by SB Sarah • Saturday, February 09, 2008 at 03:00 PM
Bitchery reader Alyssa send me a link to more of the 100th Anniversary of Mills & Boon coverage, with, as she pointed out, a most excellent quote: “It tended to be rather breast focused....”
Not that there’s anything wrong with that!
What captured my attention was the mention of an upcoming exhibit in Manchester titled “And then he kissed her: 100 years of Mills & Boon.” I’d totally fly across the pond to see that, especially since there are some new direct-to-London discount airlines.
Meanwhile, Achewood’s Cornelius is writing a Harlequin. Organic style. I nearly hurt myself laughing at the unspoken sexuality inherent in a water yam. Thanks to Katia for the link.
...the assumption [is] that genre fiction — mysteries, thrillers, romances, horror stories — is a form of literary slumming. These kinds of books are easier to read, we tend to think, and so they must be easier to write, and to the degree that they’re entertaining, they can’t possibly be “serious....”
What we look for in genre writing… is exactly what the critics sometimes complain about; the predictableness of a formula successfully executed. We know exactly what we’re going to get, and that’s a seductive part of the appeal. It’s why we can read genre books so quickly and in such quantity, and happily come back for more of the same by the very same author. Such books are reassuring in a way that some other novels are not.
Does that make them lesser, or just different? Probably both on occasion. But it doesn’t necessarily make them easier or less worthwhile to write.
Hold up now, a Times writer gets that genre fiction is satisfying, worthwhile, and as difficult to create as any other work of writing? That it’s not lowbrow plebian dreck? That it is very odd that the best of the genre writers aren’t more often promoted into mainstream fame?
Holy shit.
I’m especially tickled by the idea posited by McGrath’s interpretation of Updike that literary authors wish for the success of genre fiction authors, while assuming that genre authors wish for the respectability of literary fiction.
Funny enough, back when I aspired to write fiction (which I shamelessly now acknowledge is not at all my strength), I never wanted to write literary fiction. Only genre. Love me some genre fiction.
by SB Sarah • Friday, February 08, 2008 at 01:13 PM
Heads up to Harlequin authors. An anonymous source forwarded me a link (which I am so not going to republish because why should they get traffic?) to a site illegally offering free eBook copies of Harlequin novels. The site has multiple listings of a month’s worth of books in one file, and fields requests for books by title.
If you’d like to email me, I can send you the link so you can look for your book there. If an author finds that her book is being offered illegally, she needs to report the individual title to Harlequin.
The original email came from an author’s loop and the author of the original message suggests a rather sharp and brilliant method for tracking potential piracy: create a Google:Alert for the title of your book, and for your name or pseudonym. Google will email you daily, or as frequently as you wish, any search results that match your alert terms. Unfortunately, I do not know who wrote the original email that I received, but whoever you are - that’s a damn smart idea for any author published in eBook format, so mad props to you.
And good luck to any Harlequin author who finds her pirated eBook offered illegally.
UPDATE: RWA National just sent out a members-only alert about the issue.
by SB Sarah • Friday, February 08, 2008 at 11:31 AM
Ever eat something so sweet your teeth actually hurt from the incredible amounts of delicious savory sugar rolling about in your mouth? Your brain will get that feeling watching this Swedish children’s song set to some absolutely adorable kitty footage. Thanks to Jessica Andersen for the link.
But wait, there’s more from the Overly-saccharine Department of Video!
Not only will this irritatingly catchy song live in your brain for awhile, but you’ll find deeper hidden truths in the English mistranslation of the lyrics: apparently, it’s hard to stick it on Miguel. Poor Miguel. Thanks to PuccaGirl for the link.
by SB Sarah • Friday, February 08, 2008 at 10:43 AM
Our Grade:
Title: The Bleeding Dusk Author: Colleen Gleason Publication Info: Signet February 2007, ISBN: 0451223268 Genre: Paranormal
First, please pardon the obnoxious “Buy now” link. Until I know what’s up with the images on our server, I don’t want to host broken image links or load new graphics that might later disappear.
In book 3 of the five-part Gardella series, Victoria has assumed the rule of Illa Gardella and is in Rome chasing after the keys to the Door of Alchemy. If she and the other venators get into the chamber first, the good guys win. If the vampires get into the chamber first, it would be bad. Very bad.
