I suppose it was bound to happen sooner or later.
Agent Kristin Nelson posted an entry this past Friday on her popular blog, PUB RANTS, about recent query letters that her assistant Sara had received.
Sara talked about the reasons she passed on several recent queries: Overused plots, personal turn-offs, genres they didn't represent, etc. She spoke in generalizations.
Then Sara talked about three queries that she'd received that warranted an enthuastic "I want to see this!". She spoke in specifics when describing the plots. Unfortunately, these weren't projects being repped by their agency. It was just three queries that had crossed her desk and piqued her interest.
The feedback on the Comments section was immediate...and quite interesting.
Some people thought it was a great idea. Others thought it was unethical.
Now, agents who critique query letters on their blogs is nothing new. Miss Snark has done it. Rachel Vater, too. But the difference is that the author knows in advance that will happen when they submit their query to those bloggers. The authors who submitted queries to Kristin Nelson didn't, and therein lies the difference.
My question today is for the writers out there, unpublished or published. How do you feel about agents who blog? Was Kristin Nelson well within her rights to post synopses of the works pitched to her in a query letter?
What do you think?