Request of Query Review

[ajhoward]

Hi there MF,   

I agree with the statement that prototype is too vague. If the prototype is for stuff toys that are stain resistant, it doesn't sound (to me) like something worthy of one's life. Whereas, if it is for a new type of war tank, resistant to bombs, and in demand by the U.S. military, the stakes become higher. It's big money and big contracts.

If he fails, Max stands to lose not just the prototype but his life.

The above was also suggested and I think its contrast is a good hook. The prototype needs to be powerful to compare to loosing one's life.

I was told that there is a limited, third person voice and an omniscient third person voice. In the limited, third person voice, the protagonist cannot know the thoughts of others without being told. The omniscient third person voice, is sort of like a being overseeing what is said and thought by the characters. It's an "all knowing" viewer of the characters and actions. I  hope this is explained well enough.

Your query is great. Keep on going. You work deserves a karma point. 

Good luck, 

AnneJ

[MF]

Thanks AnneJ,

I think you may have missed the last version on the bottom of page three in the thread. This version explains the prototype is a newly developed computer component. However, the killer only wants it because the prototype links him to an earlier murder. I left that out of the query because there are to many details to explain without the query becoming too complex. Here's the latest version.

Thanks,
MF


Max Fried, a retired computer forensic examiner, is living his island fantasy. Well, at least until a smooth-talking lawyer persuades him to find data needed to settle an estate. Max takes the job, thinking it will be a snooze. Instead, he discovers someone murdered the deceased and the killer wanted the prototype of a newly developed computer component.
 
Unfortunately, the prototype is still missing and the killer thinks Max has it.

When police find the dead man’s partner murdered as well, Max becomes the last person alive who knows the killer’s secret. If Max can find the prototype and catch the killer, he can return to his barstool on the beach. If not, he’ll be victim number three.

A DEADLY OCEAN SALE is my completed 62,000-word mystery. Like Max, I worked in computer forensics and have a Florida private investigator's license.

[ajhoward]

 

Hi there,

Yes, as hard as I tried, I missed a version. I see where you added the prototype. Excellent!!

Yes, this is a very good query. Your voice is so much better as you have added more touches.

Good luck, AnneJ.

[tm9410]

Nice job Mf! Now that you're an expert on queries you'll have to start helping the rest of us!!

Tamara

[MF]

I had a lot of help. You guys are the experts.

[Jole]

Hey MF, I realize I'm coming into the game rather late, and no, I didn't read all 49 posts. (Good job though, way to entertain the ladies.) But these fresh eyes just had to point something out: when I read your most recent query, my impression was that this isn't so much a suspenseful murder-mystery/man-on-the-run, so much as a quirky....something. Like part of me wanted to picture John Grisham's The Firm, but the voice sounded almost lighthearted. To be specific, it was the phrasing of the 2nd sentence, the use of the word "snooze", as well as "...return to his barstool on the beach". I guess it contradicts the effects of "killer" and "murder". My emotions were a little confused, truth be told. (Am I supposed to be in suspense, or amused?)

Now if this tone was your intent, please - ignore me. I guess the real question is, what authors would you compare yourself to? How would you describe the genre? Do you think you've set the tone for that style of novel? You obviously know better than any of us. This is just one reader's opinion.

Good luck to you, mate!

[MF]

Jole,

You're very astute. Part of my problem is that the story is about a laid back relaxed guy with a wry sense of humor that gets sucked into solving a murder. The ms isn't hilarious. It's not outlandish like the Stephanie Plum series or Carl Hiiassen's stuf, but it is humorous. It's supposed to funny and quirky.

The problem lies in the fact that the humor is not in the storyline but instead lies in Max's reactions and observations as he solves the case.

Since queries seem to focus on "what happens" instead of what the characters think about what happened, I had a tough time conveying this. I think that I may have stumbled on the answer by first writing a query that detailed the plot and then infusing it with Max's voice. I hope that this works. What do you think?


MF

[tm9410]

MF,

I haven't read your book, but based on my own impressions, if you're looking for comparable authors, how about Carl Hiaasen? His mysteries always have an offbeat, kooky kind of quality, 

Tamara

[MF]

I've read all of Hiiassen's stuff but I still can't remember how to spell his name. My story isn't as outlandish as his are. My characters are more or less normal people. It's just that Max has an offbeat way of seeing things that is sometimes humorous.

So far, I sent ten queries out last night and got one reply - a rejection.

[Jole]

I think Max's voice does come shining through, whether that's a good thing or not is subjective. In fact, I'm starting to think this whole query process is more luck-of-the-draw than a science, or an art, because everyone's opinions is different! For every "fact" out there, there's another one to prove the opposite. But here I am on my soap box again, stating the obvious, again....

Good on ya for sending out queries! Either way it turns out, I hope you get some good feedback.

