Maureen Dowd’s column this weekend focused on the issue of “Chick Lit” being shelved among the classical works of fiction under that general heading.
Before I get to my actual point, anyone else notice that in her column she mentions that she bought a bunch of ChickLit to sample that which she found so egregiously shelved next to her more erudite reading choices? Wonder if a purchase for the purposes of writing is expensable? I do think it is. Nice of the Times to possibly foot the bill for what might be her secret reading enjoyment. Methinks she might protest just a bit too much.
Her question of shelving has been in my brain since I read her column, because it is a good question: where do you put the ChickLit? How do you shelve fiction that’s not quite one genre, but not quite another? Looking specifically at ChickLit, is it that oh-so-slightly-snidely-termed “Women’s Fiction?” Is it fiction? Is it romance? Is it popular fiction? Where do you put it?
We romance readers have been spoiled a bit – if we go hunting in a store for our bodice-ripping man-titty extravaganzas, we look for the sign that says “Romance” and head that way. But lately that heading has been crowded, and there’s a lot to be said even within the romance community of where books are shelved, and where they should be shelved. Seems the question of shelving is a very, very big question among authors of various subgenres of fiction, particularly among minority writers.
Coincidentally, while Dowd was ranting, I was emailing an Anonymous Author asking about the shelving of minority romance, from black to Asian to gay and lesbian romance. Where are the minorities shelved? It’s been a long time since I’ve gone brick-and-mortar shopping, and when I do I go to a teeny tiny local bookstore that smells like old books, but barely has the shelf space to get creative with subgenres. Everything is pretty much like a library – fiction, alpha by author. Non-fiction, alpha by author. Gifty little books are in the middle, if you’re looking.
But in larger stores, like Barnes & Noble or Borders, is there a standard rule of where to shelve minority books, much like Romance usually has its own shelves? Are black romance novels shelved with romance or with African American fictions? Is it a store by store decision? I know I’ve seen Adrianne Byrd in the romance aisle, but I think I saw her books in another store shelved among the mystery suspense.
The basic info I received from A.A. was that it’s a store-by-store decision unless the chain has a policy for all outlets. According to A.A., Waldenbooks/Borders shelves their African American romance based on the wishes of their readers, who prefer a one-stop shopping experience with their books in one location. Some authors, according to A.A., find their sales are much higher from bookstores that shelve minority books separately.
A.A. disagrees and would prefer minority authors be shelved according to their genre, not by their race, but shelving becomes more complicated when there’s also separate imprints for minority writers. A.A.‘s problem with the imprint and shelf segregation is that the distribution is limited to those geographic areas where there is a decided market for that minority romance. The problem is distribution, in the end, not bookstore real estate.
That said, last month news broke that one author, Millenia Black, has filed a lawsuit against her publisher for targeting the sale of her book toward an African American audience and, in the words of the filing, “classified her book based solely on [the author’s] race and without regard to the subject matter of the novel.”
If you Google the issue, you’ll find a great many comments on the topic on various publishing blogs, and as A.A. mentioned to me, not many of them are supportive of her efforts. Some are mocking her as the author of a frivilous lawsuit, while others are looking at the reasons behind her publisher’s actions, asking if the publisher’s decision was not racial profiling of the author but marketing to a lucrative book-buying public. Others question the wisdom of her efforts. Overall, I didn’t find many online folks at all cheering her on.
But other authors in other genres are talking about the problem: a December 2006 article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Wall Street Journal examines the issue that the book industry pays close marketing attention to race, even if the author disagrees with the practice. Publishers are following the money – and books marketed as African American fiction sell. According to the article, Romantic Times divides it’s “Top Picks” by subgenre, but “lumps black writers of all genres into one African-American category.”
Now, clearly, the subject of shelving minority authors is a much, much bigger and emotionally-charged issue whan where to house Dowd’s hated ChickLit. But with so many subgenres emerging, are old methods of marketing and shelving at odds with the variations within each already-established subgenre?
Is the library method the right solution, or would that harm those authors who are “discovered” by being housed alongside an established author on that subgenre shelf? Or will folks hunting for new books using the “if you like X, you should try Y” method use the internet to research as opposed to blind picking on the shelf?
As A.A. said to me, “Somebody said bookshops should all shelve like the library and I’m in completely agreement. The library sometimes has special tables or a new books section, otherwise it’s completely by content.”
What’s your take? Is this much ado about nothing, or something that’s long been brewing in the mysterious world of publishing and marketing? How would you shelve books in your store?
