Yesterday, I started to answer a very logical question: why, in these days of growing environmental awareness, is the writer expected to send a SASE (thatâ€™s stamped, self-addressed envelope to the rest of the population) in anticipation of a rejected manuscriptâ€™s return?
As a writer, freelance editor, and writing teacher, I hear permutations of this question all the time. â€œI understand why I need to include a SASE for a query,â€ aspiring authors tell me, â€œbut do I really need it for the submission? Itâ€™s not as though Iâ€™m going to be able to reuse the manuscript after itâ€™s passed through the mail twice, anyway. Canâ€™t I just ask them to recycle it instead?â€
In a word, no. In several words, no, no, no, no, no, no, NO!
Yesterday, I explained the history behind the SASE: part of its original purpose was not just to save agencies the cost of postage, but also to render submissions cheaper for the writer. It was also intended to preserve copyright by allowing the author ostensible control about whose grimy paws were on the manuscript when.
Writers tend to forget this in the cyber age, when huge chunks of writing can be transferred from one end of the planet to the other with the simple push of a button (yes, of course I know that the world is not as flat as that image implies. Donâ€™t stop me now; Iâ€™m on a roll), but technically, in order to retain copyright over your own writing, you need to control where and when it is read by others. Writing I post on this blog, for instance, is under my control, since I dictate where people can view it; I could disable RSS feeds, if I wanted. (Oh, the power! The power!) If I sent the same posts out via e-mail, they could end up anywhere, forwarded far beyond my knowledge.
When you send uncopyrighted material off to an agency or publishing house — to a credible one, anyway — you and your readers there are both operating on the tacit assumption that they will not reproduce your work without your permission. You are not, in effect, authorizing them to show it to anyone else until you sign a contract that explicitly grants them the right to do so.
When you send a SASE, you are implicitly asserting your right to control where your work is sent next. It conveys an expectation that if they reject it, they will mail it back to you, rather than forwarding it to the kind of pirate press that is currently cranking out the 8th, 9th, and 10th installments in the Harry Potter series.
As I believe I have mentioned before, this is a tradition-bound industry; it has historically been slow to change. No matter how good the logic against some of its long-held norms, this one did not change at all until there were some very tangible benefits on the agentsâ€™ end to altering it.
For example, the anthrax scare convinced some agencies to accept e-mailed queries and submissions. And the post 9/11 requirement to tote heavy packages to the post office prompted some agencies to start recycling rejected manuscripts, rather than having the lowest intern on the totem pole — the one who aspires to Millicentâ€™s job someday — wheel a paper-loaded dolly up out of the building.
But practice, most agencies still adhere to the old norms. Donâ€™t believe me? Thumb through any of the standard agency guides, and count how many agencies mention that they recycle.
Like so many other aspects of the querying and submission process, at one time, the use of the SASE carried greater benefits to the writer than it does now, but time has hardened courtesies into demands, and habits into traditions. Today, if you do not include a SASE with your submission, you are perceived to be thumbing your nose at the traditions of people you are trying to impress.
As satisfying as that may be, itâ€™s not the best way to convince an agent of your Socratic intellect and lamb-like willingness to take direction.
So while my long-standing affection for writers, trees, and the printed pages both work to produce would LOVE to be able to say dispense with the SASE for the manuscriptâ€™s return in favor of a simple #10 envelope, it would not be in your best interest to fling away the old norms.
The only alternative that I have seen work in practice is to include a line in the cover letter, POLITELY asking the agency to recycle the manuscript if they decide not to offer representation and mentioning the business-sized SASE enclosed for their reply. Do be aware, however, that this strategy sometimes backfires with screeners trained to check first for a manuscript-sized SASE: itâ€™s not unheard-of for the Millicents of the world to toss aside such a manuscript to be tossed aside without reading the cover letter.
As I believe I may have mentioned before, I donâ€™t make the rules; I only comment upon them. Letâ€™s all pray that when Millicent does engage in summary rejection, she flings that precious ream of paper into a recycling bin.
Knowing the likelihood of that happening, I feel as though I should go off and plant a tree now. Keep sending in those great questions, and keep up the good work!