I’ve listened to agents, editors, authors at writer’s conferences. It’s business. You’re right. Agents want a book they can sell. And they make up their minds after a 15 second look at the query letter. Most go in the slush pile.

One author’s workshop was heartening. She had a 100+ manuscript of a “mainstream literary novel.” The “gatekeeper” agents weren’t interested. It sat dormant for years.

But she did not give up on her baby.

Using an excel spreadsheet, she took 3 weeks to input every scene in the novel, analyzing what was happening, what changed, and how. From that, she cut down her novel by 40%. An agent snapped up her manuscript and sold it as a fast paced thriller.

The fact that you position yourself to say ‘no’ is exactly what makes you a gatekeeper (whether you enjoy saying it or not is irrelevant).

An agent’s customers are indeed publishers, but technically their clients are writers. This represents a house divided. I won’t say anything against agents’ work per se, particularly in our market when the restrictions seem to be drawn tighter and tighter every year. But no man can serve two masters, and while agents are trying to please the publisher, who is left out of that endeavor? The readers, definitely. The authors, I think yes, for the most part.

And IMO saying “not a gatekeeper” is like my saying I am not fat and over sixty. That’s just labeling, and serves no purpose whatsoever.

First of all, remember that the role of a gatekeeper is not to keep everyone out (that would be the job of the wall, not the gate) but to control access and be selective in whom to admit. That is exactly what you describe for yourself (and for editors and librarians and women’s wear buyers) so, yes, the term is appropriate.

What you’re describing in your post is your focus. You are looking for the next author to say ‘yes’ to and that is what matters to you. But the flip side of the same coin is saying ‘no’ to a lot of authors along the way. That may not be your focus but it’s an inherent part of the process, like it or not. And that responsibility for selection is the very definition of gatekeeper.

There is nothing inherently bad about being a gatekeeper, but I guess it’s got a bad rap in the industry (a) because such a huge proportion of people knocking on the gate are refused entry, and (b) because the selection process is really not about quality. There is a heartbreaking amount of good writing that will never see the light of day, and a load of garbage published just because of the author’s name. You said it yourself in the post, publishers are looking for things they can sell.

You, personally, may never take on a project that you don’t absolutely believe in, but I wonder how often you’ve had to say, ‘This is brilliant … but I can’t sell it’?

Responsibility makes sense. You have to be responsible to yourself, your agency, your clients, and to the publishers.

I think one of the basic ideas behind the whole “gatekeepers” issue is that it has been more difficult for authors to gain public attention compared to other art forms. Musicians and singers can perform on the streets, painters, photographers, craftsmen, and even sculptors can display their work in a way you can’t help but see, and actors and poets can get your attention with short works, but an author can’t as easily thrust his or her work on the populace in order to gain public support.

Authors have traditionally been more dependent on “the system” to “be discover” and reach their audience so they are more at the mercy of the “gatekeepers” and therefore more paranoid and jaded.

On the flip side though, I believe more people trust a literary agent over a talent agent.

Yep, I’m not submitting for another six months, so I haven’t faced this yet. But I’ve been working on the planning side, platforms, and education for 2 years. There are so many books and resources online about what agents are looking for, to me it is terrible for people to get bitter with all the resources to make them get better so they get an agent and a contract.

Yes, I definitely sense some bitterness in a lot of the arguments hurled toward agents and traditional publishing.