Romance novels used to fit fairly neatly into two categories…contemporary or historical. There was little deviation, so it was simple for a writer to classify herself.
At our local RWA chapter meetings we often introduce ourselves around the table and say what we write. This used to be simple…”I’m Shannon McKelden, and I write contemporary romance.”
Then came the advent of subgenres–which were probably always there, we just didn’t feel the need classify further than contemporary or historical. The idea behind them is simple enough, though: to further break down the genre of Romance so that readers can more easily choose books they will be happy with and avoid the books that don’t interest them. These subgenres are pretty straightforward, too. Inspirational, romantic suspense, paranormal, futuristic, regency, time-travel, romantica, etc.
I changed my intro a little bit to further clarify. “I’m Shannon McKelden, and I write contemporary romantic comedy.”
As tight constraints on the romance genre loosened a bit, some of us drifted to chick lit as a way to explore the ability to write in the first person point of view. That just further muddied the waters.
Chick lit became my “voice of choice.” So, I could say I write chick lit. However, that might cut out a large group of readers who like romance, but not chick lit, which doesn’t have to include a romance, though mine always do. Thus, “I’m Shannon McKelden, and I write romantic chick lit.” That’s better.
Until paranormal romances came into vogue and chick lit (with it’s preconceived notion of being only about drinks and dating in the publishing/fashion industry) fell from favor. Thankfully, by chance, my book has some paranormal elements in it.
Okay, so how about, “I’m Shannon McKelden, and I write paranormal romance.” Except that it’s written in the first person POV from two female points of view (minus the hero’s voice), and that might not really be considered “romance” by the standard definition, so maybe, “I’m Shannon McKelden, and I write paranormal romance with a chick lit flavor.” Whew. Dodged that bullet.
Only there are a lot of readers out there who aren’t into the vampire/werewolf/demon dark paranormal scene, which isn’t at all what I write. So maybe I should further define my subgenre(s). “I’m Shannon McKelden, and I write humorous, romantic, light paranormal with a chick lit flavor.”
By this time, I’m to point of needing cue cards to remember what I write.
The problem is further exacerbated by the fact that even my publisher, who started out buying my book to branch out into the popular chick lit scene, is now nixing that term for the most part. I believe they are calling Venus Envy, “humorous women’s fiction for a younger audience.” (So the fact that my 60-something mother enjoyed it was kind of a fluke?)
The point of all of this is the ridiculousness of labels. Those who haven’t sold in “chick lit,” but who still feel that that is what they write, frequently ask if they should call it something else, like “women’s fiction” or “humorous, romantic, light paranormal with a chick lit flavor.” (Did anyone else’s eyes just glaze over while reading that? If so, what do you think the chances are an agent’s or editor’s eyes would do the same?)
I admit I still struggle with this and tend to describe Venus Envy differently depending on who I’m describing it to. I may leave off the paranormal part for someone I think might balk at “magical stuff.” I might skip the chick lit label for someone who may have been vocal about the “death” of the subgenre and their joy about it. Deceptive? I don’t think so. I believe they call that marketing.
So what do you think of the labels? Are they important or just silly? Do you want all the possible nuances of a book explained to you before you pick it up? If not, how would you then judge what to buy or not to buy? How could publishers market books if they didn’t use labels?
*For information on how you can submit to Open Blog Night, click here.
I belong to the labels are silly group, but then, I’ll read anything and I don’t think it’s necessary for a romance to have a traditional HEA to be called a romance.
What’s the point of getting the nuances explained to you? You’re supposed to read the book and find out for yourself, IMHO. Otherwise just buy the Cliff Notes.
I buy based on blurb and how loud the buzz about the book is. I sometimes buy by publisher, editor or agent, and more rarely, because of the author blurb. Genre/category never ever enters the equation.
I can’t answer the last question. But I believe all libraries should shelved from A to Z, and bookstores should be too.
by May January 7th, 2007 at 7:53 amHa!
by Bernita January 7th, 2007 at 8:38 amI understand - but I don’t have any answers.
I write romantic adventure/suspense w/ time travel/historical elements.
Think I’ll just skip the whole thing and ask “Would you like to read something with time travel, terrorists and temptation?”
:smile:I like being able to run through the aisles and read on the spine of the book if something is a Futuristic, Time Travel, or one of my other favorites. But, I am also learning to hate
labels for the reason we had the discussion on erotica yesterday. I used Rumble on the Bayou as an example. If I had known it was a mystery, I never would have read it and I would have missed out on my favorite book of 2006!:shock::cry: So, what are readers and authors to do?
by Kimber An January 7th, 2007 at 9:30 am[...] In the meantime, she’s got an Open Blog Night post at RTB! miladyinsanity @ 2:33 pm [filed under Blogosphere, My Bloggie [...]
by Milady Insanity January 7th, 2007 at 9:37 amWhenever a “different” book sells well (Think Outlander or Bridget Jones’ Diary), publishers are going to fall all over themselves to offer more of the same, which is why all of our genres have sub- and sub-sub-genres these days. We writers may chafe at all of these labels, but readers are, for the most part, blissfully unaware of the extent of the pigeonholing. The average reader isn’t going to walk into a bookstore and ask for a humorous, romantic, light paranormal with a chick lit flavor. She’s going to look for certain authors or publishers/lines, and she’s going to look at covers and at back-cover copy–just like always.
