For so long on my journey to publication, I would have accepted an offer of representation from anyone. The validation of a literary agent, telling me my book was good enough to go to bat for, mattered more to me than any of the things I now see are non-negotiables in a literary partnership: editorial vision, taste, rapport, tenacity. If I could just get that one yes, then the rest of it—the book deal, the bestseller lists, the movie deals—would all come to be.

It took me nearly a decade, several hundred rejections and three shelved manuscripts to get me to that yes. I now view that winding road as the biggest blessing, because that stamina led me to Courtney Paganelli.

It was a dream come true getting a literary agent, but Courtney has taken me beyond my dreams. I’ve run out of wishes—truly—because of how far she’s taken me. Her mind is captivating—she took an interesting plot in my manuscript and flipped it into a twist I still get giddy about. She’s strategic—she told me she’d sell my book in a month. We had interest in two weeks. She’s bold—she landed me a film and TV agent without me knowing that was a thing I should ask for. She’s calming—I’ve been deep in the deadline trenches as well as the newborn trenches, and her ease has been contagious. She’s fun—she loves reality TV and her sweet pup and Virgos. I could go on, and on.

Almost every good thing that has happened to me over the past year has been because of her.

And she rejected my manuscript not once, but twice before offering representation.

I almost gave up, started another manuscript, forgot these characters and this premise because the rejections were mounting and clearly they were telling me something. Most people would think those rejections were saying it’s time to move onto a new story. Courtney has a different perspective I think all writers should know. That maybe, just maybe, you should revisit that shelved manuscript you’re still thinking about because with some fine tuning and a vision, it just might be the one that makes your dreams come true.

It was for me.

And so, without further ado…Courtney Paganelli everybody.

Mary Maeve: Courtney, I submitted to you three times—first as a query referral through my college professor, second as a “revise and resubmit,” and third, after I’d given up then resurrected the manuscript that will now be my debut novel. Have you gone back and read a part of my first and second submission? Do you remember what specifically wasn’t working about them?

Courtney: This was a fun walk down memory lane! I remember immediately being drawn to the query letter you shared – there’s something about the way you were crafting this relationship that felt so representative of a love story that felt truly real and that in itself was captivating. Back then I wanted to understand more about what it was that brought these two characters together in the first place – why these two people in this one moment that pulled them together in such a consuming way? Why did this person stick with them mentally and emotionally for so long? I am a big “why” girl, so I think for me – the whys were key!

Mary Maeve: Your rejection letter was the most thorough letter I received from agents during my time in the querying trenches. From my perspective, this is proof that you were the right agent for this project. I just needed to get the project up to your standards. What do you include in a rejection letter when you see potential versus when you know it’s never going to be the right fit for you?

Courtney: For me it depends on how long I’m still thinking about the pages after I’ve read them. It’s also a mixture of the writing skill, overall character and plot development, and what my own editorial vision is (if any). I think I provided that level of feedback here because I was so inspired by your book. I remember how close of a call it was for me – but I did feel I had some questions I personally (emphasis on personally because this is so subjective) would like to have seen answered. There was always a chance you didn’t want those questions answered in your book – that you had a different vision for this story – and because it was a large-scale edit, I felt like if I could give you feedback to sit with and contemplate, you could figure out if there was vision alignment, if you felt inspired by it, versus feeling like “absolutely not that’s not in-line with the story I want to write” feeling. That information, I hoped, was really powerful for you to know. It definitely wasn’t a standards issue – you have always been an incredibly strong writer, it was a vision question and if we were in alignment for where this book could go.

Mary Maeve: On our offer call, you mentioned that you wish more writers thought to revisit and improve shelved manuscripts. What do you think separates writers who successfully revise the same story from those who should actually move on to a new one?

Courtney: I truly think that there could be a time and a place for any manuscript that’s “on the shelf.” The market shifts so rapidly in publishing. Taking time to keep the creative muscle working on new ideas is really helpful to create space between the book you’re “on a break with” [insert ross geller gif!] and a new one you are feeling excited and inspired by. When the road takes you back, you’ll read it totally fresh because you’re not constantly reading one thing. And then from there you have the power of options – and your inspiration can drive what you tackle next.

