Independent Bookstores’ Decline: The Price of Biblio-elitism

Independent bookstores are a rare and dying breed. They are often small, local bookstores. And one thing they all have in common, it seems, is the belief that superstores, chain bookstores and the internet are the reasons it is difficult to survive.

After all, those discounts are hard to beat when you deal in low volume. Amazon.com doesn’t collect sales tax. That’s a disadvantage, right? And don’t even get them started on the new ebook phenomenon that excludes them from the sales loop.

But, at least for me, the reason I don’t shop at most independent bookstores has nothing whatsoever to do with price. It’s because the majority of independent bookstores ignore genre fiction and its readers. And this, more than anything, has cost them business. BIG business.  Genre fiction readers: mystery, science fiction and romance comprise the largest group of book buyers. They spend more per person, buy more frequently, and are often far more loyal than buyers of other types of books. [This is not to say genre fiction readers are not also literary fiction readers. They can be.]

By contrast, independent bookstores seem to focus almost exclusively on literary fiction and non-fiction. And while literary fiction may be published at a happier price point--most lit fic is published in hardcover or trade paperback format--its readership is only a fraction of mystery, romance or science fiction. It has been argued that without those three genres, literary fiction would not be published because the publishers use the cash from genre sales to finance the publication of literary fiction. Because, quite frankly, there’s not a lot of money in it. In 2008, romance fiction alone generated $1.37 billion in revenue. Literary fiction brought in $446 million. (source: rwanational.org)

I spend quite a lot of money on books. It’s my primary method of entertainment. And I do not read literary fiction. Ever.  I read fantasy, science fiction, romance, mystery, and non-fiction.  [I blame Oprah’s first book club and my dozens of lit classes in college for my lit fic aversion.] So, the question for me is why do independent bookstores have such a love affair with literary fiction? And why do they ignore genre readers when they clearly are the ones who buy  most of the books?

Trade Paperback books: My least favorite format

I admit it. I'm a format snob. I'll buy mass markets without a thought. I'll pay hardcover prices for a book I don't want to wait for. But I rarely, if ever, even LOOK at trade paperbacks.

Why?

Part of it is the price vs. value proposition for me. Trade paperbacks are still paperbacks. They are not made sturdier (in general) than a mass market paperback. They are simply bigger. And are, in some cases, double the cover price of a mass market. There's no additional value for the increased price.

The size is also a factor. Trade paperbacks are uncomfortable for me to hold. Hardcovers can generally be rested on my lap. They stay open easier. (Not to mention that they do not suffer the insta-damage of spine creasing that paperbacks do.) Trade paperbacks must be held open. And I have small hands.

The biggest reason, though, is that I tend to mentally equate trade paperback books with literary fiction. It's most likely a leftover reaction to all of those Oprah books I had to shelve when I worked for B&N, but I don't think of genre fiction when I see a book in trade paperback.

Pseudonyms: Fair to Compare?

It's a common practice to compare a new book by an author to their previous work. But what about when the book in question is written under a pseudonym? Presumably, the new pseudonym is being used to prevent precisely that kind of comparison, but with the "open secret" pseudonyms these days (ie JD Robb/Nora Roberts or Castle/Krentz/Quick) or even the 'writing as' designations on covers, is it fair game to judge a new book written under a new pseudonym by the backlist of another name?

My own feelings on this are mixed. Clearly, if the books are in different genres, then different expectations and conventions exist. But if my concern is with the quality of writing, I think the writer's experience and past success should play a factor in how harshly I critique. Something that bugs me from a newbie author would probably be treated with more leniency than the same thing by a veteran author. I'm not sure if that's fair, but it's how I think. Writing is a learned skill for most. It's not all just sheer untutored talent.

What do you think? Is it okay to judge a new pseudonym's work by the backlist of another name? Does it make a difference if the pseudonym is an open secret? Am I the only one who does this?

In Defense of Genre Fiction

There’s a pervasive feeling of insecurity for me as a genre fiction reader. Despite knowing that I’m in the majority when it comes to my reading choices, I still get flashes of embarrassment when someone asks me what I’m reading. I have to force myself not to be uncomfortable because I like to read romances and mysteries.