Personally, my library separates out romance fiction and even gives science fiction and fantasy fiction different designations, which is more than my local B&N does. So that analogy doesn’t work for me. Especially when their romance section sucks large donkey balls.
I don’t know about AA fiction, but I do know that it’s both kinda nice to look for gay fiction in the Gay and Lesbian section but also kinda annoying that it won’t make it into the romance section.
I guess it might make it into the Fiction and Literature section, but I’ll never know, because I never go there. I don’t like beating my way through shelves and shelves of “classic” fiction and shelves and shelves of hoity-toity, depressing literary fiction to find my romance, thankyouverymuch. But then, I don’t publish AA romances that get shuffled off into sections they might not belong.
In fact, there’s a lot of good gay romance, but it’s difficult to find. You can find the smut, because those are “anthologies” and get shelved as such in B&N. But the novels are scattered. Some stores put them in the GLBTQ section, some put them in among the General Fiction, but never never never in the romance, and I think that’s where they belong. But then, I don’t write that, either.
Ugh.
I think I’m getting more Republican in my old age. I’m sick to death of all the pigeonholing by genre that’s going on—at this rate, soon there will have to be a “Short White Jewish Paranormal Humorous Dark Fantasy” section for my work.
Grumble.
Okay, first point: Unless it’s a memoir, who the author is should have nothing to do with how the book is shelved in the stores. It should be about the content. Period.
Second point: I understand the need for some classification in fiction—if you want a Western, chances are you don’t want to accidentally pick up a Science Fiction novel. But this minutia with the genres and subgenres is making me cross-eyed. Barring a general FICTION section—and trusting the reader to read the jacket copy/back cover to determine if it’s a book he or she wants to buy—I say go for a broader approach:
– Contemporary Fiction (Women’s fiction and chick lit would be here, along with, cough, men’s fiction and good ol’ general fiction)
– Literary Fiction (metafiction titles, the “new classics,” etc.)
– Romance (everything from contemporary to historical to paranormal here)
– Speculative Fiction (Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror)
– Western
Maybe I’m just grumpy today.
It would be nice to have a uniform system. But until that day, if you have a book which overlaps genres, why not shelve a couple of copies in each section that might be relevant? This would mean you could find the story of a black cowboy who finds his HEA with his cowgal in both African American and general Romance. Or the paranormal chick lit could be found in the Science Fiction section as well as general Fiction.
Is there some plain and simple reason I’m missing that’s preventing this from happening? Is it because there aren’t enough books shipped to do this kind of cross-referencing? Did I use the term “cross-referencing” correctly?
Too many questions for a Monday.
If there are bookstores out there doing it in different ways, it seems to me it should be easy to determine which way of shelving sells more books. Clearly the motivation for publishers and booksellers is money. If they think that shelving AA books seperately will bring them more sales, there’s really no arguing with them. (Or if they think incorporating all romances together sells more, they’ll do that.)
Neither publishers nor bookstores are in the business of catering to the wants of authors. They are in the business of selling more books to more people. Doesn’t matter if customers SAY they like it one way, what matters is how much they buy.
Has anyone seen any hard numbers about this? Perhaps it works better in some regions than others? Perhaps it depends on the type/size of bookstore? Sorry to sound so mercenary. . .
I don’t think shelving black* authors separately increases their sales. I think publishers and booksellers believe white folks don’t want to read books featuring black characters, so they put them in the corner where most readers won’t even notice them unless they’re specifically looking for them. It’s segregation.
In my ideal bookstore, all fiction would be grouped together under “fiction” and sorted by author’s surname. Possibly this is because my bookstore would be 95% non-fiction and 5% gay romance fiction.**
*Pardon me for writing “black” and not “AA”. Many black writers are not United States citizens, and AA means specifically US citizens only. Which is another kettle of fish entirely: why is it assumed that all black writers (or readers) worldwide are somehow American?
**Hey, a girl can dream.
Hey, Charlene! News sources regularly call Nelson Mandela African-American! As a white South African with American citizenship who teaches at an Historically Black University in NC, I call myself African-American in my classes to make my students think about labels and names and titles.
