Genre conundrum

WhatTheWhat · Jul 1, 2013

Hi all! Sorry I haven't been around much--busy busy busy. Which is a good thing, when it's writing several books in a row, right?

Anyway, I find myself experiencing a kind of conundrum with my books--namely, their genre. They're listed as "contemporary romance," but I've gotten two reviews (by two different reviewers), one for my first book and now one for my second (upcoming), that have said my books "read more like chick lit" because the plots pay as much attention to the MC's job, friends, family, etc., as her romance with the hero. I also include a lot of humor. (I call my books contemporary romantic comedies, but I'm the only one who does.) Also, my covers do look way more like romances than chick lit (I begged for a chick-lit style and was refused); perhaps that also contributes to the confusion.

The problem: These reviewers act affronted, like they've been the victim of some sort of bait-and-switch. Have they? I'm in the US, where the words "chick lit" are still akin to poison in the publishing world, so there was no way my publisher was going to use that genre. I believe that if I had gone with a publisher elsewhere in the world, I would have been labeled "chick lit" and all of this would not be an issue, but...woulda coulda shoulda...no point in what-iffing.

So...have these readers been robbed? Is there such a huge difference between contemporary romance and chick lit that it's a shock to the system when they expect one thing and get another? And, more important, what can I do about it? I don't want reviewers or readers to feel cheated and consequently hate my books because of it. I write what I write--I don't think I can--or ever would--change my style/plots to accommodate the genre I've been saddled with. And I feel like I don't really have any say in the matter anyway. If I bring up concerns like this to my editor, he just shrugs it off, kind of..."Oh, bloggers/reviewers--what do they know?"

I feel pretty stuck. Any advice for the genre-confused? Thanks!

Filigree · Jul 1, 2013

Really, you cannot win with some reviewers. They're offended by the strangest things. I dare say the readers haven't been robbed. For me, a romance without a good framework is a little shallow. Any reviewer stuck on that issue should probably just go cue up several hours of Cinemax plot-what-plot porn, and get it out of their system.

WhatTheWhat · Jul 1, 2013

Ha ha ha oh, those are other reviewers! I feel like marketing t-shirts to clean/sweet/closed-door romance authors that say "I never promised you a graphic sex scene."

Thanks, Filigree. I wish I could get more feedback from real readers to get some perspective. Perhaps with time. Or, if not, I'll just fade into oblivion. But I'm not going down without a fight!

Filigree · Jul 1, 2013

Don't fade away, WTW. Then the bastards just win. There's a strong market for the kinds of stories you tell. Your publisher may have come on too strong with the romance angle, if there is little graphic sex. But I hear you about the current stigma toward anything perceived as chick-lit from a female author. It's probably more lucrative to court the romance market right now.

Quality feedback comes with time. My first novel came out a year ago, and I have two reviews on Amazon. Two. And on Goodreads, a number of the one-star reviewers take me to task for the very things that the four and five-star reviewers celebrate.

One thing I do, which is sadly close to sour grapes, is look at other books those negative reviewers really liked. Quite often, that tells me I'd *never* be able to write anything to please them.

You can't please everyone. Once newer writers understand this, their lives are a little easier.

WhatTheWhat · Jul 1, 2013

Wise words, Filigree. I thank you again. I guess I'm puzzled about why some people think contemporary romance and chick lit are one and the same, while others consider them completely different animals. The reviewers who complained about the genre label weren't even seeking out graphic sex (although, like I said, other reviewers have, even though I never implied there was going to be any)--just wanted a solitary focus on the love relationship.

But I'm with you--if there isn't a detailed plot with more going on, I get bored. I remember one book that was really well received, but when I read it I couldn't help but wonder why the scenes were all "couple goes out to eat" then "couple goes clubbing" then "couple goes out to eat". Then I realized there was nothing else to talk about, nothing else to busy the characters with. Well, wait--there was, but the author didn't delve into it. It's my personal opinion there should be more to the story than relationship angst--love, then arguments, then reconciliation, end.

Thanks also for the info about feedback. I have very few reviews--more on Goodreads than Amazon, but not that many--and I do wonder if they're a fair representation of how my books are being received.

Too funny about getting praise and criticism for the same things! That happened to me when I entered contests--four judges, two loved it, two hated it, and for the same reasons. You just can't win 'em all, for sure.

Cathy C · Jul 1, 2013

I feel you pain, WTW. Literally. My paranormal romances were urban fantasy before there was such a thing. I got lots of comments from reviewers that there was too little romance and too much action.

