While we’re on the subject of the Harlequin/Silhouette titles, most specifically the Presents line, take a look at this: The Romantic Novelists’ Association has announced the shortlist for the Romance Prize for 2008. The finalists are:
- Lucy Gordon’s The Mediterranean Rebel’s Bride
- Liz Fielding’s The Secret Life Of Lady Gabriella
- Fiona Harper’s Her Parenthood Assignment
and English Lord, Ordinary Lady
- Kate Hardy’s Breakfast at Giovanni’s, which I had trouble finding in Amazon.com (that link is to Amazon.co.uk).
- Julie Cohen’s Driving Him Wild
Now here is where I get confused: Julie Cohen’s book is about to be released in the US, but under a different title: instead of Driving Him Wild, we American folks will have to look for His For The Taking
What the shitting crap is that all about? I’ve long refrained from reading too much into the category titles because it might make my head spin around on my neck, but take a look at that: “Driving Him Wild?” Female in control. “His for the Taking?” Lie there and take it! What kind of passive female crap is that?! American audiences prefer a male-dominant title? That’s pretty much the only conclusion I can draw from the decision to change the title, unless one of the new marketing hook words is “Taking.”
I’d like to be Taking this opportunity to ask: what the hell is up with the titles, yo? Seriously? Not just that one – all of them!
The decision to change Cohen’s title makes little sense to me. As a rule I think American audiences are sophisticated enough to appreciate cultural differences. I don’t think Harry Potter needed to be Americanized because we Yankees are too dim and navel gazingly xenophobic to appreciate the differences between a philosopher’s stone and a sorcerer’s stone, let alone what “troll boogies” are. Bend it Like Beckham was nearly released in the US as “Move it like Mia” and that was just ridiculous. I’m sure Beckham himself appreciated the slight boost in his American credibility anyway, seeing as he and Posh are all over the US right now. (Aside: a note to Victoria Beckham – we Americans are on the whole a happy, boisterous lot. It would probably help you a bit if you smiled, you know, every now and again.)
But I can’t place the change from “Driving Him Wild” to “His for the Taking” on cultural differences, unless there’s a huge community of Dominatrixes that buy Mills & Boon in the UK, whereas female subs comprise more of the Harlequin buying audience in the US.
Cohen’s title change really befuddles me, about as much as the whole titles question for the Presents line does as well: I ask again, what the hell is UP with the TITLES?
I realize the simple answer is that it’s all about marketing, but I am long past the “yeah yeah it sells yadda yadda” argument. I want to know WHY these titles with hookwords like “billionaire,” “tycoon,” “cowboy,” “boardroom,” “viking,” “Roman,” and, for crap’s sake, “Mistress,” sell, even if there’s a vocal group of readers, including myself, who find them insulting, demeaning or at the very least irritating.
Kimberly Van Meter left a comment in the entry about our RN.tv discussion about categories that read: “Don’t let the titles scare you. We don’t have any control over that stuff.” I am well aware that authors don’t have much control over titles, much less cover art, so believe me, I know it’s not up to the authors.
Kate Hewitt commented in that same thread, “Authors have *nothing* to do with the titles, and I don’t know a single author who likes them. That’s just marketing. They also come way after the book has been plotted, written, and accepted for publication.”
So who is it that likes them? Or is the question really how consumers of the categories thus titled use those titles in their buying decisions? Do consumers of the categories look past the titles because they know not to pay attention in the first place, or do they perhaps use the keyworded titles as indication for a specific type of story? Thus the “Tycoon” title is one word shorthand for a specific type of romance, where as “mediterranean” is shorthand for another?
From my perspective, I don’t see how it isn’t counterintuitive to closely word all the titles in the first place. Wouldn’t it be self-defeating if someone’s looking for a book they heard was good and they conflate (2 pts!) the title words and go home with a horrible “Billionaire Sheikh’s Mistress” when they were looking for the excellently written “Mistress of the Billionaire Sheikh?”
It’s almost like a secret society – the readers who love categories know to look past the titles. But that’s not much of an allure to someone like me who looks at the covers and the titles and says “What the crap are the publishers thinking?!”
