Bitchin' Blog Posts
Authors as Diversified Conglomerates
by SB Sarah | by SB Sarah | April 27, 2010 | Tuesday at 1:03 pm | 92 CommentsI have an agent; his name is Dan. Dan doesn’t represent romance, but every now and again I receive an email from authors asking how I like him (well done, with lava
fava beans and a nice chianti!). I’ve received more of these sorts of queries lately (which I absolutely don’t mind) and I noticed a strange trend among those asking.
Seems several authors are looking quietly for new representation because they want to branch into other genres, and their agents say no. This makes absolutely no sense to me.
In the contracting publishing market and the Is-the-recession-over economy, shouldn’t an author be, to use business terms, as diversified as possible? Shouldn’t an author’s business be a conglomerate of strong writing in potentially more than one genre? Why should an author limit herself to one subgenre of romance when she has an idea for a historical or has a proposal for a suspense series, and her prior work is not in those fields?
I’m completely baffled by the number of authors who have emailed me to say they were ready to rock the socks of more than one romance subgenera and were stymied by their agents unwillingness or disinterest in shopping them to publishing houses.
So in an environment where folks like the Waxman agency are going to start digital publishing projects for fiction from their authors, how does it make sense that at the same time other agents (note: none of the authors who wrote to me were represented by Waxman to my knowledge) are discouraging authors from expanding with a new genre or project?
Now, I don’t know as much about the publishing industry between agents and editors (oh, mercy, pass the chianti) so I thought I’d ask y’all what you thought. Would diversification be a strength?
Readers, do you dislike when an author writes in a new genre, under their own name or a new pseudonym? Will you follow an author to a new genre you might not have tried before?
Authors, do you want to add another subgenre to your business? Have you met resistance for that one? And agents, what reasons might someone have to encourage an author not to branch outside their published genre?
Now, I generally don’t encourage anonymous comments, but if you want to comment anonymously you can do so by entering a nonsense@blitheringyaddayadda.net email address. I’m honestly befuddled and would love to learn more.
Filed: General Bitching, Random Musings
Tagged: writing, romance, historical, authors
Stephanie said on 04.27.10 at 01:35 PM • [link]
I will definitely follow an author I like to another genre. That said, I generally only give them one chance in their new field. If I don’t like their new stuff, I tend to disregard everything after that they publish.
Nadia said on 04.27.10 at 01:35 PM • [link]
As a reader, I’d have to say “sometimes.” JAK rocks the spectrum, and I enjoy reading her past, present, future. Anne Stuart moves back and forth from historicals to contemporaries, Karen Robards did some paperback historicals a while back, KMM moved from historical paranormal to urban fantasy, Teresa Medieros did a couple time-travels - and I read them all. Trying on the genre du-jour or just mixing it up to keep from getting stale, I can definitely see the appeal to the author.
Sometimes, though, the author loses me on the move from historical to contemporary and/or paranormal - Dodd, Garwood, Putney, St. Giles. I just don’t like their new voice as well as I did their historical voice. And other authors who rocked at romance make me sad that they moved toward mainstream or more plot-driven fiction. Lowell and Hoag, I still read, still enjoy, but miss the more romantic sensibility of their older works. Lowell used to write sex scenes that lasted ten pages, LOL, and they were hawt! Now her main characters rarely have internal conflict toward their growing attraction because they are so busy with the suspense/mystery, so the payoff when they hook up isn’t as satisfying.
I’m sure the author would like to take their name recognition with them to the new genre, and in most cases, that’s fine because we readers would like to find you. I would say a pseudonym over their regular author name is a better idea, though if the genre switch moves to a much steamier level. Readers who buy on name won’t be happy if their “at the bedroom door” Regency fave was all of a sudden wall-banging erotic paranormal. Better in that case to write the new line under a new name.
Nancy said on 04.27.10 at 01:48 PM • [link]
I will follow someone to a different genre. If they’re good, it’s worth a shot. Lisa Kleypas is at least as good, if not better, when she writes contemporaries. However, it drives me nuts when a successful author completely defects to suspense or mystery. I always feel like they care more about write more “respectable” books than about giving me the books I want from them. Elizabeth Lowell is the perfect example- I occasionally read her new stuff, but I’m not rushing out to buy them like I was her romances. And I just don’t like mysteries at all.
AgTigress said on 04.27.10 at 02:01 PM • [link]
On the whole, it is an author’s voice that captivates me, not the precise genre in which she is writing. JAK is a good example—and interestingly, I was already keeping her categories written under two different names in the early 80s before I even noticed that they were the same person!
Another example is Crusie: while I do have strong views about some of the twists and turns of her career (I disliked the first collaboration with Bob Mayer so much that I have not read the two subsequent ones), the thing that keeps her many admirers hooked is simply her own take on life and the way she expresses it in her writing, whether she is writing a novel, a non-fiction piece, or her blog.
I will read almost anything, fact or fiction, written by a writer whose style and voice appeal to me, and I suspect there are many other readers who feel the same way. If so, agents and publishers are making a real mistake in trying to confine their authors into little sealed boxes with genre labels. No doubt a major change, say from traditional Regency to no-holds-barred erotica, will lose some readers, but it will probably gain others, so the overall reader numbers should not be seriously affected.
The genre obsession comes of seeing books as ‘products’, and thinking that they must to be standardised and ‘measurable’ as far as possible. This may appear to make sense to some of the people in publishing, but it is simply mistaken. None of the best things in life can be reduced to simple, standardised rules.
Lil' Deviant said on 04.27.10 at 02:24 PM • [link]
Oh YEA! If I like an author then of course I will give her new ideas a go. I agree with Stephanie if I don’t find them entertaining I won’t go that direction again. I will stick with the books I like.
SB Sarah said on 04.27.10 at 02:35 PM • [link]
@AgTigress: I really liked “Agnes and the Hitman,” though I was not crazy about the first one. You might enjoy it, though I don’t know how well our reading tastes match.
EmmyTie said on 04.27.10 at 02:44 PM • [link]
As much as I’m not fond of pseudonyms, I can actually see why authors use them (or are encouraged to use them). A friend of mine is in a book club (she is not a romance reader and is unlikely to ever become one) and they decided to read JD Robb’s newest. They had no clue they were written by Nora Roberts and if they had known, the book probably wouldn’t have been chosen. None of the people in that club responded well to the sex, but that’s ten new readers that wouldn’t have read a book because they would have thought that it was too fantastical and focused on emotion.
But I would think this would be more a story about how it’s good that an author writes in more than one genre from a business point of view. Just with a pseudonym.
SB Sarah said on 04.27.10 at 03:03 PM • [link]
It’s not just the reader’s perspective I’m curious about. Why from a business perspective is it a bad idea, such that agents would discourage clients from selling in more than one genre, or that publishers might not be interested? Must crossing genres require a pseudonym? I am so confused at the idea that selling in more than one subgenre would be a bad idea.
Rachel Aaron said on 04.27.10 at 03:05 PM • [link]
I can actually understand the agent’s reluctance if they’re thinking of the author as a brand. I write funny, action fantasy (http://www.orbitbooks.net/2010/04/26/cover-launch-the-legend-of-eli-monpress/), but say I wanted to write a romance. If a reader liked my current book, they might pick up my romance and be horribly disappointed that there was say, steamy luuuuuuve rather than sword fights (though I don’t know why I wouldn’t have sword fights too, but for the sake of argument…). Said reader might not pick up my books again, even my fantasy ones.
You can get around this by simply using a different name (Rachel Aaron for fantasy, Anastasia Von Swansong-Swoon for my Russian Empire Epic Romance or whatever), but you’d dilute your brand because you’d essentially be starting over from book 1 yet again.
There are plenty of authors that do this very successfully, but agents also play to niches. I don’t even think my agent reps Romance, so if I suddenly started writing categories, he’d be flying blind (of course, knowing my agent, he’d probably still knock it out of the park, but I am very lucky). This may be the reason they don’t want you to switch if they don’t know anyone in your new genre and don’t know where to submit your work to get you the best match.
I would think this would be a bigger problem for authors taking a huge leap, though. Say going from Regencies to Tom Clancy style thrillers. I wouldn’t think moving between Romance categories would be an issue, but then I don’t know Romance publishing very well. Maybe things are very compartmentalized?
Just a thought on why this may be happening. Love the post!
-Rachel
Ken Houghton said on 04.27.10 at 03:08 PM • [link]
“well done, with lava beans and a nice chianti”
Fava beans, no? (And, really, well done? Haven’t you read the worst Romance novel of the past ten years, Kitchen Confidential?)
