Quick update on the "SCBWI Reflections" I posted on Sunday 5/17: my writer friend, Amanda, recently got a comment on her blog, literallyhumann.blogspot.com from literary agent Michael Stearns, who said he wanted to "squash the rumor before it gained any traction."
The rumor is that Mr. Stearns "likes" lists. Not true. Mr. Stearns can appreciate a good list, but he is not actively looking for them.
And so I wanted to correct my own 5/17 post on echoarna.blogspot.com. Why does this matter? Agents are inundated with queries from writers, so it's better to be clear about what they want AND they don't want. We writers can run with an offhand comment made at a conference and end up in Bhutan, apparently. (Someday I'll get to Bhutan, but not via misunderstanding an agent's preferences for submissions.)
To read Mr. Stearns own blog, see http://astheworldstearns.wordpress.com/.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Great point. My sister was recently featured on the news after a post about her went so far out of hand that responses poured in for months. Worse yet, the rumor mill eventually construed them in to a pointedly racist discussion. I think one big problem is that a post like this has no real sense of time to the reader, so they feel like a response now is the same as it was 12 months prior, when the article was originally published.
ReplyDelete