# NYT Article about Romance Novels and E-Readers



## chipotle (Jan 1, 2010)

Here's an interesting article from the New York Times about the growth of romance novels as ebooks.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/books/09romance.html?_r=1&hp



> Romance is now the fastest-growing segment of the e-reading market, ahead of general fiction, mystery and science fiction, according to data from Bowker, a research organization for the publishing industry.





> "Romance," said Matthew Shear, the executive vice president and publisher of St. Martin's Press, which releases 40 to 50 romance novels each year, is "becoming as popular in e-books as it is in the print editions."





> When "Maybe This Time," a lighthearted ghost romance by the best-selling author Jennifer Crusie, went on sale in August, it sold as many e-books as hardcover books in its first week, Mr. Shear said, a phenomenon that he began noticing this summer with other romance titles.
> 
> At All Romance, an online retailer that sells only e-books, sales have more than doubled this year, and the most sought-after titles are usually the raciest.





> Barnes & Noble, the nation's largest bookstore chain, is courting romance readers more aggressively than ever. William Lynch, the chief executive, said in an interview that until recently Barnes & Noble was a nonplayer in the huge romance category, but that it now has captured more than 25 percent of the market in romance e-books. Sometime next year, he said, he expects the company's e-book sales in romance to surpass its print sales.


They think romance is more popular now because of e-readers; others don't have to see what you're reading. There's a lot more - B&N is starting a romance readers store for the nook and there are interviews with women from my favorite blogs - Dear Author and SBTB. More than 75 million people read at least one romance novel in 2008 and they estimate that romance readers buy 3 books a month.


----------



## Raffeer (Nov 19, 2008)

Another interesting article from the Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/books/09romance.html?_r=1


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

I was immediately struck upon joining this board by the apparent popularity of romance and fantasy fiction among the members.

It had not occurred to me that romance readers might appreciate reading in obscurity with an ereader. Obvious, of course.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

merging into thread in Book Corner on same article. . . . .


----------



## arshield (Nov 17, 2008)

I think there is just as plausible an explanation that has nothing to do with "the naughty bits".  Romance, and I think westerns and some mystery and sci fi readers, are mostly disposable pulp readers. Not many want large libraries of relatively cheap paperbacks.  Ereaders both take up less space and presumably cost less in the long term.  And since romance and many other fiction readers are often big readers there is not the delay that comes from going to the store.  I think the article might adresses some readers but probably not the majority.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Most romance readers I know have a definite (often large) keeper shelf. I know tons of women though who find the covers embarrassing. I've frankly never heard the disposable argument before since these books are loved, shared, and discussed. In the article, there is a mention of two very popular romance blogs, and I'll put $5 in your paypal account if you go call them disposable at either one.


----------



## Sean Sweeney (Apr 17, 2010)

My girlfriend sent me that story.


----------



## Kenneth Rosenberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Did anyone else already mention this? The NY Times posted an article today about how the romance genre is taking off on Kindles and other e-readers. Apparently those sultry paperback covers can be a little embarrassing on the subway! Anyway, if anyone is interested, here's the article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/books/09romance.html?_r=1&hpw

Kenneth

Update: Oops, I just saw this on the Reader Discussion board posted by someone else already. Sorry to repeat!


----------



## Kenneth Rosenberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Ooops, I just posted a link to this article on another page.  I'll go back and delete mine!


----------



## Vegas_Asian (Nov 2, 2008)

lol The article is so true. Its akward carrying around some books because of the covers. I remember my uncle taking one of my books and teasing me because of the cover (Incubus Dream by Laurell K Hamilton). No more searching the city for a single copy of a book i want that day


----------



## K. A. Jordan (Aug 5, 2010)

This something that has been discussed on the romance boards for over a year now. NYT is behind the "Times."


----------



## chipotle (Jan 1, 2010)

I wonder why the publishers do those covers? It certainly sounds like some readers don't like them - people are embarrassed to read them in public and some parents don't want their kids to see them. I am not embarrassed by them but I can live without them. Half the time the covers don't have anything to do with the actual novel. I guess there must be some readers who do like the covers though.

