Pub Rants

Taming the RT Convention

 16 Comments |  Share This:    

STATUS: I’m actually having a pretty fine day for a Monday. It’s usually so crazy the first day back in the office. Folks are still recovering from BEA so I bet tomorrow goes nuts. Still, I’m a little late in getting to this blog today.

What song is playing on the iPod right now? WAIT by Sarah McLachlan

And I have a rant for today that’s for sure.

Before I hop to it, I just had to laugh at an email Sara and I received today. We are really caught up on queries (except for the ones I still need to review—which means I might ask for 30 pages still). If it was a NO, Sara responded to all queries—even up through 3 p.m. today! Wow. What a gal. I’m so excited to be this on top of things (except this all falls apart when I get behind on the stuff—such as partials–Sara screened for me—I’m working on that). We got an email that accused us of sending an auto-response.

I assure you. If you emailed us a query, it was read before a response was sent.

So here’s my rant for today.

I was regaled with wild stories of the Romantic Times Convention. Half-naked men. Drunken debaucheries. Parties all night long.

I’m thinking I was at the wrong convention.

Well there were half-naked men…

Here I am on the left, my author Shanna Swendson, and that’s my sister (who came with me for a little R&R), Lisa Horner looking pretty startled.

Picture compliments of Linnea Sinclair.

In case you were wondering what she was seeing, here’s a sample. It might be a little dark.

Big smile.

Hey, I just read on Editor Anna’s blog that she was there and I kid you not, I didn’t see her once. There were at least a 1000 people there but sheesh, to not even pass each other in the hallway or elevators. The hotel was rather large and well, I’ll fess up. I did spend a lot of time on the beach.

But just in case you thought I wasn’t really working. I have proof that I did. Here is Anne Groell (Linnea’s editor at Bantam), Linnea, and I. We are obviously working very hard.

Seriously, here I am at the SF & F Panel –giving my top ten things I’d rather not see in the opening chapters of your manuscript (and you guys all know this since I’ve blogged about all 10 of them). I figured the people in the audience might not read my blog so it would be fun to share.

See, I worked.

16 Responses

  1. Dwight The Troubled Teen said:

    Speaking as one who got a rejection letter while the boss was away…

    Thanks, Sara. Thanks for your diligence. I am so happy that you are so efficient.

    Happy. Really. Ecstatic. Did I mention happy?

  2. Sid Viscous said:

    Re: the last picture in this post, I’m not sure if a strappy-bra thing is the best outfit to get you taken seriously as a writer. (That is, if she is a writer. If she’s an agent or editor, more power to her!)

    Remind me to wear my Tarzan outfit next year.

  3. eleora said:

    I have been searching through past blog entries for the top ten of what not to do in your manuscript…can’t seem to find it. Can anyone point to a month?

    This blog is so valuable! Thanks for all the good candid info.

  4. Michelle said:

    It was very early on in January. I went back and looked and there were only four listed, so I am rather curious about the other six.

    Maybe we’ll get them in today’s post?

  5. Jillian said:

    You may not realize how much you are doing to enhance the sense of “agents are real people.” I’m sure you’re well aware of the “Agent as Demigod” attitude that is rife among aspiring authors. Your delightful photographs (as well as your ongoing and helpful rants) bring warmth and “realness” to an otherwise cold and distant business.

    That, and you’re just so dang cute. I do enjoy my visits here! 🙂

  6. Patrice Michelle said:

    It was a fun conference…as always. It was great to meet you in person, Kristin!

    Hmmm, I didn’t see Anna not once either. You would think I’d see her at least in passing in the halls or something.

  7. Anonymous said:

    I can actually understand why that writer accused you of doing an autoreply (although I am in no way condoning someone actually contacting you to SAY that) because of the form letter you send out for rejections. When I received one, it did cross my mind that it might be an auto-sent thing, given that it has no mention of my name or my book’s title. I then just figured, “Oh, well, moving on,” and queried someone else.

  8. Dwight The Troubled Teen said:

    Chah, Anony.

    I was very fortunate that my first rejection letter was a personalized affair with glowing encouragement, great suggestions, and even a referral to another agency that might be more interested in my type of writing.

    Sara/Kristin’s stock, rubberstamp e-rejection spawned a WTF moment.

    And then I realized that the first rejection letter was likely the anomaly.

    …But the whole e-query thing is SO easy. I am out no money for postage. The… the… the response (for lack of a better word) was fast.

    Gotta thicken that skin! Not everyone wants to see pictures of our beautiful, literary babies!