Cassie said on 04.27.10 at 03:10 PM • [link]
Carrie Vaughn (Kitty Norville urban fantasy series) wrote a really interesting post about just this at Genreality. She left her previous publisher because they didn’t want her to publish books in another genre/series/storyline under her own name. The comments are really interesting, and include some from publishing perspectives as well.
Here’s the link: http://www.genreality.net/breaking-up-is-hard-to-do-choosing-to-leave-a-publisher
Andrea said on 04.27.10 at 03:16 PM • [link]
I don’t mind if an author tries a new genre. If it sounds interesting, I’ll try it but if it is a genre that doesn’t interest me at all, even if I really like the author’s other stuff, I won’t. I actually prefer it if they use a pseudonym because then I won’t have to check every time a new book comes out what genre it is - BUT I want to know about the author writing under another name so that I have the chance to pick up the new books.
Yep, completely agree there! Still read Lowell but might not get them as soon as they come out.
So, basically, I don’t mind if they try something new as long as it is some subgenre of romance. ;-)
Laurel said on 04.27.10 at 03:18 PM • [link]
I can’t figure out if this is dinosaur syndrome or sound business tactic.
Everyone, not just in publishing, likes to stay in their comfort zone. So I get that an agent and author have built a brand together, things are rolling along, and the agent figures, why rock the boat? The other thing to consider is if the author has moved into a genre the agent doesn’t deal with. The network of editors is totally different and the agent doesn’t necessarily know who to shop the MS to or have any street cred with the right people. Plus, the agent knows that the author will now be taking time away from a proven money earner to experiment with an unproven commodity. I guess it’s kind of like an actor cutting an album or Darius Rucker going country. Sometimes it works, sometimes not so much.
SB Sarah said on 04.27.10 at 03:22 PM • [link]
What’s wrong with lava beans? They’re really good! *HAHAHA*
Jessica Andersen said on 04.27.10 at 03:41 PM • [link]
In my case, I jumped a fast bus to Insecurity when my series didn’t rocket into the stratosphere on the first couple of books. I put in a suspense proposal, thinking I needed a backup plan.
My agent was willing to support me if I wanted to write in both genres, but the publisher said ‘We believe in you and the series. Let’s hold off on this and focus on what we’ve got cooking already.”
So I sucked it up and worked on making book four the best f-ing book I had ever written. It’s only been out for a few weeks, but it’s had the best sales of the series so far, and my shelf space at B&N/Borders tripled practically overnight.
The moral?? In my case, the publisher’s reluctance to see me branch off into another genre was because they thought I was pulling the OMG WTF Help! trigger too early. And they were right.
YMMV!
Henofthewoods said on 04.27.10 at 03:48 PM • [link]
1. I like when authors move to new challenges.
2. A few authors I like have pseudonyms or slight changes to their names for their YA books, and that seems like a good decision, just to keep parents from having heart attacks.
3. Slight name changes work better for me than full on pseudonyms I have to keep track of year after year. S J Viehl to Lynn Viehl (I am about to try out some sample chapters of SJ after reading most of Lynn) or Jayne Castle (maiden name) to Jayne Anne Krentz, Lilith Saintcrow’s new YA name was close to Lilith Saintcrow. JAK to Amanda Quick and Barbara Michaels to Elizabeth Peters leave me more room to make a mistake and get a book that is not theirs or miss one of theirs. (Of course, with both JAK/AQ and BM/EP - I am going to check the books at least a little and remember their names because I have enjoyed some so much. Other authors may not have that advantage when I go shopping.)
my word today is feel44 - but I am only 41, I swear.
DianeN said on 04.27.10 at 03:51 PM • [link]
What’s interesting is that apparently some writers are actually encouraged to move away from their usual subgenre. I corresponded with an author whose romantic suspense series I really enjoyed for the first several books, and she told me that she was being required to up the suspense and tone down the romance in order to appeal to a wider audience. I have to say that I don’t enjoy her books as much as I did when the romance and the suspense were equally important. This makes me wonder if sometimes it’s not the author herself who wants to change subgenres—maybe she’s been encouraged to try something new, possibly by dangling the possibility of moving to hardcover?
Christina B. said on 04.27.10 at 04:37 PM • [link]
A couple years ago, I read a post by agent Nathan Bransford and it really stuck with me: http://blog.nathanbransford.com/2007/12/genre-hopping.html
I generally work within a handful of sub/genres and yes, I do it to have fun. But I also have a pretty high yearly word count, and I think moving from, say, a romantic suspense project to a YA romance keeps me fresh, keeps my writing pace moving. And I also feel like I can cultivate more than one brand at the same time. Maybe this isn’t the best way to work it, but I couldn’t imagine any other way for me.
I also think the best way for an author to approach crossing genres is to use different pseudonyms, but keep them transparent to a certain extent so as not to dilute the brand but to also allow readers to follow the author to a different genre if they want.
Kalen Hughes said on 04.27.10 at 04:59 PM • [link]
It’s a bad idea when you A) haven’t established yourself yet in your first genre and/or B) can’t write enough books a year to support multiple genres. Basically, if you spread yourself too thin you risk losing momentum and losing readers.
Beth said on 04.27.10 at 05:13 PM • [link]
I think it’s awesome when authors write in different genres. I don’t have much experience with this, but I think KMM’s urban fantasy is better than her paranormal romance, and I’m really glad she had the opportunity to let her storyline and characters evolve in that way.
Also, I don’t find it confusing or annoying when authors use pseudonyms. Finding out two authors you like are actually the same person is a fun surprise. Like when you find out Chipotle is owned by McDonalds. They are both so different but so good.
Which leads me to my next thought. I understand the thing about and author as a brand, but only to a certain extent. I mean, a good book is a good book whether it is a romance, or a mystery, or a paranormal, etc.
spamword: that69 hehe :D
joykenn said on 04.27.10 at 05:25 PM • [link]
Ok, I’m of two minds on this. It is disconcerting to pick up a book by a familiar author to get something unexpected. BUT, though this is heresy to say it, I was burned out on Nora Roberts and picked up the JD Robb series and loved it. In fact, it brought me BACK to Nora. If I like a writer’s style I will generally like them in other persona.
Then there is Charlaine Harris…I had read one or two of her books but wasn’t a fan of all her series. The Shakespeare series has a serious tone and not much romance since the heroine is the survivor of a truly awful rape experience. Very well written so I searched them all out. I picked up her Stackhouse series without connecting her with her other series. Somehow the idea of Southern Vampire Mysteries appealed to me. Now I’ve gone back to connect with other series of hers. I’ve come to appreciate her and even the less “serious” series have a subtle appeal now that I recognize more of her “voice”.
I guess the answer is…it depends. A familiar name might make me pick up an unrelated book as long as it was REALLY clear with cover art and book blurb that this was a different experience. I like Carrie Vaughan and will probably give her a try in a different, non-series mode. Certainly the inability of her publisher to even consider her doing something different would be a major reason to leave them. A publishing contract shouldn’t be a reason for locking away her creativity. Now, if they wind up being really not very good, she might have wished she’d stayed. We’ll see.
Joy said on 04.27.10 at 05:28 PM • [link]
I have followed some authors to different sub-genres and been quite happy with it. I tried a Western by Jo Goodman (was OK) and contemporaries by Lisa Kleypas and Julia London (were fabulous). I followed Bujold from sf to fantasy/romance.
I am slightly less likely to follow an author into mysteries, but I followed Diana Norman’s straight historical fiction to Ariana Franklin’s historical mysteries (notice different pen names) with great pleasure—but I only did that when I learned that Franklin was Norman because I looooooooooved Norman’s work.
There are certain genres/subgenres I will almost never touch; I like Carolyn Jewel’s historicals but I will probably not touch her paranormals because paranormals do nothing for me.
Jodane said on 04.27.10 at 06:13 PM • [link]
Absolutely! I think the whole genre-labeling system is one of the worst things ever, even though I completely understand that is how the market works (simplification, pigeonholing, simplification!) and it couldn’t work any other way. If authors want to branch out, more power to them, and if they’re good, of course I will follow them over.
The whole “branding debate” drives me a little nuts; I even feel it as a book reviewer, since I am like a literary magpie and I can’t just say “Oh, I review YA” or “Oh, I review fantasy” or “I review literary fiction.” How do you brand that? It’s always refreshing to see the take of someone who comes from a different discipline. I’m always going to be encouraging interdisciplinary experimentation, because I think it’s awesome and there’s enough systematic stifling of it already.
