Bitchin' Blog Posts
Romance in the New York Times
by SB Sarah | by SB Sarah | December 09, 2010 | Thursday at 4:14 pm | 63 CommentsRomance is front and center, or front page, bottom right corner, in the New York Times today, with a picture of me and my dogs.
Sarah Wendell, blogger and co-author of “Beyond Heaving Bosoms,” is passionate about romance novels.
Except for the covers, with their images of sinewy limbs, flowing, Fabio-esque locks or, as she put it, “the mullets and the man chests.”
“They are not always something that you are comfortable holding in your hand in public,” Ms. Wendell said.
So she began reading e-books, escaping the glances and the imagined snickers from strangers on the subway, and joining the many readers who have traded the racy covers of romance novels for the discretion of digital books.
If the e-reader is the digital equivalent of the brown-paper wrapper, the romance reader is a little like the Asian carp: insatiable and unstoppable. Together, it turns out, they are a perfect couple. Romance is now the fastest-growing segment of the e-reading market, ahead of general fiction, mystery and science fiction, according to data from Bowker, a research organization for the publishing industry.
Not only are my dogs pictured, as well as Christina Dodd’s three-armed book cover and some other of my oldest favoritest romances, but booksellers like AllRomance.com, and publishers are included as well. But the best part is that the article is anchored by readers- by me, and Jane from DearAuthor.
The reporter who wrote the article, Julie Bosman (congrats on your front page article Julie!), told me that so many of the Times editors are romance readers, and many of them read digitally. I don’t think this is surprising. With all the bad news and unfortunate stories that get published in a newspaper, happy endings must be a welcome and awesome reading choice. I am totally curious which books are among their favorites - but I’m also going to recommend a romance novel for Bosman to try, too. Yay for good press for Romance!
ETA: I have been asked for a Asian Carp Borg shirt. Ahoy, here it is:
Filed: General Bitching, Smart BItches In the News
Tagged: romance, ny times, ftw, bosoms, awesomesauce
Tabithaz said on 12.09.10 at 04:54 PM • [link]
Congratulations! That’s awesome news, for you, for Romance, for Jane, for Julie Bosman, and of course your dogs! Yay!
Darlene Marshall said on 12.09.10 at 04:54 PM • [link]
My son and my niece sent me links to this article early this morning. They know ebook sales have been very good for me, and it’s only going to get better.
Now I have to think of a good promo for digital editions. It’s hard to jam my bookmarks into those tiny slots.[g]
lorelai said on 12.09.10 at 04:57 PM • [link]
As a romance reader AND someone who has done a little research on Asian Carp, I love their reference combining the two: If the e-reader is the digital equivalent of the brown-paper wrapper, the romance reader is a little like the Asian carp: insatiable and unstoppable.
Congrats, Sarah!
Lora said on 12.09.10 at 05:03 PM • [link]
YAY! Hurrah!
Sarah W said on 12.09.10 at 05:04 PM • [link]
What a great article!
We may be insatiable and unstoppable, but I don’t think we’re particularly invasive . . . are we?
Of course, some of us are good at convincing people to try a romance novel or two . . . but that’s assimilation.
Oh, wow—-we’re Asian Carp Borg!
Jayne said on 12.09.10 at 05:09 PM • [link]
How exciting! As someone who was converted to romance novels because of e-readers (and SBTB), I hope that many other readers will give them a shot. We CAN eliminate the stigma of sexy books!
Laurel said on 12.09.10 at 05:17 PM • [link]
Yay! Congrats on the great article and also on cracking the NY Times, who I would have sworn was unaware that there was such a thing as Romance in genre fiction.
One thing I think they overlooked in the discussion of covers: Romance is picking up converts because of eBooks, not just being supported by already loyal readers. Over the last year I’ve bought at least 50 titles that I would never have picked up in the bookstore, in large part because I saw the review but not the cover. The midriffs, tattoos, man titties, etc. always served as a big neon sign for “Not your kind of book, move along.”