Bottom line? eBooks from Harlequin rock my world because I really want to read category, and some of the category romances I’ve read have been exceptionally skilled pieces of writing, but let’s me be blunt: being seen with an Asus or a Bookeen is a LOT more reassuring to my pride and my professional identity than being seen with “The Billionaire CEO’s Virgin Boardroom Mistress.”
I’m not saying that because I give a shit what people think of my reading material (I so do not) but because I think titles like that in the wrong circumstance could get the reader into some hot water.
So, what is with the titles? Do you buy them? Do you like them? Honestly, please speak up. I’m not looking to pound on you for your taste – if anything, we here at Smart Bitches are enthusiastic defenders of your right to enjoy whatever you want even if other folks think it’s in poor taste. If some of the authors don’t like the titles, and I and other consumers don’t like them either, who are the people that do, and why do you like them?
I am a naive Romance virgin (billionaire cowboy virgin?), who is just now plucking up the courage to be seen in the pink-und-ivory aisles of the bookstore – and I have to say, the categories fucking scare me. There is no way I’m going to pick up the Sheik’s Secret Virgin Boardroom Table and take it to the cash at the bookstore I frequent – at least, not without hiding it under “The Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire” so I can hold my head up.
This is a character weakness, I know. I shouldn’t care.
What I do: call my S.O. and read the titles out loud to him over the phone. Then we laugh, shake our heads, and wonder what the hell are the marketing departments thinking.
These days I only buy category romances when more than one reviewer whose taste I trust jives with me recommends it.
It’s all about the possessive pronoun, baby. Julie’s book DELICIOUS was released in the US under the title MACALLISTER’S BABY.
I love them.
I mean sure, I might roll my eyes and snicker, but I know what I’m getting. When faced with six (?) Presents, I know this one has a Sheik, that one has a virgin and oh, wOOt!, this one has a Greek billionaire. I’m all about the Greek billionaires, regardless of the heroine’s state of virginity.
I can look at that wall of category romances and know who has a secret baby, who has amnesia, who’s daring to trust and who’s doing his mistress on the boardroom table.
Without picking each of the umpteen books up and reading the blurbs.
I also like Spam cut up, fried and mixed with mac & cheese, though, so my taste may be suspect.
I like the U.K. title better. It’s a stronger title and doesn’t give you the impression of some young busty blonde with 80s hair hold on to a guy with too much man titty.
But I think that’s the image that U.S. romance industry is holding on strong to. While the U.S. title is more romance, in actuality the U.K. title sounds more chick lit.
Its obviously time to evolve. Its hard for me to even pick up a book to read the back in the romance section because they all look the same. I wish the one old person still painting all the illustrations would get a cramp in their hand and die, so we could get better covers.
as a Jewish Canadian, I could kill two birds with one
proverbial (and very sexy) stone, and write my next novel about Jewish
Canadian protagonists in Mission, British Columbia. What do you bitches think?
ONLY if it is titled, “His Frozen Chosen.” Or a variation thereof.
Seriously: AWESOME.
Signed – Jewish American SB Sarah
Has anyone else noticed that the people featured on category covers are often smiling at one another? The people on historicals are passionately staring at one another (you know, those smoldering gazes) and the people are paranormals are trying to look tough enough to kick your ass. But in category land it’s always smiles . . .
Putting on my publisher hat: titles are a pain in the ass. Coming up with something short, descriptive, and catchy isn’t easy and in my experience marketing doesn’t have control—choosing a title is a balance between editorial and marketing. My boss has been known to say: “For god’s sake people, we’re publishers. We ought to be able to give this book a compelling title.”
There is no way I’m going to pick up the Sheik’s Secret Virgin Boardroom Table and take it to the cash at the bookstore I frequent – at least, not without hiding it under “The Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire†so I can hold my head up.