I completely understand your frustration.
ugh. publishers and bookstores probably shelve their books the way they do because of people like me. The thought of trolling through 50 shelves of fiction to find something I’m in the mood to read gives me a headache and DEFINATELY makes me want to order through Amazon instead. I mean, that’s a ton of jackets to read. I like it when I can walk in and think “you know, I’m really in the mood to read about a kick-ass space caption battling aliens” and head over to Sci-Fi, or “gee, I could do with a few hours of reforming a Regency rake” and head over to romance. I think the last time I could even get up the guts to attack the regular fiction section was in college for required reading books. So for me and the way I shop (which doesn’t sound like the way authors want to sell), divide away! If it gets me to what I want faster, then I’m all for it.
Let me add that I would be VERY unhappy if I walked into a giganto bookstore and all fiction was shelved together. I like to head right to romance if that’s what I’m looking for, ESPECIALLY if I’m browsing. Hell, even when I’m looking for a specific author it’s likely I can only remember part of her name.
This isn’t really some new, unplumbed issue. Anyone here ever been to a music store? (I know they’re getting rarer.) I’d venture to say that any individual album is likely to be harder to classify than a book. But somehow, we all muddle through.
Yeah my library shelves Sci-fi/Fantasy separate from the Romance too although I do want them to explain Anne McCaffrey some day on that note.
I still think it should all be shelved in the romance section if it is romance this whole AA thing seems rather forced unless some author wants to justify the separate shelving based on some type of cultural thing.
Though I like the paranormal romance shelved together.
It’s easier to find the werewolf romance that way. I guess I am a hypocrite with he werewolf thing.
“it’s both kinda nice to look for gay fiction in the Gay and Lesbian section but also kinda annoying that it won’t make it into the romance section.”
Oh hell no, that’s why I go to Gay Bookstores and Gay Adult Book stores.
The porn is better… I only read it for the articles though.
Oh come on, yeah, I like the pictures too, Mary it takes a fairy to make a man hard cock pretty.
http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/
As a former bookseller, I can tell you that while I would have loved to have shelved a cross genre title in each of the genres it represented I couldn’t due to space and time. Not in a quantum physics kind of way, but in a “only so much space available, only so much time to handle the product and only so much time a customer will grant you to find it” sort of way. Shelving a book in a multitude of sections only works if you have enough quantity of that title.
Say I have five copies of a book that I need to place in three different sections, then none of those sections will have a face out. Furthermore if I sell three copies, I’ll have no idea where they were bought from (and therefore need to be replaced) without looking, which takes more time. It’s a problem I would already run into with placement of a book in section as well as on a display or table, compounded by the inclusion of more variables.
Do I think that segregating books by the race or the sexual preference of the author is the way to go? No, but that’s what my customers asked for, so that’s what we provided.
In chains, at least, the process of how many people handle a book (and how long it is handled) before it gets shelved is streamlined to save payroll hours and limit inefficiency. Therefore how and where a book is placed is streamlined as well. Placing a book in three different places increases not only the time spent shelving a particular title, but also the time spent looking for it. Not a problem for those customers who like to browse and discover, but a barrier to those who want to get in and get out.
Now, I’m a librarian who’ll disagree. I honestly feel that one of the flaws of Dewey and LC is that they completely ignore fiction and only deal with non-fiction. I’m a medical librarian, but I can comment on my local library and I despise their system of organization for the fiction collection, because it is…well, crappy. The hardcovers are by author, and then paperbacks are sometimes broken down by genre, sometimes not. It depends on the cataloger.
I know what types of books I want to read, but to find anything in this library, I have to know exactly what I want to read. Browsing is a maddening process that makes me want to punch someone in their face.
I have very little patience when forced to wade through dick lit, christian inspirationals and sci-fi to find what I want.
I can’t think of a better or more clear and rational explanation on why more books aren’t routinely shelved in multiple areas than Bookseller Chick’s.
We might all wish, but the reality and the logistics just don’t line up with the fantasy. At least not for most stores, spaces and staff.
I buy alot of books, and yes this is a MAJOR source of shopping frustration for me. There is also some libriarian in my background, so when book shopping I like to be independant and usually arrive with a list (compiled of new releases by my favorite authors & recommendations I’ve gathered). If I can walk into a bookstore, research inventory on a computer, walk directly to the section my book is shelved in, I am a happy camper…unfortunately it rarely happens that way.
I like the member discount at B&N but get pissy because customers are not allowed to use the computers…so I’m asked to give my private (almost illegible) list to some minimally qualified clerk to research availibility. So basically, if I can’t find it myself I take my money and leave.
