Queries, Darn Queries, and Statistics

I majored in Mathematics Education and Economics in college, so I spent a lot of time with numbers. And as much as it pains me to admit it, some of my favorite classes--please don’t think less of me when I write this--were statistics classes. Honestly, there is nothing more satisfying than doing a little research, running a regression, and seeing those coefficients, with their respective p-values, pop up on the screen. I swear, it’s almost magic. Something very much like finishing that final FINAL draft:)

No regression analysis here today (I wouldn’t want to scare too many of you away), but I do have a lot of good, old-fashioned graphs and charts. Not the graphs and charts I’d like to have, mind you--Excel isn’t quite as robust as it ought to be--but they’ll work well enough. I just hope none of my old professors happen to drop in.

First, a disclaimer (in case any of you happen to be closet statisticians): My bar graphs should be dot plots. I know, I know, I know. But Excel doesn’t do dot plots, so bar graphs it is. And Mr. Gates was too busy, apparently, to program Excel with an actual calendar, so all my calculations assume 12 uniform, 30-day months instead of 12 28- to 31-day months. AND Excel insists on starting at one day instead of zero days (yeah, some agents are THAT fast), so everything is one day off. But everything was already a little off, thanks to those 30-day months, so…yeah.

You should also know that I sent every query by e-mail (or online form). And when I say query, I mean my initial contact with the agent. It doesn’t matter if that initial contact involved a one-page letter, or a one-page letter, five-page synopsis, and first three chapters--I consider all of those to be queries. (Actually, one of the agents I queried wanted to see the entire manuscript in the initial contact.)

All right, here’s the first graph, Response Times (Rejections). This graph depicts the frequency of query response times (how many agents responded in zero days, how many agents responded in one day, and so on), but only for those agents who responded via rejection.


I realize it's a little fuzzy, but the shape of the graph is more important than the numbers themselves, anyway. Encouraging, isn’t it? For the most part, agents respond to e-mail queries rather quickly, especially with rejections:) I cut the graph off at 90 days, as I officially catalog it as a non-response after three months. But I do go back and fill in dates if a rejection comes in after the fact, so there are a few outliers not included in this graph: at 116 days, 122 days, 239 days, and, the big winner, 263 days. Wowsers.

Now for the positive responses, the partial and full requests. This graph, Response Times (Requests), depicts the frequency of query response times for the agents who requested more material.


Now, obviously, there are a lot less data points, but the overall shape remains the same. Again, most agents respond to e-mail queries within a couple of weeks or, at most, a month.

To get an even clearer idea of what’s going on, check out this chart. Here, I’ve broken the data into quartiles. The minimums and maximums are exactly what they sound like--the lowest and highest data points, respectively. The median is the data point in the very middle of the data; 50 percent of the data points are below it, and the other 50 percent above. The quartile Q1 divides the data between the minimum and median in half, and the quartile Q3 does the same thing for the median and maximum.


So how should you interpret this? Well, if you look in the Combined column, you see that the median is 13. So 50 percent of all 59 agents who responded to my query got back to me within 13 days. In that same column, the third quartile, Q3, is 34. That means three-quarters of the agents who responded to my query, or 75 percent of them, responded within 34 days. That really isn’t that long. And it shows that the outliers really are outliers; only once in a very long while will an agent leave you hanging for 263 days.

I’m sure some of you are interested in how long I waited to hear back on my requested partials and fulls. I didn’t create a graph because the data points are much more spread out--hearing back on requested material follows a much less predictable pattern, apparently. Also, I didn’t break it down into partial requests and full requests because that would really involve very few data points. So here’s this chart.

I bet that’s not as bad as you thought it would be. The longest, absolute longest, turnaround time on requested material was (only) four months. And since Q3 is 62, I heard back on 75 percent of my partials and fulls within 62 days, or just over two months.

