Pan Jenoff, author of The Kommandant’s Girl
In the summer of 2006, my publisher informed me that feedback from key accounts indicated that they loved the story, but were not enthusiastic about the cover and title. The release date was set back six months, and the book was given its present, more literary cover, becoming The Kommandant’s Girl once more. Barnes and Noble featured it as a book club selection for April 2007 in the genre of historical fiction. Romance was dead, or so it seemed, until the Quill nomination revived the debate.
So after two years, two covers, two title changes and too many genres to count, I have to ask: Is there a difference?
Janoff’s ultimate diagnosis is that it doesn’t matter much, that “genre is a distinction without a difference, a line that has blurred to the point where it is no longer meaningful.” While being marketed as a romance has had its benefits, she notes some drawbacks as well – that independent bookstores are less interested, and male readers are hesitant to engage in the book.
However, Janoff notes, the British cover, which is decidedly romantic, has been selling like hotcakes.
What immediately comes to my mind in light of Janoff’s discussion is the way in which a good number of romance novels are marketed now. From the slow decrease in size of clinch cover art to landscapes to the newer trend of twirling headless women, and clinch art with 3/4 of the protagonists showing on the cover, the art is rapidly changing, to say nothing of how books are shelved. It’s no longer so easy to tell what is a romance, and what isn’t, judging just by cover and position. So does breaking out of the romance genre help or hurt? Can a book successfully be marketed as both romance and not romance?
i’m the first comment? how exciting for me. and how unfortunate for you, cause i’m not big on the smart in-depth genre analysis that your usual commenters are so good at, and i’m running on about three hours of sleep right now besides. i’m wondering about the last question myself. i hope this comes out in a way that makes sense to someone other than myself. it seems to me that just about any book that has romance elements can be marketed as a romance, if the shelving at my local barnes and noble is any indication. the one that stands out in my mind is maria schnyder’s ‘poison study’ ( and i’m pretty sure i got the author’s name wrong, but it’s been languishing in my paper tbr pile for months now). when it first came out, it was shelved with the sf/fantasy section, which made sense based on the few chapters i read before being distracted by something else. after it had been out a while and generated a bit of a buzz, i saw it over on the romance shelf. i thought maybe someone was browsing and just left it there randomly, but the new one is shelved over in romance too, and both book are also still shelved in the sf/fantasy section. on the surface it makes a wierd sense to market to as many genres as possible. people who would enjoy the romantic elements but would never consider browsing the sf/fantasy section get exposed to a book they would otherwise pass over as “not their thing”, and same for sf/fantasy geeks that wouldn’t be caught dead reading “one of those silly bodice-rippers”. but on the other hand, purists might feel pretty pissed and think themselves duped if the story didn’t follow their expectations for their preferred genre. me, i’m not a purist, and browse the full spectrum of publishing and really couldn’t give a rat’s ass where a book was shelved as long as i enjoyed it. i guess what i’m saying is that cross-genre marketing has its good and bad points, which as previously stated, will be discussed much more thoroughly and intelligently by your regulars. i’m really looking forward to it.
Don’t forget the running couple. It seemed like every other book last year had that running couple on it somewhere!
Heh, design14
Oh, and for me, a romance has a very defined HEA.
I was wandering in B&N the other day and noticed the pile of LKH books over in the SF/Horror area and had to wonder for a minute…
Whorrotica? Science Friction? WTF?
the one that stands out in my mind is maria schnyder’s ‘poison study’ ( and i’m pretty sure i got the author’s name wrong, but it’s been languishing in my paper tbr pile for months now). when it first came out, it was shelved with the sf/fantasy section, which made sense based on the few chapters i read
It’s Snyder. 😉 You’re right—the Poison series is fantasy but it does have some strong romantic elements in it, which I think probably helps in cross-promotion (plus, her publisher’s Luna which is owned by Harlequin so that certainly isn’t hurting matters any *g*).
As for the question at hand, I think a book could be successfully marketed as both romance and not-romance, but it probably depends upon reader and author tastes. I was actually a little irritated when I went to Books A Million to pick up SEP’s Natural Born Charmer and couldn’t find it in the romance section. For whatever reason it had been shelved in general fiction. But when you look at authors like Jennifer Crusie and Nora Roberts who are shelved in both romance and not-romance, it’s hard to argue that it hurts the writer.
This is a bit of a tangent, but it’s something I’m curious about—and it IS related to the post, I swear. As a librarian, and it’s probably sacreligious to say this, but I’ve always had a bit of a problem with organizing and categorizing by subject (romance/not romance). It causes just as many issues and road-blocks, as the case of The Kommandant’s Girl shows us, as any other system of categorization. How to get beyond the reliance on subject classification? I’m not sure. But it might make for an interesting experiment to organize a bookstore by spine color, rather than subject/author, and see if that alters people’s choices and/or reading habits.