Borders customers have access to computer inventory, but attempting to then find said book can be impossible because they are majorly into subgenre selving. So again I have to approach the minimally qualified clerk and hand over my list, so they can duplicate my research and then hunt for the subsection the book is hidden in. It’s very time consuming and frustrating. Erotica can be shelved with romance, fantasy, or self help (sex). At one time I hunted for weeks for L.A. Banks, only to finally realize that she is a black author and was shelved seperately.
Really people, I can (and prefer) to do this myself…if bookstores would just shelve their merchandise in a manner that an intelligent librarian could understand.
Avoid the Lit section like the plague. That stuff is so dry it will suck the life out of a person, not to mention terminal bordom.
Will I have to duck if I pipe up and say that I LIKE Lit Fic? Of course, I also like romance, non-fic, sci-fi/fantasy, mystery . . . pretty much anything but horror and true crime (which are the only thing my sister reads, LOL!).
What I found interesting was that even those stores that don’t normally have an AA section (can’t remember now if it was Borders or B&N) have one in both Atlanta and Oakland (where I live) because of the large AA population and the demand for such. But then, here in the Bay Area most book stores also have Gay/Lesbian/Transgender sections, Asian sections, and Latino sections.
I’m really interested to see how this all turns out. As of this moment we’ve only seen one side of the argument. I really want to see Penguin’s response so I can judge the legitimacy of the plaintiff’s statements and argument.
“Wonder if a purchase for the purposes of writing is expensable?”
Absolutely. Books, magazines, comic books, and even movie tickets, regardless of subject, all go on my tax forms as deductions, and my accountant puts them all through without a peep from the IRS. It all falls under the heading of research. I love coming home with a bunch of graphic novels knowing they’re tax deductible as well as great good fun.
“Where do you put the ChickLit? How do you shelve fiction that’s not quite one genre, but not quite another?”
Berkley’s marketing department has that very same problem with the Undead series. They’re not exactly romances (in UNDEAD AND UNWED, the the heroine never really warms up to the hero), they’re not horror, they’re not literature (snort), they’re not true crime, they’re not sci fi, nor general fiction, they’re not young adult. But romance sells the best, so there they are. In particular my male fans HATE going to the romance section to buy them. Female readers who don’t consider themselves romance fans don’t much care for their placement, either. So it’s an interesting question, and not just from an AA viewpoint.
As a former bookstore employee, I can guarantee you that they don’t give a yippity damn about the “shame” level of your list. You’ve got to come up with a very new level of weird to get them to react.
Kind of like ER employees. When my brother was doing his ER rotation I asked him, “Do people really put that much stuff up their butts?” He said that they have generally 2 people a week come in with something wedged up there.
When you deal with the public on a regular basis, you lose all ability to care.
In my old bookstore, an author is shelved where they sell. If an author develops a following in one genre, but produces books in other genres, they’re all put in the “profitable” genre.
Trust me. It made no damn sense to me to shelve Anne Rice’s Sleeping Beauty series with horror, but that’s what corporate wanted us to do.
The only section I ever use for browsing in book stores is the “new books” table. Otherwise, I am one of those people who walks in with a list of books I want (from internet research and friend’s recommendations.)
It would be fine by me if all fiction was in one big section by author’s last name, instead of having to figure out what genre this store thinks the book is.
I’d like fiction shelved alphabetically. Then if I’m looking for something specific, I can find it – if I’m just browsing I might find anything. I read mostly genre books, but I do think they look fairly dispiriting when they’re shelved en bloc.
When my local Waterstones had a Romance section (now MIA) it only shelved bodice-rippery covers there – romance authors with less specific covers were in general fiction. So helpful.
Thanks for the explanation, Bookseller Chick! I knew there had to be a good reason out there.
The main library in my system has sections for general fiction, fantasy, science fiction, mystery, western, Classics, and African American. The fantasy and African American sections were created while I was working there, in response to the fact that people would come in asking where those sections were. Some of the branches have an inspirational fiction section, and they’re planning one at Main but don’t have one yet. In the paperback racks near the check-out, Romance has its own section, but in the regular shelves it’s mixed in with general fiction (or African American, if applicable).
I’d say, for something that’s not quite one genre but not quite the other: if it fulfills the genre expectations of both (or more) genres, it’s a judgment call. Zelazny’s Amber series is both fantasy and science fiction, so it can go in either section- if they’re even seperated. Compass Rose could probably go in either Fantasy or Romance. If there was a seperate section for historical fiction, then Stephen Saylor’s Roman detective series could go either there or mystery, but since usually historical fiction doesn’t get a section, then it goes in mystery. If it has some aspects of several genres but doesn’t quite meet the definition of any – let’s make up a book about a detective that involves a romance, but the couple doesn’t wind up together and the mystery isn’t solved, it’s more a character study than anything else- then it goes in general fiction, because it doesn’t get any more general than not being any genre.
