Podcast Summary: The Shit No One Tells You About Writing

Episode: "Comp Titles That Make Agents Go...Hmm"
Date: March 26, 2026
Hosts: Bianca Marais, Carly Watters, CeCe Lyra

Overview

This episode dives into the critical art of picking comp titles (comparison titles) for query letters—a topic that often leaves emerging writers puzzled. Bianca, Carly, and CeCe critique query letters and opening pages from listeners, focusing especially on the effectiveness of comp titles and how they impact an agent’s decision to request more pages. The episode is filled with practical advice, passionate opinions, and the usual blend of candor and humor that define the show.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Trigger Warnings in Queries and Genre Expectations

• The group debates whether queries for horror novels (especially with sensitive or graphic content) require trigger warnings.

  • Carly: Suggests a trigger warning is considerate, especially for support staff or junior team members.
  • CeCe: Argues that horror as a genre comes with an inherent expectation of disturbing content but supports trigger warnings if they help anyone feel safe.
  • Bianca: Reminds listeners the show is marked adult and often deals with adult topics without additional warnings.

  Notable Quote:

  “If you think horror sapphic cannibalism books maybe need a trigger warning, let us know. I mean, this is Cece’s one to tackle first...” — Carly (04:26)
  “If it does make someone, even one person, feel safe, great, let’s do it. It wouldn’t bother me at all to see a trigger warning here.” — CeCe (05:24)

2. Comp Title Strategy: Why Agents Care

• Comp titles are vital for signaling where the author wants their book positioned in the marketplace.

• Mistakes in comp titles—such as using self-published comps or getting titles/authors wrong—can send the wrong message to agents.

  • Carly: Discourages using self-published books as comps in traditional publishing queries.
  • CeCe: Strongly advocates for including both book titles AND author names to help with name linkage and avoid confusion.
  • Petition Started: CeCe launches a friendly on-air campaign for always listing the author with the comp title.

• Discussion on accidentally pitching a book too similar to a trending title and how that impacts an agent’s calculus.

  • Carly: Highlights the challenge of selling a book that’s highly similar to a recent bestseller—it must be “as good as, if not better than, that other one.”
  • CeCe: Emphasizes the agent’s role in finding what makes a similar project distinct and marketable.

  Notable Quote:

  "If you’re going to mention a book as a comp title, you must say the author’s name." — CeCe (33:09)
  “Anytime something is comped to something, and it is very similar, it has to be as good as, if not better than, that other one." — Carly (39:03)

3. Query Letter Critiques – Analysis and Feedback

A. "Nothing But Skin" by Cassie – Adult Sapphic Horror (CeCe's pick, [02:03])

• Comp Titles Used: Our Wives Under the Sea meets Love Lies Bleeding. References to The Lamb and Julia Armfield’s works.

• Premise: After finding her girlfriend eating a loved one, Billy helps cover up a crime, only to find herself deeper in horror as the relationship spirals into cannibalistic dependency.

• CeCe:

  • Loved the hook (“I am hungry for more—pun intended!” [06:59]).
  • Would read immediately if queried; “no notes,” rare level of enthusiasm.

• Carly:

  • Expresses the need to reference Billy's own prison experience (tie personal history to stakes).
  • Debates if this tips into dark romance territory due to the intense, morally blurred relationship.

• Group Discussion: Dissects the difference between dark romance and horror romance, arguing it's about what’s foregrounded—relationship or horror.

  Memorable Moment:

  • CeCe's comic horror over the missing trigger warning and her self-deprecation: “I am a disturbed person.” (05:38)

B. "Nothing But Skin" Opening Pages ([12:32])

• CeCe:
  • Praises the strong writing but urges for more realistic character thinking and reactions.
  • Critiques lack of interior reasoning—Billy doesn't speculate enough about what's wrong with her girlfriend, making her less believable.
  • Recommends deeper interiority and realism in behavior, stronger causality.
• Carly:
  • Applauds atmospheric word choices and subtly creepy tone.
  • Notes some confusion about the protagonist’s “home,” backstory consistency.
  • Menions a standout joke:

    “This was a name she could get behind or underneath. She wasn’t picky. 10/10 joke.” ([21:55])

  • Questions whether opening in a car is the “most active” place to start.

C. "Never the Same Love Twice" by Manny Tyler – Women’s Fiction (Carly's pick, [25:05])

• Comp Titles Used: Before We Were Lovers, Hearts and Lovers (with later confusion—turns out the correct comp is likely Writers & Lovers by Lily King).