The good points: Gleason as usual excels at reminding me of what happened in the previous two books without dumping too much detail on my head, or bringing in a “As you know, Bob” character or conversation. As I’ve often whinged about, my memory is for crapcakes and the easy reminders of past events led me to recall a great deal more than what the reference provided, so I went back into the larger story arc with few holes in my recollection. Furthermore, Gleason has mad skills when it comes to creating flawed characters. Even when I wanted to bash Victoria over the head with something for being stubborn and obtuse, I still liked her, or at worst respected her motivation for whatever action made me cringe. Gleason is particularly strong at creating active, palpable tension through both complicated fight scenes and individual character stories.
The not-so-good points: Victoria becomes Illa Gardella, and administrative details ensue. Thus, The Bleeding Dusk is a lot of transition and in my opinion is lighter on action plot.
The writing is solid but it doesn’t contain as much punch-to-kick action as books 1 and 2, and I was left feeling let down by the story on the whole.
One of the two major conflicts to be resolved in the larger story arc is a love triangle, and I am not rooting for Sebastian. He has more screen time in this book, and perhaps because I’m rooting for a different character pairing, I didn’t enjoy or become more sympathetic to Sebastian as a result of this book. And I’ve been navel gazing about why it is that the fact that *my* choice didn’t get enough face time makes me both disappointed with the present book while simultaneously eagerly awaiting the next because in my opinion? OMG MAX ANGST = HOT HOT HOT. WANT MORE MAX PLS KTHXBYE.
In this book, Sebastian has to settle one of his major conflicts - his loyalty to his powerful vampire grandfather vs. his desire for Victoria - and has to reveal the true nature of his character. By the end of the novel he is only slightly less ambiguous than it has been in previous novels, but still a large and knobby mystery to Victoria, and to me as a reader.
The scenes between them read to me as if they were more carnal, and not so much emotional, which of course gives me real hope for Max, because I’m a pleated-skirt skimpy-top color-coordinated-scrunchie-wearing cheerleader for Team Pesaro. Rah rah rah. But then, I have to ask whether my preference for Max could have colored my perceptions of the scenes with Sebastian, and if any reader who hopes Victoria ends up with Sebastian could have reveled in their hot attraction and erotic chemistry.
In any triangle-based conflict, I have a fear that the author will invent a shallow reason to tarnish the nobility and worth of one of the characters so the other becomes an obvious choice. I don’t think that Gleason will pull such a shabby trick; my big fear now is that I’ll feel genuinely bad for the character Victoria doesn’t choose because the three of them, Max, Victoria and Sebastian, are layered, flawed, and fascinating characters individually. The three of them playing off one another is more than a little sparky as well.
Further, Gleason definitely has her eye on the larger story arc, the development of the Big Bad that will likely return to face Victoria and the other Venators, and the development of Victoria into a female leader who hopes to equal the legacy of her grandmother’s time as Illa Gardella. While this installment didn’t leave me breathless and edgy as the previous two books did, The Bleeding Dusk did cover my curiosity with accelerant and light a big ass match.
Today’s New York Post reveals that not only is there “no possibility of Stephen Canell [sic] and Janet Evanovich ever collaborating on a series of adventure novels,” but that the “fallout may have caused a rupture in the relationship between Evanovich and her longtime agent Robert Gottlieb at Trident Media.” Yeouch.
Publisher’s Lunch Deluxe confirms the report, stating that “creative differences” were the cause of the cancellation of the novel.
by SB Sarah • Friday, February 08, 2008 at 07:44 AM
So back during the ferret discussion amid the plagiarism discussion, I got into an email discussion with Lori Armstrong , native South Dakotan, award-winning mystery author, and keeper of some good cover juju the likes of which I haven’t seen since PC Cast. Seriously, Armstrong’s covers? Creeptastic, and appropriate for her genre. They give me the jibblies like damn.
I’m fascinated by authors who base much of their writing in their home states, especially when the state is one that doesn’t get a whole lot of attention on an individual level, and I’m fascinated by the sparsely-populated but increasing numbers of the female private investigator protagonists in fiction that isn’t paranormal-based. So I asked Lori a bunch of questions about South Dakota, bikers, guns, detectives and writing, and she was kind enough to answer them. I’m nosy, really, and I should probably work on that flaw.
Lately, states attract attention because of political scheduling of primaries, and while there’s attention paid to Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada, not a great deal of focus is paid to the Dakotas...
