Podcast Summary: "Why Plot and Specificity are a Query Letter's Best Friends"

Podcast Information:

• Title: The Shit No One Tells You About Writing
• Hosts/Authors: Bianca Marais, Carly Waters, and CeCe Lyra
• Episode Title: Why Plot and Specificity are a Query Letter's Best Friends
• Release Date: April 17, 2025

Introduction

In this episode of The Shit No One Tells You About Writing, hosts Bianca Marais, Carly Waters, and CeCe Lyra delve deep into the critical elements that make a query letter stand out in the competitive world of publishing. Centered around Deborah Whittle's query letter for her novel "Linda. Linda," the discussion emphasizes the paramount importance of plot clarity and specificity to capture the attention of literary agents.

Books with Hook: Deborah Whittle's Query Letter

Deborah Whittle's Query Letter: An Overview

Deborah Whittle presents her query letter for "Linda. Linda," an 80,000-word upmarket women's fiction novel set in the 1980s. The story explores the complex relationships between Linda Hammond and two women, Eleanor Stewart and Belle Martin, highlighting themes of patriarchy, betrayal, and personal growth.

CeCe Lira’s Initial Critique [04:26]

CeCe begins by acknowledging the strengths of Deborah’s query letter, particularly praising the “hook sentence” for its potential to engage readers. However, she points out significant areas needing improvement:

• SEO Concerns: Suggests removing forward slashes from the title for better search engine optimization.
• Plot Clarity: Highlights that while the emotional depth is evident, the actual plot lacks specificity. CeCe states, “I really struggle to see the plot... I just wanted something more concrete.”
• Narrative Ambiguity: Notes that the query letter leaves too much to the imagination regarding how Linda interacts with the protagonists, making it difficult to grasp the novel’s central conflict.

Carly Waters’ Critique [07:56]

Carly echoes CeCe’s sentiments, adding her perspectives:

• Title Approval: Agrees with removing forward slashes but defends the creative choice of “Linda. Linda.”
• Comp Selection: Suggests choosing Canadian authors as comparable titles due to the novel’s setting.
• Plot Specificity: Emphasizes the necessity of outlining a clear plot to prevent agents from perceiving the book as lacking substance. Carly remarks, “I really think we need to focus on plot.”

In-Depth Discussion on Plot and Specificity

The Importance of a Clear Plot [15:43]

The hosts collectively stress that a query letter must present a clear and compelling plot. CeCe illustrates the challenge Deborah faces in conveying the novel’s events succinctly while maintaining emotional depth. Carly adds, “Your job is to sell the crap out of this thing. Like, what’s the drama? Where’s the juice?”

Balancing Emotionality and Plot [20:01]

While the emotional and psychological layers of the characters are crucial, the query must balance this with plot-specific details. Carly emphasizes that agents need to understand the stakes and conflicts to assess the book’s marketability effectively.

Notable Quotes:

• CeCe Lira [04:16]: “My writing is really strong. If I had to choose between strong query letter or strong pages, I always prefer strong Pages.”
• Carly Waters [18:03]: “Your job is to sell the crap out of this thing. Like, what’s the drama? Where’s the juice?”

Deborah Whittle’s Responses and Further Questions

Addressing the Critiques [13:40]

Deborah acknowledges the critiques and raises her own concerns:

• Plot Development: Struggles with presenting the plot in a "quiet novel," where major events unfold late in the story.
• Word Count Adjustment: Adjusts her manuscript from an initial length to 70,000 words and questions if this is suitable for upmarket women's fiction.

CeCe’s and Carly’s Responses [14:48]

• Genre Clarification: Carly suggests that the novel might better fit as a historical literary work rather than upmarket women’s fiction, noting, “This is more of a historical literary novel.”
• Word Count Assurance: Both agree that 70,000 words are acceptable, focusing more on how effectively the story is told.

Notable Quotes:

• Deborah Whittle [13:40]: “Is that too short for upmarket women's fiction?”
• Carly Waters [14:48]: “I don't think this is upmarket women's fiction. To me, this is a historical novel and potentially literary.”

Brainstorming Session: Enhancing the Query Letter

Developing a Stronger Plot Outline [26:22]

The conversation transitions into brainstorming ways to enhance the query letter by incorporating a more detailed plot:

• Clear Power Dynamics: Carly suggests framing scenes to highlight shifts in power and introduce disruptions early on.
• Specific Incidents: CeCe proposes including concrete examples of Linda’s manipulative behavior to provide agents with a clearer understanding of the conflict.

Scene Development Example [39:28]

Deborah shares her thoughts on initial scene development, expressing difficulty in making high-stakes scenes without compromising the novel’s quiet nature. Carly offers a structured approach:

1. Set the Scene: Introduce Eleanor’s role and setting.
2. First Disruption: Introduce Linda unexpectedly to create immediate tension.
3. Character Interaction: Showcase Linda’s manipulations in specific actions, such as sabotaging relationships.

Notable Quotes:

• Carly Waters [26:22]: “We need to focus on how are the subtle and not so subtle ways that the women support the patriarchy.”
• CeCe Lira [34:41]: “What is Linda getting out of this? I can't figure it out.”

Detailed Analysis of Opening Pages

Carly and CeCe’s Summaries [26:46]

Both hosts read and summarize the opening pages of Deborah’s manuscript, highlighting differences in their perceptions:

• Carly’s Interpretation: Feels a “Sapphic” subplot based on the interactions between Eleanor and Linda, suggesting a romantic undertone.
• CeCe’s Perspective: Disagrees, emphasizing that intense female friendships do not necessarily equate to romantic relationships.

Deborah’s Reactions and Adjustments [34:57]

Deborah clarifies that any perceived romantic undertones were unintentional and rooted in her focus on portraying complex female relationships. She emphasizes the importance of maintaining the story’s intended direction without letting personal interpretations derail the narrative.

Notable Quotes:

• Carly Waters [26:46]: “These two women are intensely focused on one another. That’s why I thought this was a completely Sapphic, you know, romance plot line.”
• Deborah Whittle [49:38]: “I didn’t get Sapphic vibes at all... It often does sound obsessed and filled with desire, but not in a sexual way.”

Key Takeaways and Conclusion

Balancing Strengths and Weaknesses

The episode underscores the necessity of a well-crafted query letter that succinctly conveys the plot while maintaining emotional resonance. Hosts emphasize that specificity in the plot helps agents quickly grasp the story’s potential, increasing the chances of securing representation.

Actionable Advice:

• Enhance Plot Clarity: Ensure the query letter outlines the main conflict and stakes clearly.
• Be Specific: Provide concrete examples of pivotal events to illustrate the plot.
• Maintain Balance: Blend emotional depth with plot details to present a compelling and comprehensive overview.

Final Thoughts

Bianca Marais wraps up the episode by encouraging writers to continuously refine their query letters, focusing on plot and specificity to make their submissions irresistible to agents. The hosts highlight the importance of vulnerability in the writing process and assure listeners of their unwavering support.

Notable Quotes:

• Carly Waters [52:15]: “What is Linda getting out of all of this attention?”
• Bianca Murray [53:38]: “For more information, head to Biancamurrae.com and go to the Beta Reader Matchup page.”

This episode serves as an invaluable resource for emerging writers, emphasizing that a successful query letter is not just about showcasing writing prowess but also about presenting a clear, engaging, and specific plot that captures the essence of the novel.