JewelTones said on 04.27.10 at 06:19 PM • [link]
Funny JAK was mentioned here. She does cross genre lines (historical, contemporary, futuristic, paranormal), and she was the first author I ever heard say that getting readers to cross genre lines is very, very hard (which is why I think her current Arcane Society “gimmick” is freaking brilliant!). I was surprised because I’ll follow a good writer pretty much anywhere. But she mentioned at an RWA convention a few years ago that a ton of her readers won’t/don’t do that. They like the one type of book and won’t cross over into the others—whether that’s from now knowing she is all those other names or just a dislike of that particular subgenre, I don’t know. But I gather it is quite the problem.
A couple other romance writers who voyaged into paranormal have run into the same problem from other comments I’ve heard. I guess a majority of readers just don’t like change.
JT
JewelTones said on 04.27.10 at 06:22 PM • [link]
oh darn it. Typo. Sorry. That’s supposed to be:
They like the one type of book and won’t cross over into the others—whether that’s from not knowing she is all those other names or just a dislike of that particular subgenre, I don’t know.
JT
Karen H said on 04.27.10 at 06:39 PM • [link]
I started reading only historical romances (which are still my first love). It wasn’t until I discovered that one of my favorites, Amanda Quick, was really Jayne Ann Krentz who wrote contemporaries, that I tried my first contemporary. I mostly associated contemporaries with Danielle Steel, whose books don’t appeal to me particularly. Then I found out JAK was Jayne Castle who wrote paranormals and I got into another genre. Now I read a good author, no matter what genre is involved. And several of my favorites do write in several genres. So, definitely, I will follow an author most anywhere she wants to go as long as I like her writing.
Becca said on 04.27.10 at 06:42 PM • [link]
Hm. Writing this, looking at favorite authors, I seem to like it when they change names for different genres. I guess I treat different nyms as separate “people”.
I really like JAK and Jayne Castle books, but don’t care for Stephanie James or Amanda Quick (although I will read the new Amanda Quick Arcane Society book because it’s part of a trilogy). AQ books are just too mannered and precious for my taste, I guess.
I love Nora Roberts in all her guises - she successfully kept the NR “brand” with contemp romances, paranormal romances, and romantic suspense. I also love that she writes in a slightly different style as JD Robb (Remember When is one of my favorites, because it has both styles).
I like the more recent Kay Hooper books (except her last two, which were too much same-old same-old) than I liked her straight romances.
I read Elizabeth Peters but don’t care as much for Barbara Michaels.
Kristina said on 04.27.10 at 06:49 PM • [link]
I have and will follow authors that I love to new genre’s. Julie Garwood is a good example in my list of must read authors. When she made the jump from sweet historicals to modern suspense with a dash of romance I jumped on that band wagon and picked up a trumpet.
What I don’t care for is when an author that I love suddenly disappears with no explanation and then a couple years later after no new book I learn they’ve been writing something unique to them under a different name. Ummmm hello???? You have a fan base? Did you NOT want to use them as leverage into a new area? Makes no sense to me.
Typ0 said on 04.27.10 at 07:06 PM • [link]
I think the problem with genre changes comes when authors don’t make it clear to their fan base what’s going on. For example, Karen Marie Moning’s Fae series receives a lot of flack from her fans for “not being romance.” She, on the other hand, says it was never intended to be: it’s an urban fantasy. But her fans didn’t realize that and initially felt duped. For this reason, i feel pseudonyms are a better bet when an author is trying to genre jump.
TKF said on 04.27.10 at 07:08 PM • [link]
I’m one who didn’t follow her, and I loved her historicals. In fact, she lost me entirely when all her “historicals” became all about her made up, magical, kung-fu secret society. They just weren’t HISTORICAL anymore.
AM Riley said on 04.27.10 at 07:35 PM • [link]
This is a really interesting topic. I have had readers tell me they were surprised when I wrote a paranormal book. They had expected a mystery with romantic elements, because my other books with that publisher were mystery/romance. I was silly enough not to warn them.
I have seen the reactions, though, to authors who assume a new psuedonym for every genre in which they write. That seems a little too devious for me, and I think readers feel that they are being played.
It’s undoubtedly a tricky and careful thing to start messing around with your fanbase
So, an agent or publisher who really is in the business of making the most money for the writer and themselves as possible, is going to be a little nervous if that writer starts diverging from his/her expected path.
We writers, who like to push the envelope a little or who (as in my case) have not yet decided which genre to settle on, want to experiment, want to indulge the crazy whacked out muse. Its a sticky wicket. The comments above have been very interesting to read.
TKF said on 04.27.10 at 07:41 PM • [link]
How so? What ulterior motive could they possibly be attributing to the author?
willa said on 04.27.10 at 07:44 PM • [link]
I will not follow a writer into a new genre, for the most part. Contemporary romance writers that I love making the jump to romantic suspense—argh, it kills me, because I cannot follow them! I hate romantic suspense! The same goes with paranormal romance, I cannot get into that genre and when a writer I like goes to that genre, I try really hard to follow her, but I just can’t.
Actually, it kind of goes across the board. Science fiction writer? Won’t follow you to mainstream contemporary fiction. Contemporary YA writer? Won’t follow you to mainstream adult. And so forth.
As for agents not wanting to make the jump with their authors, it’s generally because they don’t know anyone in that genre and have no contacts in that genre. They wouldn’t know what’s popular in that genre, who’s looking for something in that genre and who is full up and won’t take anything new from that genre. The agent wouldn’t be able to tell if the story is derivative or overplayed or passe, and so forth. It makes sense. (So says a former literary agent’s assistant.)
AM Riley said on 04.27.10 at 07:53 PM • [link]
TKF, I’m not sure myself why the reaction has been so strong and I don’t want to get that old “who is so and so really” thread going again, but every now and then another blog gets going about multiple identities and it does seem that people don’t like it. I’ve thought about it a bit because I write for two totally different audiences under the same name. Sometimes I think it would be wise to adopt another psuedonym.
Susan Laura said on 04.27.10 at 08:10 PM • [link]
TKF, LOL!!! Thank you for putting into words what I don’t like about those books.
Anonymous said on 04.27.10 at 08:19 PM • [link]
I just had this conversation yesterday with my agent, probably while you were composing this post. I’m early in my career and changing gears suddenly is likely to annoy (her words: “piss off”) the readership I’m building. She discouraged the change and I’m taking her advice, although I may turn to this project later in my career.
Chicklet said on 04.27.10 at 08:50 PM • [link]
As a reader, I already read a bunch of genres (mystery, SF, fantasy, chick lit, literary fiction, nonfiction), so I’m not at all fazed at trying an author’s foray into a different genre or subgenre. I guess I’m more experimental than some readers, though, judging by the other comments.
Deb Kinnard said on 04.27.10 at 08:56 PM • [link]
I may be the salmon swimming upstream on this (won’t be the first time) and I wonder if this “the reader won’t like it if you genre-jump” paradigm is nothing more than publisher hearsay. That is, are there stats to support this mindset? Or is it simply easier for a publisher to say “no” to an agent based on, “Oh, we know that Deb Kinnard, she writes contemporary Christian romance” if my agent tries to pitch my historical to them.
Maybe this is, more than anything, about being easy for the publisher to understand. Not the reader so much.
Thoughts?
donna said on 04.27.10 at 09:08 PM • [link]
I’m boggled. McDonalds owns Chipolte? How did I not know this? Now I’m going to have to really think about how much I want another fajita burrito w/carnitas….
Switching genre’s? I can’t think how awful it would be to have a book idea rejected because it was outside the “niche” I’d been arbitrarily ascribed to. (And if it isn’t arbitrary, why do I find Gail Carriger in SciFi/Fantasy & Meljean Brook in Romance?) Aren’t they like an author’s children; every book having an equal value & deserving equal affection? Pidgeon holes are small, unpleasant spaces. I’d hate to find my favorite writers trapped in one whether I liked the new direction or not.
Betsy said on 04.27.10 at 09:16 PM • [link]
The writers I most admire write successfully in more than one genre—and not just fiction. Poetry! Memoir! Plays! I tend to get bored with authors who stick to a too-particular genre or formula.
TKF said on 04.27.10 at 09:31 PM • [link]
Maybe it was just a word choice thing? Calling the author “devious” and saying the readers feel “played” implies that the author is gaining something by duping the readers. But there’s nothing to gain (at least nothing that comes at the reader’s expense).
Often writers take new pen names so as NOT to confuse their readers (for example, a friend of mine writes Inspies and Blazes, but she keeps those two identities far, far apart). Others simply use it as a marketing tool so readers can keep track of which “type” off book this is going to be, others do it because their publisher says they have to. *shrug* If it’s not a walled off thing (like my example), they usually link their various names on their websites.
