Ok, how would you guys handle this?

I have no idea if he read it or not, but I don't see how calling him on it could possibly improve your situation. The only real result I see it bringing, besides being ignored, is being blacklisted for any future interactions with him. What would doing it get you besides personal satisfaction?

Well, even if he was off-base in his assessment, it sounds to me like the agent was trying to give you his honest opinion, which was generous of him and which you asked for. It's much better (and less frustrating) to get some honest input from beta readers so you don't feel you need to rely on agents for that.

Also, it sounds like something in your query obviously pushed the "terrorism story" button in this agent, even if he didn't read to the end, so you might try fixing that wording to prevent a similar response from the next agent.

I know rejections are very frustrating, but blaming the agent isn't really a helpful attitude. All you can do is try and learn from it if possible and move forward.

First thing Colossus, I would suggest getting a second opinion on your query letter. Because unless they were confusing you with someone else, (which I doubt as if they took the time to respond to you, they probably refreshed their memory of your query letter so they could reply on point) - they probably read something into your query letter that you didn't intend to put there. Calling it a terrorism story is very specific, and I can't imagine them labeling it thus without something to make it stick out that way for them. So offhand I would say there's a possibility your query letter actually misrepresents your story as something its not. Sometimes we know our manuscripts so well that we don't realize how a short summary or out of context line would read to someone unfamiliar with the material.

If you're only getting rejections on your query, chances are your query needs work. When you get to 50 posts, we have a critique forum for queries in 'Share Your Work'. Before 50, there's a lot of useful information in the stickies and you can see/respond to other people's query attempts.

But that aside, few agents send personal rejections on queries (whether initially or when asked later), because authors get snarky and abusive. The agent is always wrong and the author has ten reasons why. So generally, agents just don't say anything. Even that doesn't work entirely, as some authors reply to every form rejection with an abusive comment.

Based on all that, I think you can answer the question yourself... do you want to be that author?

You might want to reconsider your assumption that agents aren't even reading your query letter. If you got a rejection, they read it. At least up to the point where they decided they weren't interested.

Let me give you a hypothetical example. Let's say someone sends a query letter for a YA sports novel. Let's say the agent has recently decided they're not interesting in working with more sports novels right now. As soon as the reader gets to the sentence that identifies the manuscript as a sports novel, they don't need to read anymore before sending a rejection letter. Why is this wrong? If they know they're not interested, why should they keep reading? Do you read every unsolicited piece of e-mail and snail mail you receive? When my cable company sends a letter offering expanded cable service, I already know I'm not interested, and I stop reading.

However, I daresay that agents pretty much read every query letter that doesn't shoot the author in the foot from the outset. If, from your query letter, it doesn't sound like something the agent is interested in representing, you're going to get a rejection slip.

AND SO WHAT?????

Rejection is part of this business. If you can't take it without reflecting it back on agents and editors, you might be in the wrong business.

The mere fact that you actually wrote back to an agent who rejected your query letter reveals that you are new to and/or naive about this business, because writing back after a rejection is (with only a very few exceptions) considered to be inappropriate. I can't help but wonder what else you're doing wrong. As others have said, once you reach 50 posts, put your query letter through Query Letter Hell and see what comes back. It might be that your query letter is one that's shooting you in the foot.

And your suggestion that the agent should be 'called out' for not reading your query letter? You might want to dial back on that sense of entitlement there. YOU broke the 'rule' about not writing back to the agent, and now you're making large and unsubstantiated claims about the agent's professionalism.

Writing is a frustrating business. You need to learn how to handle it, or you're going to be one very unhappy writer.

Colossus said:

Should I reply and call him out on this or what?

Click to expand...

Absolutely not.

The agent has already done you a huge favour by explaining why he rejected you. He wasn't obliged to do so, but still he's taken time to offer you his opinion. You might not like it: but he's given you a lot of help here. As has already been suggested, bearing in mind his apparent misreading of your query it's possible-to-likely that your query isn't as effective as it could be. But don't try to make this a problem with the agent who rejected your work: work on your query until agents are compelled to ask to see more.

