I'm going to risk the wrath of other aspiring authors and just come out with the truth, I like the query process.
Sure, I've done my share of complaining in the past, but if I had to pick out of submitting to a publisher's slushpile or sending a query letter to determine whether the editor wants to see my manuscript in the first place, I think I'd pick query letter every time. Unlike some other authors, I don't have a complex about writing query letters. They seem pretty straight forward to me and I must be doing something right because I've had more hits than misses with my query letters when it comes to getting requests from agents. What I do have a complex about is the synopsis. I totally suck at those. If it wasn't for my CP, I'd never have a workable synopsis. In fifty years, when I'm a best selling author and have penned a hundred-odd books, my CP will still be there, helping me with the synopsis because I will still suck at them.
But back to the query letter. They're just so straightforward. Sure, it can be a challenge to cram a whole plot's worth of story into a couple of paragraphs and make it sound interesting enough that an agent/editor will want to read it, but what's so different to writing a blurb for the back of your novel?
Usually response times for query letters are far quicker than waiting for your manuscript to float to the top of the slushpile and even with some agent's policy of 'no response means no' at least you have a silent answer within a somewhat short time frame. I'm an impatient person. I don't want to wait a year to find out whether or not an editor or agent might be interested in my work. If they want to read a sample, I want to know about it tomorrow.
So today, I appreciate the querying process. I sent a query off to the editor of Kensington's Brava imprint today. Fingers crossed for a request. At least that way, I'll know for sure that the editor had some interest in reading it, instead of sending an unsolicited package off to the slushpile-blackhole like I did with Silhouette.