More will flock to Lulu after recent ISpark Announcement

I have absolutely no problem with you taking all of your medical concerns to your local florist, plumber or used car salesman.

A writer can be experienced simply by producing a large body of work.

Quite so.

An impressive writer would be one who would write something memorable regardless of quantity. To take one example, think of the yeoman authors in the days of the pulps who would crank out stories and novels literally by the hundreds,

They still do. (But what definition of yeoman are you using?)

all of which may have been entertaining but forgetable.

May not even be entertaining.

They were certainly experienced.

And become published and often sell in the tons.

But an author such as, say, Margaret Mitchell

A journalist. But how many know it was first a book? I have never read it so cannot comment on if it was impressive or not, and the film, which I think I have seen decades ago, is a romance is it not? Not my thing to find impressive or otherwise.

or Harper Lee may write something lasting and meaningful in a very small body of work.

Two novels, which I have never read, and don't recall seeing the film of one of them.

In fact I had to look the two names up. It's 2020 and only old people have possibly ever heard of them, even as films, apart  from a still moderately famous quote. Don't also forget that both their novels cover very American subjects. I am not American.

That's how I would define "experienced" vs "memorable."


I asked you to define Impressive though, but are you saying those two names where not experienced writers? As in, they were not at all good at writing? They both appear to have been very well educated, one appears to have been mentored in it.

On the other hand, Dan Brown is an experienced, and very successful, writer whose work is at the pulp level and eminently disposable.

Never read them, never seen the films. The main gripe against them is they seem to have twisted many timelines. Whereas, 50 Shades is said to have been very poorly written.

This isn't to say, of course, that an experienced writer cannot also be a memorable one. There are certainly many writers with large body of important work. But the only point I wanted to make was that "experienced" and "memorable" are not synonymous.


I don't recall saying they are. I said that a publisher would prefer a story they don't have to spend months editing to make it readable, nevermind to make it make sense. Impressive story or not. But, what you may find memorable, or impressive may be simply what you like. I perhaps read a novel a month, and what I find memorable, you may hate.  And to be honest. I often read some again, because many years have gone by since I first read them and I cannot fully recall what the story was about! Having said that, I do recall what many of Pratchett's books are about, but often read them a few times because they are so good. Do you read him? (He was a journalist, BTW.)

I am not at all sure how a publisher asking for a query letter is "pretty much the same thing" as a publisher "insisting" on a letter of introduction.



Who said insisting or even asking for? Are you being pedantic Ron?



You did, on March 9, when you posted: "Indeed. No doubt that's why they insist on a letter of introduction as the first approach. Or being taken to dinner by an agent."

Ah! Good, you do take notice of what I type! But they do insist on it. (State positively and assertively.)


The former is SOP, the other is almost unheard of.



What is SOP?



Standard Operating Procedure.

Oh, OK, thanks.

You sample, by the way, is a very good way to start off a query letter!



Indeed, it's a letter of introduction. Or nowadays, an email. However, due to almost all publishers now being on line there's no need for 'Cold Calling' them, because they usually state if they are accepting anything new.



No. "Letter of introduction" has a very limited, very specific meaning. It is a letter from someone introducing you to someone else: "noun. a letter given by one person to another, as an introduction to a third party." A query letter, on the other hand, is "a formal letter sent to magazine editors, literary agents and sometimes publishing houses or companies by which a writer proposes an idea." If you meant it as a synonym for "query letter" than you used it improperly.

No I did not. It's hardly still the 18th century. It can also be "hello, let me introduce MYSELF … "


One reason they are very different is that a query letter can be sent by a writer to their own publisher, if they are proposing a new book. For instance, the book I am working on right now is being published by a company that I have done more than twenty books for. I needed no introduction but I did need to send in a query letter describing what I'd hoped to do.

You don't need introducing to them then, do you? Even by introducing yourself. Your query letter was a proposal. 


So now you know the difference.

No, you are just being extremely pedantic.

Anyway, what time is it where you are?