A few more notes about this project, since I feel like sharing them. Its title is SEE THE SAMELINGS (have I mentioned that before?), and it’s a young adult urban fantasy. Its main character is Eva George (she’s a cabbie), and it’s set in pretty much the only place a book about a cabbie could be set: the quintessential NYC.

Wow. Writing this post has been really…cathartic. Or maybe just nostalgic. Or maybe a little of both. And hopefully it’s been informative for you.

Query Update

It’s been a while since I posted one of these, but I’ve been waiting for the last of the responses to come in so I could do sort of a query wrap-up. Well, the last response came in (another request for revisions!), so you can think of this as the last hurrah for this round of querying.

Total queries: 76
Pending queries: 0 (phew!)
Full requests: 4 (2 requests for revisions)
Partial requests: 10 (1 non-response)
Rejections: 45
Non-responses: 17

I’m planning to dump a whole slew of statistics on you later in the week, so I won’t say much about numbers in this post. I will say that these ones satisfy me (for now), as they far exceeded the bar I set for myself after my first foray into Queryland. That first foray involved a query that broke about every rule of query writing, a second query that wasn’t much better, and exactly one full request (which, to my delight, was an upgrade from a fifty-page partial included in the initial query). It seemed like a miracle to me at the time, and, after looking back on those queries and that word-bloated manuscript, still does:)

What this round of querying has taught me, then, is that partial and full requests--and even offers of representation--aren’t just pots of gold at the ends of rainbows. It really is possible to crawl out of the slush pile and onto an agent’s list. Writers do it all the time (in fact, I can’t think of many writers who did it any other way), and they’ll--we’ll--do it again. So let’s stay positive, keep working hard, and for heaven’s sake, keep writing. We’re only going to get better, right? So why quit now?

And with that, I gracefully hop off of the query-go-round. I do plan to revise this manuscript, just as soon as I get Bob into the inboxes of some betas, but for now, I think I’ll enjoy the view from here. That query-go-round is pretty dizzy-fying:)

Interview with an Agent: Kate Epstein

And here’s another agent interview to finish off Recommendation Week. (If you haven’t already noticed, I recommend every agent I interview, or ever will interview. The way I see it, if they say yes to the interview, they must be fabulous!) This one features Kate Epstein of The Epstein Literary Agency. See you on the other side.

KV: How did you get into agenting?

KE: I hung out my shingle! I was an editor for some years and I decided I needed a change. It’s been great.

KV: How would you summarize your personal agenting philosophy? What do you expect from an agent-author relationship?

KE: I expect to provide advice and advocacy. I expect clients to listen to my advice even if they don’t follow it. Most of my agent/author relationships are both warm and professional--but professional alone will do, if that’s what’s best for the author. I expect a long term relationship, but I expect that to come from my doing a good job (and the author’s ongoing need--there’s nothing wrong with only having one book in you). I’d rather have too much information about how things are going than not enough. I expect my clients to be awesome--and I expect to enjoy telling them that they are.

KV: What client work do you have coming out soon? What drew you to those writers and/or projects?

KE: HOME STAGING THAT WORKS by Starr Osborne (Amacom) is a recent release. Starr is professional who sees the book as an enhancement to her business, and she’s putting every ounce of herself into promoting the book. It doesn’t hurt, either, that home staging is a fascinating phenomenon--speaking as it does as to how we live and how we want to imagine we live.

AN EAGLE NAMED FREEDOM by Jeffery Guidry (William Morrow) releases in May. It’s a striking and inspirational story of a man and an eagle. It has a beautiful message and it’s the kind of book you can buy for just about anybody in your life. (Unless she has a bird phobia.)

KV: What genres do you represent? What genres do you definitely NOT represent?

KE: I represent fiction for young adults and nonfiction for adults and for young adults. I don’t do any other fiction, and I don’t do poetry or screenplays.

KV: What query pet peeves and/or pitfalls should writers avoid when querying you?

KE: The biggest thing is not reading the directions on my website. I can overlook most things that aren’t listed there.

