I'd forgotten that before some recent excursions I'd sent queries to two or three publishers . My book 'Silkworms & Snow'is based on journals and letters I wrote whilst working in China in 2003-4. I've now written up enough chapters to think the end is near. I abandoned a chronological approach in favour of topic-based chapters, so there was quite a bit of reorganising to do.

In my query letter I introduced the book with examples of chapter headings and said I'd be willing to send samples.

Today came a reply from Pan MacMillan:

'It's an interesting idea and very relevant in the current climate. However, unfortunately our lists are very full at present and we are unable to consider any new titles.'

Does this mean I should resubmit in a few months, or is it code for 'don't darken our letterboxes for the next hundred years'?

Sheila

Sheila, I suspect there's not much prospect of them taking it on later, although as they say they like the idea. Publishers think long-term on these things, and a few months probably wouldn't change their minds. Nothing to stop you sending something else, though. And have you thought about approaching an agent?

Emma

Thanks for this, Emma. I've been working a while on the book so have nothing else in the non-fiction line to send them just now, although some of the material is suitable for short travel pieces. There are some other publishers I can approach. I thought it might be more troublesome to find an agent.

Sheila

I too wish there were a code book we could use to deconstruct publishers'/agents' responses. I just got such a charmingly written rejection from an agent that it was almost a pleasure to receive. She had lots of good things to say about the book but she said 'I'm not sure how I could place it in this very conservative market'. Does this translate as my book being uncommercial? Unusual? Lousy? Any insights gratefully received.

Hilary

Saying their lists are full is a pretty standard, polite, way of saying, "No thanks." Since you're never likely to see their lists, it's not a response you can really argue with. Another thing to bear in mind is that most if not all publishers are now owned by big multi-national companies (French and German ones for the most part) who do not see books as being any different to the other products they sell. What this means is that they don't accept a publisher's explanation that this or that author's books might only be making 5% profit now but in time, with a growing audience, will reach the 15% or so that the owner is demanding. And what that means is that editors have less time to work with a new author, even if they think he or she has a lot of promise. So, even if your book is fundamentally exciting, original, etc, if it needs a lot of editing work, it will probably be rejected. Unfortunately, a publisher is unlikely to tell you this, since it exposes the fact that they don't any longer provide the intense editorial input (with exceptions, of course) that a new author needs in order to produce professional work. If they did, it would highlight the fact that publishing is almost unique as an industry in that the manufacturers of the product provide little to no training for those who are expected to produce it.

Terry

Well said, Terry!! It's a ridiculous situation indeed ...

A
xxx

It's very true. The other reason agents and editors don't give much if any reason for rejecting things is that they really, really don't have time to get into correspondence about it.

Emma

The agent's letter merely tells you how they want to be perceived.