So this opinion may or may not be of value to you, based upon what you hear from those agencies, but this is what I was thinking. Because you only have 4-5 sentences to convey your story, IMO (I stress) choose an emotion and run with it, either humor or suspense. We as audiences like to keep things relatively simple, I guess that's why there are genres. Of course any genre can have any sorta edge, I'm not arguing that. I'm just sayin' with only such a short time to capture the agent's attention, I'd say chose one emotion and make that super-duper strong. Better to have one really strong emotion, than 2 that are sorta, for lack of a better word, half-assing it. (Can I say that on here?)

But you know what, you're totally gonna sell your book to one of those agents you've already solicited, and I'll just be that writer who gave you some shit advice.

Keep up the good fight!

[MF]

More likely, you'll be the one that I should have listened to. Thanks for adding your opinion. You're probably right about picking one horse to ride. I may have an underlying problem in that I wrote something that has humor and suspense but it's not funny enough to be hilarious or sufficiently suspenseful to have readers on the edge of their seats.

Thanks,
MF

[violet]

MF-

Believe it or not, I think you're on the right course. There's voice to your query. I think right now, the query is confusing.

Max Fried, a retired computer forensic examiner, is living his island fantasy. Well, at least until a smooth-talking lawyer persuades him to find data needed to settle an estate. Max takes the job, thinking it will be a snooze. So far so good-good voice!   Instead, he discovers someone murdered the deceased and the killer wanted the prototype of a newly developed computer component.
 
Unfortunately, the prototype is still missing and the killer thinks Max has it, but he doesn't.

When police find the dead man’s partner is murdered as well, Max becomes the last person alive who knows the killer’s secret. Ah! Here's where things go off track...from the beginning it sounds like the killer THINKS Max has the prototype. Here it sounds like he DOES -- because he knows the secret.  If Max can find the prototype Now it's clear he doesn't have it...see?   and catch the killer, he can return to his barstool on the beach. If not, he’ll be victim number three.

I think you need to clarify a tad about how Max knows what the killer is looking for...and why he thinks Max might have it. I think you're getting close...hang in there!

[violet]

I think this works too. From this query, it sounds as though the murderer is trying to cover his tracks re: an old murder. Your prior query had to do with a prototype. So...which is it?  The only other thing is that this sort of sounds like you're giving the ending away--the killer is covering his tracks, killing those from a prior murder.

The voice is GREAT!

Max Fried, a retired computer forensic examiner, is living his island fantasy. Well, at least until a smooth-talking lawyer persuades him to find information needed to settle an estate of a salesman.

Max takes the job, thinking it will be a snooze. Instead, he finds someone murdered the sailing salesman with an overdose of seasickness medication. Then, he discovers that the killer is trying to eliminate people that can tie him to a 24 year-old murder.

The next victim, a compulsive snacker, survives an attempted "Death by Doodles" when his cheese snack is compromised comma only to sucumb to death later when the killer force-feeds him peanuts. This is all very funny.

Now Max is the last person alive who knows the killer’s secret. If Max can trap him, he can return to his barstool on the beach. If not, he’ll be victim number four.

[MF]

Both queries are accurate. The killer was blackmailed by the sailor into stealing the prototype. When the blackmail continued after the theft, the killer decided to kill the sailor and to return the prototype before anyone noticed it was missing. However , the killer is unable to find the prototype and starts hunting for it. While he's looking for it, he realizes that the sailors business partner and Max both know of his past.

So ,which approach do you prefer?

This one…


Max Fried, a retired computer forensic examiner, is living his island fantasy. Well, at least until a smooth-talking lawyer persuades him to find information needed to settle a dead salesman’s estate.

Max takes the job, thinking it will be a snooze. Instead, he finds someone murdered the sailing salesman with an overdose of seasickness medication. Then, he discovers that the killer is trying to eliminate people that can tie him to a 24 year-old murder.

The next victim, a compulsive snacker, survives an attempted "Death by Doodles" when his cheese snack is compromised, only to succumb to death later when the killer force-feeds him peanuts.

Now Max is the last person alive who knows the killer’s secret. If Max can trap the killer, he can return to his barstool on the beach. If not, he’ll be victim number four.

Or this one?


Max Fried, a retired computer forensic examiner, is living his island fantasy. Well, at least until a smooth-talking lawyer persuades him to find data needed to settle an estate. Max takes the job, thinking it will be a snooze. Instead, he discovers someone murdered the deceased for the prototype of a newly developed computer component.

Unfortunately, the prototype is still missing and the killer thinks Max has it.

When police find the dead man’s partner business murdered as well, Max becomes the last person alive who knows the killer’s secret. If Max can find the prototype and catch the killer, he can return to his barstool on the beach. If not, he’ll be victim number three.

Thanks,
MF

[violet]

They both work--but if you use the first, I'm getting from the voice that the ms has a funny, kitschy feel to it. Does it? You likened it to another book / series which unfortunately, I'm not familiar with.


When police find the dead man’s partner business partner.

I'm afraid others should weigh in...I'm not sure I'm much help at this point!