I don’t like the idea of a seperate section for Classics, because how do you decide whether the genre Classics go there or with their genre? Does Sherlock Holmes go there or with Mystery? Does the Lord of the Rings go there or with Fantasy? Is there an age requirement, is there an exception for “modern Classics,” and if so who decides who they are? The English professor at the local college? Oprah? I’m not sure I’d trust either’s judgment indiscriminately. Let all of the sections be based on content, not quality. What genre a book is might be a judgment call sometimes, but quality always is.
(For the record: yes, we have Classics sections in our library, and they are defined as things assigned in high school English classes, from Les Miserables to the Hobbit. But those are additional copies of books also shelved in their genre sections.)
Maybe I’m spoilt by my bookstore (Chapters), but there’s none of this problem as far as I know there. Romance novels are shelved in the same area, regardless of race or sexual preference involved, though I think the gay romances are on a separate shelf than the straight romances, though still in the same area.
And the ChickLit’s stuck in the fiction area. There’s no literature area, so people can’t complain about it being shelved next to the classics, since it’s all fiction.
My instinct as a bookseller says that shelving AA/black authors separately sells more copies in general, but hurts individual authors who might spark with a wider audience.
For that reason we don’t separate them out at our store, but we do make a note in the computer in case someone comes in and only wants books by black authors, which does happen occasionally.
ok I’m the odd duck here. I like wandering the bookstores looking at all the shelves for stuff to read…although that’s probably because so much of what I read crosses genres and no two bookstores seem to put them in the same area.
Hmm. I feel moved to comment although generally I just sit back and enjoy all the interesting—and usually humorous— dialogue. Strangely enough in Italy, bookstores have long since dealt with the idea of genres in fiction—well and also in non-fiction as I recall. Every thing was shelved by publisher. I remember finding this incredibly hard to decipher at first. However, after awhile, I figured out that I liked certain publishers—well, I suppose I liked who they published in general—so I would gravitate toward that particular section.
Much like our system of genres and subgenres, you have to know which section you are after. Also, since certain publishing houses produce certain types of fiction, you know which one to track down for mystery, pretentious fiction, etc. However, there was certainly no question of race, sexuality, gender etc. If an author sold to a publishing house that only produces mysteries, than that author surely cannot be surprised to be shelved with other mysteries… even if s/he wrote a piece of pretentious fiction.
Of course, all that being said, the Italian experience with race and racial discrimination is different than the American one. (Note: I didn’t say better or worse merely different.)
Ah, a fellow Canadian. Isn’t Chapters beautiful? Yes.
So, I don’t know about American stores but Chapters has shelves and tables and shelf ends and stacks of books that aren’t based on genre or author or release date. There are tables of books on sale, “Classics” in trade pb, hot author tables and all sorts of crazy stuff. It’s a store made for browsers. There are sections within sections.
My only complaint is all the shelves. I remember going in for a hotly anticipated release and not being able to find it on the shelf. The computer said it had copies. They were on a shelf somewhere in the store. It took a while to find it. And when I went looking for Compass Rose in the romance it wasn’t there. Fantasy all the way. So Chapter’s isn’t perfect either. It comes pretty close though with all those notebooks, shiny, shiny notebooks.
My library has one big section and a romance section but no fantasy section. There are authors that have books in both sections and some of that is based on cover.
It looks like there’s no perfect way to shelve a book. Even if there were a perfect database system it wouldn’t be able to counteract human error (I’ve aways hated people who just put things down wherever they were standing) and people browsing is half the point of a bookstore. Short of putting everything behind glass or arresting people for being sloppy, lazy shoppers this seems like it will always be a problem.
I’ve resigned myself to having to search three different sections for a certain author if I have to. I don’t go into Chapter’s half an hour before closing anymore hoping I’ll spend less than $100 that way. It’s too frustrating to have to run between sections looking for books when I only have 5 freaking minutes left. I have to make extra time now. I bet they like it that way.
Thing is, if I don’t have to head to the Fiction section first thing to look then I probably won’t end up there. And that’s sad because nearly all my impulse buys are from the general fiction section. I only buy books based on genre when I know the author well or I’ve been referred. I go to the general or sale section for impulse buying.
