Am I wrong to assume, even if it's only a sneaking suspicion rather than an informed one, that a rejection from an agent carries more weight than one from a publisher? My assumption is based on the idea that agents must surely be creatures of pragmatism with a wide knowledge of the likes and dislikes of a broad spectrum of the publishing world; if they say "no thanks" it's not just a personal lack of enthusiasm about the mss, it's a genuine doubt that it could be sold to any of the large number of publishers with whom they have regular contact? I can see that an agent has to feel sufficiently strongly about a particular mss in order to want to take it on, so to that extent it boils down to personal preference. But beyond that? I'm a little at sea. It would be really useful to have some expert input into how I can decode the language used by agents when turning down submissions. For instance, I've just received "an encouraging rejection" from PFD:

Many thanks indeed for your letter and letting me see club_dominion and the Life Beta. I think there is an enormous amount to admire here but on balance I don't think I am the right agent to take this out in this difficult market. I am really grateful for you having thought of me and am sorry not to be able to take this further. I am certain you will find an agent or publisher before too long.

Reading between the lines, I see "admire" and think of the recent discussion on WW about books we "admire but don't love" (and vice versa). "Admire" feels a little like damning with faint praise? He didn't love it/like it enough. Then he says he's "not the right agent". This, I've seen a lot. Why? Because he lacks the personal enthusiasm to pull out all the stops and sell it? Because he thinks it needs too much reworking and he hasn't got room on his books for a "high-maintenance" new author? I suspect it's counter-productive to try and second-guess that one. The final sentence is a killer - he's "certain" I'll find an agent/publisher. But surely he can't be THAT certain, or he'd be snapping me up himself?!

Am I over-analysing this? Is it simply a nice chap trying to say "no" nicely? I'm not discouraged by the response, by the way. I sent out three new submissions immediately on receipt of it. But I'd love to know if other WW members have a key to unravelling Agent-Speak!

Tiger

Tiger Bright, that's definitely encouraging, and you're probably right that there's a limit to how much it's worth analyising this kind of thing. But of course, we all do it.

It does sound like a nice chap trying to be kind, but admire is a strong word they don't use lightly. Yes, we all know books we admire but don't love, but I think you're being unfair to your work to think of 'admire' as damning with faint praise - it seems to me to be praising with faint damns. The trouble is, there need to be no damns at all before an agent can take you on. If anything, an agent needs to be even keener on a book than a publisher, because an agent has a far more personal relationship with you, and needs to feel they'll love your work in the long term. I know that I couldn't phone a dozen or twenty editorial directors from cold to tell them that I had the most fantastic manuscript, the one we've all been waiting for, and then keep chasing for answers and giving the editor ammunition to take to acquisitions meetings, unless I really, really felt that way about it. It's worth remembering that an editor is half-way between you and the rest of the publishing house: the agent's enthusiasm has to transmit to her/him, and they then champion the book through all the acquisition, marketing, sales, PR decisions.

I don't think you can tell at all from this if he thinks it needs work, only that he, personally, is not quite excited enough by it to sell in a market where everyone is filled with gloom about everything. (Mind you, publishers always are, they're like farmers). What I'd say he's telling you is that it's clearly of a publishable standard, and he knows there are agents out there who are more likely to be grabbed by this kind of thing, so persevere. Which you are doing -so good for you!

Emma

Many thanks, Emma. That's encouraging and something of an eye-opener as far as the enthusiasm angle goes. I hadn't quite thought it through in that amount of detail but, yes, I can see that an agent would need to be more enthusiastic than a publisher, for the very reasons you state.

I'm past the stage where I'm allowing rejection to undermine my determination (it tweaks uncomfortably at my confidence, but I remember reading - oh, ages ago! - a quote by Stephen King I think it was, that the difference between a good writer and a published author is sheer bloody-minded determination), although in case anyone imagines I'm thick-skinned, I'd wept like a child for three hours when I received my first rejection for this same novel from an agent I'd been sure would like it (she'd encouraged my writing in the past).

What I do find depressing is the shift in the balance of power since the last time I tried to get a novel published (roughly 10 years ago). The number of publishers who won't even look at submissions unless they come via agents seems to be growing all the time. I think I read somewhere (might even have been the Writers' and Artists' Yearbook, 2005) that it's harder to find an agent than a publisher now. Too many farmers!!

Tiger

Tiger, glad it helped. I've only recently understood that phrase about being harder to find an agent than a it publisher, since from the aspiring writer's point of view it's so obviously the reverse. But now I realise what it means is that since agents are more and more the gatekeepers for publishers, once an reasonably good and/or established agent does take you on, the odds of getting a deal of some sort are really pretty good. You're right about the shift in the balance of power, though in crude market terms that ought to mean there are more agents out there!

I do think when agents start making noise about your work implying 'please don't be disheartened, you'll get there in the end', they're probably right. (Which doesn't stop one sobbing one's heart out and smashing things, of course...)

Emma

<Added>

Just to be depressing, one reason for not bothering to analyse too minutely is that that kind of general-but-encouraging answer can in fact be a semi-standard one. Standard in the sense that they haven't exactly and specially crafted every word to reflect what they thought of your MS, semi- in the sense that they certainly don't write that to everyone. In the days of the WP programme, it doesn't show in how the letter appears how much of it is individual, and how much boilerplate!