8 easy steps to overcome the fear of query writing

 A friend asked me for help writing a query to a literary agent for her manuscript. And I froze. How could I, who have blogged so many times about query letters, explain I, personally, was months late replying to an agent who had requested pages from me? The reason seemed so silly. I dreaded writing the covering query letter. 

I do know something about query writing, if only from listening year after year to the Query Gong Show at the Dallas-area DFW Writing Conference. This gong show is the chance for literary agents to comment on--and "gong out" anonymous queries from conference attendees. (See this blog's October 8, 2024, post: "DFWCon word limit cautions -- plus, the Gong Show" for samples of agent peeves.)

Between that and workshops whose main topic seemed to be dissing silly writers who dare waste agents' time with their horrible queries, I'm tempted to coin a new abbreviation: FOQ--fear of querying.

Still, my friend needed help. And fortunately, there was a higher power to call on. It's one of my favorite resources, "Eight Ways to Boost Your Query Letter," by book editor for the late, lamented #RevPit contests, Elizabeth Buege. 

Read the whole thing. Really. It's only a few pages, although for the impatient, here's my summary of Buege's eight essentials:

1. Prove you have a compelling premise. She offers a number of suggestions, but for my money, the best is ". . . think about why you find this story special and why it's near and dear to your heart as a writer."
2. Show how genre expectations are met. If I didn't mention it in my October 8, 2024, post, more than once agents said "the query says the genre is X, but not why it's X. And it doesn't sound like X from the information in the query."
3. Let your character's personality shine through. By this, Buege doesn't mean writing the letter in first person. That's a big no-no, basically because it confuses the agent about whether they're hearing the character's actual words or the writer's. Instead, Buege suggests writers ask what the POV character would see as their goals and obstacles, and the kind of language they would use to describe the main conflict.

4. 

   Image from Pixabay

   Address multiple main characters in terms of their shared story. Assuming the story has multiple POV characters, Buege suggests giving each (preferably not more than two) MCs a paragraph for their context, goals and states, and using the following paragraphs to show how tensions rise in the central conflict their both part of.
5. Don't spend too much time on setup. This is another issue that arises more than once in query Gong Shows. Buege's remedy: concentrate on the conflict and goals the character(s) face for the bulk of the story, giving the setup--no matter how fascinating--only a brief mention. I'll add that limiting the setup will help keep the query's length to a single-ish page. Think in the neighborhood of 300 words.
   
6. Identify the inciting incident. This is the moment that rips the main character from their normal life--that "setup--to the conflict that takes them through the rest of the story. And don't wait too long for it--generally, it should happen in the story's first act.
7. Save those plot details for the synopsis. How many times during Gong Shows did agents say about queries, "this sounds like a synopsis"? Way too many! And it's a primary reason for another agent peeve, that the query letter is way too long! Among Buege's suggestions is writing the synopsis (plot summary) first, making it easier to identify the key elements for the query letter. (And no, don't tell the ending in the query. Save that for the synopsis if requested.)
8. Avoid leaving key information too vague. Sure, we writers hate spoilers but still need to explain what the states are and what inciting incident creates the situation. From Buege: ". . . be honest and direct about the inciting incident, main goal of the MC, and stakes."

After looking again at Buege's post, I'm struck once more with fear that I may have overlooked something(s) essential as I finally hit "send" on my query. to which Buege adds these consoling words: ". . .put on a revision mindset for this process. It might take multiple drafts. . . and that's OK."

***

Well, that's longer than my usual posts. But who spotted what got left out? What else we dread--maybe dread most about query letters? Dare I say, comparison titles? But while I spent several months last year not blogging, I was still busy listening and learning, including more suggestions about those dreaded comps. 

And the writing of the possibly still more dreaded synopsis. Stay tuned.

DFWCon Query Gong Show: early morning edition

 Another great DFWCon literary conference in the books, with lots of classes and panels. But probably what readers are awaiting most anxiously are the results of the conference's famous -- maybe infamous -- Query Gong Show. 