Kalen Hughes said on 04.27.10 at 09:44 PM • [link]
Because they were bought by different houses and/or lines.
I totally think Carriger’s books are paranormal romances and she told me she wrote them with cross-genre appeal in mind, but her intended market was the SciFi/Fantasy market (and the editors her books would have been submitted to would have reflected that).
A friend of mine is a senior editor at LOCUS (the SciFi/Fantasy version of Romantic Times) and she says romance editors are consistently unable (or unwilling) to understand that the typical SciFi/Fantasy reader isn’t looking for books in the romance section, nor can they articulate to her any plan that would encourage them to do so. So it’s better for Carriger to be in the SciFi/Fantasy section, where SciFi/Fantasy readers will find her, and where romance readers will ALSO go looking for her (basically, romance readers tend to take from a wider cross section of genres than most other genre fiction fans).
Bliss said on 04.27.10 at 09:48 PM • [link]
I loved Karen Marie Moning’s paranormal romances. I read the first fae story. While I understand she decided to branch out. What I didn’t appreciate is the bookstores AND publishers identifying the books as romance.
Alpha Lyra said on 04.27.10 at 09:54 PM • [link]
I usually don’t like it when one of my favorite authors switches genres. For example, Lois McMaster Bujold switched from her science fiction Vorkosigan series to fantasy novels. The fantasy novels were good, but in my opinion they were not in the same league as the Vorkosigan books.
But maybe she simply didn’t have another Vorkosigan book in her. I wanted more Vorkosigan books, but if the author was tired of the series and out of ideas, any additional books she wrote in that series would have disappointed me.
Better an author should jump genres, I think, than write inferior books in a genre she has tapped out.
I can see how a publisher, however, might prefer a weak Vorkosigan novel to an unknown novel in a different genre, because even if the Vorkosigan book is disappointing, it will still sell. In this sense what the author wants (to reinvigorate her writing with something fresh so her books don’t get stale) may differ from what the publisher wants (a book guaranteed to sell).
Leslie H said on 04.27.10 at 09:56 PM • [link]
I actually watched this problem play out with a friend who had written many, many HQ’s. Her agent was incredibly discouraging when she tried to move into Chick Lit and when early in the paranormal boom she had a story to tell that was awesome (I would tell you more but I am still hoping she will pursue it).
In my opinion, it is about time and billable hours. They need to spend as little as possible on each author to remain in the black. They have to balance good service with efficiency and setting up what is basically a new career takes them in the red.
I also think that agencies and especially agents have their own publishing comfort zones, and a different genre may require different industry contacts. I suspect the agent’s question is “What’s in it for me?” Answer: probably less money for a few years.
There are two exceptions to all this, Janet Evanovich didn’t find the best place for her voice until she switched to mystery. Nora Roberts/JD Robb is the other exception, a writer who is so prolific that a pseudonym allowed her to publish more books! NOBODY lost on that deal.
By the way, Chipotle is owned by Steve Ells NOT McD’s
Melissa Blue said on 04.27.10 at 10:15 PM • [link]
Like all things I think it comes down to money. The idea of a conglomerate makes sense until you factor in the details. Is the author established in one genre? If so would branching out be worth the risk? Let’s say the author comes out with 2 full length novels a year. In order to build up this new name they’d have to want to come out two full length novels (probably more since I’m just throwing out numbers). Can the author sustain that without hurting the money maker? That’s 400, 000 words. Not to mention editing and promo.
Really in essence you are starting from the ground up. You can’t depend on that established readership just looking at the comments here. And as far as readers in the genre you are branching out in, you are a new author.In the long run, yes, it makes perfect business sense, at least to me. The agent (editor or publisher) may not think it’s the right thing for you to do at that very moment. From that perspective I can understand.
Yet I’ve learned when you want something you go after it. It’s up to the author to create and make the career path they envision. But I’m the type of person who would rather fail at something I believed in than something I felt meh about.
Kathleen Ronan said on 04.27.10 at 10:27 PM • [link]
I’m new to the site, and a new author working on a new project. Actually two, but I’m paying more attention to one than the other. I’ve always wanted to write a book and am one of those looney people you will find daydreaming at the train station, cafe, bus stop etc. I’m writing a story in my head. Count on it.
But I digress. About this diversification theme. Ummm. Two names: Nora Roberts and J.D. Robb. Same author. Totally different genres. Have to say, not a fan of the J.D. genre, but have read plenty of Nora Roberts. But to each her own right? I don’t think any of my stories fall into the same category, but I don’t read just one category either so today it’s Nora Roberts. Tomorrow, Mercedes Lackey. That about says it all, doesn’t it?
hapax said on 04.27.10 at 10:31 PM • [link]
I think it depends on *why* I read that particular author.
I love Bujold for her wonderful characters, and the way she lets character drive the plot. I’d follow her to any genre.
I love Evanovich for her witty banter, but her paper thin characters annoy me. So I’ll pick up any of her stand-alone romances, and the first few titles in any of her suspense series, but knowing that I’ll drop them after the first few books.
I loved Amada Quick for her historical world-building, and how her plots seem to be driven by the era. Liked the same thing about her futuristic Jayne Castles. Her contemporary JAK titles bore me to tears, and I had to give up the Arcane Society novels from too many dents in the wall.
I like both Barbara Michaels and Elizabeth Peters very much, but I cannot think of them as the same writer. Utterly different in tone, style, character, plotting… Same for Nora Roberts and J.D. Robb.
Beth said on 04.27.10 at 10:35 PM • [link]
My bad. Apparently McDonalds was an investor in Chipotle, but only until 2006.
Not to mention that the first book cover for the Fever series was really misleading. But I never saw that cover in a book store. I’ve only seen the cityscape covers. Also, KMM has mentioned that although the individual books don’t qualify as romance, the series as a whole does.
Michelle said on 04.27.10 at 11:24 PM • [link]
Personally I think both sides have merit. By allowing an author to diversify and expand within the same company they have the potential to bring in more cash, more awards, etc. However people tend to be sidetracked by what they already expect from an author and than could cause sales to tank. For example I love Robin Williams, he’s the all around funny man, great in any role, however if youn see him in Patch Adams or What Dreams may come, a more serious role - The movie tanks because people are expecting the sterotypcial Robin Williams. I think that can happen to authors that keep the same name and move from Historical romance to say fantasy and their fantasy series flop because it’s not what the already created fan base wants. I can see why an agent would want to limit the amount of exposure, they don’t want their client to loose their fan base. For me I am a reader of all sorts of fiction, so it would not be a problem for me to change from one thing to the next. I’m loyal to the authors I follow and will ready anything they write - like someone said earlier I am more interested in their voice, and their method of story telling. I’m a huge Anne Rice fan, who has written under 3 pen names, and I’ve read everything she puts out because I like the way she writes. As a hopefully writer I have written in all different genres - I would prefer to have the flexibility to tell the story in any genre or category, but realistically I know that if I want to sell both historical and contemporary it might be best to have a pen name. I guess to sum up I think diversify is more of a double edged sword, their are benefits and downsides to it.
JewelTones said on 04.27.10 at 11:39 PM • [link]
I’m in the same boat as TypO, Bliss and Beth on that whole Urban Fantasy experience. I don’t blame the authors for how a publishing house tends to market a book, but my first experience with Urban Legend was smack in the center of the Romance Section of my bookstore and was definitely *not* a romance. Like Bliss I felt very purposefully deceived.
I find it interesting that JAK is currently working very hard to inform readers that she is all of her alias. And it took Nora Roberts quite a bit before her covers started to reflect (if memory serves me right) that JD Robb WAS Nora Roberts.
I find the cross-genre aspect of the publishing business fascinating because as a reader I know the troubles I have in following an author from one to the other (Kay Hooper is a good example. Used to read her all the time. Now she’s firmly in the Romantic Suspense arena and I rarely read her)... as a writer I understand wanting to write anything as long as it interests you… and from a publishers standpoint (not that I am one but I can understand the business logic behind it) you don’t want to—as someone put it—“piss off” your readers either.
JT
Val said on 04.27.10 at 11:50 PM • [link]
I don’t see why authors can’t branch out or wouldn’t be encouraged to do so. As a reader, my genre-preferences ebb and flow like the (insert crude allusion here), so why would a writer, an artist, an author be any different? I would hate to be stuck in my job and have my HR person tell me that it wouldn’t be lucrative to my career to expand my knowledge base because I’m too good at what I do.