I was about to suggest that we writers shouldn’t worry too much about this kind of thing, but on second thought, it does make a nice diversion from agonizing over a WIP.
Brenda from
by Brenda Coulter January 7th, 2007 at 10:40 amI definitely hate the labels and realize that it’s not just a problem with books, and has mostly been a problem with movies and TV shows but books have now jumped on the bandwagon.
But it makes no sense for books. Because I am a reader and I can figure out what a book “is” by simply reading the back copy! I never buy a book without at least perusing the back-of-the-book copy, and so I generally disregard labels. I’ve always tested high on reading comprehension tests and if I’m still on the fence about the book after reading the back copy (who writes that stuff, by the way? Sometimes it’s awful and a very bad representation of the writing in the book) then I just read the first few pages.
So, down with labeling! Give me some good back copy and I’m in.
Also: If a book is labeled, and I buy it and read it simply to learn that it is labeled incorrectly, I will be mad. If I liked the book, I’ll be especially mad because now I don’t even know what “label” to check for similar books, and if I didn’t like it, I’m probably just mad. When publishers can’t use their own terminology properly, it worries me.
by Katie W. January 7th, 2007 at 12:37 pm“Hi, I’m Elizabeth, and I write contemporary historical romantic comedy-suspense with a dash of dark paranormal chick-lit fantasy woven in.”
Does that cover all the bases?
by Elizabeth K January 7th, 2007 at 2:33 pmAs a reader, I don’t let labels influence whether or not I buy a book. I’m a book blurb girl. I’ll pick up just about anything and read the back to see if it sounds like a story I’d like. And as a writer I try not to get bogged down in labels. I write romance first and foremost. Sometimes my novels are almost sweetly romantic… sometimes they are full of lots of drama and emotion… and sometimes they are wickedly erotic…
They are always romance novels though… Great post!
by Gwyneth Bolton January 7th, 2007 at 2:39 pmMay: You are one who doesn’t mind a romance not having a HEA, but there are some readers who are horrified to have that “requirement” not be fulfilled. I admit that I am one of those…if I’m reading a “romance” it better have a happy ending!
However this leads to something that Katie W. mentioned…MISlabeling books. How many of you have picked up a book (seems to be a particular problem with the label “paranormal romance”) only to find that it is not a romance in the strictest sense of the word. I can think of at least two books labeled as such, only to find they were more chick lit than romance (which isn’t a problem for me), but that there as NO romance, or very little, and certainly no happy ending. It has to be marketing that causes publishers to pull this little trick.
Brenda: I’m glad you find that readers are unaware of this labeling problem. Sometimes I think there are a lot of things us writers worry about and obsess over that readers never give a second thought to. That should bring us some comfort, at least!
Shannon
by Shannon McKelden January 7th, 2007 at 2:43 pmElizabeth K: LOL! That does just about cover it, doesn’t it??
Gwyneth: As a reader myself, I don’t think I put too much stock in labels, either. Mostly because of the mislabeling part. I can’t wait to hear what other readers (who aren’t writers) have to say.
Shannon
by Shannon McKelden January 7th, 2007 at 2:46 pmSomething that I’ve just thought about: Most of us who say we don’t look at genre, and buy by blurb instead, wouldn’t whoever’s in charge write the blurb to suit the genre that’s going to be pasted on the spine?
I’m not saying that they’ll outright lie, but this is marketing. There’s nothing wrong, at least in absolute terms, with making a book sound more romancy than it actually is.
Shannon, I know that I’m in the majority. Shhh don’t tell anybody, but I agreed to become an RTB columnist to convert people.
by May K January 7th, 2007 at 2:54 pmI think that labels matter, else why do publishers use them? And why label the book as a romance if it is not? Because the author wants the romance reader to buy that book. Over time, the lack of romance in the romance section will lead to declining impulse purchases. I can’t tell you how frustrated and angry I was after reading the three book series by Cameron Dean that was advertised, marketed, and labeled as a paranormal romance. What happened at the end of the three book series was as far from a romance as possible. Think I will be picking up any more of those books in the future? Nope.
It sure is marketing, but it can also be deceptive. It may work now but as more and more non-romances are marketed as romances, the less I will be buying without more and more research or waiting for word of mouth which frankly, takes half the fun out of buying the book and leads to declining sales numbers in that all important first week, two week, two month period.
Labels don’t constrain an author. They constrain where the book is put. So if an author doesn’t like writing romance then don’t, but don’t ask to be put in the romance section. Think sci fi readers wouldn’t be pissed as hell if the Time Traveler’s Wife was slapped with a traditional sci fi cover and put in that section?
by Jane January 7th, 2007 at 2:58 pmHey. My RTB post tomorrow covers exactly this “mislabeling” problem — misleading back blurbs, etc.
