In the great AAR-splosion lately, Fair wrote a comment regarding the challenge facing romance authors in particular in terms of marketing and building relationships with readers. Because the publishers have let the authors down as far as marketing, she writers, authors are pressured to connect with readers in a far more personal manner than in other genres, often through methods that irk the readers and the authors themselves.
Far from a few television ads a la Patterson with the author holding the book next to a close up of his own head saying ‘Buy my book Cat and Mouse,’ authors are asked to write “letters” to the reader thanking them for reading the book and inviting the reader to closely link the book to the author, and vice versa, by grounding the inspiration for the story in the author’s personal experience. One contributor to the thread placed part of the blame on the internet for allowing such personal interaction between writer and reader, and while others disagree, the advent of writer blogs, websites, and email address availability, coupled with a person whose profession asks that she park herself in front of the computer, means that personal contact can only increase. Anyone remember the days when you wrote letters to your favorite authors in care of their publishing house?
Candy and I go back and forth about whom to hold accountable when we find a book ineffably shitty, whether writing is entirely a service industry, and who is in service to whom (more on that topic at length soon on an SBTB near you), but for the publisher to invite or even demand the personal attachment of the author to the work seems just over the line. And I say that in full acknowledgement that as a reviewer, and I’ve said this before, I am ever mindful that when I bang the drum of “Damn This Sucked” about a book, I am addressing the book’s flaws, and not the author’s.
The entire idea of a symbiotic relationship between author-as-novel and novel-as-author is damn hell creepy, should you ask me, and certainly makes my job as reviewer potentially sticky, not that I give much of a crap. But I’m curious what the Bitchery thinks of this trend.
*blink*
Speaking as both a reader and a writer, I’ve never understood “book as author” and vice versa. It’s a book, an artistic creation. It might be great. It might suck. I’ve read authors who wrote stuff I loved—and stuff I abhored.
If they truly expect authors to “personalise” themselves with their books, to the point that a criticism of the book is a criticism of the author … I think that will just screw over the romance industry six ways from bloody sunday.
I already posted my opinion of this on AAR, FWIW:
I don’t just think this is stupid; I think it’s creepy.
Haven’t we blurred the lines enough between Romance authors and readers? Now, though, Har/Sil wants an overt connection between the author *as a person* and the work of *fiction*? Yikes. As an author, I think this would make me wildly uncomfortable. As a reader, it makes me feel that the publisher has no faith in its literary products as, well, literate, but only as invitations to some weird bonding ritual over a shared romantic adventure. As Fair said, when inappropriate and artificial relationships (i.e. falsely personal) are encouraged between readers and authors, bad things can happen.
I also wanted to point out that it was Fair, not Joan(Too) who wrote the post to which you’re referring. I know it gets ridiculously confusing because we’re all responding to each other and not always clearly marking the differences between posts. We should really do that better because, let’s face it, no one wants to be confused with me right now. 🙂
Ok, sticking my neck out here. I like authors being connected to books. I’m not talking about “to the point that a criticism of the book is a criticism of the author” because I mean REALLY. If you’re going to put your creation out there and not be able to separate criticism of the book and criticism of yourself as a person, well, find a new career.
I enjoy reading books so much more now that when I’m through with the book, I can hop on Ye Olde Internet and find the author’s page, a little bit about her, and maybe what she got out of writing the book.
May I also say that it’s a pretty darn effective marketing tool. Anyone heard of a little duo called Jenny Crusie and Bob Mayer? I bet most of you have, and I bet mostly it’s because of their blog and their MANY MANY booksignings, conference workshops, etc. They put themselves out there and they WANT to be connected to their creation. And you know what? I bet it’s generated them a lot of sales.
I still want to be you if/when I grow up, Robin—not that I have a snowball’s chance in hell, you understand.
How is the internet different from authors’ book tours, newsletters, and book club meetings? [My mum used to attend Foyle’s book luncheons with authors years ago.] I think it’s an old tradition that happens to be in a different format.
I mean those ‘Dear Reader’ letters have been around for so long that I rarely read them. I remember seeing them in children’s books, YA, horror, SF, and other genre novels. And occasionally ‘literary’ novels.
If anything, the internet makes it easier for authors to interact with anyone from their homes, instead of going from one city to another over a period of three weeks or such. Plus not all authors HAVE to do this, so I think some authors do benefit from having the internet available at any time.
