim that they might not read them all. Do you read every submission you receive at the agency you've created?
I know a few agents and all of them read all the submissions they receive. They might not read every submission in its entirety: but they do read enough of each one to be able to reach a fair and reasonable opinion of its quality, and whether or not they'd like to represent it.
Giving feedback on every submission is another thing entirely.
Yes, Hack, I read my submissions. But I'm not the busiest guy in town. Some agents I know, receive many more subs than I do.
Yes, my process is much like the agents you know: Often I read just enough to make a preliminary assessment, and set aside the ones I want to examine further.
Yes, my process is much like the agents you know: Often I read just enough to make a preliminary assessment, and set aside the ones I want to examine further.
When you have hundreds of submissions a week? Oh, yes, that time can add up very quickly.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2008
- Messages
- 4,151
- Reaction score
- 951
- Location
- Manchester, UK
- Website
- www.teriegarrison.com
Exactly how many agents get hundreds of requested partials and fulls per week?
Because that's what this topic is about. It's not about queries, it's about requested fulls. (Which would be clear to you if you actually read 1) the thread title, 2) the complete thread, and 3) Cornflake's posts.)
Again, the reference was to FULL requests. If you are requesting hundreds of full manuscripts a week, then yes, you have no time to write anything in response.
If you are requesting a few fulls a week (which is more normal), then you possibly have time to respond (and authors certainly appreciate it). Though, again, that is up to the agent (of course).
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
I don't disagree, but I meant it more in the bridge-burning way. If they were interested enough to request a full and then don't respond at all to those submissions if they're not offering representation, they may end up being requeried or even chasing someone who ends up a success one way or another.
In which case, I see what you're saying about it not being a criteria but if there are two or three agents next time offering you representation and one had sent you a response on the full he or she had previously rejected and the other had never responded...
That's how I meant it, and I can see it still not mattering to someone, if it's a great agent or whatever, or the only agent who responds, but in a general sense, I think the above scenario is going to bite them in the butt eventually a time or two so seems easier to dash off something.
I did start simply arguing ability, not will, however.