Do I have good timing or what?
Karen T.
by Karen Templeton January 7th, 2007 at 3:00 pmKaren T: GREAT timing! I’ll check back tomorrow!
Jane: That’s a great point about mislabeling too often leading to mistrust by readers. So far, the books I can think of that were mislabeled romances that really weren’t in the truest sense of the word, were still enjoyable books for me. But then I’m not a complete stickler about it. I’m great with Chick Lit books (which seem to be most often mislabeled as “romance”), so I’ve been okay with it. But, I can completely see your point. If readers lose trust in those labels, especially romance readers, who have specific expectations, we may end up losing them.
One thing to clarify, though, most of us writers don’t have any control or choice about where our books go. Publishers make those choice, most often with no input from us. VENUS ENVY is being shelved, in most cases, in general fiction. I’d love it to be in romance, because it is romantic, but it is NOT a “romance” by the standard definition of romance, because there is no hero POV and it is narrated by Venus (the fairy godmother) and Rachel (the “Cinderella”). This removes it from “romance” as far as the industry is concerned, which would explain the general fiction shelf placement.
On the other hand, my publisher got me involved in the Publishers Weekly article a couple of months ago called “Looking for a New Love, 10 romance writers make their debut.” Was that mislabeling? Not sure, but I do think my book will be pleasurable to romance readers who are okay with books deviating a little from the standard format. It IS romantic and it does have a HEA. So, hopefully, if labeled romance, I won’t have anyone getting upset about that.
Shannon
by Shannon McKelden January 7th, 2007 at 3:09 pmHmmmmmmmm. As a writer I really don’t care (but then what I write is pretty simple to define, I write historical romance). As a reader, I want to know a little more (like if the book has paranormal elements, or time travel, which aren’t my cuppa). Under no circumstances do I need a 10-word discription of the genre though. LOL!
by Kalen Hughes January 7th, 2007 at 3:12 pmMay K wrote: Most of us who say we don’t look at genre, and buy by blurb instead, wouldn’t whoever’s in charge write the blurb to suit the genre that’s going to be pasted on the spine?
May K,
It depends… For some of the smaller presses the authors have to write their own book cover blurbs. I had to write my own blurb for all of my novels except for my Harlequin Kimani Romance… You never know who wrote the blurb in most cases.
by Gwyneth Bolton January 7th, 2007 at 3:23 pmAs a reader, I like the labels, because it’s easier to tell whether or not I’m going to like something. I’m not crazy on Regency novels, for instance, but if an author says she writes paranormal Regencies, I’ll be all over it.
A few people have said that you can tell what the book is from the back cover copy, but that is not always true. I’ve picked up several books thinking they were paranormal from the back, but they were suspense with a veneer of paranormal that was hardly touched upon.
Me = very annoyed reader
Now, at the point when you have to say something like, “I write contemporary paranormal romantic suspense with a chick lit flavor,” that’s just getting a bit ridiculous.
by Nonny January 7th, 2007 at 4:14 pmI think I’m like most readers in that I tend to look for certain authors or select books on the recommendations of people whose judgment I trust.
I tend to overlook labels because they say more about how the sales department wants to pigeonhole the book’s promotion than they do about the contents. Jacket blurbs are little better; usually written by people who have never read the book working from a verbal description and instructions to market it as “x.”
Maybe — for those concerned about specific types of stories — books should come with little check lists on the back cover. Y’know, a list of all the available tropes of romance with the ones included in the story clearly indicated
“Ooo, this one’s got vampires, Navy SEALS, an insightful gay sidekick, and matchmaking relatives!”
by KeVin Killiany January 7th, 2007 at 7:20 pm“Dark family secrets?”
“Um…nope.”
“Highlanders?”
“Not marked.”
“Put it back.”
I think that the categories can be useful. I’m mainly a paranormal romance fan. I’ll read a contemporary if it’s got a great plotline. I can take a romantic suspense or chick lit on ocassion, but usually it’s nice to know exactly what I’m getting. I think people can get ridiculous with the way they define themselves (like when suddenly your one book is thirty different genres, assuming there are that many), but on the whole the basic subgenre labeling is helpful.
by Zoe Winters January 8th, 2007 at 4:24 amhahaha Kevin, I know you’re being kind of tongue in cheek but I would totally love a checklist on the back. hehe
by Zoe Winters January 8th, 2007 at 4:26 am[...] After reading Paula Garun’s blogpost yesterday about the new Paranormal Romance anthology that Juno Press is putting out (Juno Press is also the house that bought the Gail Dayton book) and Shannon McKelden’s post at Romancing the Blog, I started wondering who it is that wants romance redefined. [...]
by Dear Author.Com | Why Mislabeling Will Hurt New Authors (or The One Where Jane Broke Her IPAQ Hurling a Book Against the Wall) January 9th, 2007 at 5:12 am