Like others have said previously, it depends on what I like about the author and into which genre they explore which ultimately decides whether or not I’ll follow them.
For example, I love KMM and would follow her just about anywhere under any name. I’m a huge Nora Roberts fan and will peruse inside-flaps and back covers for anything she writes under that name or pseudonym to see if the subject matter will entice me into purchase, regardless of genre. I love Anne Rice and followed her into Erotica with the Sleeping Beauty trilogy because I thought: If she can captivate, entrench, and affect me like that in General Fiction and/or Horror, what will she do with Erotica? (side note: YIKES and HOLY CRAP! Of the 3 “Beauty” books, I made it through 1-1/2 of them before literally flinging it away in abject horror at the sheer insanity that is kicking off between the covers of these books. WHOA! I **will** finish the trilogy as a matter of pride and principle. I WILL NOT be bested by a folk-tale. Damn you, Beauty…. Damn you! I couldn’t look my family in the eyes for days after! WHY!!??)
I digress. To recap, I can’t understand why diverging would be a bad thing… why not do as Anne Rice did and write under a pseudonym along with your name? As in: Anne Rice writing as A. N. Roquelaure. That way you’d keep the brand and achieve a separate “identity” for the new genre while giving the “new brand” time to flesh itself out and gain momentum and then eventually dropping the “old brand” from the new genre if it’s successful. I’m sure I don’t understand nearly enough about all this to make a convincing argument, but that’s my $0.02.
future68 - u do me, and tmo, I’ll owe ya one.
Becca said on 04.28.10 at 12:12 AM • [link]
@ Alpha Lyra - Lois Bujold has a new Vorkosigan book coming out this November, fyi.
Kinsey Holley said on 04.28.10 at 12:40 AM • [link]
A NEW VORKOSIGAN NOVEL! WHOO HOOO…..Seriously, I was starting to think she’d never write another one and I am a huge Miles devotee…
I think if an author is prolific enough, writing in more than one genre shouldn’t be a problem. Individual readers may not like to cross genres, but there are enough romance readers overall, I would think, to provide an audience for a talented writer. Look at Lynn Viehl, who does paranormal romance and science fiction and anything else she wants. She also has a superhuman output - an average of twelve thousand words A DAY—so she can write enough books to keep her momentum going in more than one genre.
It’s no secret that publishers are risk averse, esp. nowadays, when smaller advances are being paid, fewer new writers are offered contracts, and writers whose very first books don’t sell well aren’t given any time to develop. So if an author’s selling well in one genre, I imagine a publisher wouldn’t encourage a genre jump. I wonder if e-pubs are any more open to genre switching.
I’m still determined to write the straight Regency I’ve had in my head for years, as well the time travel regency I recently dreamed up.
Oh my God, y’all. REGENCY WEREWOLVES. Huh? Huh?
beyond45 - sure. rub it in, bitch.
Becca said on 04.28.10 at 01:38 AM • [link]
Kinsey: I’m not sure where Lois can go more with Miles. Parenthood, certainly. She said at one point that the next Big Miles Book would deal with the death of Aral (*sob*!) but she seems to have gone back on this. It’ll still be something that Miles will have to deal with, but I don’t know if I’ll want to read that book.
Lorraine said on 04.28.10 at 01:48 AM • [link]
I definitely have followed romance authors into different genres. I first read a Kinley MacGregor historical, which led to Sherrilyn Kenyon’s DH series, which led to several other authors’ paranormal series, which led to their historicals, eg, Carolyn Jewel. See how it works, agents.
It’s ridiculous to think that the reading public won’t go along for the ride. If the books are good, we go. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
CLMoore said on 04.28.10 at 01:50 AM • [link]
I’ll follow an Author if they switch genre’s. Pseudonym don’t fool me for long..
Remember this link: http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/
fantasticfiction site is your friend..
oldbitey said on 04.28.10 at 01:59 AM • [link]
How come this industry feeds on fear?
Publishing houses are so averse to change, frightened of allowing authors who CAN write to branch out into other subgenres, that there’s a lack of freshness across the romance genre. As a result, agents won’t take a risk on something or someone new because the publishing houses are busy being scardy-cats. Fear of change is responsible for the stagnation of Contemporaries. Mould has started to grow, but, and this may be a stretch, maybe fear is why paranormals keep zombie-ing along.
—Sandra
Moriah Jovan said on 04.28.10 at 02:26 AM • [link]
Aside: Deb Kinnard, I’m reading Damages right now and quite liking it. :)
I write completely differently all the time. It’s kind of a point of pride to keep changing it up book to book, genre-hopping within a unifying theme. Family saga, contemp romance, women’s fic, historical, and post-apoc. Different POVs, different premises, different foci.
My goal is to build a reader base that understands I’m not a “this” writer or a “that” writer, and will follow me on whatever ride I build.
Trippinoutmysoul said on 04.28.10 at 02:35 AM • [link]
There are some authors I will follow anywhere- Stephen King? Pet Sematary is a far, creepy ass cry from the Dark Tower series. Diana Gabaldon? I’d read her grocery list. But I like to know when the book I pick up by a familiar author is not in the genre I’m looking for, and I think some-what transparent psuedonyms are a useful tool for this. After years of reading GREAT romance like Lucky’s Lady, Cry Wolf and Dark Paradise from Tami Hoag, I picked up a new book with her name on it and was totally disappointed when it didn’t have those elements I was looking for. Some authors I buy because I like their voice and I’ll read anything they write, some I look for because I ‘know’ what genre they write and that they write it well.
More objectively, author’s shouldn’t be given crap for going beyond their familiar genre- as a reader, I think the more books that are written, all the better. And even if the established fan base doesn’t much care for it, someone somewhere will buy it. It’s like someone making only blue shoes for 5 years and then saying “You know, I think I’ll start making some green shoes too, and maybe brown.” Different strokes for different folks, ya’ll.
Shiloh Walker said on 04.28.10 at 03:02 AM • [link]
i do have intentions of branching into other genres and one of the reasons I chose the agent I chose was because she seemed to understand that desire-sooner or later, I’m going to try more straight UF, I’d like to try my hand at fantasy and there are one or two other genres I’d like to try.
She’s totally cool with it, and in fact, wants to me to try everything I want to try-spread my wings, so to speak.
There are some authors who’ve branched off and while I may not follow them everywhere, I continue to read if they still write the areas I like.
Whether or not I’m going to change my name if I branch off, that’s something I haven’t thought about yet. I do understand why authors pick multiple names, and if it seems like the wisest decision for me to go with a new name, I will, although I’ll likely go with something similar or the same vein.
DS said on 04.28.10 at 03:36 AM • [link]
I have no idea why anyone would want to discourage an author from trying other genres. If I had to speculate though, I would guess it has to do with individual novels in certain genres may sell well, but romance novels in general may sell better with less effort and initial outlay by the publisher.
From my memory, Iris Johansen, Tami Hoag and Tess Gerritsen all broke out at the same time with suspense novels. All three are still publishing with some degree of success. Hoag is the only one I read consistently these days. I haven’t finished one of Gerritsen’s since the Mephisto Club, a book I was very disappointed in.
There were a lot of other romance writers who also tried their hand at suspense about the same time, who did not break out. Elise Title’s Romeo comes to mind because I have a copy on my shelf. Not a bad book, but it did not hit the way the books by the other authors mentioned did.
I also have no idea why anyone would feel that an author was being devious by using a pseudonym. It used to be the norm when romance publishers essentially owned the name an author wrote under. I have a book somewhere that was published in the 80’s that listed pseudonyms for all the major and some minor romance writers up to that time.
JJ said on 04.28.10 at 03:58 AM • [link]
Throwing my two cents in here as a green member of the publishing industry, but there are a few reasons an agent or publisher might be wary of an author changing genres. I’m not as familiar with the romance market, so you’ll have to forgive me.
There are novels and then there are books. Authors write novels; publishers sell books. There is a slight, but not insignificant difference between the two. Readers buy a book, then read the novel. I’m trying to develop a difference between a book as a PRODUCT (with a brand) to be bought and a novel as the story contained within.
The hard part is figuring out what makes a brand. Is it the genre? Is it the voice? What is it? Why are some authors successful in writing in multiple genres (Nora Roberts, Neil Gaiman, Michael Chabon) and others need pseudonyms?