So, yeah, don’t judge a book by its cover and all but most of us do. Ebooks are uniquely poised to get the sale based on the blurb instead of the cover and although it’s counterintuitive after years of marketing research on cover art the genre might be growing simply because the traditional market is still there but newbies are giving it a try.
The classic half-clad cover was definitely a signal to the loyal romance buyer: “Pick me! Pick me!” but it wasn’t attracting those of us who didn’t think we liked romance books.
wvs: theory47- that’s my theory and I’m sticking to it.
Barbara W. said on 12.09.10 at 05:18 PM • [link]
Congrats! I started with my Kindle because of EC, not because I was shamed into it, lol, although with the state of HQ’s Presents lately, I should be. Now most of my books go there, just because my space is gone.
Is there still a stigma for smutterfic books? I’m such a shameless ‘ho with mine, I guess I don’t notice.
respect85 - because I’ve been demanding everyone respect my right to read true smut when I wanted to since 1985 (when I turned 18, ha!)
Lil' Deviant said on 12.09.10 at 05:24 PM • [link]
Congratulations!
Yay Asian Carp Borg! Resistance is futile. HA!
JB Hunt said on 12.09.10 at 05:27 PM • [link]
This came through on the NYT feed this morning, and I jumped for joy.
Well done, Sarah! Thanks for representing us so well.
joanne said on 12.09.10 at 05:30 PM • [link]
The New York Times and a non-snarky article about romance? Are we in heaven?
A rec for Ms Bosman in historical romance would be The Last Hellion by Loretta Chase. It’s heroine is a writer for a newspaper.
Contemporary, I’d suggest romantic suspense especially the paranormal-sort-of In Death books by J.D. Robb.
RebeccaJ said on 12.09.10 at 05:35 PM • [link]
Wow, congrats on being on the cover yourself! Why has puppy been banished to the other side of the door, though? LOL!
Love the “how much is that doggie in the window” look he’s got going on, though.
Jenn said on 12.09.10 at 05:47 PM • [link]
Wonderful article, congrats! I second the convenience of the ebook. I’m 40 and married with two kids. My husband used to make fun of my romance books and covers and tell me I shouldn’t read “trash”. Now that my kids can read and take notice, I just can’t have some of that stuff laying around with risque covers and such. So I love my kindle! No more laughter from my husband and my ten year old son can’t go gawking at the heaving bosoms. eReaders are my favorite invention and I go through romances like candy—the best escape from mom drudgery!
DianeN said on 12.09.10 at 05:50 PM • [link]
You know you have arrived when you’ve been called “Ms. Wendell” by the Times. Congrats, Sarah!
Milena said on 12.09.10 at 05:55 PM • [link]
Can we get that on T-shirts? I’d wear one with pride.
Re the covers… I have a confession to make. I re-started reading romances when I was going to a lot of mainstream literary conferences. The whole point was to choose the gaudiest, mantittiest covers I could find, preferably with golden embossed letters, and read at breakfast, just for the shocked looks of other attendees. It was great fun… does that make me a bad person?
Great article, congrats!
Hannah said on 12.09.10 at 06:08 PM • [link]
Yes, bring on the Asian Carp Borg t-shirts! On the back they could say “I read romance” which would bewilder people who think the Asian Carp Borg is some kind of inside Trekkie joke.
Congrats on the article, Sarah!
You get extra awesome points if you read books with holograms as well. Remember those?
Elaine said on 12.09.10 at 06:08 PM • [link]
Yeah for good press for romance! What a great article, Sarah!
LEW said on 12.09.10 at 06:42 PM • [link]
Nice! And I particularly love the Julie Garwood front and center!
