What Do You Want to See in a Historical Romance?
The debate continues on whether or not historicals will once again be in favor with readers and publishers.
My theory is that if they are selling well (and as a result publishers are cashing in on them) then we will be seeing more published in the future. If not, we won't.
If historicals are going to make a comeback readers have to support the genre by purchasing the books new — even though they may be tempted to pay less for them on the many used book sites that are selling practically new books as used.
It doesn't matter if a book is 5 years old or 5 minutes old. If it's sold as a used book it will not get credited to the overall sale of the book.
What does this mean?
If there are 50,000 copies of a title distributed in bookstores and only 10,000 sell as new books then that translates to a 20% "sell through" for the book which publishers consider extremely low. This low sell through will be interpreted to mean it's not a popular book.
Let's say the same 10,000 books (mentioned above sold as new books) then circulates as a "used book" and goes on to garner an additional 30,000 readers in the used book arena. That means that the total number of readers for this book is really 40,000 (10,000 new + 30,000 used). If all sales were counted, 40,000 (out of the 50,000 the publisher printed) is a 90% "sell through" which is considered fantastic to a publisher. The problem is that the publisher NEVER sees the 30,000 that were bought used. They only count the 10,000 that gets logged in as new sales.
So my point is that even though you may LOVE historicals and are reading them like crazy unless you are buying them as "new books" the perception in the book industry is that historicals are not selling well because only NEW BOOK SALES COUNT.
So my question is if you are willing to support the genre and you do want to see more historicals being published a) what historical period do you want the books set in and b) what do you expect from a great historical romance?
I look forward to your feedback.
Carol Stacy,
Publisher of RT BOOKreviews
My theory is that if they are selling well (and as a result publishers are cashing in on them) then we will be seeing more published in the future. If not, we won't.
If historicals are going to make a comeback readers have to support the genre by purchasing the books new — even though they may be tempted to pay less for them on the many used book sites that are selling practically new books as used.
It doesn't matter if a book is 5 years old or 5 minutes old. If it's sold as a used book it will not get credited to the overall sale of the book.
What does this mean?
If there are 50,000 copies of a title distributed in bookstores and only 10,000 sell as new books then that translates to a 20% "sell through" for the book which publishers consider extremely low. This low sell through will be interpreted to mean it's not a popular book.
Let's say the same 10,000 books (mentioned above sold as new books) then circulates as a "used book" and goes on to garner an additional 30,000 readers in the used book arena. That means that the total number of readers for this book is really 40,000 (10,000 new + 30,000 used). If all sales were counted, 40,000 (out of the 50,000 the publisher printed) is a 90% "sell through" which is considered fantastic to a publisher. The problem is that the publisher NEVER sees the 30,000 that were bought used. They only count the 10,000 that gets logged in as new sales.
So my point is that even though you may LOVE historicals and are reading them like crazy unless you are buying them as "new books" the perception in the book industry is that historicals are not selling well because only NEW BOOK SALES COUNT.
So my question is if you are willing to support the genre and you do want to see more historicals being published a) what historical period do you want the books set in and b) what do you expect from a great historical romance?
I look forward to your feedback.
Carol Stacy,
Publisher of RT BOOKreviews
posted at 1:08 PM
35 Comments:
I would love to see more westerns come back. Not the horrible indian romances that you know could not have a happy ending but the really hot ones, Elizabeth Lowell style. I get a little tired of the "ton" where every man is rich, handsome, etc. The most refreshing romance I'Ve read lately is Renee Bernard's A Lady's Pleasure. Even though it is not and Amereican western, it was a really great read. Need more of those! There is a fine balance between the soft porn and the hot stories with two adults falling in love. Need more and more of the second.
Hello,
Don't want HOT historicals romances with many sex scenes !!!! I just want beautiful and moving love story with interesting characters. More books like historicals by Mary Jo Putney ; Linda Francis Lee ; Edith Layton. I would like more adventure in them and also more "exotic" and unusual setting such as China / Japan / India... Some good "saga" like "Tanamera" by Noel Barber. More attention given to the dialogues : It's so bad to read medieval books where characters talk like modern-day people !!!! No more cliché such as a very happy ending or a pregnant heroine at the end... so boring ! But please, don't stop them !!!! It's a warm sun in this cruel world ;) JOELLE from FRANCE
to the above poster, most people don't like unhappy endings in their romance books.
while i actually only read historical romances, and usually buy news ones each month, i do have one major complaint.
there are too many books being published that are set in regency england. not everyone wants to read hundreds of romanaces books inspirid by jane austin books.
i do like some regency books, but it is rather annoying when it seems like 90 percent of historical romance books published are regency.
Great post!