For authors like Nora, Neil, and Michael, it most often comes to down to a commonality of voice, tropes, and themes (and how they are treated) in their books that appeal, so genre-hopping is less of an issue. But say you have a writer who wrote a really fantastic gothic romance and the things that appeal about the book were the gothic and the romance. Then s/he wrote a light-hearted romantic comedy. What does the publisher do? The brand the booksellers bought was the gothic romance with its tortured love story and creepy mystery; how do we sell them the light-hearted romantic comedy? Especially if they’re equally good in two utterly different ways?
Say a company makes really awesome socks. One day, they decide, hey, I’m going to make really awesome hats and gloves too. Their buyers are probably going to say, “Yeah, sure. It’s all made from quality yarn. I can trust this company to make me awesome socks, hats, and gloves.” This is a writer who can probably write in multiple genres and it goes without a hitch.
But say there’s another company who crafts really gorgeous rocking chairs. Each rocking chair is a work of art and gorgeous. Then one day, the company says “We are also going to make replica swords.” Their buyers are probably going to go, “Say what?” Each replica sword is ALSO a work of art and they will find another base of buyers who appreciate them. But there’s a little bit of a mental disconnect there when you realize the same company does both things. The people buying replica swords will go, “What’s with the rocking chair?” and vice versa. It’s probably best this company start a separate business for the replica swords. This is a writer who probably has a few pseudonyms.
Those are my, uh, neopyhte thoughts! The honest truth is that there is no one answer to your question. I hate to equivocate, but it all depends. (No one likes to hear it. Nevertheless, that’s the only real answer I can give.)
I jotted some quick thoughts about branding in my blog here, by the way.
Cora said on 04.28.10 at 04:02 AM • [link]
I read across genres and I will follow a favourite author to a new genre or subgenre. And in many cases, I enjoy both the old and the new books. Of course, I may not care for the new stuff and will avoid it from then on. For example, I’m not a big fan of historicals and thus I like Jayne Ann Krentz and Jayne Castle a lot more than Amanda Quick, though I’ve read all. And I enjoyed Suzanne Enoch’s Samantha Jellicoe series a lot more than her historicals. I read Jim Butcher’s Dresden Files, but not his Codex Alera series. And while I didn’t really care for Karen Marie Moning’s Highlander books, I enjoy her Fae series a whole lot. But those are personal preferences. And my personal preferences in no way mean that an author should only write what I like, especially since another reader will have very different preferences.
Authors are not brands nor are they the slaves of their agents/publishers/readers. Authors are people. They should be able to go where their creativity takes them, even if it crosses subgenre and genre boundaries, and they should be able to do so under their own names. I understand the need for pen names, if the genres are wildly different, e.g. YA and erotica or inspirational and erotica. But a switch from contemporary to historical or from romantic suspense to paranormal should not require a new pen name. And if a different pen name is chosen, it often feels to me as if the author or publisher are ashamed of the new books. For example, there is a male epic fantasy author who also writes an urban fantasy series under a different pen name. Under his epic fantasy name, he is pretty involved in the SFF community, etc…. But he does not even mention the books under the urban fantasy name on his blog, does not link to them from his website, and it does feel as if he is trying to hide them. This is just sad IMO. Besides, blurbs, covers, etc… usually make it amply clear what genre one is dealing with.
I do understand the agent’s POV, if he or she does not work in the new genre. Hence, I think a writer should be upfront about the desire to change genres somewhere down the line before signing with an agent and/or publisher. I am an aspiring writer myself and I have the tendency to write all over the genre map. There are certain similarities between the different works, but being forced into one narrow genre or subgenre would kill my creativity really fast. Plus, the genre of my current WIP is pretty much a fluke and not where I see myself. This will probably hurt my chances when it comes to finding and agent and publisher, but I think it’s better to be open about this from the start.
Catherine said on 04.28.10 at 04:18 AM • [link]
if i really liked the author, i would absolutely follow them. if i didn’t know the author, i wouldn’t know the difference. i can’t see how it would hurt - if it’s a good author (and more importantly a really good book), why not try something new?
M. said on 04.28.10 at 04:54 AM • [link]
Genre jumping is a sticky issue with most agents, especially ones who represent a limited number of genres. I found my first agent at seventeen, whom I worked with for about two years on a project (YA mainstream) that didn’t sell, but when I decided to work on my next project (YA sci-fi) it wasn’t something the agency could represent. I’m now twenty and have found another agency, but it wasn’t easy. A lot has to do with the editor contacts the agent has prior to submission—many times an agent dealing primarily in horror or suspense won’t know many editors who take literary or romance.
In addition to bridging the gap just to get a work published, you also have to contend with gaining a new readership. If you have a solid readership in the paranormal romance genre, then the publishing house stands to profit from more paranormal romance novels by you. If you branch out to, say, westerns, then you are approaching a group of readers who may never have read your work and thus the publisher might lose money if the work is not quickly accepted by said readers. It’s basically starting from scratch. Big names like Stephen King and Nora Roberts can get away with it because even readers in other genres know who they are and are more willing to pick up their book, supposedly. And that doesn’t always work—Meg Cabot, for example, is a YA writer to some and a chick lit writer to others, and one readership may never pick up one of her books from the opposite end of their spectrum.
I don’t know for sure, but it seems to me that it would be easier to branch out to other subgenres within romance, since the genre itself is still romance. I know if it were me I would just as easily pick up a paranormal romance as I would a regency historical.
My two cents :)
spam word: fine 56. Switching genres is fine 56 percent of the time!
Angelia Sparrow said on 04.28.10 at 04:56 AM • [link]
I don’t have an agent. And so far, my publishers have been happy to let me genre-hop any way I see fit. Steampunk lesbians, gay werewolves, a sexy Hanukkah gift or pagan inspy, swashbuckling pirates or contemporary BDSM, flower faeries or erotic horror, it’s all good.
It keeps me fresh and it keeps my readers and reviewers on their toes.
Marjorie Liu said on 04.28.10 at 05:24 AM • [link]
As an author, I just like to tell different kinds of stories. I mean, why not? It seems like a no-brainer, no matter what folks say about branding, expectations, etc. Yes—one has to take those things into account—but it shouldn’t be a reason to deny yourself the pleasure of spreading your wings.
I’m writing comic books for Marvel, which is about as far outside the romance genre as you can get—but it’s going great. I’ve been able to move between romance and urban fantasy, as well—and I plan to keep mixing things up. My agent totally supports me in this.
Emily said on 04.28.10 at 05:29 AM • [link]
I can see an agent having limited contacts and not wanting to do another genre with an author. I’d really hope the agent would be upfront about it if that is the reason. I really dislike the idea of them (or a publisher) discouraging an author from trying. If an author gets bored in a genre, it really shows up in the writing quality.
I’m fine with pen names. I know of one author who writes both erotica and YA. Really good reason for her pen names. I just have to say, I want the author’s website to mention the other pen names. (Well, not the YA side of the website in previous case.) And to LIST THE BOOK ORDER of a series.
Ulrike said on 04.28.10 at 05:40 AM • [link]
Yes, yes, yes, and yes some more! I’m much more likely to try a new genre by an author I love than to try a new author in a genre I love. That includes following a blogger into book format.
I followed Sarah Rees Brennan’s blog for several years before she published The Demon’s Lexicon. DL is an urban fantasy, a genre I don’t usually read and never seek out. I never would have picked it up if I hadn’t already loved the author.
Sam said on 04.28.10 at 06:37 AM • [link]
I’d have to say, it depends on the author. There are some authors (example: Diana Gabaldon) whom I would follow to the inner circles of hell and back, as long as they keep publishing. If the best part of an author’s books are her sex scenes, though, and the rest of the story - you know, minor things like the plot and characterization - are total crap, I would probably be more willing to leave her debut mystery novel on the shelf where it belongs.
CHH said on 04.28.10 at 08:07 AM • [link]
As a reader, I have no problem with an author writing different genres. Writers should write what their muse tells them to write or puts food on the table or whatever. I am not necessarily going to read it though. Whether I follow a writer to another genre depends on a number of factors including whether the premise is interesting or if I’m reading them because I love their style rather than a certain character.
I read Elizabeth Peters’ Vicky Bliss books because I love Vicky but I don’t read the Amelia Peabody ones. I will read the Barbara Michaels books though. I’ve just discovered a new writer, Kit Whitfield, and the book I’m currently reading—In Great Waters—is courtly intrigue with a dash of mermaids. I love her storytelling so I’m going to read her first book which is about werewolves and normally I don’t read books with werewolf characters. I believe I like Whitfield’s writing enough to read a book about vampires if she were to write a vampire book. I didn’t read Libba Bray’s latest despite the fact I really liked the Gemma Doyle trilogy because the book didn’t sound interesting. It’s won awards and a lot of critical acclaim but I’m still not going to read it.