For those unfamiliar with the conference this is a riff on the 1970's TV talent show in which contestants performed until judges stopped them by striking gongs. DFWCon's version with anonymous entries is less brutal.

The rules: writers submit their anonymous literary queries to a panel of agents and editors who strike table-top gongs to signal the point at which they would stop reading if receiving one of these queries in their own emails. Writers can get gonged once, even twice, without stopping the reading by DFW's mellifluously voiced George Goldthwaite. But three strikes and they're out!

The query contest has typically been the final day's afternoon event of the conference. This year, it was moved to first thing in the morning. Perhaps organizers hoped panelists would be less alert to query faults before they were adequately caffeinated.

If so, that hope was vain. Of the 10 queries read this past weekend, none survived the final gong.

Possibly because they read these posts, writers avoided some stumbling blocks from prior years. Queries for gazillion-word books were rare (or at least, less outrageous). Most writers seemed aware of their books' genre. In hopes of preventing still more literary tears, here are the most-frequent issues that doomed 2023's query hopefuls.

First -- the panelists. These were five agents, and one acquisitions editor: Cathie Hedrick-Armstrong of The Purcell Agency, T.S. Ferguson of Azantian Literary Agency, Lynnette Novak of The Seymour Agency, Jacqui Lipton of Tobias Literary Agency, Sara J. Henry of Crooked Lane Books, and Eloy Bleifuss of Janklow & Nesbit Associates.

By far the most gongs rang because the query took too long to get to what Lipton described as "the beating heart of the story."

"What's it about?" Henry asked about a similar query. "It just kept going."

Image by Prawny for Pixabay

Writers are understandably eager to get as many words as possible before an agent.

 But as Hedrick-Armstrong noted, she once received 1,000 queries in three days after accidentally opening, even though she posted no notification of accepting queries.

 Even if none of these exceeded the 300-word maximum I once heard a writing coach describe, reading them all would be the equivalent of getting halfway through War and Peace (described as nearly 600,000 words, although that may depend on the translation).

For literary queries, be short to be kind. Bleifuss suggested using no more than two short paragraphs to describe that "heart of the book."

This should include what Hedrick-Armstrong noted as the five essentials (also available at her Manuscript Wish List site):

1. Who is the main character?
2. What does the main character want?
3. What or who is standing in the main character's way of getting what they want?
4. What must the main character overcome to get what they want? 
5. What are the consequences of reaching that goal? What might they gain or lose?

Somewhat similar to these "stakes of the story" issues were failure to mention the story's genre and word count in queries. (Agents differed -- some wanted this information upfront; others were content to see it nearer the end.)

Excessive length was such a major sticking point, some agents said they would have kept reading despite additional issues, if only the query had told them what they needed to know more quickly. Among the tips, despite sheer wordiness, agents noted, "don't start with setting," "cut out filler words," and "no flowery language."

Issues gonged less frequently included:

• Querying for sequels or series of books. "Don't write the sequel if the first book doesn't sell well," Novak cautioned. (Most panelists were OK if an author mentioned that a first book was a stand-alone "with sequel/series potential.)
• Excessively high word counts for the genre, although agents varied. However, in debut novels, word counts outside of norms may indicate problems with pacing, Lipton said.
• Stories that seemed too familiar/stale/tropey. "Try to find a fresh perspective," Bleifuss urged.
• Objectification of female characters. 

Although panelists realized Gong Show entrants had no way of knowing who they would be addressing, the salutation "Dear Agent" hit sore spots from agents who've received similarly addressed queries too many times.

When addressing agents/editors, please use their names. And get them right.

Ferguson bemoaned the number of times he's been addressed as "T.J." (He's properly T.S. Ferguson.) And "don't call me Mr.," Henry said.

In fact, honorifics are tricky, especially if an agent/editor has not specifically indicated which they prefer, or if they are nonbinary individuals. Better to use simply "first name + last name" as indicated on the individual's or agency's website.

Again, all queries were anonymous. So, here's to revamping and sending to appropriate agents. (They probably won't even remember seeing the first version after doing their half-W&P worth of subsequent query readings.)