I mean, really I understand that most Query letters probably never get read.

Click to expand...

Then you understand wrong.

All queries are read. Every single one of them. Up to the point where the agent, intern or editor reading them gets bored, or realises that the book relating to the query isn't appropriate for them. Which is why writers have to write compelling queries, and send them to appropriate agents etc.

Yes, definitely let it go. And go read up on queries!

I've looked at lots of queries in query letter hell (QLH). Frequently what I read is no where near what the writer intended.

If he answered your question, he went back and read your query. He then pigeon-holed it into where he thinks it fits in the market. Now you want to tell him he's wrong.

Without having seen the query, without know who the agent is, but knowing queries, I'd bet money he's right and you're wrong. Further, and again you don't intend to convey this message and based exclusively on this thread and what you've said; you're probably going to be a pain in the butt to work with. Further, and again based upon what you've said in this thread, your writing is probably not as good as you think it is.

Snap judgments. We make them all the time. Right at the moment, you're probably coming up with a snap judgment of me, and there's a good probability that the one word description of me that you'd use would start with an "A." Snap judgments might be right, they might be wrong, but it's how the world operates.

If you want to see a thread involving someone determined to "prove" this his query letter was right, read Go Ahead, Make My Day ( 1 2). I'll warn you in advance it isn't pretty, and further, that many times when I suggest to someone reading this thread, they end up in the same position as Basil did.

But if you make it up to 50 posts (the minimum to post a query in QLH), send me or some of the other experienced critiquers in QLH a PM and ask us to look at it. Remind us of this thread (because the length of time that I'll remember you is going to be measured by the second hand) and ask us to look at it. I don't think you'll like the experience, but if you get over that, you'll learn something.

However, so far you've shown me that when presented with an incredible learning experience, rather then trying to figure out why the agent said your book is a "terrorism story," you'd prefer to show why people who don't agree with your view are wrong. And you're going to tell me what a reasonable person you are, but you know what? I won't buy it.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Colossus said:

Should I reply and call him out on this or what? Why bothering answering the letter (or the second one), if you aren't even going to read it?

Click to expand...

It might be dicey to assume the agent didn't read your query. If he's anything like most agents and editors, they read tons of query letters every day, and it's hard to remember them all. It was lovely of him to reply to you, even if he didn't tell you what you wanted to hear. Having been on the receiving end of authors who send an angry reply after a rejection, I agree with what others are saying. Stifle the urge to communicate any further. It may make you feel better, but you're making a poor impression to that agent, and there is no positive outcome for you. You've learned a valuable lesson, so move on and stay professional.

Or how about I put it this way: have you ever received snark and thought "Well, you told me!" or "My word, you're right, I'm such a dolt?"

Even on the off chance that what you wrote in your original post is 100% true and there is no way in heck someone could mistake your work for a terrorism novel and it is true the agent didn't read your query (again, this is very very unlikely), snarking at said agent isn't going to accomplish anything aside from make you feel better. But for how long would it even make you feel better? Once you think about it you'll realise, "Well now this agent probably thinks I'm a totally unprofessional newbie and is very happy he rejected me and congratulating himself on making a wise decision." And then you'll feel frustrated all over again knowing that your attempt to hurt the agent has only made him feel better about himself.

Just don't do it.

And like all the others, I strongly advise posting your query in QLH. If all you've been rejected on is your query, it's really really good news because it means your query sucks. Why is that good news? It means rejection has nothing to do with your novel. You don't have to change your novel (yet). So work on your query, which is a really tough thing to do - not trying to make it sound easy.

Good luck!

Agents do not reject queries without reading them at least to the extent necessary to establish a basis for rejection.

A rejection is not an invitation to start a dialog.

Also keep in mind that this is how agents make a living. This is how they put food on the table. The query process is in place to make the most efficient use of their time, which they are entitled to do without having to answer to anyone but themselves and their family members who depend on them. Being "called out" should never be in an agent's job description.