I do prefer pen names that can be mentally linked to the previous identity because it makes it easier to find books by a particular author like Meg Cabot writing as Patricia Cabot. The Cabot is the same so whenever I see Patricia Cabot I always think, “Oh yeah, that’s Meg Cabot!” and I’m more likely to pick it up.
Gary said on 04.28.10 at 08:11 AM • [link]
I have before. I will again. I’ll use the same examples as other folks, the first being Jennifer Crusie and the second as Lois McMaster Bujold. Like others, I enjoyed Agnes & the Hitman more than Don’t Look Down. But I still enjoyed both.
LMB went from SF to Fantasy to Romance/Fantasy. All those Vorkodigan Universe Novels and Novelettes, Then stretching her muscles. Book 1 (of 4) of The Sharing Knife was definite romance in a fantasy setting.
I’ll even cite Robert Heinlein, famous hard-science “speculative fiction” writer as a closet romance writer. Has anyone else here read The Menace from Earth?
So, yes. I’ll follow a good author almost anywhere.
Lyssa said on 04.28.10 at 10:33 AM • [link]
I would have to say “It depends”. On what? The stories, the writing style, and the genre. For instance, Bujold’s ~fantasy/romance~ The sharing knife series, I could not get into. I love her writing but I did not care for the story. But I <3 the Miles books.
Other authors have ventured into new genres when a particular market is hot (Urban Fantasy anyone? Bueller? Bueller?) Too often as a reader I don’t enjoy these stories, they fail to entertain. It is not because the writing is bad…exactly, only that it does not provide what I want from that genre. Romance, give me a HEA. Urban Fantasy? A well thought out world, a plausible story, and action/adventure, is normally what I look for. (BTW I don’t like most of NR’s fantasy novels, but I still enjoy the JD Robb books. (I know I will read about Eve’s ‘Cop eyes/Whiskey colored eyes/Cold eyes’ once in the book, but I don’t care…it’s 2059 and NYC.)
But back to the subject, if an author branches out, I want them to do it well. If they don’t, I begin to feel like they are changing horses mid stream to cash in. And that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I agree JAK is one of the authors who do it well, but so many do it poorly that I will read the first book looking for that illusive something new. That is what will hook me in any series, and if I don’t get it, I won’t read another of that genre by that author.
Regarding Agents not wanting Authors to branch out, I would ask, Could it be that these agents don’t have the contacts with the publishing houses departments for those genres? Could it be that they as an Agent are trying to do right by their client and steer them away from trying to sell a book they don’t feel will sell well? (And also protecting their part of the proceeds) If author X can command a 10k advance in the Romance market, but only a 5k advance in the Fantasy market, there is a reason for the agent to steer their client towards Romance. But I am not an industry insider and so I don’t know…
ShellBell said on 04.28.10 at 11:54 AM • [link]
If I absolutely love an author I will certainly give one book in the new genre a read, but if I don’t like that book then I won’t continue to purchase any more books in the new genre - such as Judith McNaught and Julie Garwood. I loved their historicals but can’t stand their contemps.
Having a pseudonym isn’t an issue for me, in fact it makes it easier to avoid buying/borrowing any new releases in error if I don’t particularly like the books in the new genre. Some authors I’m not particularly fussed over whether or not I read each and every single book released whatever the name on the front cover is - I occasionally enjoy reading a JD Robb story, but am not at all interested in reading any of her books written as Nora Roberts and I enjoyed reading Marion Chesney’s regency books but am not interested in her mysteries when she writes as MC Beaton.
Maria D. said on 04.28.10 at 02:03 PM • [link]
As a reader I will follow an author that I like regardless of the genre….if they writer wants to try something new ...I’ll read it and give it a try..it’s not a guarantee I’ll like it but I will at the very least keep an open mind. If they want to use a pseudonym, that’s their choice and I can understand why they would want to do that and have no problems with it (Hello JD Robb/Nora Roberts) and I will try a new genre for an author that I’m already reading. In my opinion an agent that doesn’t want to try to cross-sell for his talented authori is an idiot and needs to be replaced!
Kalen Hughes said on 04.28.10 at 04:30 PM • [link]
Am I the only one who’s starting to hear “George R.R. Martin is not your bitch.” running through their head? God how I love me some Neil Gaiman . . .
Kristina said on 04.28.10 at 05:04 PM • [link]
@Cora
I came across this just last night. I’m trying to organize all the ebooks on my kindle and make sure I have all my series together and in reading order. I made a trip to an author’s website to look up the reading order of an Ellora’s Cave series she did and the ONLY thing listed in her books section were her Urban Fantasy mainstream books. No mention except a microscopic link to another site of her erotica books. AND, and!!! The link was a dead one.
BTW, this was an author that I own just about every Ellora’s Cave book she’s written and I paid full price for them. But her Urban Fantasy books I stopped buying after the second one. I tried to jump genres with her but it didn’t work for me. So there. I’m kinda sad that it appears she’s ashamed of her erotica books that I just love. :-(
Kalen Hughes said on 04.28.10 at 07:12 PM • [link]
I’m sure lots of authors DO wall off their pen names for a host of reasons. It’s sad to think that shame might be one of them though . . .
Lane said on 04.28.10 at 07:16 PM • [link]
@Michelle:
I, I totally go with this - it gets even worse when you see something like Insomnia, where he’s truly the bad guy, or Bump in the Night in which Christopher Reeves plays a pedophiliac stalker
It can kinda work with suspense/horror because it emphasises your discomfort, but I can totally see someone going in looking for Mork or Superman, and getting well and truly tweaked.
Randi said on 04.28.10 at 08:11 PM • [link]
Generally speaking, I’m not a big fan of the pseudonym. JAK/AQ/JC is a perfect example. The Arcane series spans all three names and it is exasperating trying to follow the series. Additionally, I never even noticed the “tone differences” in the three names. So for me, the name changes don’t mean anything to me except massive confusion. It also, and this is just an OCD complaint, makes it ANNOYING to shelve. They’re all the same author: which name should I use to shelve the books? ugh.
Ann Aguirre is another one I am going to have a hard time with. Now..let me state I am a total fangurl of Ann. So, how confusing was it to find out she has not one, but TWO, count them TWO, new pseudonymes (one is not quite out yet). I will give her some kudos to her website for making it VERY clear what her two other names are, even though one takes you to a whole other website (very annoying IMO). But trying to keep track of release dates is going to be a bit high maintanance. I will have to do a search for three names, rather than just the one.
For the record: I’ll be shelving all of Ann’s books under Ann Aguirre. ;)
As for genre shelving at bookstores-that’s a never ending problem. I don’t really get all huffy about *where* in the bookstore I find a book, only that I find it. The oddest example of this though: Mike Shepard’s previous Longknife book (not the one that just recently came out, the one before that) was shelved in MILITARY HISTORY. LOL. Not SciFi/Fantasy, which is where it had been shelved historically. I practically howled in the store when the employee finally found it. Military history, really?
helen said on 04.28.10 at 08:23 PM • [link]
More genres=more books by my favorite authors per year…who could ask for anything more. Some of my favorite authors are multi-genre-Lynn Viehl (aka S.L. Viehl, aka Gena Hale, aka Jessica Hall), Kim Harrison (aka Dawn Cook), Nora Roberts (aka J.D. Robb), and on and on. I’ll follow a favorite author anywhere. It seems to me that some of my favorite authors are constrained by having only one name and one genre. They are “allowed” to put out 1 book (sometimes 2 if we are lucky) per year, but if they have multiple genres voila 2, 4, 6, 8 books a year means more great books for me! It is a win win situation. I have followed authors to Young Adult, Mystery, Romantic Suspense, Historical, and even (if you knew me this would make you laugh) Christian fiction.
Connie said on 04.28.10 at 08:35 PM • [link]
I’ll follow an author into a new genre. So many have rewarded me with wonderful books. But I can also be a little unforgiving. If the new genre book disappoints me, I’ll probably never buy another book in the new genre by that author.
Cfarley said on 04.28.10 at 09:15 PM • [link]
Speaking a a NF author and a rabid book buyer I can say I tend to read more in GENRES than authors. Becuz I have gotten burned by Rom authors who it felt need to be more “credible” and started writing nerve-wracking suspense. I write NF—my nerves don’t need to be any more wracked. It made me sad to lose Tami Hoag, Elizabeth Lowell, the gal who wrote all the great Russian and NaAm romances, and on and on. It also becomes SO VERY DAMN HARD to find the authors titles in stores because the shelving has become useless. I really enjoy the metadata fashion of Amazon because “yes I will like that if I liked this”. xxoocf
Ulrike said on 04.28.10 at 11:08 PM • [link]
I’m noticing a couple of trends in the replies here.
