Arrogant "Literary" Agents

How about an agent who, when queried, asks for a synopsis and a sample chapter.  You send them along, hoping he'll ask for more.  Then . . . nothing.  So you send an email -  hey, did you get my synopsis and sample chapter?  Nothing.  So, a few weeks letter, you send another,  very polite email (including copies of the 1st 2 emails)  - may I have a status report on the  material I sent ?  And then . . . nothing!  Weeks later - still nothing! 

What the hell did you ask for the material for?  Rectal orifice  . . .

An agent asks for material because that's the only way she can possibly know whether or not she likes it.  I don't know how long you waited before asking, but it should have been at least two months.  Any sooner than this is just nagging, and sometime it can take up to six months.  It takes as long as it takes.

At any rate, there's nothing arrogant about it, other than what sounds like arrogance on your part.

The agent is under no obligation to reply to anything, to acknowledge anything, to ever have contact with you again.  An agent asks for material because she wants to know whether you can write as well, or better, than the publishing world demands. 

If you can do this, you'll hear back from that agent as soon as she has time to get back to you, which may be in a day, or may be in six months.  You aren't the only unpublished writer that agent has to deal with, and 98% of her time is spent handling the published writers she has already signed.  And rightfully so.

But no agent or editor is ever obligated to reply at all, in any way, if you can't write like this.

And a big piece of advice.  Never ever spend a minute online, on a forum, on a blog, or anywhere else, talking about how arrogant you think agents or editors are.  Would you want to work with a writer who does this?  I've rejected writers for less.

I was speaking about one particular agent, not all agents or editors as you imply.  And you have "rejected writers for less."  Now who's being arrogant?  Here's  a piece of advice for you - without writers there would be no editors or agents.

And without agents and editors, no writer could ever be professionally published. It goes both ways. So don't ****** them off. Word does get around, and you don't want to be blacklisted as an author.

You might have a legitimate complaint, I don't know. It depends on how long they've had your material, and how long they typically take to review submissions.

SO not true.  this is the propoganda the industry wants you to buy into.

First of all agents are NOT necessary to be "professionally" published.   It's a fairly recent thing that they are required at most big publishers, but small presses aren't so messed-up. 

Writers meet publishers at writers conferences, get referred to them, attract their interest by making the papers with success as self-publishers  (does "Amanda Hocking" ring a bell?   How about "Seth Harwood"?   "Cory Doctorow?")

Then there's the whole question of what you have decided "professional publishing" is.  Hocking made millions of dollars with her own project.  Is she not a professional?  I have sold over 100,000 books I printed myself.  Am I an amateur.

The whole "blacklisted" thing isn't even industry propoganda, it's mindless internet rumor and absurd.

It's good to keep perspective (and facts) in order when giving advice.