THE LITERARY ICK

Literary agents are all victims of personal taste 👻

François Boucher, Portrait of Madame de Pompadour, 1756.

Hello there

Ivan today with a quick note on the literary ick I feel in response to reading certain perfectly sound words like cavernous sometimes.

Why do I have an ick when reading perfectly sound words like cavernous?

Probably because it’s one of those words we don’t usually say out loud.

And yet I might use a word like eschatology without flinching or anticipating this kind of complaint because it’s necessary to describe something specific sometimes.

Eschatology is precise and there’s no obvious alternative. Its rarity announces itself and that's good.

Whereas cavernous makes me think "you mean spacious? Oh, is spacious not fucken good enough for you?"

I know this isn’t fair or objective, it’s a taste thing.

Which is my point to you today.

You submit your book to a literary agent and you likely imagine it will be read ‘objectively’.

The agent will rationally consider the merits of your book and therefore estimate its appeal to readers and therefore to publishers. And sure. There’s an element of that. Likely there are agents who are entirely logical about your book’s market appeal. But most of us are drawn into your story by our taste.

For me, I have to be excited and admiring as I read. I have to want to read more for myself—not because I can instantly see the book deal. I love doing big book deals. But I hate selling things that others should love but do nothing for me personally.

Remember that when you get an agent’s rejection.

Maybe it wasn’t for them. But another agent might adore it.

As ever,

Ivan Mulcahy

of Mulcahy Sweeney Literary Agency

[ENDS.]

---

🚨 ACTION POINT in the comments 🚨

Which words, when written, give you the ick? Curious to see if there’s any overlap here…

---