Oh, God. I know what you mean. Except in my case, it is erotic romance. I really, really wanted Emma Holly’s Strange Attractions, but the only way I could past my burning face and buy it was to buy it with a Julia Quinn novel. “Innocent” romance versus OH MY GOD YOU SLUT YOU BOUGHT WHAT?
So I have issues. Who doesn’t?
I went bookstore to bookstore last February with a friend, searching for copies of her first book in the wild. Her book was a Superromance, so we spent some time checking out which category lines each bookstore carried. One of the stores had a cardboard display rack for its categories, and while we were reading off the titles of the Presents books we did a double take. One title was The Millionaire’s Pregnant Wife and another another (same month, same line) was Pregnant by the Millionaire.
Julianna, snarkhunter, I too, hated the embarrassment at the cash register. So I learned that through my public library system I can reserve books online, have them put on hold, and do self-check out. A girl never need to interact with a human being. My library carries quite a bit of erotica; it’s where I pick up books by Emma Holly, Angela Knight, Lora Leigh, gave Kate Douglas a try (one was enough) and whole bunch of others.
I was just writing about titles. There are some interesting theories out there on why these titles sell.
The piece of the puzzle that I really don’t understand, and should think more about, is the reader who loves a specific setup:
I know what I’m getting. When faced with six (?) Presents, I know this one has a Sheik, that one has a virgin and oh, wOOt!, this one has a Greek billionaire. I’m all about the Greek billionaires, regardless of the heroine’s state of virginity.
To me, those titles say nothing about the style or emotional content of the book. So there’s a sheik? I don’t understand how that’s a good predictor of the quality of the book. Aren’t there good sheik books and bad sheik books? (I’ve only read maybe two of ‘em, but logic dictates….)
Well, I’m not sure I’m any good at titles, because my personal title for DRIVING HIM WILD/HIS FOR THE TAKING was “I Left My Clothes in the Bronx.”
However I did like the UK title a lot. The heroine is a New York City cab driver, so the “driving” works. The hero is a Maine park ranger, so the “wild” works. And she does drive him wild, because she’s one stubborn and strong and sexy and woman.
The US title…well. Um. There ya go.
It’s partly line promise, I think: in the UK, it was released as a Modern Heat, which is a flirty, fun, sexy line aimed at younger readers. Whereas in the US it’s being released as a Harlequin Presents and that has a different promise. Of course that doesn’t change what’s between the covers, and I hope that US readers aren’t disappointed at finding something a little different.
I agree with you, Sarah, that it replaces an active female with a passive, taken, owned one. And that doesn’t reflect my writing (or my personal beliefs) at all.
some young busty blonde with 80s hair hold on to a guy with too much man titty.
Dude, you saw my cover, didn’t you???
Julie’s book was a Modern Extra/Modern Heat in the UK. This is the line they came up with to replace Temptation. Originally it was only being released in the UK and places like Australia and was being marketed as younger/flirtier/lighter etc. So the titles were more Temptation-y
I suspect they’re being retitled in the US as they’re being released as Presents (Modern = Presents in UK) Collection or something and they want titles that sound more like a straight Presents. Whether or not this is a good idea, who knows? The ones I’ve read are quite different to Presents so you’d think having some different style titles might be good to cue the reader. If a fan of the Billionaire/Virgin etc type book picks up one of these based on the title alone, they’re not going to be getting their normal read.
And darn, while I was composing my answer, the author herself explains : )
Can someone EXPLAIN the lines for those of us who are category-tarded? My mom/aunts/grandmothers/friends don’t read these, so I have had ZERO exposure to them. For the life of me I can’t figure out what the “promise” of each line is supposed to be (except that Blaze = hot). And the titles scare me. The only cats I have any experience with are the Trad Regencies that basically don’t exist anymore.
Aside: a note to Victoria Beckham – we Americans are on the whole a happy, boisterous lot. It would probably help you a bit if you smiled, you know, every now and again.
She can’t or her makeup would come off in big flakes. 🙂
As for titles, I think my favourite ever is The Very Virile Viking. No, I didn’t read it, but I saw the title at Amazon and read an excerpt. *shudder*
Fixed that for you.