KV: What are you looking for in a manuscript right now?

KE: You know it when you see it! For fiction I want something that’s both fresh and fantastic--a good concept but also terrific execution. For nonfiction I’ve been having a fair amount of luck with craft books lately. What I’d really like to do that I see virtually none of is nonfiction books that explore a topic or make an argument that are based primarily on research or investigative journalism. Such books have to be accessible to interest me, but I do read a lot of them.

KV: What’s the best way to query you?

KE: E-mail. If you’re querying via snail mail, there really should be a very good reason--such as you’re in prison. Writers need a certain level of technical proficiency; it’s just a part of the job.

Thanks, Ms. Epstein, for these responses. And for those of you who decide to query, don’t forget to check out her submission guidelines. Nothing too unexpected there, but I figure if you’re reading this interview, you want your query to be as perfect as it can be.

Have a jolly weekend, all!

Recipe Recommendation: Garlic and Citrus Chicken by Giada De Laurentiis

Dead or alive, whole chickens scare me. There’s something about the mob mentality of a pack of live chickens that is positively terrifying. Dead chickens, on the other hand, are exactly the opposite--they look so sad and vulnerable that I’m afraid I’ll ruin them. Which is why I’ve always shied away from roasting whole chickens.

But then I saw Giada roast one on the Food Network (I’ve tried so many of her recipes that we’re on a first-name basis now), and I thought, “That doesn’t look so hard.” So we tried it, and let me tell you, that whole chicken was delicious:)

Here’s the original recipe from Giada (De Laurentiis). And here’s my version, which is virtually identical:

Garlic and Citrus Chicken

1 (5- to 6-pound) whole chicken, neck and giblets discarded
Salt and pepper
1 orange, quartered
1 lemon, quartered
1 head of garlic, halved crosswise, plus 3 garlic cloves, chopped
1 or 2 (14-ounce) cans of chicken broth
1/4 cup frozen orange juice concentrate, thawed (no water added)
1/4 cup fresh lemon juice
2 tablespoons olive oil
1 tablespoon chopped fresh oregano (or 1/2 tablespoon dried oregano)
Kitchen string or butcher twine

Sprinkle salt and pepper into the cavity of the bird, then stuff it with the orange and lemon quarters and the halved head of garlic. Tie up the legs, just to make sure everything stays put, then salt and pepper the bird’s exterior. Place the chicken in a roasting pan and roast in the center of a 400-degree Fahrenheit oven for one hour, basting occasionally with chicken broth.

While the chicken’s roasting, prepare the juice mixture by combining the orange juice, lemon juice, olive oil, oregano, and the remaining (chopped) garlic. At the one-hour mark, baste the bird with about one-third of the juice mixture, then continue roasting for approximately another 45 minutes, basting occasionally with the remaining juice mixture.

Once the bird’s temperature reaches 170 degrees Fahrenheit at the seam between the thigh and the torso (which will happen in about another 45 minutes), remove the chicken from the roasting pan and cover it with foil to hold in its heat. Then prepare the sauce by simmering the remaining juices over medium heat until they have reduced to about one cup’s worth of sauce. Strain into a two-cup measuring cup, discard any chunks, and spoon off the fat before serving.

The only real difference between my version and Giada’s is that she seems to think you only need to add chicken broth if the drippings start to burn, whereas we found there was nothing to baste with if we didn’t add broth. Or maybe our chickens were just not as oozy as hers.

I realize it’s getting too warm to be roasting whole chickens, so maybe you’ll have to wait until fall to give this one a try. But this recipe’s a keeper for sure. I could slather that sauce on just about anything:)

Book Recommendation: OUTLIERS: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell

I’d seen OUTLIERS around, and although that title caught my eye (I’m the only person I know who actually likes statistics), it wasn’t until I saw Liesl’s recommendation that I finally said, “Okay, I’ll read it.” And a good thing I did.

