Why Bother, One Wonders

I've just published a new, illustrated edition of my novella "Manhattan Morning" for Amazon's Kindle reader. It can be read on one of Amazon's physical devices or on a smartphone or computer where the Kindle reader app has been installed.

Now the question is, should I attempt to market this book?  I ask because without any marketing, the original version of "Manhattan Morning," still available without illustrations as a print-on-demand book, has, shall we say, remained "undiscovered."

It's an uphill battle and probably one that can't be won.  That's because most people read only or largely within certain genres these days and "Manhattan Morning" falls into one that is -- not to put too fine a point on it -- highly unpopular.

Writers write, an online portal that offers courses and advice to creative writers, business writers and bloggers has a list of the 17 most popular genres of fiction and, no surprise, "literary fiction," which is where "Manhattan Morning" would fall, is dead last.

Here's what writers write has to say about it:

"Literary Fiction. This genre focuses on the human condition and it is more concerned with the inner lives of characters and themes than plot. Literary fiction is difficult to sell and continues to decline in popularity."

I've also heard literary fiction -- the stuff that largely populates what is known as "the canon" -- described as a "niche category," read mostly perhaps by college students -- because they have to. Well, they certainly don't have to read "Manhattan Morning" and few if any will.

So what's REALLY popular these days? "Romance novels," which in contemporary form, are mostly written by women and heavily into explicit sex.  The most well-known, of course, is "Fifty Shades of Grey," which has old over 125 million copies worldwide.  Interestingly, it was first released as a self-published e-book.

The author is middle-aged woman named E.L. James and graphic sex is what the story, and its various sequels, are apparently all about.

According to an article entitled "The Business of the Romance Novel" published by JSTOR Daily, 

romance novels "despite their decided lack of cultural clout" are what's driving publishing these days.

"The average income for a romance writer has tripled in the digital age—an especially impressive feat in the age that finds writers of other genres struggling," the article said.

According to JSTOR, the romance sector had its ups and downs until 1972 when a woman named Kathleen E. Woodiwiss published a book considered to be the first modern "bodice ripper" -- "The Flame and the Flower." It had what was considered an overtly sexual cover and graphic, exotic sex scenes that occurred early in the book. Eventually it sold over 2.5 million copies.

And so it went from there. As we know, sex sells.

What about "Manhattan Morning?"  Does it have any sex and could it squeeze into the romance genre?  Yes, it does have sex -- possibly a bit exotic -- but not explicit.  No bodices are ripped much less anything more graphic than that. And it isn't written by a woman, which probably no doubt undermines its credibility when it comes to romance and what that means.

So I'm afraid it will have to languish as "literary fiction."  

I'll keep you posted as to the results of any marketing attempts. 

Why Are Books Perceived as "Literature" Unpopular?

In a recent post that can be found here, I mentioned that writing a book that can only be labeled as "literature" (as opposed to thriller,  detective story, romance novel or some other popular genre) is a kiss of death in the current milieu.

I mention that because in a letter to the editor published in the May 6, 2016 NYT  book review section, William F Wallace, of Brandon, Miss., concludes his missive as follows: "so readers don't buy too many books they suspect are 'literature.' Have you noticed that?"

Well, I'm sure The Times, along with the publishing industry has, indeed, noticed that.

Which begs the question "why don't people want to read such books?"

No Prize For Literature

If you are thinking about self-publishing a work of fiction and troll the Internet to find out how best to do so, you are, at some point, likely to be advised NOT to identify your work as "literature." It's a kiss of death in the marketplace and, indeed, in the prevailing social climate.

The only exception may be college campuses, but even there, literature is mostly required reading for certain majors. And, yes, there are some book groups here and there that still read such works.

Yet More on the Dotted Line

I've written earlier posts on the idea that there is a dotted line between fact and fiction, not because I want to suggest that non-fiction is fundamentally flawed. Like almost everything else in life, it has its shortcomings from time to time, but as a former journalist I'm inclined to believe what I read in credible publications unless I have strong reasons to suspect it isn't correct.

As someone who now dabbles in fiction, it is the other side of the line that is more interesting to me: how should fact be used in fiction?  I will have more to say about that in another positing, but for the moment, I want to call readers' attention to a quote in a recent "Bookends" feature in the Sunday "New York Times" Book Review section.