ReadinginAK said on 12.09.10 at 06:57 PM • [link]
I like this sentence: “It’s easier to check out some naughty little title online than in a brick-and-mortar store where your pastor could step up in line behind you,”
I like it because I’m a pastor and my Nook keeps my lovely books to me. It mostly helps to keep hubby from teasing, but no one has to know I’m reading about *Twinkies* on my lunch break. Can’t do all theology, all the time… Love the gospel of Mark, but it sure wasn’t written by Loretta Chase!
Lori James said on 12.09.10 at 07:01 PM • [link]
I was just over on the NY Times site reading comments. I’d love to see more romance readers opinions represented there shouting out loud and proud!
Carrie S said on 12.09.10 at 07:11 PM • [link]
Rock on, Sarah - you’re famous!
DreadPirateRachel said on 12.09.10 at 07:48 PM • [link]
Damn, you beat me to the punch! Please, please make T-shirts that say this; you will have a market of at least two!
Zoe Archer said on 12.09.10 at 07:49 PM • [link]
I used to staple colored paper onto the covers of my romances and write BOOK on them so I could read them on the train.
darlynne said on 12.09.10 at 08:03 PM • [link]
The article was great and I was thrilled and proud to see it. Congratulations, SBSarah, er, Ms. Wendell.
And then so not surprised—yet still disappointed—at the reader comments. Honestly, we’ve gone ‘round this block too many times. The sales figures alone should have made it clear why the NYT chose to cover this subject and, still, the haters don’t get it.
I started thinking about all the other things people can like—music, art, shoes, clothes, colors, cars—and whether anyone would criticize or mock another person’s choices and then realized, yes, they would and do. No cows are sacred or even just treated with respect these days. So, screw ‘em. I’m still loud and proud.
Sara Nalley said on 12.09.10 at 08:50 PM • [link]
Escuse me, is that a Columbia College graduate on the front page of the New York Times? Good to see you, Sarah!
Genevieve said on 12.09.10 at 09:00 PM • [link]
Wow, and right after all the Franzen/Weiner fun. That’s great.
My goodness, to be on the front page of the NYT… you’ll be in those immortalized anthologies the History of America… or one of those “buy the front page of the newspaper the day you were born” gift thingies…
I made the front page of the San Francisco Chronicle as a random grocery shopper after 9/11, explaining I wasn’t too worried about terrorists poisoning the leeks. But I think yours is a little more impressive :-P
So cool. Thanks for being such a great spokesperson for the genre.
Kathleen said on 12.09.10 at 09:44 PM • [link]
Congrats Sarah!
Hmm the average romance reader buys three books a month. Three! How about 8 a week? One of my pet peeves about buying ebooks (don’t do paper anymore) is that you have to buy them one book them at a time. Or am I missing some trick to throw them in a cart? It makes my credit card bill look freaky.
dragondreamer said on 12.09.10 at 10:26 PM • [link]
What a fabulous article…CONGRATS!
Kristin said on 12.09.10 at 10:28 PM • [link]
@Kathleen…I know you can easily buy multiple books at a time from All Romance…not sure about the other retailers.
Heather Snow said on 12.09.10 at 10:31 PM • [link]
That’s fantastic! And with RWA set in NYC this year, I can see the Asian Carp t-shirts swarming the Big Apple :)
Elizabeth Krentz-Wee said on 12.09.10 at 10:52 PM • [link]
This made me smile:
———-
I like it because I’m a pastor and my Nook keeps my lovely books to me. . . . . Can’t do all theology, all the time… Love the gospel of Mark, but it sure wasn’t written by Loretta Chase!
———-
because I, too, am a pastor. My husband does not give me grief about my romances, but we have been book hounds since we married 32 years ago. In my study at home, I now have a book cart to hold my overflow. We have 75 boxes of books in our garage that don’t fit in our new home. I only wish more theology and ethics came as ebooks!
Back to the great article: In my romance, I’m with Jane on the issue of missing covers. Why can’t all ebooks have the real deal? Is it so hard to include the cover commissed for the paper book?