I do think most romance novels are pretty fast reads and it sounds like most romance readers read a lot. In my case the Kindle is definitely helpful in keeping my bookshelves from taking over the house.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

chipotle said:


> I wonder why the publishers do those covers? It certainly sounds like some readers don't like them - people are embarrassed to read them in public and some parents don't want their kids to see them. I am not embarrassed by them but I can live without them. Half the time the covers don't have anything to do with the actual novel. I guess there must be some readers who do like the covers though.
> 
> I do think most romance novels are pretty fast reads and it sounds like most romance readers read a lot. In my case the Kindle is definitely helpful in keeping my bookshelves from taking over the house.


I remember reading -- might have been here, in a book co-written by one of the women in the article:



that men thought these covers would sell well. This became the case, not because women liked the covers, but because the covers made them easy to find, made them stand out to fans of the genre. One popular solution was a step-back cover -- a more sedate outer cover and a more ooh-la-la "inner" cover. As much as many women hate the covers, pubs don't think it's broke since the covers stand out at the bookstore and they wish other genres sold as briskly.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

merged again. . .so things might seem a little mixed up. . .sorry for any confusion.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> I remember reading -- might have been here, in a book co-written by one of the women in the article that men thought these covers would sell well. This became the case, not because women liked the covers, but because the covers made them easy to find, made them stand out to fans of the genre. One popular solution was a step-back cover -- a more sedate outer cover and a more ooh-la-la "inner" cover. As much as many women hate the covers, pubs don't think it's broke since the covers stand out at the bookstore and they wish other genres sold as briskly.


That's fascinating. I've always wondered about the covers and the titles--one of my favorite essayists Florence King wrote a romance novel back in the 70s and her essay about writing it is hilarious, particularly how she and her editor went back and forth about the title. And I imagine back and forth about the cover art, though she doesn't mention that.


----------



## Lalalaconnectthedots (Dec 5, 2010)

I mentioned in another thread: I don't normally find myself in the romance section, but I've seen stories that I thought sounded decent via a review or someone's suggestion, gone to look at the book and found myself looking at some ripped man with his six-pack staring at me. I've probably been put off hundreds of books because of this.

Likewise, I'll pick up a book that is romance, but appears a bit more grounded because it has a classy cover. 

*shrug*


----------



## chipotle (Jan 1, 2010)

That's interesting about men deciding on the covers for romance novels!

My favorite romance readers blog - Smart B***hes, Trashy Books - regularly does hilarious write ups on the cover art. I believe there was a recent focus on covers that involved guys with mullets.   (The woman pictured in the NYT article was from that blog but they didn't mention it, perhaps because of the name?)

I occasionally miss having the color covers on the Kindle - Lisa Kleypas' Wallflower series had nice covers (no people). Usually though I can live without a cover showing a shirtless long-haired guy with the obligatory six-pack abs looking off in the distance holding some sort of weapon. LOL 

I guess the fact that romance novels are selling so well in ebook form means that the agency model publishers are not going to lower their prices. sigh Lisa Kleypas' new Christmas Eve at Friday Harbor is currently $7.58 for the hardcover and $9.99 for the Kindle version.


----------



## Thalia the Muse (Jan 20, 2010)

If nothing else, the covers are full of endless possibilities for entertainment -- this Web site retitles them to fit the cover art: http://worldoflongmire.com/features/romance_novels/

I especially like this one:


----------



## Pamela (Oct 6, 2010)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/books/09romance.html?_r=1

If you paste the above in your browser you will see a NY Times article about how many people are buying romance ebooks. Kind of interesting.

Pam


----------



## Sean Sweeney (Apr 17, 2010)

Thalia the Muse said:


> If nothing else, the covers are full of endless possibilities for entertainment -- this Web site retitles them to fit the cover art: http://worldoflongmire.com/features/romance_novels/
> 
> I especially like this one:


Should Photoshop in some red or blue stripes on them there socks.


----------



## Author Eyes (Nov 26, 2009)

Pam, thanks for sharing this! Great article.


----------



## Melonhead (Jan 1, 2010)

Aren't most "bodice ripping" covers being replaced with "shiny-naked-hairless-muscled torsos" with or without actual heads? I _think_ I read on the book corner that those are the romance covers that sell the best these days.

I too am inclined to pass the torso covers over unless I know the book is good from reviews, etc. I certainly wouldn't carry one around in public, so Yay Kindle.