Fortunately, the readers who LIKED a lot of action, and just one sex scene, when the moment was right and proper, won over the others and our sales continued to be just fine.

I really don't get why the term "Chick Lit" has become toxic. Maybe because they went so far away from the original concept that there was no romance left, and only the chick?

I wouldn't worry about one or two reviewers. But are YOU the one sending the review copies? If so, then you need to start to create a dialogue with the reviewers to let them know what they're getting. If it's your publisher sending them, then don't be afraid to send your own copies---to reviewers who already like what you do.

Some good reviews on Goodreads will overcome the bad. But it's important that they're not "guided" on how to review. That looks bad all around. Just search out blogs that talk about humor and Chick lit in a good way.

ap123 · Jul 1, 2013

Wow! I can't believe I'm seeing this thread now, I am in the middle of a PM conversation, explaining my decision to shift my query (and the manuscript during edits) away from romance, now just mentioning strong romantic elements.

Someone told me it can't be considered a romance if the heroine doesn't need the hero for her success--the what she wants aspect. That isn't my story, and not one I want to write.

Very interesting, I'm going to keep watching this thread, thank you

LA*78 · Jul 1, 2013

I don't really have a clue about the answer to your question. I really fail to understand why the label chick lit has been sullied. For me there is a slight difference - mainly in the focus of the story. For me a romance is generally focussed on the couple/trio/insert appropriate grouping here and the relationship that develops between them. Chick lit is generally focused on the journey of the main character, who in finding herself generally also gets lucky in the love department. Maybe contemporary women's fiction is the right label? I'm certainly no expert in the field of novel categorisation...

LJD · Jul 1, 2013

No advice, but...sounds a lot like Kristan Higgins' earlier novels. They read more like chick lit to me, written in first person and with less interaction with the hero than other contemporary romances. Usually a lot about the heroine's family. There was an interesting blog post about this--whether her books would be better classified as women's fic--that I've linked to before, but the link appears to be broken

I used to read a lot of chick lit, and Higgins' All I Ever Wanted was one of the first romance novels I read, and it was the first one I enjoyed. As a chick lit reader it did read a little differently to me than what I was used to reading--mainly in that there was a bit more lusting. (Though All I Ever Wanted is far from a super sexy romance. I think the sex is all behind closed doors?) But not all that different.

Later, as a regular romance reader, while I enjoyed her books, I found the romance part of them a little disappointing due to the limited interaction between the hero and heroine.

WhatTheWhat · Jul 1, 2013

Oh this is nice! I've been stewing about this all day, trying to figure it out, then it dawned on me to bring it into this group. Such a relief to discuss it!

Cathy--I don't know much about PNR/UF, but I have heard that there is the same sort of tussle with labels. Such a hassle, no? And funny you should ask about solicited reviews--I always research reviewers very thoroughly before sending them a review request (with the exception of two of my early requests for my first novel--starry-eyed hero worship clouded my judgment...and got me two unimpressed 3-star reviews for my negligence). I didn't approach this latest chick-lit accusing reviewer, and I'm not sure my publisher did, either, although they might have (she didn't mention where she got the ARC). However, just the other day I got to give the PR department what for because they sent my ARC to a reviewer who didn't like the book. Three seconds of research (perusing her GR bio) showed why--she stated flat out that she prefers stories with possessive alpha males, and my heroes are betas. Plain ol' sloppy on the PR department's part, that one.

LA*78--Agreed. Then I'm contemp WF if nothing else! However, my publisher has declared me romance, and apparently that's where I'm going to stay, unless I figure out a way to stage a prison break. Hmmm.

LJD--I like Kristan Higgins a lot. I discovered her when I was about halfway through my first novel and thought "kindred spirit!" because we have a similar tone. I've since read all her stuff and I agree with you--I'm always surprised that she's with Harlequin and listed as standard romance when she does sound more chick-lit-like. And yes, her sex is closed-door. I think I prefer her first-person narratives, to be honest, but who am I kidding? She puts something out, I'm going to be at the front of the line for a copy.

Ap123--If this thread helps you and others, then perhaps this was all worth it.

Honestly, I don't know why chick lit has been demonized--and for so long! I thought publishers would ease up by now. I suspect it sort of became a parody of itself, with the pastel covers and the New York City and the shoes and the handbags and the meet-cute and blah blah blah, and then the field got glutted by bad chick-flick movies and there was a general backlash. But I think what publishers fail to realize is there's always a market for good chick lit, without cliches, and with humor and smart heroines. There was just too much bad stuff clogging up the market for a while. That's just my opinion, though. I could be entirely wrong. Would love to hear others' thoughts on the matter.