And since nobody's mentioned it yet, I'll go ahead and say it: it's a small world. Agents and editors know one another, and word gets around. Agents and editors are among the most gracious people I've corresponded with, but even they have their limits. If you're a PITA with one, you risk having that label with others.

Bottom line: get over it, and move on. As a writer, you should have far better things to do with your time than to "pwn" an agent who was gracious enough to answer your unsolicited question.

Colossus said:

"I didn't read it, don't plan to, and will use the first sentence of the description to tell you my opinion".

Click to expand...

You may not realize it but if the agent has a "terrorism" flag going up, then it's your query giving him that impression. I quoted above where you claim that he used the first sentence to come the conclusion that it was a terrorism story. Which IS hard to pitch in NYC. Miss Snark won't even consider that type of story no matter how phenomenal it's written simply because it's too close.

Accusing the agent of not reading your query (especially when he took the time to write back to you - many won't) is unprofessional.

Accept that your query probably sucks and learn how to write a good one. That's what I had to do. I was rejected by 30 agents based on the craptastic query and I am ashamed of the garbage I sent out to pitch my book. So I am fixing my book and fixing my query.

You need to be a mature professional. Not a screaming child that is going to have a temper tantrum because no one has asked to see more material.

Replying to the agent when he was nice enough to respond to your question will only close an avenue for future books. Most agents do NOT respond after an R.

Stop querying and once you reach 50 posts,let the experienced veterans in QLH go over it. If the agent thought terrorism,obviously something in the letter triggered that response.

What everyone else said - don't send another message to the agent.
Work up you 50 posts to qualify for QLH and in the meantime time go and read Queryshark (queryshark.blogspot.com)

Colossus said:

Okay, so long story short I didn't reply. I still think that there are a lot of query letters that go unread (my reason is that I have sent some that were rejected within 5 minutes of my send...kinda like "auto-reject"). Anyway, as I said before I think my frustration got the better of me and I'll keep looking. Still posting on occasion, when I get to 50 I'll post a query or two.

Click to expand...

You might want to check out this thread.

Colossus said:

Okay, so long story short I didn't reply. I still think that there are a lot of query letters that go unread (my reason is that I have sent some that were rejected within 5 minutes of my send...kinda like "auto-reject"). Anyway, as I said before I think my frustration got the better of me and I'll keep looking. Still posting on occasion, when I get to 50 I'll post a query or two.

Click to expand...

This is why I strongly recommend you read and post in Query Hell while you're building your post count. Because you'll see just how little time to takes to decide a query doesn't work. It takes seconds, not minutes.

The delay for most agents is because they're behind in their reading. They'll still reject it in 30 seconds. It's just you might have to wait a month for them to get around to it. Hit an agent who is all caught up, and the rejection may be quick. It doesn't mean they spent less time reading it. All it means is they've kept their inbox under control. (The proof of that is that sometimes people get partial requests in 30 seconds too).

Having never written a query letter, I don't have much advice to offer the OP. But, can I just say how impressed I am with the amount of time and energy the fellow posters put into this thread? What a great group!

And to the OP, good luck and keep us posted. I'm curious to see that query letter... terrorism and all .

I know how the OP feels. When I get upset like that, I write whatever I feel like telling the person, let it all out in a killer letter....and then I don't send it. The release of that energy helps me get on with what's really important. Try it, you might discover something else about your query afterward.

a_sharp said:

I know how the OP feels. When I get upset like that, I write whatever I feel like telling the person, let it all out in a killer letter....and then I don't send it. The release of that energy helps me get on with what's really important. Try it, you might discover something else about your query afterward.

Click to expand...

LOL, just if you do this, be really REALLY careful you actually don't send it. I have a friend with a veeeeeery infamous story of doing just this....and accidentally hitting send.

I'll take 'Things That Did Not End Well' for five hundred, Alex.

Don't enter the e-mail address and you should be safe.

(I tend to do that last anyway to keep my mail from sending before I'm finished. But for cases like these... yeeaaah.)

(Kalen, I want to know your friend's story. )