Plus it’s cheap, easier on maintaining family home, and some authors can take all their time composing their replies or a ‘Dear Reader’ letter [which is useful for a couple of authors whose minds tend to go blank when asked a question in person].
After reading LFL’s post regarding Adele-gate, I am really starting to think that some of the author/reader interaction is backlash against more vocal readers wit higher expectations for the genre. I’m not in any suggesting that publishers are trying to do this, or even that authors are rallying fans consciously based on a need to lash back, but I really do think that this sub-culture in Romance—the call for higher standards and greater literacy and more respect and better books all the way around—is causing some discomfort within a genre that’s largely been based on lots of gushy fan mail and endless protestations of loyalty among readers to particular authors. And one way to get rid of that discomfort is to silence the unwanted critics.
There is a point in some books in which criticism of the book becomes criticism of an author. That dynamic is displayed in the work of LKH and the criticism of LKH. I do feel the culture of the internet fosters a great sense of false intimacy than do the Dear Reader letters on bookcovers and the tidbits re: about the author. Authors who blog about everyday items encourages reader to greater personal identification. Readers think that authors are real people too. Not the artists that they are, with the corresponding artist’s temperament. (sp?)
There is no question that publishers want a personal connection between authors and readers. I think Suzanne Brockmann is the perfect example of an good author becoming great on the basis of advertising, marketing, and fostering a fan base. Lori Foster and Sherrilyn Kenyon are a couple of other authors who have fostered that personal fan base to their benefit, rising from midlists to bestselling authors.
But for every rabid fangirl, there is also a disinterested reader who feels that her $8.00 was taken from her in the guise of a shoddy work product. The author who cannot let go of that will inevitably have hurt feelings and all the goodbyes in the world won’t make readers stop being critical of an author’s works.
Ooo, I was hoping this topic would come up on SB. I find it fascinating.
I don’t think this is specific to romance writers or writers in general. We are all much “closer” to everyone now. Look at how Hollywood stars go on talk shows to talk about their personal life in relation to the movie they just made. Look how fans think they know these actors. They want to talk about their divorces and children and love life. It IS creepy.
But fostering that sense of closeness as a marketing tool isn’t going to go away. I just got my first book deal and I don’t doubt I’ll start blogging soon. It’s marketing and you can do it or not do it, depending on your comfort level.
There is certainly that pressure, as we’ve discussed before, in the romance genre to make nice-nice even if it sucks-sucks. Hence the creation of this site.
PBW pointed out that writing can attract a solitary type and trotting those sour-pusses out to represent their work is a big mistake in the marketing department.
That’s why I don’t do signings on my own. I spend all day alone and when I get into public I tend to babble (until someone throws a green baize cloth over me).
It is interesting how many of the successful writers—who give the keynotes at conferences—are poised, well-groomed etc [Carly Phillips comes to mind].
I suspect they gained success IN PART because their publishers are willing to put time and money into someone who can wear heels well and is patient even when tired.
Anyone heard of a little duo called Jenny Crusie and Bob Mayer? I bet most of you have, and I bet mostly it’s because of their blog and their MANY MANY booksignings, conference workshops, etc. They put themselves out there and they WANT to be connected to their creation. And you know what? I bet it’s generated them a lot of sales.
I think that there is a qualitative difference between (on the one hand) getting out there – in person and on the web, talking about the book, and even about the writing process, meeting readers and so on and (on the other hand) seeking to “ground the inspiration for the story in the author’s personal experience.”
My personal experience of the upper echelons of English Society in the early 19th Century is somewhat limited. That does not stop me from writing about it, but I would never claim that my writing is (as SB Sarah suggests – and like her, I find the idea creepy – that some publishers might like me to claim) some sort of extension of my psyche.
Apart from anything else, most authors do not have enough personal experience to inspire more than a few books. What happens when they have written those? Are they used up and spat out, or should they be sparing with the dose of experience that they use to inspire each one?
Books, like paintings and sculptures and three-minute pop songs, are cultural creations, not slices of soul sent out into the market place.
I’m not terrified any more because I’m taking de-stupidification action on my books.
I’m shocked that no one thinks a writer would take criticism of her books personally. Now I don’t mean there should be arguments or rants or even explanations for God’s sake. Suck it up, writers, but feel free to cringe!