Kathleen said on 12.09.10 at 11:29 PM • [link]
@Kristin - Thanks. I should have said that I was talking about my Kindle, but I will certainly check All Romance for books to read on my itouch.
Marty said on 12.09.10 at 11:49 PM • [link]
Yeah, congrats to you!
Pam said on 12.09.10 at 11:59 PM • [link]
Great article, and some very interesting comments too. Overall, I thought that the typical, ignorant, stereotype-spewing comments from people who don’t actually read romance were a definite minority. Some of the more positive testimonials were intriguing in that they brought up points that are frequently emphasized on this site, but don’t get tons of play elsewhere. My favorite was Jessica, the professor from Maine, who didn’t comment directly on romance at all, but analyzed the article itself with great panache.
Congratulations, Sarah, and thanks for shining such a clear positive light on romance literature.
Alexis Harrington said on 12.10.10 at 12:07 AM • [link]
How wonderful for you, Sarah! Congrats, and thanks for giving us this great forum. I tried to find it on the Net version but no luck.
nitnot said on 12.10.10 at 12:18 AM • [link]
I love that there’s Lisa Kleypas, Nora’s Valley of Silence and JR Whard amongst the books in the picture.
Sarah - you go, girl!
SB Sarah said on 12.10.10 at 12:18 AM • [link]
Thank you!
Hey Loreli, got a good picture you’ve taken of an Asian Carp? T-shirts are SO coming right up.
paige said on 12.10.10 at 12:21 AM • [link]
Will the Asian Carp have little electronic eye thingies? And long flowing locks? And off the shoulder fins?
Joy said on 12.10.10 at 12:54 AM • [link]
Ok, OK, which one of Dodd’s covers has a three armed model? I don’t spot it in the picture.
Karenmc said on 12.10.10 at 01:06 AM • [link]
I nearly choked on my lukewarm mocha.
Saw the blurb about this Times thinghy on Facebook this morning and danced in my chair.
Jennifer said on 12.10.10 at 01:30 AM • [link]
Great story.
I originally found SBTB after reading about it in a print newspaper in Melbourne, Australia, which then lead to me reading romance ebooks - so maybe this will lead to more readers of romance books, and followers of SBTB.
Karenmc said on 12.10.10 at 01:36 AM • [link]
I’m really tired and only now figured out why “thinghy” looked wrong: because it IS wrong.
head74: I have 74 different things to keep track of in my head, and it can only hold 47 at a time.
SAM I Was, SAH I Am now.. said on 12.10.10 at 01:39 AM • [link]
What eerks me the most about the people complaining about romance not being worth someone’s time to read or if they do, it makes them dimwitted.. (I finally had to stop reading the comments.. grrr) Is that no one ever complains about romance in movies. You can’t even see an action movie anymore without some nookie happening in it anymore, but heaven forbid if you want to READ about it. Even the most popular shows on prime time television have some form of romance in them, but nobody complains about that. Because romance is life. Nobody goes through life without some form of romance happening in it. But have it written by women and market it to women and that life becomes literary trash.
But on a high note.. Congrats on the article!
rebyj said on 12.10.10 at 01:41 AM • [link]
congrats on the article!!
Allison said on 12.10.10 at 03:06 AM • [link]
I saw you and was SO excited! Congratulations!! Can I just say it again? SO EXCITING!
Spam Word: old97 (I love the Old 97’s—they’re a great band!)
MarieC said on 12.10.10 at 03:18 AM • [link]
Congrats! It’s so exciting to see the romance genre taken seriously.
Moviemavengal said on 12.10.10 at 03:35 AM • [link]
Mazel Tov!
ev said on 12.10.10 at 04:01 AM • [link]
Congrats!! Nicely done, esp for the NYT.
All the time I worked at Border’s, I tried and tried to tell our idiot Store Manager that Romance was the top seller and to keep the shelves stocked, up to date and in order. But noooo, she was more concerned with history and art or some such crap.