OUTLIERS is precisely what it purports to be: the story of success. But that story is probably not the one you think it is. According to Mr. Gladwell, success is a function not of a person’s intelligence or talent, but of his or her opportunities and legacy. He finds evidence for this claim in all of the expected places--the Canadian Hockey League, for instance, and Bill Gates’s life story--but also in a few less expected ones. Like the rice paddies of southern China. And the cockpits of Korean Air jetliners (back when they had a bad habit of crashing planes).

As someone who’s enjoyed a fair amount of success in life, I should probably find this book insulting:) (What’s that, Mr. Gladwell? I’m not really smarter/swifter/stronger than everybody else?) But I don’t. Because I think he’s right. My own life only confirms his theory. In terms of opportunity and legacy, I have been richly blessed.

OUTLIERS was a fascinating read. If you’re looking for a book to share with that eclectic reader in your life, this could definitely be the one. And if you’re that eclectic reader, definitely give this one a read.

Book Recommendation: THE GUERNSEY LITERARY AND POTATO PEEL PIE SOCIETY by Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Barrows

I know exactly two Myrnas (one of which you know, too), and they both recommended this delightful book to me. Actually, Myrna Number One recommended it, and then I couldn’t remember the title (it is a little cumbersome), and then Myrna Number Two recommended it on her blog, and I was like, “Oh, right, that’s the book Myrna Number One told me I should read a few months back.” So I read it--and loved it:)

THE GUERNSEY LITERARY AND POTATO PEEL PIE SOCIETY is an epistolary novel (wow, how often do you get to use that word in real life?), meaning the story unfolds through a series of letters. Our main letter writer is Juliet Ashton, a British newspaperwoman whose collection of wartime articles was just published in a single volume. With the war over (the Second World War, that is), Juliet casts about for a new book idea, finally settling on the tale of a small group of Britons, the Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, who took up reading as a means of resisting the German occupation of their tiny island in the English Channel.

In addition to educating me on a piece of World War Two history I didn’t already know, GUERNSEY thoroughly drew me into its pastoral world and made me lament the lost art of letter writing. I exchanged letters, real, actual letters, with Honey Bear for two years before he was my husband, and those letters are now a prized possession. I ought to stick them in page protectors and organize them chronologically in a three-ring binder. It’ll be like having my very own GUERNSEY.

Definitely give this book a read. (Did I mention it includes an adorable romance?) And go write someone a letter, a real, fold-it-up-and-slap-a-stamp-on-it letter. You just might make that person’s day.

It's Recommendation Week

It’s Recommendation Week here on the blog. I recently finished two great books, and Honey Bear and I discovered a new recipe that is definitely worth sharing. But we'll kick everything off with some links.

For blog surfers I’ve stumbled across a blog or two of late that I wanted to share with you. Here they are, in alphabetical order:

My Bloggish Blog Thing with Josin L. McQuein The first thing I noticed about Josin was her interesting name; the second thing I noticed was that she was winning all of the writing contests I was entering around the blogosphere:) So give her blog a look-see.

Somewhere Between Fact & Fiction with Shannon McMahon If you like my blog, you’ll probably like Shannon’s, as we share a lot of the same interests (writing, cooking, blogging--I guess that one goes without saying). Check it out.

For queriers Have you heard of Absolute Write? It’s a fantastic website, with forums on practically every topic a writer might find interesting. I especially like their Bewares and Background Checks, which allow writers to share statistics and anecdotes relating to specific agents. Want to know how long Agent A has been taking to respond to queries lately? Wondering if you’re the only one waiting to hear back from Agent B on a manuscript request? Absolute Write probably knows.

And don’t forget to register for QueryTracker. It is, in my opinion, the best online database for finding and researching agents.