(editorial insert by Lori –see? We’re still referred to as “The Dakotas” and North and South Dakota have been separate states since 1889)
Most people think of South Dakota as a barren wasteland full of barren wastelands, or one of the five “red stripe down the middle” states during election years. Set me straight - tell me about South Dakota - the best part about being relatively ignored by the rest of the country, and the worst part of the same.
Lori: Politically, yes, we are a red state, with three measly electoral votes so we don’t get any of the campaign stumping, which isn’t all bad. I think it’s easy to confuse “red state” with being a “redneck state” and it is not the same thing. We’re very independent voters out here. All the political party line bullshit aside, we continually elected Tom Daschle (at one time the senate minority leader) as our senator, and other democrats (2 of our 3 reps in congress are democrats) not because of party affiliation, but because of what he or they could do for our state.
As far as living in flyover country, beef country, the breadbasket of the word…the best part is the wide open spaces and geographical diversity. I see beauty in the rugged unpopulated country where there isn’t a store or town for 40 miles, and in the rolling plains where you can see for 50 miles, and in the mountains, and in the starkness of the Badlands, whereas folks from metro areas see…nothing. Or so they gleefully tell me. “How can you live there? There’s nothing to do!”
At one conference recently, a woman saw my name tag and said very condescendingly, “You’re from South Dakota? Oh, I’m sorry.” How do you counter that attitude? You don’t. While I admit I would’ve liked to punch her right in her botoxed mouth, (yeah, I know, how redneck), I refrained because secretly I felt a little smug; I knew she wasn’t tough enough to live here for a day, let alone 100+ years.
I’m 4th generation South Dakotan on both sides of my family. My great-grandparents and grandparents and parents have lived through years and years of drought. Dealing with blizzards which kill cattle and family members, worried about fires and floods and hailstorms that wipe out entire crops and an entire year’s wages. Why? Because we’re tied to the land and this way of life people who’ve never lived it can never understand. That’s what I try to get across in my books; the splendor and the horror of living in rural America, even if you’re not involved in agriculture, as many of us here aren’t, you are surviving and thriving in the modern day Wild West. I understand the next generation’s need to escape, and as you get older, the desire to never leave here. The mixture of the people who stick it out here, year after year, with low wages, limited choices in everything from transportation to jobs to healthcare to politics, the warring between the ‘old ways’ and the ‘new ways’ of changes not only in agriculture and business, but in dealing with racial prejudices, continued sexism, and the bias from outsiders who think ruralism = idiocy.
In the announcement for your book deal (congratulations!) it was mentioned you’re a former firearms professional. What in the world does that mean? You sold guns? Fixed them? Worked for the NRA? Did you twirl a pistol and jam it artfully into your tooled leather holster?
Lori: Have you been peeking in my windows, SB Sarah? What did you think of the metallic tassels on the bottom of the holster and the matching fringe on the chaps? Seriously, my husband, brother-in-law and sister-in-law own a firearms business, primarily manufacturing commemorative firearms. If you see gold-plated rifles or pistols or shotguns with intricate artwork, like the image of John Wayne, or state centennials, or fundraising guns for Pheasants Forever, chances are damn good it was created by their company, located right here in Rapid City. I worked in the family business for 10+ years as a bookkeeper, which meant in addition to the financial end of things, I logged in gun inventory purchases and dealt with some of the rigid regulations passed down by the BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) for businesses with an FFL (Federal Firearms License). I never assembled or disassembled the various types of guns—that’s left to the gunsmiths and I stayed out of the sales end of it.
Which is your preferred gun?
Lori: I have a Walther P-22 (considered a ‘plinker’ by folks who like more firepower) and we have a Remington 870 shotgun. I’ve shot a variety of guns, and always thought I’d be the 9mm Glock kinda chick, but the ones I’ve tried don’t fit my hand very well— I’m not petite—and I’m not patient enough to dink around with different grips to get a good fit. My dream handgun was an H&K P7 – is very pricey, so I gave it to one of my characters in the Julie Collins series. I’ve had my eye on a sweet Sig Sauer, a Taurus Millennium Pro and a compact Kahr Arms pistol, but I haven’t ponied up the cash for either yet (Valentine’s Day is coming, hon! And you know what I want…) The cool thing is I can give my characters the guns I’d like to have, and I love doing hands on research messing with all different types of firearms.
Why do you think American culture in particular is so fascinated with firearms?