----------



## donna callea (Dec 25, 2009)

Thanks for sharing the article.  I think it's too bad romance has had a stigma attached to it.  When you get right down to it, a romance is simply a love story.  And who doesn't love a well-told love story?  I've read romances -- love stories-- that have been better written and more compelling, not to mention satisfying, than novels dubbed "literary fiction."  We should all read what we enjoy.  If ebooks are helping us to do that in public as well as private, I say hooray for the digital revolution.

Donna


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Melonhead said:


> Aren't most "bodice ripping" covers being replaced with "shiny-naked-hairless-muscled torsos" with or without actual heads? I _think_ I read on the book corner that those are the romance covers that sell the best these days.
> 
> I too am inclined to pass the torso covers over unless I know the book is good from reviews, etc. I certainly wouldn't carry one around in public, so Yay Kindle.


There's also the headless or semi-headless women in ornate dresses covers that do pretty well:





One of the more sedate/stepback covers -- the other interesting thing about this one is the hero as Asperger's long before that was a diagnosed condition:


----------



## Iwritelotsofbooks (Nov 17, 2010)

I've noticed a flurry of really niche romance at the supermarket lately.  Other than the obvious vampire stuff, there's been Scottish Highlander stuff, and I think also an Amish series.


----------



## K. A. Jordan (Aug 5, 2010)

Then there were the 'Fabio' covers...never understood those. He ended up ghost-writing several titles. He was so hated by men that I wouldn't buy a book with his face on it EVER. I'm VERY glad that my e-reader has a plain leather cover. I don't want anybody poking fun at me because of what I'm reading. 

I'm not into the 'swooning' covers. I LOVE the parody titles that make fun of the covers. Lord of the Tube Socks!  

And while I like to look at men - ripped pecks and 6-pack abs aren't requirments for my heros. The guys have to be pretty smart to keep up with my Heroines. Lindsey has a habit of rolling her eyes at come-ons and bad pickup lines. 

Come to think of it - the Hero in "Lunch" is pretty beat up. He's covered in burns, has tattoos and is missing his left foot. I guess it's best that he doesn't appear on my cover, sans shirt.  

My romance cover doesn't have any people on it - with or without ripped abs or heads. I have a cover with a pair of hands holding a menu, but I'm the only one who loves it. 

'Bonnet' romances are VERY popular. Highlanders are hot - - Highlanders have been hot for hundreds of years, but thats beside the point.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

lacymarankevinmichael said:


> I've noticed a flurry of really niche romance at the supermarket lately. Other than the obvious vampire stuff, there's been Scottish Highlander stuff, and I think also an Amish series.


Scottish Highlander stuff -- if you mean historical romance set in Scotland and not that sci-fi stuff  -- has been around for a pretty long time. At least the 80s, and everyone -- at least then -- said "ken" (understand) and dinna (did not.) A popular type of romance helped out by Diana Gabaldon's books. The Amish stuff, although I haven't paid it a lot of mind, has also been around for a while.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

K. A. Jordan said:


> Then there were the 'Fabio' covers...never understood those.


I remember in my teens or early twenties being told by a woman at the used book store that anything with Fabio in it sold instantly. Pretty funny. Since then there've been other popular models, like John DeSalvo.

http://www.johndesalvo.com/


----------



## Julie Christensen (Oct 13, 2010)

Like a lot of other posters, it never occured to me how perfect a Kindle would be for a reader embarrassed about romance covers.  If I remember correctly, there's a museum somewhere in the US dedicated to romance cover paintings.  Subject matter aside, many of them are really well-painted pictures!  

Also, I think that romances are a very quick read, so I wasn't surprised to read that readers can go through three books a week.  Another great reason to own a Kindle, esp when so many books are so cheap!  With so many going for 99 cents, it reminds me of downloading songs from iTunes.  Of course, a book lasts a lot longer than a song.


----------



## K. A. Jordan (Aug 5, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> I remember in my teens or early twenties being told by a woman at the used book store that anything with Fabio in it sold instantly. Pretty funny. Since then there've been other popular models, like John DeSalvo.
> 
> http://www.johndesalvo.com/


Holy Hot Abs, Captain Marvel! Fabio never looked that good!


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Abarific!


----------



## CathyQuinn (Dec 9, 2010)

Yes, romance covers can be embarrassing. And sometimes they're not really all that romantic either...