So now I just buy them at home and put them on my ereader. I keep my TBR pile and it’s covers for “bathroom” reading.
And I never have to show my husband what I am reading. I can’t believe someone actually made that comment.
sweetsiouxsie said on 12.10.10 at 04:40 AM • [link]
Good for Sarah!!!
At my advanced age, I just don’t care who sees what I am reading anymore. Nosy people can just mind their own business. ;-)
I love my security code…freedom25. Yup! In this country I can read what I choose.
Heather Massey said on 12.10.10 at 04:52 AM • [link]
Way to go!
peggy h said on 12.10.10 at 04:58 AM • [link]
Congratulations! Great job! (Nice picture too!)
saltypepper said on 12.10.10 at 05:05 AM • [link]
Good job, Sarah!
I’m surprised but not shocked (or should that be the other way around?) the editors at the Times were such big romance fans. You’d never know the genre existed by the coverage they give it. The Sunday book review has a crime section, and the occasional Science Fiction/Fantasy round up, but romance is invisible outside the best sellers lists.
SB Sarah said on 12.10.10 at 07:00 AM • [link]
For those looking for a fine Asian Carp Borg shirt, your apparel is ready:
Asian Carp Borg.You will be assimilated. by SBTBLLC
Make cheap custom t shirts at zazzle.com
Mary said on 12.10.10 at 07:07 AM • [link]
Congrats! Read the article from a link Lori Foster posted on Facebook.
Woo hoo!
beverly jenkins said on 12.10.10 at 07:19 AM • [link]
Great article. However, HLN covered the article this morning and said very little positive. The two women reporting on it talked about cheesy covers and blowing hair and how they and their friends read romance novels aloud to each other and giggle. I hate pop tarts with my coffee in the morning. I’ve been pissed off all day because I’m sure more people saw the giggling pop tarts than read the NYT article. *Sigh*
Susan said on 12.10.10 at 07:43 AM • [link]
Sarah! You were on the *front page* of the NYT!!! Sqwee!
DreadPirateRachel said on 12.10.10 at 10:09 AM • [link]
Love the shirt!
Milena said on 12.10.10 at 11:48 AM • [link]
Love the T-shirt!
Lori James said on 12.10.10 at 04:25 PM • [link]
I just went over to the Times website to read more comment. It appears they’ve closed commenting…after #69. Do you supposed someone thought that through? LOL!
Jen B. said on 12.10.10 at 05:31 PM • [link]
Bravo! The front cover and all! Well, I started reading romance novels about 2 years ago. At first I was in hide the cover mode. Now, I only hide it if it is “graphic”. You know what I mean. I love my ereader!
Ellen W. said on 12.10.10 at 07:20 PM • [link]
So excited to see Sarah- you look lovely!
My comment got listed as a Highlight (which makes me more happy than just about anything else this week except Allie Broch’s post on moving with her dogs.)
But I realized that I fell into a trap. I used my “respectable” reading as proof that I should be allowed to read romance. And that’s wrong. If you only read romance because it makes you happy, that should be respected. It’s your money and your time and I’m tired of women having to justify their fun. So, sorry I didn’t take advantage of that opportunity.
Ann Stephens said on 12.10.10 at 09:45 PM • [link]
Saw the article online (noticing several books I’ve read in your pile, lol)! Congrats on holding the romance novel banner high.
And the T shirt made me smile.
Pam said on 12.12.10 at 04:28 AM • [link]
I was telling my husband about the NYT article tonight at supper and he said he heard about it this morning on Wait. Wait. Don’t Tell Me on NPR. Apparently, one of the questions asked what the most popular genre was on e-readers and cited the article as their source. Unfortunately, it must have gone downhill from there, because my husband said that the only reason given was to avoid showing the romance covers and there was a lot of “humor” centering on chests, flowing hair, and Fabio.
Care to comment?
Comments are now closed for this post.
Subscribe to These Comments