I know I will take some of it personally, in the same way I take being reviewed on any job personally. “Wow, I had no idea. I will be aware of that next time and do a better job.” I mean, I always want to be doing a SUPERB job and it chafes me if I’m not. But maybe I’m only thinking of those criticisms that I’d recognize as being valid.
Of course, you can’t please everyone, not with something as subjective as a novel, but. . . imagine your work review being conducted in a conference room with all your supervisors, co-workers and customers present. Some people love you, some hate you, and some are just objectively bringing up all your mistakes so you can learn from them. Your books will be reviewed and criticized and you have to expect that and welcome it, but it would also be a painful learning process, I’d think. Especially at first.
Perhaps some people have trouble keeping their self-worth seperate from their professional goals? *shrug* Or maybe they just can’t tell the wheat from the chaff, as far as what should be taken in and what should be discarded. Or maybe I don’t know what “taking it personally” means. *grin*
Before I start, let me just say, I’m not sure I understand what all this is about. The whole writer/reader relationship and all that. It take two people to create a relationship. If you’re a reader, and the writer/reader relationship squicks you, then don’t participate in it, and vice versa. Problem solved.
However, since I just turned in a proposal and have some time to piddle around on the internet, I’ll jump in on a couple of points.
Point A. I am not a big fan of the, “I’m not a bestseller because the publisher did/did not do xyz.” Publishing is a big crap shoot and some people do great with no marketing and some people tank with tons of marketing. What makes people buy books? No one knows, and that’s no secret. Ask any publisher and they’ll shrug and say, “Pfffft.” They do their best with the resources they have, as do we. I have eight books on contract, four already published, and I consider that eight at-bats. If I fail to get a big career off the ground, it will not be the publisher’s fault. Trust me.
Point B. If a book is ineffably shitty, it’s the author’s fault. The buck stops there.
Point C. Sure, every now and again a publisher might ask you to write a little letter for the back of the book, but they’re sure as hell not telling you to get on the internet and puke your personal crap all over your blog, or to run out to all the review sites and defend yourself against attackers. Authors get involved with the readers because they like to, for whatever reason. Some are extroverts and are stuck at home on the computer and like to chat with people who share their interests; most authors started out as readers. Some are insecure and want to scour the internet for people who will tell them how wonderful they are. Some are bored. Some are trying to market themselves. Whatever. Bottom line, authors who argue with readers are wrong. The reader is always right. When someone says, “I didn’t like this book because…” she is right. She didn’t like that book because. However, there were probably a lot of people who did like that book because, and God bless ‘em, each and every one.
Point D. A writer is in service to the readers. See Point C.
Point E. Some reviewers/readers do take cheap, personal shots at the writers. Writers, it doesn’t matter. Shut up and move on. When a reviewer says something nasty or personal, the review has already spoken for itself, and there’s really nothing else to say. If you argue, you are wrong.
All right. I’m out of gas. People can agree or disagree, but this is my take, and it’s served me well.
I like that authors are easily accessible to readers, but I believe there will come a point when it will grow to be too much for both us and them, and then a balance will be established. Not as little as before, but definitely not as much as now.
What really bothers me is when authors, prodded by their fans, start changing things in books that have already been published. Judith McNaught for example, completely altered Whitney My Love and is now adding an epilogue (and some other things) to her latest title because her online fans were displeased with it. I find this disrespectful. What about those that bought an expensive hardcover and will now have to buy the paperback version as well because the book isn’t the same? If you’re going to do something, do it well the first time and stick by it. Is she now going to start changing all her books at the whim of her readers?
Lani’s right. I’m not entirely wrong (re: poised writers=PART OF the formula for a bestseller [confirmed by a relative in marketing]), but I’m not nearly as right as I thought I was.
For instance my point about the bestsellers who get up and talk at the big conventions? They’re the ones who have the poise to carry off talking in front of large groups of people. Self-selecting bunch. Duh.
Kate
My excuse for haunting the board and not working is a sick kid at home.
I’ve always likened the romance author/fan relationship to that of fan and country music star.
Think about how country music tends to treat its fans (and how it is viewed) as opposed to rock n’roll. Rockers are put on a pedestal. We expect them to be bad boys. Smashing instruments on stage; trashing hotel rooms; rehab and so on. Heck, 60some year old rockers need brain surgery after falling out of palm trees.
Country stars are more accessible. There is (or was) a huge annual fan fest in Nashville where the big names would appear. And they don’t just make stage appearances, they mingle with the fans, sign autographs. Winona had a well publicized garage sale. Can’t quite see Mick Jagger doing that.