*giggle* spam blocker is “possible” Now I’ve got that song from Cinderella (the real musical) stuck in my head.
It’s interesting that you say the British cover is “decidedly romantic”. I agree that it is romantic in the general sense of that word in that it features an embrace but, to me, it does not look like a romance genre novel i.e. I would not expect to see this novel shelved in the romance section of a British bookshop.
I doubt that this book has been selling well in the UK because people look at it and think “oh – there’s a romance novel”. In fact, I can’t help but think that the presence of the swastika on the man’s arm makes a strong statement that this is NOT a romance novel. It suggests – to me – that this is a serious story, set in a time of war and upheaval. If someone asked me if I thought this book would feature a HEA, I would guess it was unlikely. I would not pick up this book hoping to read a romance genre novel. I might, however, pick it up as a literary fiction book as I do really like the cover.
The question of cross-genre-marketing which you posed in your posting is too difficult for me to answer. I’m just a reader. However, what is interesting to me is the part played by websites like this in marketing novels. Most of the new authors I have tried out over the last couple of years have been the result of looking at websites like this one and All About Romance rather than browsing in bookshops. I don’t find book covers and book blurbs particularly enlightening. In fact, I’ve been greatly disappointed in some books I’ve bought with beautiful covers and have adored some books I’ve purchased on recommendation which have covers so execrable that I’ve physically concealed them when reading in public.
An editor starts marketing a book from the moment they pitch it at an ediotrial meeting and ask for the money to buy it. You are describing the book to a bunch of people who are never going to read it, in all likelihood. You certainly have to say what it is. It can’t be a romance and not a romance.
Also the genre determines which buyer at the major outlets the sales rep. will solicit for orders.
Covers will continue to change as we all try to keep the market interested and develop a wider readership for each of our authors. It is far from an exact science as you no doubt have noticed-but it is one of the most interesting challenges we face when publishing a book.
Kate Duffy
When it comes to reaching as wide an audience as possible, if your book is romantic (and yes, has an HEA) you’re probably best off in the Romance section.
The RWA Romstats say that Romance writers read more – and more widely – than readers in other genres. My years as a bookseller tell me the same thing. Certainly when it comes to the Romance/SFF divide you’re much more likely to see the Rs browsing the SFF than the other way around.
Somewhat Off-Topic, and I apologize.
I just looked at both covers…and I can speak from personal experience, as someone who’s released a graphic novel title with featuring an officer wearing a swastika on his armband: Many book distributors will not carry books in their catalogue that display the swastika [because of their ties to European distribution]. In the UK, my book had no issues—however, my book is near being released in Germany, and we might be required to change the cover, because it’s illegal in Germany to have the symbol in artistic print media.
In the case of one distributor, they simply altered the artwork in their catalogue, removing the symbol all together. I just found it curious that in the UK, the symbol is very prominant in the artwork [as it was on my title]; but stateside-it seems to cause mini-dramas.
I’m not sure if a book can be formally marketed in more than one genre (i.e., publicity materials, interviews, etc.), but doing it informally might work (double-shelving the book in more than one genre). When Outlander first hit mass-market lo those many years ago, my local B. Dalton had it in an endcap with new Science Fiction/Fantasy novels. I bought it based on the cover blurb (time travel!) and didn’t notice it had ROMANCE on the spine in five-point type.
You should have seen me when I got to the first sex scene between Claire and Jamie—I said, “Is this a romance novel?” in much the same voice little Fred Savage used in The Princess Bride to say “Is this a kissing book?” By that time, I was too into the story to give up. *g* In a way, that double-shelving (or mistaken shelving, whichever it was) is partly responsible for me reading the romance genre today. I doubt I would have picked up a romance later had I not picked up Outlander, thinking it was a SF/F novel.
(Epilogue: I’ve given up on the series 200 pages into The Fiery Cross, but I plan to read the by-blow book Gabaldon wrote about Lord John, because I love me some Lord John.)
I’ll tag on to the book cover observations with this: I lived in France almost two decades ago, and noticed that WWII was a much stonger presence in that culture than it was in the states. I wonder if the cover differences have less to do with the sales than perhaps cultural differences do?
And to follow up on the genre tangent, as a reader, I’ve had problems in bookstores and in the library finding authors due to differences in catagorization methods. It can be a help, and it can be a nuisance.
Regarding spam blocker: I previewed my message, but it would not let me submit without another spam word, but I saw no place to do this in the preview screen.
On the upside, it knows how old I am…
Hmm… I think that both covers are lovely, but neither strike me as being especially romantic. And why does the heroine become a blonde, when the cover gets more “romantic”? I liked her better as a brunette, and I’ve never even read that book.