Lori: If you’ve never fired a gun, it is a heady experience, feeling that power in your hand. Out here, guns are tools; you have to have the right tool for the job, hence multiple guns, especially if you hunt. Then there’s the whole gun ‘collector’ side of the equation, which I’m thankful for every day because it keeps a roof over the Armstrong’s heads. It’s funny, whenever my husband and I go someplace and people learn he owns a gun business? All the men bombard him with questions, want to talk shop, and it’s like he’s living their dream: being paid to be around guns. All. The. Time. And I will admit, it freakin’ rocks to have a gun expert at my fingertips whenever I need one. But I will also admit, since he is around guns 50+ hours per week, we don’t personally own a lot of firearms, which shocks a lot of people. They expect us to have an arsenal, wear camo and have NRA mudflaps on the truck.
Writing question time! When constructing a mystery, where do you start - with the solution working backwards? From the beginning, writing without a plan, aka by the seat of your pants? Or from another point of access altogether?
Lori: It’s a little bit of all of that panster—plotter—then some heavy duty bargaining with the writing Gods. When I start, I know the main plot thread, who gets killed and why, who did it, and the 8 to 10 “black” moments. As far as the secondary plot threads, of which I usually have at least one, I sort of wing it and see where it goes. For me there’s already a bit of inherent knowledge when you’re writing a series character, so I’ve known up until the last Julie Collins book (SNOW BLIND, Oct. 08) where I’ve been headed with the series since the first book.
There have been big discussions in the mystery world the last few years of the demise of the purely plot driven mystery, meaning, where the characters are secondary to the discovery of ‘whodunit.’ My books are first and foremost character driven; the plot has to evolve out of the characters reaction to the situation, whatever it may be. Even as much as I plot—and I find I plot more, the more books I write - invariably things happen in the book I didn’t foresee. That’s the fun part, the magic part of writing and why I keep doing it. Oddly enough, I usually don’t have those AHA moments until I’m finished with the first crappy draft and I go back and start editing—which used to be my least favorite part of the process, but now is my favorite part. Seems like I can’t actually figure out what the hell the story is about until I’m done writing it and maneuver it into what I envisioned in the first place.
In fiction, there are a lot more male PIs than female PIs, though the female superpowered superhero in romance, paranormal, Fantasy and Science Fiction is becoming much more common. Do you think more female PIs who aren’t superpowered will come along?
Lori: Honestly? No clue. I’m afraid that sub-genre of any of those genres will get a bit James Bondish, which for me was getting stale until Daniel Craig slipped into the role and shook it up again, and made Bond a real man, not a caricature of the perfect stud. Don’t get me wrong, I like reading about chicks with special gifts, the ability to kick ass, then, have sex for three days straight with a guy hung like a bull…and still be able to behead the bad guy one-handed, and save the world in an evening gown and heels.
Why do you think superpowered women are more common than plain old everyday human mortal badasses who have investigatory skills and a penchant for cussing?
Lori: Because it’s a fantasy, and every woman would like to see herself in that role. I don’t think it’s a coincidence women are drawn to those ‘I can do everything, be everything’ types of books. My character, Julie, is a little over the top, as far as how many punches she can take without puking in the bar fights she gets into, the gruesome bodies she discovers and the umm…excessive drinking and smoking and sex, but she relies on her guts and her smarts, rather than a psychic insight or incredible physical strength. Sometimes she’s wrong. Sometimes she makes mistakes. It is her frailties and her hidden humanity, which we all have that fascinates me and wants me to peel back the layers to see what else she’s hiding—not a sudden knowledge of weaponry she didn’t know she possessed, but what makes her so bristly and ready to do the right thing, even if it isn’t necessarily the legal thing. I will admit I take some hits from folks on the rough language in the books. I refuse to apologize because it is true to the character and that’s what matters to me. There is so much diversity with strong female characters it is a great time to be a reader.
Let me ask you a question about biker culture: I don’t know many people who can afford a Harley, with the price point they demand nowadays, and, granted I’m in the wrong part of the country to be asking this question, it seems I see a lot of people “dressing up” in biker style rather than actually participating in that culture. Do you think biker culture is going to die out? Or is it a relatively ignored but thriving subculture in the US that only demands attention when a whole lotta bikers gather in the same spot?