I love historicals. There's so much excitement hidden in the past!
My favorite historicals are emotional, richly layered and complex. I could care less about the setting because in truth I find all historical settings interesting!
I love historicals. I don't have any preference for a time period in historicals. I just want them to be rich with the conflicts created by the traditions of the time. I don't particlarly like historicals where a woman with modern thinking and ways is "dropped" into the time period. I feel like it robs me of the experience of the time period.
Sarahkp
So many thoughts, so many things to say, where to begin! Thank you, Carol, for stating the problem so eloquently. And to the reader who is tired of Regency settings--this is a direct result of what Carol is talking about. Readers were only buying Regencies new, so publishers believed only Regencies were selling. The consumer really does affect the book market, far more than you realize.
I would dearly love to see a return of the Roberta Gellis type books, and I'm hearing lots of positives about this happening. So Carol, you play up the new historicals in RT, I'll buy them new from your lists, and we'll all knock wood together.
And if it helps at all, my July book will travel into Brittany in 1789. No Regency setting here!
Patricia Rice
SWEET HOME CAROLINA, Ballantine 2/07
This is very helpful. I will compile all of your responses and send it on tio the publishers.
Keep your comments coming, please.
Carol Stacy
Publisher of RT BOOKreviews
I like American historicals best - post-Civil War through World War II. They can be sexy or not. What matters most is the story.
And I buy new, too, because I know authors don't get royalties on used books. Maybe publishers could print 20,000-25,000 of a book and then go back to print? This is the age of computers, when turnaround time is nil.
I love historicals, and I buy new (mainly) even though I'm a voracious reader, but prefer medieval to regency. And I want LOTS of sex in them--preferably not one-sided.
I like/love Elizabeth Lowell, Mary Jo Putney, Brenda Joyce, Sabrina Jeffries, Suzanne Enoch, Marsha Canham, Bertrice Small, Susan Johnson, Christina Dodd, Karen Ranney. Laughs are appreciated, Teresa Medeiros, Sandra Hill, Nina Bangs. I'll even make an exception for a really good contemporary--Susan Elizabeth Phillips and Judith McNaught.
I grew up on and love westerns, but can't stand many romance westerns. They're too insipid and mild, compared to Louis L'Amour, Max Brand, Zane Grey, and many others. I know the down-home expressions and don't need them beaten to death or endlessly repeated, and don't want to be patronized. All westerns are actually romance novels without the strong romance (and sex) at the forefront. Read your genre's competition. Memorize L'Amour!
Thanks for asking!
I love Regencies. For me, the plot is not as important as the personalities. I can read the same plot over and over with different personalities and still be entertained.
I love regencies (both traditional and the bigger historicals like those of Julia Quinn and Eloisa James). I also wish more publishers would do colonial romances--they're few and far between. I read a mix of contemporaries and historicals. I love suspense subplots.
I'd love to see some fresh voices in historicals, too. Not that the authors already mentioned aren't terrific - they are. But there's nothing I like better than finding a new author and losing myself in the story s/he is telling. And thanks to the Internet, I can help spread the word if a really talented author comes along.
As for new vs. used: prices have gotten a little steep of late so I'll sometimes ask my local library to order books for me.
Thanks for asking for readers' input!
I've been reading historical romances for about 26 years and would like to see a return to more complex story lines and characters, humor and mystery. It seems like a majority of books are currently written to fit into a certain page count. Also, Ditch the "bodice ripper" covers.
I buy all my books as new, but find I have to order them off the internet since the local bookstores don't carry a lot of new titles. I wish the reissues were easier to identify without having to find the small print copyright dates inside the book.
"I wish the reissues were easier to identify without having to find the small print copyright dates inside the book."
Regarding this comment:
We identify all of the books being reissued with new covers (and sometimes even new titles) in our monthly column called Paperback Roundup. We also give the history of the book i.e. when it was first published, in which format, if the story has been updated etc. . It's a column our reader's value for the same reason you state.
Just thought I'd let you know.
Carol Stacy
I love historicals, or rather did in the glory years of the early to mid-90's. Today's historicals are too modernized with 21st century heroines and oversexed love scenes. The romance has gone completely out of fashion. That's why I'm stuck digging up older used books to fill my reading pleasure.
What I miss are the epic romances ala Elizabeth Lowell's "Only" series. Heck, I'd love to see some light farce ala Julie Garwood come back to vogue. All we have now is Julia Quinn's Bridgerton's series and even that was a little half-baked.
I love the idea of historical romances, but now only read a few a year. Why? I can't stand the heroines! They're flawless, self-sacrificing -- and boring. Where are the heroines who grow as a result of the romance? The heroes and heroines are all interchangeable from one book to another (big exception: Judith Ivory and Connie Brockway). So I've almost given up.