DFWCon Gong Show just keeps breaking records

This week’s literary query Gong Show – a highlight of the annual DFW Writers Conference – regularly breaks some of its own records, and the 2019 event was no exception. Mellifluously voiced conference member George Goldthwaite picked up the first randomly selected query from an anonymous author and began to read. The six agents arrayed at his side listened attentively, waiting for a point in the query at which they would have stopped reading if it arrived in their inbox. And at which they would strike the small gongs provided to them to indicate their lack of interest.

This year’s agent participants were Margaret Bail (Fuse Literary), Tina P. Schwartz (The Purcell Agency, LLC), James McGowan (BookEnds Literary Agency), Savannah Brooks (Jennifer De Chiara Literary Agency), Erik Hane (Red Sofa Literary Agency), and Nikki Terpilowski (Holloway Literary Agency).

If a query was gonged by at least three agents, Goldthwaite would stop reading, and the agents would explain themselves. The point of the exercise was to help writers tailor their queries – in most cases, their initial contact with an agent – to best pique an agent's interest. (Note: agents were not allowed to gong a query simply because it for was a literary genre they did not represent.)

image: ktphotography from pixabay

Goldthwaite paused briefly as he finished reading the first paragraph of the first query. The gongs remained silent. Another paragraph, and still the agents forbore to strike their gongs. And still another paragraph, with silence continuing. And then the query ended. 

It was the first time in the history of the convention’s gong show that the very first entry had made it past the gauntlet of gongs and applause rocked the room.

In all, of 11 queries read, one other made it past the gong squad (although with a single gong strike), tying the show’s previous record of two winners. 

I might have congratulated myself that readers of this blog are learning from my annual reports of what it takes – or doesn’t – to push their queries past the automatic reject function of literary agents. Unfortunately, some of us still have some learning to do.

In the past, a significant reason query letters receive multiple gongs has been their excessive length. It's an understandable issue – with manuscripts that may run to the tens of thousands of words, writers may long to cram the whole story into a one- to two-page query letter.

There is a place for such a summary. It’s called a synopsis, which some agents will request alongside the query. Perhaps tellingly, the initial, no-gong query letter was for a 450-word picture book. Did fewer words in the manuscript enable the author to escape the temptation of an overly wordy query?

What surprised me this time around was the number of queries whose writers appeared not to understand what genre they were writing or what age readers they hoped to reach. Possibly I should have been better prepared for some of this after my stint as a slush pile reader for the 189 entries in DL Hammons’ WRiTE CLUB contest. Other slush pile readers, especially those who write or read young adult fiction, questioned the relative lack of YA entries. However, repeatedly, I found writing samples labeled "adult" whose voice and material strongly suggested a younger audience. (I did not rule out entries whose readership or genre category seemed misplaced, leaving that to agents.) 

A 45,000-word gong show entry labeled MG (middle grade) concluded with proclaiming its appeal “all the way up to adult men.” Three gongs rang out simultaneously at that phrase. 

Admittedly, adults often read books aimed at younger readers, but “If it’s MG, own that appeal,” agent Brooks said, to which Terpilowski noted, “The same. It’s my pet peeve. We need to think of stories in categorical terms.” And “it helps to think about where it would be shelved in a library,” Schwartz said. 

Other gripes cited more than once by agents were vague, unspecific language, cliched or (ahem) generic language in a query. Another query received multiple simultaneous gongs when the writer outlined a story premise and then wrote, “this is not that story.”

Opening with unlikeable characters, gross-out language, and depressingly sad situations were also reasons for gong strikes.

And if writers truly wanted to rile agents, there were few better (or worse) way to accomplish that than to assure them that the story was “intriguing,” or that it was a “good fit” for them.

“That’s for me to decide,” Bail said, adding, “and then it went on too long.” 

Goldthwaite's reading, of course, disguised any errors of spelling, punctuation, and formatting. And an agent's failure to gong didn't imply that they would read a query for a genre they don't represent. So, I'll add this admonition – always read the agent's website for particulars!

And of course, keep your eye on this site for more helpful tips from the Dallas-Fort Worth Writers Conference.