Lori: No. I believe there will always be fringe groups, who see themselves as modern day rebels who are mindful and prideful about not fitting in. I live 30 miles from Sturgis South Dakota, home of the infamous Sturgis Bike Rally, where half a MILLION bikers descend on us the first two weeks of August, every year without fail (remember, we have 750K in our entire state). So we have a very large ‘real’ biker population of those people who’ve come here, found their niche and stayed permanently. I’ve watched the rally change over the years from a serious biker gathering—with deadly, big time, name recognizable biker clubs (don’t call them gangs, no seriously, don’t) fighting an all out turf war over the local drug trade, what ‘colors’ are acceptable to fly, and ownership of strippers and strip clubs, and bike shops—to yuppies having their bikes “trailered” in — meaning they don’t ride them across country, but have them shipped here, which signifies pussy in the real biker world. So there are a lot of poseurs in those two weeks. Mostly the doctors, lawyers, stock brokers and dot comers who can afford the hefty price tag Harley Davidson motorcycles come with these days, who grow their beards and their hair for a month before the rally starts so they think they look badass. They have new leathers and matching boots, and a fake attitude while they’re ‘roughing it’ in a hotel. The real bikers, you know the mechanics, cooks, welders, and other blue collar workers who still drive the piece of shit bikes that break down all the time and actually exist in that shady life 24/7, they camp out and suffer through the weather because it’s what they know and all they can afford.
One year during the rally, when I was still waitressing, I waited on the vice president of the Hells Angels. I was nervous as shit, because he had on the vest, with all those patches, proclaiming who he was. He was an absolute dream customer. Counter that with a guy I’ll name Dick, a high-powered attorney from the east coast, who literally made me cry and redefined prick. Give me a real biker any day of the week. Purchasing a $50K bike, slapping on a bandana and piercing your ear before coming to Sturgis does not make one the real deal—and usually these assholes want to prove how tough they are by being jerks to everyone around them.
It is interesting to watch them get their asses kicked. And no, I don’t feel sorry for them. Men and women who live that alternate lifestyle, officially as members of a particular biker club, are not people to mess around with. They are deadly. I use a fictional biker club in my books, but I do not sugar coat how ritualistic and barbaric some of the clubs behave toward each other—and women in particular.
Let’s see: you, and your heroine, are take-no-shit women who cuss a lot. (Obviously, I can’t understand that at all.) You are published with a newer publisher that “took a risk” with your books, and you’re both now reaping the benefits of that risk. Do you think established publishing houses will wake up to their missed opportunity and make the “risk” of a flawed but heroic female PI protagonist a more common entity? Or will new publishing houses continue to break molds and cause change from outside the established houses?
Lori: I have no earthly idea how things work, how decisions are arrived at in the publishing world. Medallion Press took a chance on me (the 16 yr old daughter of the CEO, Helen Rosburg pulled my submission out of the slush pile, read it, loved it and made her mother read my book, no shit) because my book was different—which is precisely why the NY pubs didn’t want it. And the series has gone on to be nominated for major awards in the mystery industry—as well as winning a literary award. Who’da thunk it?
There’s been talk that the PI genre is dead, for a number of years, but I don’t see where that’s necessarily true either, but I do believe there are trends no one can predict no matter how long you’ve been in the business. It’ll be interesting for me, to go from being published as a mass market paperback original with an independent house, to hardcover with a big house when the first book in my new series comes out from Touchstone/Fireside (Simon and Schuster) in April of 2009. I guess maybe the smaller houses are taking bigger risks, because they have less people to answer to. Case in point: the Edgar nominations were recently announced and a couple of independent publishers –Bleak House, Akashic Books and Busted Flesh Press—all had nominated works, which I think bodes well for all the smaller presses in all genres. But I’m mighty glad Touchstone/Fireside is taking a chance on me and my style of storytelling.
Thanks to Lori for tolerating my nosy ass questions, and for some smart responses.
by SB Sarah • Friday, February 08, 2008 at 05:22 AM
I have no idea where our images went. I’m working on it. In the meantime, here. Have a picture of John Mayer that is OMG-NWS. You can blame Mel Francis for the image.
by SB Sarah • Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 12:45 PM
Our Grade:
Title: The Pride of Jared MacKade Author: Nora Roberts Publication Info: Silhouette (Special Edition) 1995, ISBN: 0373240007 Genre: Contemporary Romance
This book fascinated me because I get the feeling this was a heroine that most category readers would not have expected. Roberts spends a lot of time slowly building the character of Suzannah Morningstar, which is partially accomplished by a gradual reveal of her backstory. There’s no giant dump of revelation, where she spills her life’s story to the hero. She reveals herself deliberately and in small portions, and that slow discovery reveals as much as the actual details. Within that backstory, Roberts tackles some heroine standards head on and knocks them around a good bit. She plays with the virginal expectation of the heroine (Suzannah is a single mom; she’s definitely not a virgin), the purity expectation of the heroine (See #1), and in doing so creates a tough, edgy, unapologetic heroine who doesn’t think much of her son’s father because he obviously doesn’t think much of them, if he thinks of them at all. No angst, no bitterness, no self-pity—just factual hard reality. Savannah is not a victim; she made her choices and learned to work through them.