I won’t say what I think about marketing people, in any discipline/industry. But if they are going to do any meaningful market research, one useful project might be to find out how many readers buy certain novels IN SPITE of the title/cover art, rather than because of them. It might give them, as Poirot would say, furiously to think.
I used to be too embarrassed to buy category romances when I was young, too. I started reading them in my 40s (20 years ago), because I didn’t care any more what someone at the cash desk thought about my taste.
I don’t read many of them any more, because the authors I got to like a lot at that time are not writing category any more, and anyway, I am too busy writing my own (non-fiction) stuff.
Different titles in different countries (when the language is approximately the same) is bibliographically irresponsible and infuriates me. Don’t these prats (publishers) realise that these books are going to be major resources for academic research in social history in the future? Having the same book under different titles is going to cause such confusion…
My verification code is ‘picture69’. Yes, I can picture that.
Lol, we should leave poor Vicky alone. It’s hard to look human if you don’t weigh more than a sparrow.
Can’t bring myself to even touch [cooties] some of those books with *those* titles [squick], and *that* kind of cover art [yark]. Yeah, maybe [?!] I’m shallow, but I don’t like being judged by the company I keep, and I never know who I’m going to encounter before I can get to the register.
I guess it’s all a kind of shorthand for various archetypes, and marketing is always aiming for the subconscious.
[Srsly, tho’, if they’re this bad at titling books, can you imagine what names they inflict upon their offspring??]
The title confusion must be worse for those who buy catergory at Amazon.de, because they list both UK and US titles. And the short descriptions won’t help much in sorting out if a book was the same under another title.
Billionaire Greek makes deal with virgin mistress.
Kate Hardy’s Giovanni’s at Breakfast is to be called In Bed With Her Italian Boss and is out in April in the US. I believe she prefers the first title. She is currently running a contest on her blog in celebration of being short listed and the prize is a copy of said book. http://katehardy.blogspot.com/
But as far as I understand it, the vast majority of Modern Heats are having their titles changed when they go to the US as Promotional Presents.
The Modern Heats, particularly Julie Cohen’s and Kate Hardy’s, have rapidly become one of my fave lines in contemporary. So they are worth seeking out. Modern Heat of course used to be Temptation but is now editted out of London.
In Bed With Her Italian Boss
What the—!!?!???!
Ah-HA! I just figured it out—these cheesy titles sound just like the HEADLINES on the tabloids!
[a.k.a. ‘Scandal Alert!’]
This reminds me of the Sophie Kinsella book where the heroine works in marketing, and she’s faced with the company decision to market its new line of whatever at women, by making a logo that includes stylised ovaries. And she’s like, WTF? Ovaries?
We should bombard the HMB marketing dept with emails that we really love books with the word penis in the title, and see if they change their titles accordingly.
Spamfilter: appear27. Which reminds me: why are the Modern Heat books being marketed as Presents in the US? Do they feel the younger, flirtier audience doesn’t exist in America? Has the marketing dept. revealed that US Harlequin readers are all old and boring?
out—these cheesy titles sound just like the HEADLINES on the tabloids!
Yep, that’s Jennifer Crusie’s view too.
Oh, and for Kalen: if you go to http://millsandboon.co.uk/ and click on each different line, it gives you a short blurb about them at the top. (You can go to http://eharlequin.com/ for all the lines sold in the US, but there are freaking millions, and it’s probably quicker to read one of each than navigate a site that’s bigger than Texas.)
What’s the difference between the Temptation and the Blaze lines?
Something I’ve been wondering: how many billionaires are there in the Greece, anyway?
For info about Harlequin & Silhouette lines you can explore the eHarlequin.com site. You can also shop there and buy the books without making contact with another human being, who might disparage your choices. Also, prices are lower there than at brick & mortar stores.
I choose category romances by author and/or description rather than by title. I also note the series # and the date in my reading journal. When I first started reading them, I checked them out of the library for free. Then I culled the used book stores in my area. Then I joined the publishers mail order clubs. After a time, I found that I didn’t like enough of a month’s shipment to justify the cost. Now, I order what I want from eHarlequin or shop for them at my favorite UBS.