Evangeline · Jul 2, 2013

WhatTheWhat said:
I suspect it sort of became a parody of itself, with the pastel covers and the New York City and the shoes and the handbags and the meet-cute and blah blah blah, and then the field got glutted by bad chick-flick movies and there was a general backlash. But I think what publishers fail to realize is there's always a market for good chick lit, without cliches, and with humor and smart heroines. There was just too much bad stuff clogging up the market for a while. That's just my opinion, though. I could be entirely wrong. Would love to hear others' thoughts on the matter.

That's pretty much what happened. Plus publishers throwing six figure deals at almost every author during the very short-lived chick-lit boom. By the time chick-lit died--almost overnight--publishers were stuck with a bunch of debut novels that were never going to earn out their huge advances.

On top of all of this was the backlash against the term/genre from top selling "women's fiction" authors like Jennifer Weiner and Jodi Picoult! As a result, chick-Lit became a parody of itself and a dirty word in publishing circles.

WhatTheWhat · Jul 2, 2013

Thanks for the confirmation, Evangeline. Do you think it'll ever turn around and not be considered so "evil"?

LJD · Jul 2, 2013

WhatTheWhat said:
LJD--I like Kristan Higgins a lot. I discovered her when I was about halfway through my first novel and thought "kindred spirit!" because we have a similar tone. I've since read all her stuff and I agree with you--I'm always surprised that she's with Harlequin and listed as standard romance when she does sound more chick-lit-like. And yes, her sex is closed-door. I think I prefer her first-person narratives, to be honest, but who am I kidding? She puts something out, I'm going to be at the front of the line for a copy.

All her recent stuff is third person, no? I always wondered if she was encouraged to switch to third and give more page time to the hero to make it less like chick lit.

Reviews of her earlier books are frequently along the lines of: like the book, wish I could have known the hero better. eg. Catch of the Day (see the comments)

And I do think that's fair. If I read a romance, I want to see a good amount of hero/heroine interaction--that's why I'm reading a romance novel--and her books don't always deliver that. It's quite rare for me to think that about a romance novel; I honestly can't think of an example by any other author, so I don't think I'm overly picky there.

So...have these readers been robbed? Is there such a huge difference between contemporary romance and chick lit that it's a shock to the system when they expect one thing and get another?

"Robbed" is a bit strong, but I understand feeling misled, as the reasons I'd pick up a romance vs. a chick lit novel are completely different.

I always thought chick lit was very much about the voice. A voice with a chick lit vibe in a romance wouldn't bother me, though. But if it's sold as a romance and there's not a lot of romance, I'd spend the whole book waiting for the romance to become more significant, and then feel disappointed when it never did. Hard to tell without having read your book whether there's enough romance in it for it to satisfy me as a romance.

Evangeline · Jul 2, 2013

WhatTheWhat said:
Thanks for the confirmation, Evangeline. Do you think it'll ever turn around and not be considered so "evil"?

Probably not. The phrases "Contemporary women's fiction" or "Humorous women's fiction" are here to stay. Though, I kind of feel that New Adult romance is a descendant of chick-lit: youthful voice, coming-of-age, urban-ish settings, sexual coming-of-age, romantic plot, and so on. The emotional impact of New Adult owes much to Young Adult fiction, but some of it is rather alike to my favorite chick-lit novels (for example, Lucy Sullivan is Getting Married and Rachel's Holiday by Marian Keyes).

WhatTheWhat · Jul 2, 2013

Well hell, I don't know WHAT I am now!

I like the term "humorous women's fiction" or, like I mentioned upthread, "contemporary romantic comedy", but if my publisher isn't calling it that, it doesn't really matter what I call my books.

LJD, yes, as far as I can recall, Kristan's books have shifted to third person and dual POVs. I'm that rare bird who actually enjoys first-person narrative, so that must be why I like her earlier stuff just as much. I never thought about whether Harlequin nudged her in that direction, but that would make a lot of sense.

I also never had a problem with Kristan's balance of romance plot/other stuff in the heroine's life, but I can see how people who like relationship-focused romances would balk. Kind of funny that my books are labeled romances when I actually don't enjoy a plot that focuses mainly on the H/h relationship. LOL I'm a freak!

LJD · Jul 2, 2013

WhatTheWhat said:
LJD, yes, as far as I can recall, Kristan's books have shifted to third person and dual POVs. I'm that rare bird who actually enjoys first-person narrative, so that must be why I like her earlier stuff just as much. I never thought about whether Harlequin nudged her in that direction, but that would make a lot of sense.