----------



## corkyb (Apr 25, 2009)

K. A. Jordan said:


> Holy Hot Abs, Captain Marvel! Fabio never looked that good!


Ok, you made me look. Pretty hot stuff.


----------



## Pamela (Oct 6, 2010)

I think you're all right about the covers.  Embarrasing to buy.  That's why I just picked a picture of a woman in sillouhette for my one romantic suspense, Midnight Reflections, even in ebook format.  Lots of wonderful books get overlooked because of these covers.


----------



## donna callea (Dec 25, 2009)

I agree with Cathy and Pamela about covers.  I like them to be subtle, and I think it's better when they're not some artist's depiction of the hero and heroine.  It can be annoying when they don't look the way they're described-- or imagined by the reader.


----------



## K. A. Jordan (Aug 5, 2010)

My hero is too beat up to look good on a cover. 

Besides, the book isn't about _him._

Mullets on book covers, how embarrassing!


----------



## DonnaFaz (Dec 5, 2009)

In the 20+ years I've been writing romance, the biggest complaint I have heard from readers has been about 'clinch' covers: half-dressed couples in the throes of desire. However, I attended a conference panel where a publisher admitted that those covers are directed at book buyers (the people at Walmart or Target or wherever who decides which books will grace the store shelves) who are mostly males. I don't know if it's true, but it is an interesting idea.


----------



## DonnaFaz (Dec 5, 2009)

Me, point fingers? Never!


----------



## Alice Y. Yeh (Jul 14, 2010)

modwitch said:


> Are big box book buyers truly men? Looking at the selection, I'd guess it's mostly women buying the books, so it would make sense to have women doing the book buying job, no? I wonder if this is one of those urban myth deals - where everyone points a finger at the mythical man somewhere in the publishing/distribution chain as the reason for the covers, when really, that idea is 20 years out of date?


Running the risk of being crass, I would like to point out that if men are interested in looking at (half)naked women, there are plenty of alternatives out there more visually stimulating and less mentally laborious.

Right.

I always thought that women were the major market for this genre. Also, not every romance is torrid, no? Just look at Austen or Bronte.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Alice Y. Yeh said:


> Running the risk of being crass, I would like to point out that if men are interested in looking at (half)naked women, there are plenty of alternatives out there more visually stimulating and less mentally laborious.
> 
> Right.
> 
> I always thought that women were the major market for this genre. Also, not every romance is torrid, no? Just look at Austen or Bronte.


Women are the major market, but the buyers being discussed this time around are the people who choose what titles will be carried in various chains. Male or female, they would choose what they feel would sell, and common wisdom says that's half-clothed people embracing in the middle of a storm as indicated by the angry color of the sky and their hair blowing in all different directions. Also, there needs to be a horse in the background and a body of water. They collectively, man, woman and horse, don't have the sense to come in out of the rain. What I mean to say is, their passion -- excluding the horse -- is more wild, more untamed, than even the gale force winds.


----------



## Alice Y. Yeh (Jul 14, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> their passion -- excluding the horse -- is more wild, more untamed, than even the gale force winds.


Scenes from _Gone With the Wind_ just raced through my head.

Maybe it's meant to be subliminal? Okay, so some of it's obvious, but the idea is to get the potential reader's mind on a certain track?


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

What I love most about the Cialis commercials is how the man looks at his wife and suddenly the room starts flooding or they're transported to a place with a stream. Not Freudian at all.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

MichelleR said:


> What I love most about the Cialis commercials is how the man looks at his wife and suddenly the room starts flooding or they're transported to a place with a stream. Not Freudian at all.


But what's with the separate bathtubs?


----------



## K. A. Jordan (Aug 5, 2010)

Nothing like a little Freudian slip first thing in the morning.


----------



## Alice Y. Yeh (Jul 14, 2010)

K. A. Jordan said:


> Nothing like a little Freudian slip first thing in the morning.


Is it a Freudian slip if it's intentional?


----------



## mcostas (Nov 22, 2010)

Thalia the Muse said:


> If nothing else, the covers are full of endless possibilities for entertainment -- this Web site retitles them to fit the cover art: http://worldoflongmire.com/features/romance_novels/
> 
> I especially like this one:


OMG!!!! Those are hilarious!!!! I'm emailing this link to my friends!


----------