Kay
Kelly Hunter is another Modern X author who’s title has been changed for the US release as Presents. Her wonderful Priceless has become Bedded for Diamonds, and personally I’m furious about it. B4D creates an impression that has NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING to do with the plot, style and themes of the book.
GRRRR.
But buy the book, anyway. It’s the best category book I’ve read in a long time. It’s not a fantasy style – the protagonsists are ordinary people and there’s not a billionaire to be seen – but it is a wonderful read.
(Disclaimer: Kelly is a friend of mine, but I read this when I still hardly knew her, and was WOWed. And I have a personal thing about not pimping books unless I think they’re brilliant.)
I went to eharlequin.com in and they have a “pregnant mistresses” line. WTF??! (And who uses the term mistress anymore? )
I wonder a little bit if the Presents titles have some kind of cult status. When folks poke fun at romance, they usually try to make up a Presents-like title.
I think it has to do with the target market. In the UK, Modern Heat/Modern Extra targets 18-35, while I think Presents is 35-50. It’s as if it stays that way so readers will recognize them. I guess the red circle on the cover isn’t enough.
Blaze titles aren’t bad, usually, and I think they go after the younger demographic.
“ONLY if it is titled, “His Frozen Chosen.†Or a variation thereof.”
Ha ha ha. Sarah, you ARE a Smart Bitch. I am SO doing it!
Do you think the following euphemism would be apt for a Jewish protagonist: “His searing Shabbos love candle lit her deep within”, and such like?
Incidentally, have you read that book, Neurotica: Jewish Writers on Sex?
His Frozen Chosen…ha ha. I am SO digging the rhyme scheme! If my novel were to be a category, though, it would have to be more specific: I was Seduced by a Hassidic Hunk, maybe? I would SO buy that title!
“these cheesy titles sound just like the HEADLINES on the tabloids!”
That’s the point, as I said on another thread on this site. The Harlequin books are competing for attention at grocery stores and Wal-Marts and K-Marts right next to magazines with screaming high-concept headlines. (High-concept as in simple, not elevated or complex or intelligent.)
And I have to say, as a long-time category reader, the opinions of people who do not habitually read category should not be important to the publishers. Sure, I noticed the “Pregnant Millionaire” duplication. But if that’s the kind of story I want to read, Harlequin is doing me a favor by saying so up front.
The real problem is that some of these romances, if not all, may be considerably different from the impression the title gives.
As for being embarrassed to buy a book because of its cover, really. We all should be over that by now. Who cares what the worker behind the register thinks of my choice in reading? I let her/him know my choice in deodorants, after all. And toilet paper. And junk food. Very personal choices.
I hate them. I never would have started reading category if I hadn’t been given a bunch to review, and that’s largely because the titles and cover pictures turned me off so much. I’m past my prejudices now, but I still think the titles are embarrassing and make it harder for me to convince other people that there’s value in them.
I don’t read along those strict lines of kink so maybe that’s why they do nothing for me, but if I did want to know whether there was a tycoon or a virgin or whatever in the book I wouldn’t need the cover to tell me that since all that should be in the back cover copy anyway. At this point I mostly choose cateogires by trusted authors, but if I were picking an author that was new to me I’d ignore the title, read the description, and then skim the first chapter to figure out if I wanted it.
P.S. My favorite bad category title ever is still The Virgin Bride Said, “Wow!”.
Don’t these prats (publishers) realise that these books are going to be major resources for academic research in social history in the future? Having the same book under different titles is going to cause such confusion…
And there’s going to be/already is a boom in literary criticism of romances, and the different titles won’t help with that either.
Can someone EXPLAIN the lines for those of us who are category-tarded?