Whether the romance author’s relationship with her fans is good or not, I think there are pros and cons. But I don’t think it’s total unheard of in the entertainment business.
The world is a much smaller place that it used to be. Apparently the author/writer relationship can be as close or as distant as desired. Some authors appear to update websites/blogs weekly or daily, others annually or semi-annually (Karin Lowachee has been “under construction” since Nov. ‘05).
Personally, I rarely read those “letters”, also don’t read those (already SB’d) “peer quotes” on the cover. Basically, I know what I want to purchase before entering the bookstore, based on 1) name recognition, and 2) respected recommendations (like SB!).
Inquiring minds want to know…the author/publisher relationship. Some authors appear to have more leeway than others? Some authors seem to have exact control over release dates, content/length, titles, and covers. Others appear to have much less control, Suzanne Brockmann recently noted that her release date had been moved again, and she did not yet know the exact title or cover? She only refers to her latest book by her “working title” and did not know what title her publisher had chosen? Are the contracts for authors as varied as they appear?
I have somewhat mixed feelings about this whole topic. I don’t think any of my readers believe I’m a gay pirate, or a Cracker smuggler, or a big, hairy, privateer. They’re able to separate the author from her characters and her writing.
At the same time, I like blogging about some of the cool stuff that goes into my writing, like the time I went caving or how I use inter-library loan for obscure books.
What I never lose sight of, I hope, is that my blog and the comments I post here can be read by anyone, anywhere, and I don’t want to get too personal because the Internet is so public.
dl, I know that Nora Roberts also has had some changes in her releases this year, but in timing and title.
(check here http://www.noraroberts.com/)
[wish I could to pretty links here]
*sigh*
And that should read, “BOTH in timing and title”
*sigh*
De-lurking to say that as an actor, I am certainly in some ways connected with my characters, though they do not represent the complete and entire me to any extent.
As a writer, however… I did the nanowrimo thing this fall, and I don’t know where the story came from. Or some of the more gruesome details. I don’t read horror, so why I should write it is completely beyond me.
In both instances, though, I must say that I understand why audiences/readers think they know the actor/author. It’s such a personalized experience, you can’t help but assume that you recognize the person who gave it to you. To encourage that as a publisher would, on the surface, seem like a good idea. Capitalizing on the connection that alread exists in the reader’s head.
On the other hand, it would ultimately limit the writer. Because you’re forced into a mold that you don’t dare break. To the reader, changing formats, approaches, styles would potentially be a HUGE betrayal.
SandyO’s comments about rock vs country are close to my take on this phenomenon—most genre writers, especially romance & SFF writers, are closely tied to their fanbase in a way that mainstream or literary authors very rarely are.
There are a lot of reasons for that, but a big one is the conventions that many romance and SF&F writers (and some mystery writers) attend. That brings them into contact with the hoi polloi of fandom in a way that Margaret Atwood isn’t, even if she does the occasional reading or signing.
Add the Internet & its slightly deceptive sense of personal contact to that, as others have noted, and you can wind up with rabid fangirlz/boyz who think they know someone deeply through their art.
I am one of those readers who are not particularly interested, personally, in the author beyond their works. I find most interviews and the typical publicizing tools (blogs now, and the like) to be uninteresting and trite unless a) it involves a good interviewer who doesn’t ask the same ol’ questions everyone else is and the author is a good interviewee and b) the author is actually interested in the blogging form as a medium and doesn’t use it solely to sell his/her wares.
I could do without author photos.
There’s even a new “P.S” thing in some literary fiction books (Hilary Mantel’s “Beyond Black” for eg) where it includes interviews, the author’s top ten lists, “A Writer’s Life” and other such gladtrap that are yet another distraction from the book as art, as an entity (and yes I include romances in this labelling).
I am even unfairly scornful of the biographical approach in literary criticism where every little moment of an author’s life must be mapped on to her works and everything analysed through it. It has some merit but it’s so often taken to ridiculous lengths.
So…what was I saying? Yeah, I don’t really wanna know about my favourite author’s personal life. 😛
What a surprise to see my comments on AAR discussed here. This topic is so interesting to me, probably because I work online, get a lot of email, and have to make a big effort every day to be professional and polite when it often means hiding what I really think.
(Robin, have you thought of starting a blog? I wish you would.)
As a reader, I’m of two minds about this.