First person is fairly popular in romance these days, but that seems to be particularly in erotic romance...

Evangeline · Jul 4, 2013

WhatTheWhat said:
Well hell, I don't know WHAT I am now! I like the term "humorous women's fiction" or, like I mentioned upthread, "contemporary romantic comedy", but if my publisher isn't calling it that, it doesn't really matter what I call my books.

LJD, yes, as far as I can recall, Kristan's books have shifted to third person and dual POVs. I'm that rare bird who actually enjoys first-person narrative, so that must be why I like her earlier stuff just as much. I never thought about whether Harlequin nudged her in that direction, but that would make a lot of sense.

I also never had a problem with Kristan's balance of romance plot/other stuff in the heroine's life, but I can see how people who like relationship-focused romances would balk. Kind of funny that my books are labeled romances when I actually don't enjoy a plot that focuses mainly on the H/h relationship. LOL I'm a freak!

Labels are for marketing purposes--and sometimes, different people see a book in different ways for different reasons!

Lauren Willig was interviewed(ish) on Dear Author earlier this year about her Pink Carnation series. Willig thought she was writing a Regency romance, but was told it was "historical chick lit" when chick-lit was popular. Then CL died before the book was released and the publisher marketed it as "historical fiction"; the mystery elements had mystery fans calling her series "historical mystery"; and finally when the first Pink Carnation book was released in mass market paperback, it was classified as romance!

Another author who comes to mind is Megan Mulry: her books straddle the line between women's fiction and contemporary romance, but the books are published in trade paperback. I'm pretty sure that if I walked into B&N, they'd be in the "Fiction & Literature" section and/or placed on the front tables, yet they still hit the sweet spots romance readers love.

My advice is to study your targeted agents (or editors) and tailor your query to their client list and/or reading interests. Some agents who rep women's fiction don't rep romance at all, so you'd have to word your pitch to focus on the WF/CL elements. In a way, query letters and pitches are the first step in marketing your book!

WhatTheWhat · Jul 4, 2013

Evangeline said:
My advice is to study your targeted agents (or editors) and tailor your query to their client list and/or reading interests. Some agents who rep women's fiction don't rep romance at all, so you'd have to word your pitch to focus on the WF/CL elements. In a way, query letters and pitches are the first step in marketing your book!

Ah, therein lies the rub. I have an agent. And an editor. My first book has been published and my second and third are coming out this year. I see my stuff as chick lit, as does my agent, but my publisher doesn't use that term, so I get the "contemporary romance" label, which irks some readers who find more plot points than just girl-plus-boy-equals-happy-ending. And I end up with a literary/professional identity crisis. Now the question is...is it hurting my sales? :gaah

MsLaylaCakes · Jul 4, 2013

From my very short experience as an author: Some readers will be irked no matter what label, warnings, and content notes are used to market the book. I've been surprised at how perfectly some responses match what is stated in the content notes verbatim.

As far as sales go. Remember: what one reader hates can be exactly what another reader is looking for.

Cathy C · Jul 5, 2013

I have a friend, Maria Geraci, who debuted during the chick-lit boom for Berkley. She's since finaled for a RITA award. In what subgenre? "Novel with strong romantic elements."

Her first novel was Bunco Babes Tell All. When it was first released it carried the Chick Lit label on Amazon (proudly, I might add--and placed there by the publisher). I just went back to see what labels it carries now.

Look for Similar Items by Category
Books > Literature & Fiction > Contemporary
Books > Literature & Fiction > Humor
Books > Literature & Fiction > United States > Humor
Books > Literature & Fiction > Women's Fiction > Contemporary Women
Books > Literature & Fiction > Women's Fiction > Friendship
Books > Romance > Contemporary

Her books are quite successful still, so you might enjoy them just for reading.

So I think that's your answer.

Genre conundrum

WhatTheWhat

PRing my little heart out

Filigree

Mildly Disturbing

WhatTheWhat

PRing my little heart out

Filigree

Mildly Disturbing

WhatTheWhat

PRing my little heart out

Cathy C

Ooo! Shiny new cover!

ap123

Twitching

LA*78

LJD

WhatTheWhat

PRing my little heart out

Evangeline

Twirling in a glass of champagne

WhatTheWhat

PRing my little heart out

LJD

Evangeline

Twirling in a glass of champagne

WhatTheWhat

PRing my little heart out

LJD

Evangeline

Twirling in a glass of champagne

WhatTheWhat

PRing my little heart out

MsLaylaCakes

Playing the waiting game

Cathy C

Ooo! Shiny new cover!