There are a lot of them, so the quickest way to explain it is really to point you in the direction of eHarlequin’s guidelines on each line, which they have up to help aspiring authors. Those include descriptions of the “feel” of each line. I’ll pick out a few of the lines and a quick summary description taken from the guidelines:
* Harlequin Presents (Mills & Boon Modern in the UK and “Sexy” in Australia):
Although grounded in reality and reflective of contemporary, relevant trends, these fast-paced stories are essentially escapist romantic fantasies that take the reader on an emotional roller-coaster ride.[…] All are set in sophisticated, glamorous, international locations. […] focus on strong, wealthy, breathtakingly charismatic alpha-heroes who are tamed by spirited, independent heroines
When they say “spirited,” here, this includes the virgin mistresses, so they’re different from the heroines of the Mod Extras (described below).
* Modern Extra/Heat in the UK, being sold as Modern Collections in the US an d Sexy Sensation in Australia. This is Julie Cohen’s line:
Take an international city background that vividly conveys the sophistication and buzz of cosmopolitan life, an independent woman who knows what she wants from love and her career and a guy who’s very much an alpha male—charismatic, confident, gorgeously sexy [interestingly, on the M&B Australia site that line reads “a guy who’s confident, easygoing and gorgeously sexy”] —and you have the Modern Extra line. […] the kind of relationships that women between the ages of 18-35 aspire to. Young characters in affluent urban settings
There’s a bit more of a chick lit feel. Only a bit, because these are still romances, but compared to the Harlequin Presents line there’s usually more about the heroine’s career, and there’s something a bit less “escapist” about them. So fewer billionaires, sheiks, Greek tycoons and virgins.
* Harlequin Romance (M&B Romance in the UK, M&B Sweet in Australia):
She drives the story — the reader lives vicariously through her. […] The reader wants to be able to identify strongly with her, to like her, to want to be her, or want to be her friend. She must be a strong, convincing woman of the 21st century. […] Stories should be driven by strong, emotional conflicts that are character-rooted and relevant to women today. These conflicts should stem from the realities of real women’s lives — the importance of home, family, friends; universal hopes and aspirations for love, security and children. The desire for recognition and acceptance at work and in the community. […] Couples can make love — before marriage, just as they do in real-life, but this should be within an emotional context and not described explicitly. It’s fine to shut the bedroom door and leave them to it!
As is obvious from the Australian name for the line, there’s much less explicit sex in this line, and the guidelines say that the novels in this line should not include “a strong, dominant alpha male.” Unlike the Modern/Presents, these are described as being about characters who are “Aspirational, even a bit glamorous, but very relatable. Characters and plots seem realistic and attainable.”
* The Historicals are all historicals, obviously, but the type of story can vary a lot. Carla Kelly had her Beau Crusoe published with this line recently, there are more unusual settings, including Viking, Roman and Western, as well as the more common Regency-set romances, and some of those are more like trad regencies than others. Some of them have quite a bit of sex, others have much less.
* The Medical line involves medical professionals, obviously, but it’s definitely not solely male doctor and female nurse any more. Nowadays there are all sorts of other combinations, including paramedics, midwives, and stories in which the heroine is the more senior of the two. The “Heroes and heroines are equally matched and equally respected professionals.”
I’ll stop there, because this has got very, very long, and the details are in the guidelines. Those are also the lines edited in the UK, so they’re the ones I know best. Maybe someone else can give more details about some of the other lines.
“High Concept”—
So the title is basically the ‘elevator speech’? Okay, got it. [making mental note]
But it isn’t the cashier’s opinion that concerns me. It’s the valued estimations of friends and acquaintances—of both sexes and all orientations—that frequent the same book-stops as myself.
Funny thing, though—no one ever questioned my picking up a copy of Playgirl.
I haven’t heard anyone mention Silhouette Romantic Suspense. You get a sexy, satisfying romance and an exciting suspense plot. No need to be embarrassed at the checkout stand, and no billionaire babies.
Also worth saying that a lot of single title authors who got started in category CONTINUE to write for category. So it’s not just a jumping off point.
Silhouette isn’t immune to bad titles though! From the list I lifted from Jennifer Crusie:
“The Boss’s Demand”… now THERE’s a bad title. Definitely evocative, but not in a good way.
Sorry – didn’t notice I was pasting code.