Sometimes, knowing too much about an author can colour my perception of a novel or series. Case in point, Anne Perry’s past. I was somewhat turned off from her work after having read about the whole thing. (The movie Heavenly Creatures tells the story…) Thankfully, I realized it doesn’t make her any less talented of an author, IMHO, and continue to enjoy her Pitt mysteries.
On the other hand, I was fascinated to learn about Diana Gabaldon’s work in marine biology. This has increased my appreciation of her creative work, for some reason. The same phenomenon occured when I happened to hear an interview with P.D. James. She’s incredibly funny! And when I learned that Charles de Lint lives in the same city I do.
That being said, I don’t normally actively search for information about my favourite authors. I don’t usually read their blogs, nor the letters printed in various books. It just isn’t of any interest to me to read about their lives. However, when I do happen upon some tidbit or other, I can’t help but think about it when I next read their work. I can’t help it. Does this make me shallow and fickle? Quite possibly.
I’m sure I’m not the only one to react this way. At least, I hope not. I do know this consumer behaviour invariably happens with other products. Consumers tend to associate what recording artists, actors and companies, for example, do, their actions (drugs, crazy outbursts, unethical practices, philanthropy, political and social activism, etc.) with their products. And like them better or worse for it. Is it right for us to think this way? I don’t know. I just know that it’s the way things are.
Now, I feel like I’m rambling, so I’ll just stop.
However, when I do happen upon some tidbit or other, I can’t help but think about it when I next read their work.
I’m with you, Melanie. I’d rather not know, because I want to relate to the book/song/movie on my own personal level, i.e., what it means to me. I want it to have a purely fictional context so I can mold it to my own experience.
I remember long ago when Cher’s Hot Young Thang dumped her, and soon after, she came out with a breakup song. I couldn’t hear the song without feeling sorry for her. I hated that song, not just because it sucked, but because it drew me out of the illusion.
I try not to share too much personal info on my blog, but it’s always been due to privacy concerns. Now I have another reason—to avoid Moments of Extreme Geekery like: “That fight scene in Chapter Four, Scene Two, was that your way of getting back at your mom for not paying for piano lessons?”
I actually do not want to know that much about authors. Except that since I’m on the Internet and on romance review sites, I end up knowing way too much about authors. There are some authors, well two, who I will never read again, because of the way they have behaved online. As an example in another arena, but appropriately similar—I think Tom Cruise is an ass; I’m not knocking myself out to see his movies anymore and the same with Jennifer Lopez.
It also makes it really hard for me to review books when I know the author is active online and is listed as a friend on every romance site I go to. It makes me afraid to give them a crappy review because I think I’ll end up getting hate mail from hundreds of romance bloggers.
I do not think the Jenny Crusie and Bob Mayer publicity/blog blitz is the same, though, because they are totally professional and their online writing is often about the process of writing, which is fascinating, and their publicity tours, which is funny, and their relationship, which is also fascinating and funny—it seems like they are doing an extended comedy bit, the story of their partnership, rather than selling their authentic selves.
(Robin, have you thought of starting a blog? I wish you would.)
You mean so I’ll stop dirtying up everyone else’s parlor?
There are so many blogs out there now I can’t imagine I would have anything unique or compelling to add to the mix. Besides, a blog so quickly becomes an obligation that a person like me—who finds routine uncomfortably confining—would probably not do very well with that kind of responsibility. Thanks for the comment—which I’ll take as a compliment—though.
I enjoy reading your comments and would enjoy reading your blog, if you had one. So yes, it was a compliment.
I don’t like knowing much about authors either. I know some because I belong to writer’s groups and that’s fine, but I don’t want to know all about authors I read and haven’t met. They are often so disappointing, which is a terribley unfair judgement of mine because they are just people getting by with all the faults and failure we all have. So I’d rather have a fantasy of what I think they could be like and not have it blown away.
This has been a very, very good topic for me, so thank you. I blog every day and consider it a responsibility, and think about it and work at it and sometimes edit the thing 4-5 times.
I try and talk about writing and publishing, but sometimes I talk about me, and I’ve wondered about that. I will talk about me less.
As for my website, I have a creativity page, and will continue to do that, because, oddly enough, I feel it is payback for people who helped me.
NOW I think, though, that the most important element of the site is the Worlds page, where I put story stuff up—cut scenes, maps, settings…which might give readers a little bit more—more about the stories and not me.
Thanks,
Robin