Conflict jumps into the wading pool when Jared, the idealistic hero, gets caught up in feelings of jealousy and rage. In his mind, it’s unacceptable that there WERE other men in her life, and she was a stripper and she has no regrets about either. Moreover, he has to confront the idea that she doesn’t need a man to ride in and sweep her off her feet, to make all her troubles go away. He can walk up to the door and ring the damn bell, thank you, because Suzannah has taken care of her life and her son’s well-being just fine on her own. Jared gets his BVDs in a right twisty knot and ends up asking himself the question, “What would his mama say?”
Which, in my mind, became, “What did readers say about this novel when it was published?”
In a lot of Roberts’ trilogies, there’s usually, out of three women, one “tough heroine,” the one who is prickly, standoffish, irritable, or exceptionally independent and autonomous, sometimes to the point of misanthropy. Suzannah seems almost like an early prototype of a lot of those “tough heroines” - I can see shades of a lot of other fierce, ballsy characters to come.
That said, I didn’t actually like her much. She didn’t grow on me until later installments of the MacKade brothers quartet. I thought she was too rude, too brash, too mean, and often her actions overplayed themselves when compared to the rationale behind them - however emotionally charged that rationale was. I didn’t buy the mercurial shifts between caring, doting mom, and ready to throw punches at Jared, and I didn’t get her repeated abrupt descent into rudeness to several ancillary characters. She crossed the line from independent and fierce to just over the border of batshit unstable, and it made me distrust her, while also making me question why the other characters so easily excused her behavior.
Jared, on the other hand, I imagined as a relatively standard romance hero dropped onto a wild horse and told to ride for the duration of the story. He got a lot more than he bargained for in Suzannah, and he couldn’t necessarily tame her. He has to learn to understand her, but then set limits for her behavior, limits based on respect and affection - which she’s not used to. He’s very used to control, order, and balance in his life, and has to confront that messy is sometimes very necessary.
But the title, in this case, is entirely appropriate. The main conflict between these two is pride, and as a result, the internal conflict and external conflict between them is layered, complex, and not easily resolved but worth doing so, both for the protagonists (obviously) and the reader.
by SB Sarah • Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 09:08 AM
Rachel writes:
The book I’m looking for is a category romance from the 80s, I think Silhouette Intimate Moments, though I don’t remember it being very suspenseful. The heroine went to a Romance Novel Convention with her best friend who was an aspiring author, and won a date with a Spy Novelist named Stone Grey/Gray (I think). That’s pretty much all I remember, except that the best friends book was considered terrible and Stone had a swinging bachelor pad. I think the book was pretty tongue-in-cheek.
If you could run this past the bitchery I’d be eternally grateful.
Swinging bachelor pad and a Romance Novel Convention? Oh, l so hope someone can name this one.
by SB Sarah • Wednesday, February 06, 2008 at 09:14 AM
Our Grade:
Title: His For the Taking Author: Julie Cohen Publication Info: Harlequin February 12, 2008, ISBN: 0373820690 Genre: Contemporary Romance
Dear Harlequin USA:
Without question, my biggest gripe with this book is the way in which you are choosing to market it. The UK title is better. Way better. Better like it was kidnapped by hot Vikings and rowed swiftly across the frozen seas to Betterland and crowned queen of all of greater Betterlandia. In the UK this book was titled Driving Him Wild. In the US?
For God’s sake, people. I can’t even tell you how dismayed I am that this marvelous book is going to be dressed up in the washed out faded tripe that is that title. What a damn fucking shame. “His for the Taking?” I’d like to be taking that title back to 1982 where it belongs. Do I have to move to the UK? I’d have a hell of a time getting a work permit, let alone a visa to live there. I’m doomed to endure these sexist drivel titles slapped onto books that ought to garner MUCH more attention! And wow, does it piss me off.
The tawdry, insulting craptastic shitcake that is the title of this book offends me as an American. What is with the shitalicious retitling for the American audience? Can you please explain?
