Thought you might be interested in reading this post from agent Janet Reid’s blog, Query Shark. She does all writers a great service by commenting on query letters she receives.
Below is a query letter for a thriller novel that she has analyzed. If you feel this was helpful, you should use the link below to read the other query letters she has analyzed. It could improve your skills in this area.
Here it is:
Dear Query Shark:
Most people, when offered a new job, find the decision process fairly straightforward. Since Sandra Lee Johnson’s profession is killing people, her decision process is understandably more complex.
If this is a query for a book about whether to take a job, you’ve set the stakes pretty low, even if the job is assassin.
Approached by her former ex-Army lover, Sandra is given the opportunity to kill terrorists for her country. And not just kill them, but to do so in ways that are so horrific they will dissuade the others from continuing with their radical ways.
Illegal? Perhaps. Effective? Probably. Fun? Hell, yeah!
I’m as much in favor of kick ass, violent thrillers as the next shark, but I’m having a hard time with “fun.” This is one of those things that can work well in a book where you have time to meet the characters and appreciate their dark humor, or coping mechanisms. In a query, this a pretty brutal thing to read.
Sandra has a more immediate concern, however: survival. Someone now knows that she’s an assassin for hire. Her primary objective is to find a way to protect herself.
Is she? I thought she’d been offered the job and was mulling it over (see paragraph one)
The non-governmental organization (NGO) who wants to hire her considers her to be the perfect candidate, largely because she can kill without remorse. Sociopathic tendencies are considered a positive when your job is to inflict terror.
This is set up, and we’re five paragraphs in to the query. Either this goes earlier, or comes out.
The NGO’s leader has told her that, regardless of her decision, her secret is safe. Sandra can’t afford to believe them, as much as she’d like to, even though she considers the job perfect for her.
Someone knows she’s an assassin? that’s what’s at stake?
To protect herself, she sets up a computer file outlining what she knows about the NGO. She then contacts an old friend, US Representative Pamela Calvert. Sandra knows that her former pal, who is just as callous as she is, owes her a favor.
Sandra explains her dilemma in vague and general terms. She then asks for her friend’s help, telling her she’ll send her the file if the NGO exposes her, or through a failsafe release process should they decide to remove their risk by killing her.
Sandra’s congressional friend agrees in principle with the NGO’s goals. She also realizes that exposing the organization could provide her with much-needed positive publicity for her upcoming Senate run. Accordingly, Representative Calvert sets out to find proof of the organization’s existence, uncaring of what such exposure would mean to Sandra. Sandra would love nothing more than to take the torture game back to the terrorists. At the same time, her primary goal of self-protection may have unfortunate consequences.
If Sandra doesn’t play her balancing act perfectly, she may end up destroying both her organization and herself. Then again, as one of Sandra’s new colleagues puts it: how can you have any fun without a little risk?
Sandra couldn’t agree more. Then again, it all depends on how you define the word ‘fun.’ Shock Force is a 92,000 word International thriller. Thank you for your time and consideration.
This is a mess. You’ve got way too much focus on a question that doesn’t matter: will she take the job. The book doesn’t work unless she does take the job, so leave all that stuff out of the query. Remember the Raymond Chandler quotes about kill your darlings. Here’s where you see that in action.
Focus on what matters: Sandra’s ugly job gets her killed unless…what? If she keeps the job a secret what good thing happens? What bad thing also happens? What’s her skin in the game so to speak?