For moms This past weekend, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints held its annual General Conference. In addition to hearing several beautiful messages about the atonement and resurrection of Jesus Christ, I also heard this poignant message about motherhood. Enjoy:)

Interview with an Agent: Elizabeth Evans

I decided to hold this interview for a day, just so you wouldn’t think it was a joke:) So today I give you the one-hundred-percent authentic Elizabeth Evans of Jean V. Naggar Literary Agency. See you on the other side.

KV: How did you get into agenting?

EE: I discovered agenting through my MFA program at the University of San Francisco. My first workshop instructor was good friends with a local agent, and she suggested that I should work for her friend as an intern. I started interning for Kimberley Cameron at Kimberley Cameron & Associates for three hours a week, and by the time I graduated I was a full time agent. I felt very lucky to have found a great publishing job on the West Coast.

KV: How would you summarize your personal agenting philosophy? What do you expect from an agent-author relationship?

EE: Three words: never give up! The publishing business is so much about perseverance. We are all told no, we all receive rejections, agents and authors alike. It's important that I feel passionate about the projects I take on, because I want to work with writers for several books over the course of their careers. When I truly believe in a writer's talent, it motivates me to keep going. Publishers can tell me no, but they can't tell me I'm wrong!

From the agent-author relationship, I expect respect and honesty. Clear communication is important.

KV: What client work do you have coming out soon? What drew you to those writers and/or projects?

EE: This will be a fun year for me--I have a very diverse list of books coming out! Rebecca Cantrell's second mystery novel in the Hannah Vogel series, A NIGHT OF LONG KNIVES, comes out in early June. In my opinion, it is even better than her first novel, A TRACE OF SMOKE. It is set in 1933 Berlin, and the suspense kicks in on the first page. If you like historical fiction, I highly recommend it.

I also have a YA cell phone novel (the text is delivered in a series of text messages, tweets, web links, photos, and video) called iDRAKULA from my client Bekka Black. It's a retelling of Bram Stoker's Dracula, and the digital rollout is so cool. Kids can subscribe to get it on their cell phones, and the print version will follow in October.

Also in October, my client Liza Campbell's debut literary novel, THE DISSEMBLERS, comes out. I can't tell you how much I love this book. The writing is painfully beautiful, and I am so, so proud of it. I get shivers just thinking about it.

KV: What genres do you represent? What genres do you definitely NOT represent?

EE: These days I am most interested in narrative nonfiction, especially memoir, travel and adventure writing, current affairs, journalism and pop science.

I definitely do not represent fantasy, poetry, and children's picture books. I'm also backing off from fiction, although that's subject to change. You can always find a detailed description of what I'm seeking on our company website: www.jvnla.com.

KV: What query pet peeves and/or pitfalls should writers avoid when querying you?

EE: I prefer a polite, concise query letter. If you address it to me and mention why you're querying me/how you found me, briefly describe your novel and its themes, and then tell me a little about yourself--you can't go wrong!

KV: What are you looking for in a manuscript right now?

EE: What I would most love to find right now is an adventure memoir or narrative nonfiction along the lines of THE LOST CITY OF Z, THREE CUPS OF TEA, or DON'T LETS GO TO THE DOGS TONIGHT. I'm looking for unusual and memorable stories. I recently discovered and fell in love with the American Museum of Natural History in New York. So, I suppose narrative nonfiction that incorporates fascinating aspects of nature, travel, wilderness, gems, whale skeletons or dinosaur bones would be very appealing right now.

KV: What's the best way to query you?

EE: According to the guidelines on our website at www.jvnla.com. I prefer to receive a polite query letter with a full proposal attached to the e-mail.

Thanks again, Ms. Evans, for these responses. And I hope some of you readers have a manuscript, or are working on one, that she might enjoy. I wish I did. That one line--“Publishers can tell me no, but they can’t tell me I’m wrong!”--really resonated with me, as that’s how I feel about my own books, especially Bob. And wouldn’t it be fascinating to write something about whale skeletons or dinosaur bones? (All right, all right, you got me--I had something of an obsession with dinosaurs as a kid.)

Queries away, suggestions below!