And while I’m ranting, take a look at the covers for the UK and US versions of this novel:
UK Version: Hot, slightly awkward, but genuine-looking embrace with lithe heroine and normally-proportioned hero? Awesome, with side order of HAWT.
US Version: Instead of “awesome, side order of Hawt,” the waiter has apparently delivered a steaming fresh pile of what-the-fuck. The heroine is a cab driver. She teaches step aerobics, and is described by the hero as being lean, muscular, toned and tomboyish. With short blonde hair, I might add. That right there? Soft focus vanilla yogurt retread of any image you might find on a Presents novel from 2008 to 1998. (Although the female pictured does have very red manhands and an absolutely freaking HUGE thumb like WHOA.)
And this book is not a soft-focus sudsy romance. It’s gritty and real and marvelous and holy crap am I irritated that this lovely story is going to be packaged in chiffon when it ought to be at least dressed in leather if not denim.
Zoe Drake is a New York City cab driver. She arrives at her great-aunt’s apartment to fetch some items for said great-aunt’s funeral and finds Nick Giroux, a park ranger and hot nature man, camped out in the hallway waiting for Ms. Drake. Nick is looking for his father, who abandoned his family when Nick was a little boy. Zoe is looking for the black Vuitton shoes her great-aunt specified in her funeral plan. Nick last heard from his father in a note mailed a few days prior with the return address of Xenia Drake’s Manhattan apartment, and he’s sure that his father is there, or was recently enough that he might come back. Zoe doesn’t know what the hell Nick is talking about, but against her better judgment, she lets him stay in Xenia’s apartment with her. He’s hot, he rescues wounded pigeons, and he’s kind, dedicated, and also, hot. Also, Zoe can take care of herself admirably, and has both sharp judgment of people and the ability to kick literal ass. So if he tries anything funny, she can mess him up like whoa and like damn.
Ultimately, this novel is about finding your family, or discovering who your family really is, and what unconditional love really means. Zoe has to overcome her own feelings of hurt and isolation, brought about by her family’s habit of judging her against the perfection of her sisters and finding Zoe substantially lacking. Nick has to overcome his abandonment issues, and both Zoe and Nick have to take sizable personal risks to be together, changing a little bit of themselves in the process, though that little bit is enough to alarm each of them plenty. And really, honest to crapping damn shitcakes, this book takes on a whole list of major issues, and uses them to layer the characterization to the point where only a handful of pages in, I had a better grasp of Zoe and Nick than I have of other characters in other romances after a few hundred pages of superficial description. Zoe and Nick are original, flawed, but honest and noble people who have real and enduring pain in their lives, and the issues they face in order to seize their happy ending are not contrived or shallow. My only disappointment with the book was that I wished some of the familial issues weren’t all resolved off-screen, but even then, the issues of family are never resolved neatly with a bow and a perfectly-folded seam of wrapping paper.
The conflict between and surrounding Nick and Zoe - and there are several little ones that combine into one big mess - is compounded by the fact that both characters are also grieving. Zoe has just lost her great-aunt, who she felt was the only family member who understood and appreciated her. Nick is still grieving the loss of his father and of his own childhood. Because each character helps the other heal as well as grow, their happy ending is fiercely earned, particularly because Nick is used to being a loner, and Zoe guards her autonomy deliberately and without compunction.
Cohen is a strong and marvelous storyteller in a panoply of ways. The layered characters and genuine emotions and reactions of the characters are just part of the collective awesome,. Cohen is particularly strong at showing, not telling, and uses that skill to her hero’s advantage. For example, at one point, Nick ponders the fact that he’s attracted to Zoe, despite the fact that she’s pretty buff, because until Zoe came along, Nick had only been attracted to frail, delicate women who needed his care. Zoe didn’t need his care, though she welcomed his attention. And when, later in the book, Nick figures out why he’d been attracted to delicate women, his attraction to Zoe becomes that much more telling, and, in both Nick’s and the reader’s understanding, much more significant.
So let me get back to how short the US title sells this book. I could think of any number of better options, even options that include the ever-present hook words. Heck, Cohen’s working title, which I heard was “I Left My Clothes In the Bronx,” is a hoot. The UK title and cover image are sharp - she’s a cab driver, so she literally does “drive him wild,” and those cover models look like real people. But “his for the taking?” It literally makes me sad that a ferociously independent, funny, sharp and charming character like Zoe is being sold behind a title that speaks of passivity, sexual submission, and inertia. Zoe is in the driver’s seat of her life, even after Nick lands in the middle of it, and the idea that she’s in one place long enough for anyone to take her is insulting to her character. So ignore the title, and enjoy the book.