In 1963, Sergeanne Golon and the Angelique series got me hooked;
Rosemary Rogers kept me looking for more; Judith McNaught restored my faith, and Diana Gabaldon showed us all what passion, commitment and growth in character and author truly meant.
Let’s face it…in the late 80’s when romance went boom, the publishers started putting everything in hard cover.
Too often readers are paying premium prices for mediocre content and not getting the bang for their buck.
Even RT’s has reviewed award-winning authors with comments like “…not the expected depth of character development…”.
I along with so many other readers have started to buy used books to avoid the disappointment of content and sticker shock.
Editors and publishers need to better police themselves if they what to see “new” sales increase. Your readers want QUALITY not quantity.
Before I started writing I read all my books used. Since I became aware of the hole I was digging my beloved authors into, I've coughed up the money to buy as many books new as I can. It's only fair - to all parties involved! That said, I don't think lending books is wrong. If you lend a book and that person decides they love the author and buys her backlist (new!), then you've done a good service. I'd say it's a fine line between hording and pimping, there. Plus, books are expensive and they seem to be getting shorter and shorter. There has to be some balances checked, I think, to make new purchases worthwhile.
Great post! PS let's amuse ourselves with the irony of my #1 book-lending-friend (ie. source) sending me this article...
On the other hand, I tend not to like historicals that are set in America--I HATE western romances and it is a rare American romance--usually an offshoot of a series I like--that can make me read them!
I like to read stories that show the developmnet of a relationship between the hero and heroine. not these storiees where they hate each other until the last 2 pages!!. julie garwood books - funny and exciting Ransom is a good example. Regency novels have been overdone. not enough medieval romances like The wolf and the Dove. I also enjoy the romances set in the American west -Lorraine heath has written some very good books here.
I love historical novels...and will buy them new, always. My point is that I would love to see more history of the time period involved with the storyline AND it must be accurate. Nothing turns me off more when the history is flawed. I'm a bookseller and when a new author's book arrives (which may only be one copy) I will immediately purchase the copy and promote it, thereby generating more copies to come into the store, or placing a special order. BUY NEW is my motto and you could not have said it better, Carol! Thanks!
I love all historicals from mideval to the regency era. I buy all of my books new but I have not bought a historical in months. The min reason is that the sex is usually glossed over or the heroine is silly. I miss Bertrice Small historicals *small sigh*. Get some good stuff out there and I will surely buy it.
I love new "virginal" books and buy used books only when they are out of print. But therein lies the problem: Most titles are very soon out of print. The publishers say that the storage is to expensive. May be. But it's really a nuisance!
As for historicals, I prefer all periods past the middle ages. For me the discrepancy between medieval people and modern thinking or speaking is too great. I can tolerate it in other time periods. Regency has become recently a "fairy age" where all is possible: Sex (abundant), modern thinking heroines and so on. Is the story really good and captivating, I can tolerate it, but not in a less well written story.
Mary Jo Putney, Mary Balogh, Edith Layton are among my favourite authors. What I like best about them is that there are not so many mistakes in describing an era.
I would like authors who add a little mystery to their stories and tell us about more exotic countries (examples: Mr. Impossible by Loretta Chase, China Bride by Putney)
I am a regency reader, but, I can tell you what I don't like, oversexing the book. If an author gets long and drawn out with a sex scene, I skip over it. Especially when that author does this two, three, four times in the same book. It isn't erotic, it's boring. And the sex needs to feel natural. So many scenes feel like the author said "well, I need a little more sex in this book, I think I'll put it.....Here!" Quality not quantity. That is "my" rule with sex.
My next gripe would be the heros who have had "countless" women. I do not find that sexy or appealing in any way. It makes me think of STD's and illegitiment children. Just how romantic is it really to think your guy has porked over half the women you meet while hob nobbing with the "ton". It is such a closed society, you would face this with every ball, rout, and musicalle that you attend. I could not see myself being that understanding.
I really miss the glory years of the early-mid 90's for historicals. We had the lighthearted intrigues of Amanda Quick, heartwarming comedies of Julie Garwood (she so needs to return to historicals!), and sensuous historicals of Elizabeth Lowell. I'm not so much a fan of medievals but love the 19th century. Yes, Regencies are overdone a tad and Westerns far too few. But the really bothersome thing is that precious few historical romances actually have well developed relationships in them. It's all lip service to the era and romantic farce with lovescenes that come off as modern porn.
I've tried new books by Julia Quinn and Sabrina Jeffries, but so many are blah. The most original stuff I've seen lately is by Julie Anne Long.