• Premise: Ash, split between 2002 NYC romance and her present day life-and-death crossroads, must reconcile her past loves as her story ends in tragedy.

• Carly:

  • Flags confusion over comp titles and recommends against using self-pubbed or mis-titled comps.
  • Advises clarifying genre (don’t say “mid lit”—use “upmarket” or “women’s fiction”).
  • Doesn’t like “spoiling” the ending in the query—keep the suspense for the agent.
  • Suggests streamlining the definition of love; avoid over-philosophizing in favor of plot-driven queries.

• CeCe:

  • Adds that including author names in comps should be standard.
  • Warns that “mid lit” can be misread as “mid list” or sound like middle grade.
  • Finds the plot summary too internal and passive, lacking “domino effect” of causality.
  • Recommends not mentioning the protagonist dies in the query—readers/agents want hope or a broader takeaway.

  Memorable Exchange:

  “Do you want to torture me, author?...Good job.” — CeCe riffing on comp titles confusion (31:46)
  “[Query letters] must say the author’s name... It’s really, really essential for name linkage.” — CeCe (33:09)

D. "Never the Same Love Twice" Opening Pages ([39:41])

• Carly:
  • The “looking back” narrative style makes the opening too factual, lacking surprise or tension.
  • Dialogue at the party is stilted; “finance bros” would speak more naturally.
  • The main character feels bland and undefined, more narrator than protagonist.
• CeCe:
  • Feels disconnected—reader is a “passive passenger” rather than an “active co-pilot.”
  • Misses deeper interiority and unpredictable, vivid storytelling.
  • Protagonist comes across as flat due to the focus on summary over lived experience and emotion.

Notable Quotes (with Timestamps and Attribution)

• “I have no notes. I love this. I'm completely obsessed. I am hungry for more. Terrible pun intended.” — CeCe, on "Nothing But Skin" query ([06:59])
• “The only time I ever read queries aloud is for the podcast...sometimes I pick up things when I'm reading from the show in a way that I don't pick them up when I'm actually reading.” — Carly ([27:23])
• “If you’re going to mention a book as a comp title, you must say the author’s name.” — CeCe ([33:09])
• “Anytime something is comped to something, and it is very similar, it has to be as good as, if not better than, that other one.” — Carly ([39:03])
• “I want to feel like an active co-pilot. So yeah, didn’t work for me.” — CeCe, on passive narration ([44:36])
• “You need a talent for storytelling and a talent for writing...You definitely have the talent for writing. I also think you have the talent for storytelling, but I think the storytelling execution here needs polishing.” — CeCe ([14:23])

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Trigger warnings, horror expectations – [04:19] to [06:52]
• "Nothing But Skin" query critique – [06:59] to [12:31]
• Discussion: dark romance vs. horror romance – [10:25] to [12:23]
• "Nothing But Skin" first pages critique – [12:32] to [22:12]
• Comp title strategy and pitfalls – [27:15] to [33:09]
• "Never the Same Love Twice" query critique – [25:05] to [39:41]
• "Never the Same Love Twice" first pages critique – [39:41] to [44:36]

Practical Takeaways for Writers

• Always double-check—even triple-check—your comp titles for spelling, author attribution, and market relevance.
• Provide external plot points and character causality in your query, not just internal states.
• Avoid spoiling the end of your novel in the query letter.
• Trigger warnings: Understand that tastes (and need for warnings) vary among agents; err on the side of inclusion if content is graphic.
• When picking a comparable title, choose traditionally published books in your genre, and always list the author.
• A protagonist’s actions and thoughts should feel authentic and lived-in, reflecting history beyond what’s on the page.

Notable Moments & Lighter Highlights

• CeCe’s campaign for proper comp titling (with author names) and her exasperation over getting the titles right provided running comic relief.
• Carly’s “10/10 joke” call-out for a witty bar description spotlighted the value of humor—even in horror queries.
• The trio’s recurring struggles with “horror” vs “whore” pronunciation added a playful backdrop to a weighty subject.

By the end, listeners are left with a deeper understanding of how comp titles can make—or break—a query, and a set of concrete steps for making their own submissions stand out. The episode exemplifies why the podcast is so popular: genuine expertise, honest critique, and a supportive, fun community for writers on the rise.