I do find it interesting that people will base a prejudice on what genre a book is. I’m in a bookclub, and I (almost) always choose either romance novels or classics. No one reads the classics, because they are scared of their acclaim. And they won’t read the romance novels, either. One member almost didn’t get “The Secret History of the Pink Carnation,” after asking for it in Powell’s and finding it in the dreaded Romance Section.
And she was shocked, too; not by the book, but that I, someone whom she thought of as intelligent and reasonable, would pick a romance for a group read.
In my bookstore, which is not as cool as Powell’s (what is?), TSHofPC was differently categorized—in general fiction.
Perhaps, as others have suggested, books can be sold under the title of more than one genre?
Let’s face it, there aren’t many works of fiction that don’t have some degree of romance. Same is true of movies.
A whole lot of literary classics could justifiably be shelved in the Romance section. The only reason they aren’t is because they’re…well…deemed literary classics.
Many moons ago when the topic of “make everybody happy and release books simultaneously in hardback, trade, and mass market PB” was being bandied about, it was pointed out that this is impractical due to shelf space. I think that issue applies to cross-genre marketing, as well. If Book X is over here and over there, there’s one less spot on the shelf for another book.
Personally, I’d prefer availability of greater variety. Then again, I’m an online shopper, so ya’ll can do whatever you want with your brick-and-mortar stores.
From a seeking-publication standpoint, new authors are told that if you write in your query letter that your manuscript is “speculative romantic fantasy literary fiction” (or whatever), it’s pretty much an auto reject because you obviously have no idea what the hell you’ve written. Know your market. Call it what it is—even if it’s a *gasp* Romance. I’m surprised the publisher would be so wishy-washy on the issue. If you can’t make up your mind, stick it in General Fiction.
(Incidentally, I like the idea of shelving by spine color. ‘Twould be loverly. I used to arrange my Crayola 64s by Roy G. Biv. Obsessive-compulsive? What’s that?)
I don’t have any startling insights. I just wanted to share that when I looked for The Kommandants Girl on bol.com (sorta like the Dutch Amazon), to see if there perhaps was a Dutch version as well, there was an interesting “Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought”. Namely Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner and A Thousand Splendid Suns and Stephen King’s Blaze. Who said readers of romance novels are only interested in sappy love stories?
First of all, thank you for the link to The Kommandant’s Girl which I’m now going to buy for my forthcoming holiday. Hurrah!
Second of all, the UK cover reminds me very much of the cover for Suite Francaise which is classed as literary fiction (it’s translated from French for heaven’s sake) and suggests there’s a strong trend for Robert Doisneau-type images on the covers of World War II-era books.
Third of all, it’s fascinating to see that when romance books originally published in the US are republished in the UK, the books often get a cover that’s not just different, but radically different. Far fewer clinches, less bright colours, much less mantitty.
Compare the US edition of Slightly Married and this UK version.
Quelle difference!
If I had more time, I would run along a tangent of how the romance genre is perceived in the UK versus the US, but sadly I’ll have to come back to that.
I suspect that the reason the book did well in the UK is that it was marketed as a SAGA, not as a romance. Sagas are very popular in the UK and they are basically what one would call relationship fiction or mainstream fiction with strong romantic elements.
This is very different to the straight romance in the UK and is shelved in a different section.
WW2 sagas are very popular in the UK and widely distributed—through bookstores, supermarkets and the various Book clubs.
Although many saga writers do belong to the Romantic Novelists Assoication, Dame Catherine Cookson who perhaps invented the saga genre as it currently stands did not consider herself to be a romance writer.
Thus I suspect it is more a case of there being a definite ready made market for the book.
Would Pamela Belle’s books fall under the Saga umbrella? I really like her Wintercombe series although they have been tough to get. Those of the sort of books that are not published much anymore in the US—not nearly as much as I would like them to be.
Just a note though (and not criticizing) but only one of the five books listed on the side bar was having been reviewed recently on this site would fall in the HEA romance category and there was argument about the RITA winner’s right to be considered a romance.
I would also say that, whatever marketing the publisher engages in, shelving is entirely up to the individual bookstores. If whoever is unpacking the books decides something is a romance, into the romance section it goes, regardless of spine copy or cover. That’s why you’ll find the same book in different sections depending on what bookstore you’re in. So beyond the marketing that the editor and publishing house might engage in, the bookstore is doing there own part to influence what readers get to what book.
Shelving is always dicey at my local Borders. Mysteries with cotton-candy colored covers are routinely stuck in the romance section.
Hi everyone-I just wanted to drop in and say how much I am enjoying this lively discussion.Regarding the UK market, I have a number of theories as to why the book has done so well. First, as I mentioned in my Booksquare blog, the cover is quite eye-catching. Also, there is still an intense interest there in WWII. Finally, we received some fabulous marketing (chap books in the women’s magazines) and pick up (including Tescos supermarket.)That being said, the genre issue in the UK has also been interesting. I went to grad school for history at Cambridge and when I was back promoting my book, many of my college friends there had an “Oh my!” type reaction upon learning that my UK publisher was Mills & Boon (which apparently has quite a racy reputation. ) Thanks for letting me join your chat! Best, Pam
No. Way. Way? Way!