If authors are looking to see what I mean, read Elizabeth Lowell's Only His and Only Mine. Now those are two novels with rich historical details, sensuous lovescenes and a real sense the H/h fell in love outside the world of sex.
I love LOVE Regency and Victorian set historical romances. I purchase every one that comes out each month new to read. I never get sick of the time period. I read both the humorous and more complex ones. I think that if publishers started publishing books based in Revolutionary War Philadelphia etc. I may read those. But I am really an Anglophile at heart and cannot see myself not reading the Regency and Victorian time period. If they stop publishing them - I will just go back and read the old ones. Or just stop reading romances all together.
I love Regency Historicals and Victorians and Westerns. I love the whole pomp and ceremony of the English aristocrats and who doesn't love a cowboy??? Lots of conflict and sexual tension and passionate loves scenes. I love the sexual tension to build up to the love scenes, it just makes it better. I don't like intrigue and suspense so I love some humor thrown in. I also love my dark brooding hero.
What strikes me as I'm looking through the other comments is people are saying they don't want modernized historicals, but then seem to be placing modern value systems on them. A girl wouldn't have thought about a man's sexual past unless his actions were such that Society would have frowned on it, eg seducing innocent girls.
I like anything pre-1900 and preferably outside of America, but I all I really wan t si a story that takes me to the time and place. I'm looking for differnet locales and people. Writing it too. Other folks besides Anglo-Saxons and Native Americans had sex and found love.
I love historicals but my main problem with them is the women always are so passive. Now that doesn't stop me from buying them or loving them. But I got real tired of having the male be a rake and the good woman that changed him for the better. I mean I'm sure I can't be the only one. The thing about the modern romances is that alot of times you can get a strong capable woman that can match wits with the man.
If historicals can give us more of these type of females that go head to head with the males I'm sure we'd see even a bigger change in sales.
As an Australian I HATE westerns and American historicals, seeing them only as another example of the overwhelming world-wide dominance of American popular culture. Sure, sell them in America, but don't flood the market with them. Yes, a book can be good (or terrible) in any historical context, but I tend to find of any era the American westerns tend to be the most stereotypical (e.g. little woman trying to do it on her own in small town/farm, gets help from strong macho guy who never had a family and who she tames...)
Although I read contemporaries by a certain few authors and NEVER read paranormals....I am totally addicted to my Regencies~ The love scenes are so passionate and for anyone who loves pure romance there is nothing like a regency.
I am not speaking of hot sex...(Which is great ..LOL)
I'm talking true romance with heady passionate sexy love scenes.
I get so annoyed at readers of romance novels who say they don't want the sex or don't read this genre for the sex! Why else?
Even if you don't want explicit sex there are so many authors who don't write it into their books. Those are the ones I stay away from!! LOL...If a romance has no sex then it's not a romance to me!
I buy over $100 worth of books per month. So... I fully support the romance writers.
Yesterday I spoke with Mary Balogh on Candic Hern's DIVA BOARD and everyone there said that she writes sensual and deeply passionate sex scenes and it is not offensive to anyone she has ever heard of. She is a great writer and if you have never read her stories please start with A SUUMMER TO REMEMBER!
All in all I hope that regency historical romances will stay forever and I think that they will!
RomanceFanReader~
I love the historical romances by Constance Hall. Wish she'd write some more. I haven't seen any new books of hers since Isle of Skye. I love the innocence of her heroines. I get so tired of so-called "fiery" aggressive females. I like when the man does the chasing and the heroine is sweet and innocent. Can't seem to find many of those kind of books.
I'd love to see MORE westerns (love those cowboys!) and LESS regencies. Sympathetic, engaging characters and a plot with some depth are much more important than explicit sex - the sex should just be the icing on the cake.
I'd LOVE to see more historicals western romance , i love cowboys and indians also ! Lots of sexual tension , sexy love scenes , forbidden love , impossible relationship . Strong heroes and heroines ( not passive ones ). My favorites Linda Howard , Medeline Baker , Constance O'Banyon , Nicole Jordan ( Rocky Mountain trilogy ) .
I also love Regency , a guardian/ward relationship ( one of my favs " Dangerous Desires - Julia Templeton ) ,i wish there were more like that one .
As for books , usually i buy them new !
My favorite time period was years surrounding the Civil War. I live close to New Orleans, and books with that N'awlin's flavor is always a hit with me. I think there should be less Regency, it has taken over the historical genre, that and the Highlander stories have run amok for too long. We need more flavor to our fave genre. I work in a used bookstore and the most requests in historical romance is for more antebellum stories, more plantations and less Regency/Highlander stories. Even westerns have been requested, but there are plenty of those in circulation now. Antebellum, Southern history would be my request. Rayne T. Storm
Post a Comment
<< Home