1) “I’ll try it, but if I don’t like it, I won’t keep reading it.” To that, I say, “DUH!” I’ll stop reading any series I dislike, no matter what the genre. I’d still rather try a new series by an author I know I’ve enjoyed in the past than try to figure out which totally unknown author is halfway decent. I think it improves my odds finding something good.
2) “They should use a different name for their new genre, so people don’t expect one thing and get another.” Isn’t that what the cover art and flap/back info is for? I mean, did anyone really pick up Sharing Knife or Chalion and think, “Yay! More space dramaz for me!?”
Allie said on 04.28.10 at 11:56 PM • [link]
What a fascinating discussion. I’ve tried several times to follow authors into new genres, only to be disappointed. Like a lot of others, for example, I haven’t been able to get into Lois McMaster Bujold’s fantasy series (ironic since I generally prefer fantasy to SF) but I’m a mad fangirl of Miles Vorkosigan, his friends and family and their world.
Because of these experiences I have been really unwilling to follow a favourite author from contemporary categories (from years ago, but I still love those books) into paranormal romance which is a genre I already detest. I pick the books up because the name has that much appeal to me but the blurbs always turns me right off and I have never read more than a few pages of one. Having said that I think authors should do what’s best for them. If someone has tapped out her contemporary romance mine then she should definitely move where her creativity takes her, or if she has several genres bubbling around inside then of course she should be able to go into all those areas.
Is it possible to have more than one agent? (asks someone who is hopelessly naive about how publishing works). It seems to me that either finding an agent who is happy to genre hop or finding a fit with more than one would be the way around the issue. After all, I may not have enjoyed the books the authors put out in the new genres, but the names were enough for me to at least pick the books up to take a look.
Sawsan said on 04.29.10 at 01:16 AM • [link]
I will read a well written book from an author I know regardless of the genre. That is the hallmark of a good writer that I become immersed in the story, the words take me there not the premise. Why would anyone want to restrict themselves in neat little box???????
Kinsey Holley said on 04.29.10 at 02:06 AM • [link]
I understand the separate pseudonyms for different genres thing. I’d assume readers would pay attention to blurbs and back covers too, Ulrike, but then I’m constantly amazed at the cluelessness of some people.
I’ve got some ideas for hard-core erotic romance/erotica novellas and if I wrote them, I think I’d use a different pseudonym. It’s not shame, exactly, it’s just…there are certain areas of my life that would be greatly complicated if people knew what kind of stuff I write. Enough people know who Kinsey is that it’s already a significant possibility. So if I wrote even hotter stuff (and I’m thinking of bondage-themed, maybe menage kind of stuff), I’d want to put double distance between the flesh-and-blood me and the paper-and-pixel me.
Am I a coward? It’s certainly possible.
Lu said on 04.29.10 at 07:40 AM • [link]
I can only answer from the readers perspective, as the motivations and methods of publishers are unknown to me.
It really depends on a variety of factors.
1. How big of a change is this new book? For example, if the change is from high fantasy to historical fantasy I’ll probably pick it up faster if I recognize the author’s name. High fantasy to mystery/suspense? I’d probably pick it up to take a look just to see if it got put down in the wrong spot. Of course, this all depends on the question: do I even like the new category? No matter who wrote it, there are some classifications that I don’t read, so I probably wouldn’t even look in that area to discover the new book.
2. What sort of available funds do I have on hand? More money = looking further in the bookstore & more likely to pick up something just for curiosity/ooooh, catchy title/spiffy cover art. Tight budget = looking just at my favorite authors or the reliable sections where I’m almost certain to find something of interest.
2b. Time. The longer I have in the book store, the more things I can look at, and the more I eventually will look at. Given enough time, I venture beyond the familiar comfortable sections that I know and love and start exploring other areas.
3. What am I in the mood for this day/trip? You all have seen this to some degree - today I just can’t get into this sort of story, but that sort is just wonderful!
4. How well do I like the author to begin with? There are some authors that I would try anything they wrote at least once, though I might not read all of a new series if the first one didn’t catch my interest. Then there are some that I’d have no hesitation about crossing sub-genres, but might not cross full genres immediately. Others would fall in the category of the name looks the same/similar, which gives them a slight edge in the pick up and look at the cover blurb, but the blurb still needs to convince me. Of course there are also some authors that didn’t impress me enough that their name holds a place in memory to make me go ‘oh, another one by _____. Let me take a look.’ And the inevitable ‘oh, I didn’t like that one’s work at all, I’ll pass on the new one.’
Bottom line - as a reader, I say go ahead and dabble your authorial toes in more than one classification. Just please, please try to keep them properly described in the promotions and cover blurbs. Expecting something to be an urban fantasy romance because the author had previously done fantasy and historical romance and opening it to discover an urban paranormal crime drama would not be a cool surprise to spring on the readers.
verification love43 - I don’t think there are 43 different genres to love my favorite authors in… Maybe 43 books? (hmmm… some of them need to get writing then!)
Shawn R said on 04.29.10 at 04:07 PM • [link]
I like different subgenres of Romance, and I like different genres of fiction. If I like a writer in one genre, I’m willing to give that writer a try in a different genre, and if he/she can pull it off, I will stick with it.
I also enjoy writers who might try different series in a given genre and will give them a try. I don’t always like the end result of a different try, but I don’t mind them trying. For example, I love Joan Hess’ Maggody series, but her Claire Malloy series doesn’t resonate. I love Donna Andrews’ Meg Langslow series, but not the Turing books. I liked some of Charlaine Harris’ early Sookie books, but drifted away from them, then fell in love with her Harper Connelly books. I get impatient for my favorite authors to publish the next book in the series *I* prefer, but all three of the above examples do very well and are clearly pleasing a wide range of fans, so it’s all good.
I like Elizabeth Hoyt’s historicals as well as her contemporary romances under the Julia Harper pseudonym (the latter resonate much more with me because I like the broader comedy).
I love Lori Foster’s work, but didn’t care much for her expansion with one of her MMA books into S/F, mostly because I have read extensively in the S/F genre and one of the major S/F tropes she used is one I despise. Didn’t stop me from picking up the subsequent book in the MMA series and enjoying it, and if she tried an S/F theme again, I might give it a try if she follows a trope I enjoy.
I love Jayne Anne Krentz in all her personae.
As a reader, I love discovering that an author has a presence in a genre/subgenre I wasn’t aware of. I’m more than happy to give him/her a read and see if I like that “voice style”, and if I do, I’m happy, it means I can watch for new releases I might otherwise have overlooked, or search out backlist. If I don’t, that’s okay, too.
As an aspiring writer, I hope to have a very busy career someday. I have viable ideas in three different genres, and in different subgenres of the genres. I think if I have the freedom to express my creativity, it makes my writing stronger and keeps my work fresh. I think that goes for all authors. Artificially limiting that creativity is ultimately destructive, and that means fewer books for a reader to enjoy and for a writer to build their career with.
Kris Starr said on 04.29.10 at 04:20 PM • [link]
Not at all. Delurking here to say that this topic is one I also think about quite a bit. I use a pseudonym because my family is very conservative and would absolutely flip out if they were to discover that I write erotica. So I keep virtual me and real-life me as separate as I can.
However, I do plan to someday write something more “mainstream” that my family can also read (and talk about, etc.), but that’ll definitely be under my real name, I think.
So I do agree with the other commenters who say it’s the good story that compels them to buy, not necessarily name recognition. At least, that’s what I’m hoping for in my career’s future.
Amanda said on 05.03.10 at 05:19 AM • [link]
I’ll follow an author I like from one genre to another. Usually, when I’ve done so, I’ve been pleasantly surprised. One example is Sarah A. Hoyt. Since October of ‘09, she’s published a cozy (Dipped, Stripped and Dead—written as Elise Hyatt), a space opera (Darkship Thieves) and the historical fiction No Will But His about Katheryn Howard under her own name. She’s also published a Shakespearean fantasy and the Musketeers Mysteries series as Sarah D’Almeida. None of them have failed to entertain.
I’ve never understood why agents discourage their authors from expanding into other genres. In this day and age, I’d think they’d want their authors, their clients, to do all they can to expand their fan base, especially since promotion budgets from the publishing houses have become almost non-existent for most authors.
Care to comment?
Comments are now closed for this post.
Subscribe to These Comments