Mary Maeve: What’s the most common mistake you see writers make when they revise after a rejection?

Courtney: I think sometimes people chase the itch to address all the feedback they get right away. Succumbing to the feeling you should open the doc up immediately and input changes right away and flip it back quickly removes an opportunity for digestion and evaluation. The execution of a revision is ultimately in your hands, and you’ll be best equipped if you are really intentional with how you address it, not the speed at which you do so.

Mary Maeve: What mistake did I make in my revisions after the first rejection? (I think I was too emotionally tied to the story to make any worthwhile changes to the plot—but I’m curious your POV).

Courtney: I don’t think you made a mistake, actually! I think that you needed to go on that revision journey the way you did because each version was a step towards being really ready to make those big shifts. That takes time! And time just allows you more space to process, strategize, and feel inspired to figure out what you want this next version to be.

Mary Maeve: When you’re reading a revision, are you looking for whether the writer fixed the specific notes you gave, or whether they understood the deeper problem underneath the notes?

Courtney: Definitely the latter. I do not care if you don’t take my exact feedback and implement it. If you want to, great! But even better if you take a thought I have and feel inspired and have a different idea that addresses a note in your own way.

Mary Maeve: What changed about my manuscript between the ones you rejected and the one you signed? Was there a moment in reading the “final” version where you knew you’d made the right call in passing the first two times?

Courtney: The first two times I really wanted to feel fully immersed in the allure behind the initial attraction because it pulls us through the book. I think each version showed strengthening in that moment but the first to second time a bit less – and then the third it was evident how much you were pushing. Your ability and willingness to go in and make adjustments and really put the work in on the page was inspiring to me. I had seen the growth and appreciated how determined you were.  Each time I read this I loved it more. It was truly your ability to get on the page and do some hard work and to see that change version over version.

I think that’s something else I’d like to note – you put in massive developmental changes. Each version I saw was different – that is so key. You weren’t sending me superficial quick edits, you took the feedback and the time to figure out how to implement it in a really meaningful way. That means a lot not only for evaluating a new version and not feeling like I am reading the same manuscript time over time – but also for predicting what our working relationship could look like long term. If you were able to take feedback at this level and make such amazing changes, I had immense faith in you and trust you’d be ready to get on the page together and really collaborate on notes. That was really meaningful.

Mary Maeve: How rare is it for you to see the same manuscript multiple times before signing?

Courtney: Very!!

Mary Maeve: What would you tell a writer right now who just got a “not quite, but keep going” response from an agent?

Courtney: Truly keep going. It can feel hard – you already did a ton of work to get to this moment but don’t give up. Think about what you want your next steps to be – be intentional, take the feedback that resonates with you, feel inspired by new ideas (whether from the feedback directly – one note sparks your brain to think about 3 different ways to tackle it or brainstorming your ideas with a trusted group of friends). This might not feel like it’s the start, but it is a new beginning, and where you take it from here is ultimately up to you – and you’re the one that got you here so you know you can do it!

Mary Maeve: Regarding my success: do you think my outcome was better because you rejected me so many times before? Or do you think it’s just a product of a changing market?

Courtney: I think this was all you to be honest. You were thoughtful and intentional about edits at every stage – from very first submission to working editorially now. It wasn’t my rejection – it was your time sitting with your book and taking in feedback, internalizing it, figuring out what paths you were willing to walk and what you weren’t, and putting in the time and the work. You weren’t afraid to engage with feedback – to say I hear you but how about this instead. You also knew what you wanted for the book – and what you didn’t. That knowledge is so powerful because you took feedback in a strategic, informed way. I think your outcome was the way it was because of you.

Mary Maeve: What are you hoping to see in your inbox next?

Courtney: I’d love to see submissions that are a bit speculative! I really love books like EXPIRATION DATES and SHARK HEART that take our world and tilt it on its head a bit, and I would love to see more of those. Bonus points if it’s a tear-jerker!