That was runswithscissors’ reaction to reading that the book was published by Mills and Boon. But, lo, yea and verily, so it is, right there on the Amazon page: Mira publishing.
It’s not that Mills and Boon doesn’t have a special place in my heart (their titles alone would make be love them) but I definitely don’t associate them with this type of book. They tend to be associated here with the frumpy-housewife-in-dressing-gown stereotype of romance readers.
Even more genre-bending. Cool!
IMO, the British cover is just more of a story. Agree with Joanna that it doesn’t look more like a romance. It’s hard to tell what kind of a book it is from the American cover.
Depending on the size of the store (and chain), the people putting the books on the shelves often have zero choice as to where they go. In a former Canadian bookstore chain, one shelved the book wherever head office said to shelve it, whether or not the category HO chose had any basis in reality. Otherwise, inspections by upper management could result in job loss (seriously).
There are a lot of good book people in the big stores, but their spirits get broken remarkably quickly.
I consider myself a writer of contemporary comic fiction, but because I’m female, I suddenly became a writer of “women’s fiction.” When I threw some vampires in the mix because I wanted to make fun of vampire stereotypes, I became “a paranormal romance writer.”
I had very little say or control over my book covers. The first cover seems to say, “Herein lies a story about a HOT TAMALE with some vampy action.” The second cover seems to say, “Restrained cookbook murder-mystery which inexplicably has something to do with Halloween.”
Sophie Kinsella said that she wished there was a “romantic comedy” section, and I agree. In the meantime, you may find my hot tamale, paranormal romance, cookbook murder-mystery shelved in any of those categories.
Let’s face it, there aren’t many works of fiction that don’t have some degree of romance. Same is true of movies.
A friend of mine and I were discussing this once, and we came up with . . . Platoon. That’s the only movie without a love story somewhere in it.
On topic, my college bookstore didn’t carry ‘romance novels’ but they carried an awful lot of the Red Dress Ink books.
I think the cross-genre stuff can’t hurt, but I like cross-genre books anyway (f/sf with strong romantic tendencies, generally). Is Romance more preoccupied with gaining new readership or not alienating the old readership? That would determine the proportions of the cross-marketing. I’d guess. I’m just a reader, anyway.
I’m going back to lurking now.
I’m fairly new to learning about romance publishing (prior to my time at Folio—where I, full disclosure, work with Pam—I was at FSG and Viking) but from what I’ve discovered so far, they do one hell of a job with marketing.
It’s been a real eye-opener for me to see how differently places like Harlequin approach marketing from the other publishing houses I’ve worked Which is NOT to say I think my former employers did a poor job with selling books—it’s just radically different models, and probably both could learn something from the other.
It makes Red Dress Ink especially interesting to watch, since that imprint seems to have adopted marketing techniques from mainstream publishing.
I absolutely agree that, as a British reader, I would not think this book was a romance, based on the cover. Romances have happy endings and are set in enjoyable (on the whole) settings, in my world view. The grey colours and swastika would, in my mind, immediately push this book out of that category on both counts.
Most people over here old enough to be reading adult fiction will have living family members who can remember living through WW2, even if they didn’t fight in it. My mother was a teenager in London during the Blitz, for example. There are war memorials in every English town and village, WW2 fighter planes in the sky at county shows and aviation festivals all summer long… I think the period is a lot more familiar and close to many British readers than the term “historical fiction” would imply, which may partly account for the book’s success over here. And the cover does tap in very much to that black and white “Brief Encounter” stiff-upper-lip sort of zeitgeist, which is also enduringly popular.
(Not that I’d even heard of this book before today, in spite of spending my fair share of time in bookshops.)
@ Kerry Allen:
Check this out, from Maud Newton’s blog—a bookstore in SF arranged by spine color:
http://maudnewton.com/blog/?p=7877
I adored The Kommandant’s Girl, but I wouldn’t in a million years call it a romance. The emotions were not facile as they often are in romances. By ‘facile’ in this case I mean uncomplicated and linear, i.e., the heroine only loves one man and loves him more and more as the story continues.
I like when authors give readers enough credit to push the envelope emotionally, to let them feel uncomfortable. When we reach for poignancy, we risk alienating more traditional readers. It’s a tricky thing to maintain sympathy for a heroine who has genuine feelings for two men. When one is a Nazi, well, the accomplishment is tenfold.
I bought TKG because I wanted to learn more about the Polish resistance. It was great in that respect, but I also admired the way she pulled off the romantic elements, too.