As if reading something light-hearted and conversationally written is somehow “bad.”

Why do we have this double standard with books? It’s okay to like popular music. It’s okay to like popcorn movies. Romantic comedy movies are not denigrated or made fun of except by the most snobby film critics. There’s no sneer in the voices of movie goers when they say romantic comedy. Sure, popular movies rarely win an Oscar, but most aren’t treated as garbage, either. I don’t feel silly telling someone how much I enjoyed a murder mystery or romantic comedy that I watched in the theater.

Yet when someone is reading a book, it suddenly becomes an object of ridicule. "Trashy" is probably the most common adjective I hear for romances from non-romance readers.

Authors With an Agenda

I've noticed a trend among certain authors lately that has me more than a little bit irritated. As far as I can tell, it's mainly restricted to well established authors with a high number of dedicated readers. And while this trend isn't new by any stretch of the imagination, it seems to be taking over the romance genre with increasing speed.

I'm talking about author activism.

Now, to be clear, I'm not talking about when an author takes a public stance about a particular social or political issue in their day to day lives. I'm talking about when those beliefs make their way into their stories in book after book with all of the subtelty of a sledgehammer. Where readers are subjected to mini-lectures over and over every time they pick up a book by a particular author.

For me, it's beginning to be a huge turn-off. Even if I, too, believe in the cause. Even if I, too, think these issues could use some publicity. Because I honestly don't think fiction should be used to preach an agenda. Even if that agenda is worthwhile.

Favorite Rereads aka the Comfort Read

With so many books coming out each month, it takes a rare book to get me to sit down and reread it.  My TBR pile is already sky high, but there are a few go-to books that help me out when I'm in the middle of a reading slump or just too tired to read anything new.


A few of my favorites:

The Viscount Who Loved Me by Julia Quinn.
I don't love all Bridgertons equally, I'm afraid. This one is definitely my favorite of the series. It has far more emotional depth than most of the others. Kate and Anthony during the storm scene is permanently etched in my romance drenched brain.

A Secret Love by Stephanie Laurens
While I love most of the early Bar Cynster series, Gabriel and Alathea's story is my favorite. The childhood friends turned lovers trope is my absolute favorite. And the characters here are so well done. Not to mention this one is scorching hot!

Lady in Red by Karen Hawkins
Okay. I admit it. Part of the reason I love this book is that the heroine's name is Honoria Baker-Sneed. But honestly, I love the entire Baker-Sneed family here. This is the last of the Talisman ring series, and while I like the rest of the series also, this one is special.

Single White Vampire by Lynsay Sands
This  dates back to the first few of the Argeneau series. Honestly, I think it's the first romance I read that literally had me laughing so hard I was crying. A vampire romance novelist. And the lampoons directed at the fictional version of the RT convention are equally funny. Clever and light-hearted, this book highlights what is great about this series--even if Sands seems to have drifted away from this type of slapstick humor.

Crocodile on the Sandbank (Amelia Peabody, Book 1) by Elizabeth Peters
I love the entire Amelia Peabody mystery series, but the first book holds a special place in my heart. I love watching Amelia and Emerson fall in love while chasing after perambulating mummies and trying to save priceless Egyptian antiquities. Plus--Amelia has an outrageous vocabulary which is so fun to read.

So, what are your favorite books to reread?

Historical Accuracy in Historical Romance

A recent conversation about historical accuracy in romance fiction caused me to spend some time pondering my reading preferences and expectations.

Some background: I have a history degree. It's only a B.A. (4 years for non-US peeps) and I don't use it for anything remotely useful. But I do have a pretty decent *general* knowledge of most European and American history. I am--in short--a font of useless trivial knowledge and not much else. Some would probably think that having spent 4 years (okay, 4.5) studying history, I would demand absolute historical accuracy in my fiction. But I don't. In fact, most of the authors who spend a lot of time getting the details right are the ones on my do-not-read-under-any-circumstances list.

*Gasp!* Why?