I think I assumed that whomever would submit would know the basics about querying but I could change the prefatory paragraph to this:

“Readers, though, the way that I look at it is this: Would the hook itself interest you in reading the book. If yes, what interests you and if not, what would you change to make it more appealing?”

I think this would do it, Jane.

(By the way, a book that helped me when I was on the query-go-round was YOUR NOVEL PROPOSAL: FROM CREATION TO CONTRACT, by Blythe Camenson and Marshall Cook. That helped me really get the purpose of a query, as well as the evil synopsis from hell. I highly recommend this book.)

“I’m seeking representation for Canned Heat, a 97,000-word mainstream novel.”

Then cut to paragraph four, IMO. But then, I’m a query minimalist.

Bryce takes Giselle on an odyssey of sexual discovery

I like that bit.

The actual two paragraphs that describe the characters actually sound decent…but they are all filler. Giselle is a linchpin…why? Giselle meets a guy that forces her to make a choice…how?

Hamlet finds out his uncle killed his father–the same uncle who just married Hamlet’s mother Gertrude and stole Hamlet’s crown. Hamlet’s dead father visits him as a ghost, telling him to avenge his death. His uncle does try to have him killed, but none of this seems to fit in with this:

Giselle Cox is a linchpin in the fight to regain her family's inheritance. She's survived two attempts on her life and is on constant alert for another, determined to see that justice is served. All she really wants is an ordinary life with an extraordinary man who exists only in her memory and in the pages of a book. Torn between her strict religious upbringing and her increasingly demanding sexual appetites, she walks a tightrope between the sacred and the profane-’then she meets a man who forces her to make a choice.

The writing is more back of book than query. I think everyone above has pretty much dissected it, but I do think the Hamlet ref is unnecessary as it doesn’t even fit.

Jessica

The “chewy” and “chock full” sound way too much like 70s marketing-speak.

“Torn between her strict religious upbringing and her increasingly demanding sexual appetites, she walks a tightrope between the sacred and the profane[...]“
This, along with “Glock”, make an immediate connection to Anita Blake in my brain. No comment on whether that’s good or bad.

As a young man intent on following what he believed was God's will, he lived for years in denial of and paying penance for his savage desires
“God’s will”, “years in denial”, “paying penance for his savage desires”… gay Priest?

I’m not sure what this book is supposed to be. Romance? Erotica? Horror? Suspense? Inspirational?

I did like the last paragraph, though.

I realize you have limited space to explain things in query letters, but right now I don’t have a sense of why any of these things are happening, and so I don’t feel compelled to find out more.

Inspirational Erotica?

That might grab someone but instead of alluding to it I would say it.
How does it retell Hamlet?

The Glock, Chock, Cox thing… I don’t know.

- chewy??? chock full??? Very distracting, confusing, and amateurish.

- A list following a colon shouldn’t start on a new line.

- What, sex isn't spiritual? feels a little condescending. As a reader I would’ve moved onto the next book.

- Third paragraph reads like an ad for readers and not something to be included in a query to an agent or editor.

- No mention of genre (mainstream isn’t enough), despite the last two paragraphs alluding to either erotica or erotic romance (actually, if it’s a retelling of Hamlet, it can’t be romance because there’s no HEA). However, for some strange reason, I keep thinking the story is a sci-fi or futuristic.

- Don’t see a connection to Hamlet beyond “retells Hamlet.”

- savage desires Shades of Cassie Edwards!

- All the mention of religion makes me think this book might be an inspirational, but there seems to be erotic aspects. Does the book have multiple-genre disorder? Or do you feel “mainstream” is generic enough to cover everything?

Overall, very disjointed and I would pass. (But religion playing a title role in a book usually turns me off, so other people will probably feel differently.)

Also, the 12-year-old inside me snickers endlessly at the idea of a romance novel heroine with the last name Cox. Just sayin’.

On the brighter side, your desciption of the characters is intriguing. I like the sacred vs. profane aspect. Interesting.

Readers, though, the way that I look at it is this: Would the hook itself interest you in reading the book. If yes, what interests you and if not, what would you change to make it more appealing?

I would also want to know if this was a trilogy with a cliff hanger ending in each book, which might work with a back to back release, or a trilogy with a satisfying conclusion at the end of each book which could come out with longer spaces between each volume.

I second the suggestion that the intro for Query Saturday should be altered to make it clear that this is a query letter for an editor or publisher, not a blurb for the book. They are completely different animals, and the author doesn’t write the blurb for the book (unless they’re self-publishing), so there’s little point to an author practising how to write a blurb.

This letter doesn’t describe a plot, merely a premise, and it doesn’t state how this book ends. And as a general rule, adjectives that describe how great the book is should be avoided. Another general rule to keep in mind is that the query should be only one page long, which means you have two paragraphs to describe the main characters, the plot and the resolution.

The most off-putting aspect, for me, would be the religious references – “Torn between her strict religious upbringing and her increasingly demanding sexual appetites” and “As a young man intent on following what he believed was God's will, he lived for years in denial of and paying penance for his savage desires”. It just reads as if their faith is only in the book to provide conflict, and perhaps a bit of angst.
If the author really tackles whether you would forfeit salvation for love, I’d be interested, but I don’t get that impression.
If the religious aspect is a plot device might be an idea to dwell on it less, and talk more about the overall plot – like why the family inheritance matters – and, on the other hand, if the book takes religion seriously, it might be worth signalling that in some way.

Apart from that, the idea of Hamlet retold in three parts – I’m just the wrong sort of reader. Wouldn’t want to buy the first if I thought I’d be required to buy two more for the story to be resolved, wouldn’t really want to read three books knowing everybody is going to die.