I like the idea of sorting by publisher. It made perfect sense when I was trying to find a Luna book.
Oh, and I agree with Charlene with the American thing. Only in my case it would be Canadian, Native Canadian to be precise. That’s just as bad because I don’t consider myself native to Canada. Unlike other minorities Aboriginal people don’t have a home country that we can all be slotted into. Guess there aren’t any good PC terms, not even vagina.
There isn’t a separate chick lit section because there isn’t anywhere near the number of chick lits as there are romances, or mysteries, or even mangas. At its peak, I sometimes saw tables or endcaps, which hold far fewer books than a section, devoted to the genre. We’re talking about a few dozen releases per year, compared to hundreds and hundreds in romance.
I don’t see what the big deal is about having two books next to one another on a shelf. Do they really think readers are too stupid to know the difference between Rudyard Kipling and Sophie Kinsella unless they keep at least four feet of space between the titles?
Bookstores often shelve non romance in romance sections (Danielle Steele) because most of their customers know to look for it there. They shelve non-romance by publishers known for romance in the romance section (Mira books, RDI books, BOMBSHELL books), often to the detriment of the book sales. They shelve novels in a different genre by an author known for writing in a particular genre with the author’s other books, figuring that you might give this other genre a try if it’s by an author you already love.
I think, unfortunately, chick lit is often read by women who wouldn’t be caught dead reading something identifiable as a romance novel. If bookstores shelve it all in romance (especially because most of it is NOT romance, no matter what the stereotypical articles claim), then they will lose sales. If romance writers pick it up expecting to get a romance, they’ll rant and rave.
What’s the right answer? Who knows. It sucks either way. I think “fiction” is likely the best answer, since it’s the truest. “Literature and Fiction” is exactly that. Separating them out would require BORDERS or B&N to make a pronouncement on what counts as both—do we really want THAT?
Not to start a whole ‘nother discussion here, so I’ll try to keep on the straight and narrow but:
What makes a ‘genre’ a ‘genre’? That each book follows specific guidelines?
Using romance as an example – is it a genre because ‘all the books focus on protagonists who fall in love and have a HEA’ and that’s the thread that binds each and every romance book?
Horror novels deliver on the scare factor; fantasy on the other-worldliness of the setting and that’s their thread. So they, like romance can be shelved separately with minimum complaints from interested parties.
Can ‘chick lit’ be described in a similar fashion? Is there anything that links each and every book so that they can be called ‘chick lit’ and so, fit, with minimum complaint from the buying public, into their own shelf?
I have much the same issue with Womens Fiction – I think it should pretty much be in General Fiction as there’s nothing that links all these books to call them ‘women’s fiction (written by women? only about women? 70% about women?)
But, like with all of the above examples (AA/black literature included) there are dedicated readers to these genres/niches who prefer to walk into the store and head exactly towards what they want.
If I’m a bookseller, pleasing the majority customer is what I’m after, so I’ll shelve books how these majority readers want it shelved because that in turn should aid my bottom line.
I notice the Millenia Black suit is often thrown in with this book shelving issue. That has nothing to do with it.
The problem in her case is whether or not a publisher has the right to take a non-AA book and classify it as AA simply because the author is black. Has her publisher ever put a white author through the humiliation of rejecting their work because the character’s race didn’t match their own?
I think it’s important we don’t de-value that situation by burying it in talk about where books get shelved in bookstores.
The end result of Black’s classification by her publisher means a good many things as a “black author” and one of them is the location of her books in a store, despite, as her suit states, the content of the book itself. Marketing was part of the issue, at least according to the portions of the documents I found online. Discussing the end result of classification (even if it’s erroneous classification as Black’s suit claims) isn’t devaluing her situation.
It’s germane to discuss the issue in the context of marketing and placement because the publishers decisions affect a good many authors from disparate genres, but Black is the first to pursue legal action that I know of.
Sarah, I don’t disagree that marketing was a part of the disparity, however, it really pales in view of the civil point of contention.
If Penguin had handled Millenia’s books per their subject matter, complete with the appropriate genre and cover art, Millenia wouldn’t have a case at all. They can market to whoever they want.
I think her complaint shows that the civil violation began with the actions Penguin took to MAKE them more marketable as AA fiction when, indeed, the author has not written AA content or subjects.
I think that’s far more important than the marketing. I guess that’s what I see getting lost in the various discussions.