Not every writer was born with a pen in hand, nor did every writer sit in a classroom to study writing theory. Some of us learned by living, by observing, by failing, and by writing messy first drafts that eventually became something worth sharing.
I recently came across a literary agent’s post lamenting how “incompetent” new writers are — how they don’t know how to structure a story or even the difference between a synopsis and a blurb. My response?
Of course they don’t.
That’s exactly why editors exist. If manuscripts were expected to be flawless before ever landing on an agent’s desk, then what is the purpose of an editor? If an author must present a “perfect” book before it is considered worthy of representation, then why should they even bother seeking representation at all? Why not skip the middleman entirely and publish directly through KDP or IngramSpark?
Once upon a time, publishers nurtured authors. If you approached a publisher and submitted your work, they would at least tell you what was missing and why they were rejecting your manuscript. Today, authors are met with either awkward silence or a vague “if you don’t hear back, assume it’s a no.”
That is not nurturing. That is not guiding. That is not building the next generation of storytellers.
If the excuse is that there are “too many submissions,” then congratulations — that means your business is thriving. But if you’re still unwilling to hire enough people to review submissions properly, then what does that say about your priorities? If publishing houses claim to be gatekeepers of literary excellence but won’t invest in talent discovery, they aren’t just failing writers — they are failing readers.
And it’s showing.
The literary industry is in the middle of an identity crisis. Readers are turning to other mediums — podcasts, streaming shows, interactive storytelling — rather than picking up books. Many authors, tired of endless rejections or dead silence, turn to self-publishing. Unfortunately, many of those books are rushed to market and under-edited, making little impact — but can we really blame those writers?
I recently spoke to a traditionally published author with nine titles under his belt. Despite a successful career, even he now struggles to find a publisher. His stories were deemed “not sellable.” Instead of contorting himself to write what a market-focused agent wanted, he chose freedom — writing what he loves and publishing independently, enjoying full creative control.
So here’s my question for every literary agent and publisher who spends more time finding fault than finding talent:
Why should an author submit their work to you at all?
If the process is opaque, the feedback nonexistent, and the bar set at “perfect” before you even look at a manuscript, what do you actually offer that an empowered, self-published author cannot achieve on their own?
Publishing used to be about nurturing writers and elevating great stories. Somewhere along the way, the industry traded mentorship for metrics. If that trend continues, more writers will go their own way — and more readers will follow them.
Maybe it’s time the gatekeepers remembered why those gates existed in the first place.
Leave a comment