And if anyone has the ear of the title-bestowing folks at Harlequin, tell them I’d really like a word with them. Three words, actually. And the third one is “fuck.”
by SB Sarah • Tuesday, February 05, 2008 at 08:44 AM
It seems the vast knowledge of the Bitchery when it comes to all things cover art is not a secret, especially among the publishing houses. I received an email from Lauren Naefe, Online Marketing Manager at HarperCollins, who asked if I consult the Oracle of the Bitchery to help settle an in-house debate. It seems the cover art for a particular book is under discussion, and there are two hotly-contested candidates for the coveted position. It’s like deciding the Democratic presidential nomination, only with Bitchery, cussing, and fun! How perfect for SuperTuesday, eh?
The book in question is Confessions of a Beauty Addict, the fiction debut of Nadine Haobsh which comes out November 18. Haobsh is the beauty editor who was outed by New York Post as blogger behind “Jolie In NYC”, a hugely popular blog about all things involving beauty secrets. Her nonfiction advice manual, Beauty Confidential was published in October of ‘07.
The summary of Confessions of a Beauty Addict reads as follows:
When Bella Hunter, Beauty Expert and all around magazine editor wunderkind, loses her job for spilling top industry secrets to Page 6 she thinks her life is over. And, to top it all off, she’s managed to dye her hair bright orange. At her wits end and desperate not to return home with her tail between her legs, Bella accepts a job a Womanly Wear: a magazine her mom reads. But how can she face her glamorous ex-co-workers now that she works in an office where khaki (not Cavalli) is the way of life? Bella is out to wage war on the beauty world one bad makeover at a time, armed with only her Marc Jacobs shoes, three meddling best friends, and a flighty supermodel boyfriend. At odds with her stuffy (and undeniably gorgeous) publisher, Bella begins to realize that she may be fighting the wrong battle.
With that in mind, here are the two covers that the folks at Avon A are battling over. Which do you like? What comments do you have for either one. Lauren has graciously offered 2 advance copies of the book to the two readers who offer the most helpful comment - so speak often and as much as you want.
Sarah: My opinion? Re: the blue cover - which one is the beauty addict? I hope it’s the chihuahua. I appreciate the play on Tiffany blue and the dripping-gem opulence of the creatures featured, but I have no idea what this has to do with the plot. That said, half the cover images of the romances I read have fuck all to do with the plot, so I’m betting this one will win just because cute dog + nice gems = browsers will pick it up to read more.
And as for the pink one, I am pleased the model has paid scrupulous attention to her waxing regimen, given the position of that skirt.
But oy, that font. Right up until the hot pink doodle font I was down with this cover, but man, that font. It’s so corny and jarring and utterly not attractive. I can understand the effort at contrast setting the doodle-font against the groomed couture of the image above it, but man. That font just kills the cover for me. It hurts my feelings. I take that font very personally, and am offended as an American by that font.
So if I pick between Blue and Pink? I go with blue. Even though I like the image of the pink one more, I hate the font so much that it turns me off the cover entirely.
Candy: I like the composition of the blue cover better--it wins on just about every front, from font usage (side note to the people who chose that kuh-ray-zee font for the pink cover: Why didn’t you just use Comic Sans and put us out of our misery? Chrissakes) to the way the faces are framed to the choice of angle to the use of whitespace. If I had any beef with the blue cover, it would be with the use of the chihuahua and the bedecking of said chihuahua with godawful gewgaws. I look at that, and I think “Oh god, another Paris Hilton wannabe.” And really, who wants to associate their heroine with Paris Hilton? Unless being a vacuous coke-snorting trainwreck who provides an instant win on the STD Bingo card is a good thing.
The blue cover (despite the negative associations I have when it comes to over-pampered toy dogs) also wins for me because it looks different. It’s not pink. It’s not some faceless woman (I mean, really, how many chick lit/romance books out there feature some faceless woman’s legs and/or shoes? I love shoes, and God knows I love me some beautiful legs, but enough already). It actually features (parts of) faces, and the faces are fun and interesting. If I were in a store, I wouldn’t stop to look at the pink cover (unless it was to marvel at the rather horrid font), but I’d stop and look at the blue cover.
