Mis-shelved...again

[jmc_bks]

Jennifer Rardin's Once Bitten, Twice Shy is yet another urban fantasy, paranormal book, this time about an assassin partnered with a vampire. And it is an interesting book -- interesting enough that I'll be looking for Another One Bites the Dust when it is released next month.

But.

It was shelved in the romance section. It is emphatically NOT a romance novel. *sigh*

I'm tired, tired, tired of this. And I'm at the point where I'm no longer willing to pick up books randomly from the romance section at the bookstore, expecting a romance, only to find that there may be a romantic thread but nothing will happen on that front for several books.  

I want to write an open letter to publishers and booksellers, the gist of which is this:  When you are sloppy or careless (or outright deceptive) about your labels, categorization and shelving, you are messing with our relationship.  As in any relationship, if one party continues to let the other down, eventually the other (me, the reader, the consumer of your products) will begin to feel distrust.  This is the third time in less than two months that I've purchased a book either labeled "romance" or shelved in the romance section, only to find that it is NOT a genre romance.  So I'm finished.  I no longer trust your marketing or your labeling conventions.  I'm tired of buying what I think will be a romance but ending up without a HEA or even a sort of Happy For Now.  No more impulse buying. Which is a bit of a shame for me, because I'll now be reading fewer new authors.   But it's also a shame for you, 'cause you'll be getting less of my money.

And is there some rule about urban fantasy requiring this odd script?

And one more thing -- I thought, based on the shadowy color of the heroine's arm on the cover, that the protagonist was going to be a woman of color. Nope, that's just a shadow, she's got red hair and milky pale skin according to the text. I was a bit disappointed. [And if Jaz is a carrot-top, why does the cover model on the third book have black hair?]

 

Comments

[meril.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's Orbit marketing it as romance. All the material I can see on their website calls it "urban fantasy" and "vampire fiction."

[jmc-bks.livejournal.com]

"Romance" doesn't appear anywhere on the spine or in the blurb, so it doesn't surprise me that Orbit isn't marketing it as such. But it was placed in the romance section, presumably by a bookseller. Why? Because they assumed that vampire book told in first person is always a romance? Or because that's where they were directed to place it by management per the floor plan?

I find it interesting that the cover quote is from Keri Arthur, another urban fantasy author who writes not-quite-romance but who is also shelved in the romance section. I'm not sure what (if anything) the label on the spine of her books reads.

[jperceval.livejournal.com]

Arthur's books say "Fantasy" on the spine, but they also have a ton of cover quotes talking about "best paranormal romance of the year" and such. Which is silly, since they're emphatically not romance. I mean, LKH gets a lot of romance crossover, but she's been shelved in sci-fi in every store I've ever been in.

[coolredwyne.livejournal.com]

See but that is the problem... you are going to buy the next in the series.

From what I gather most publishers sales and marketing dept. are betting on more people being interested enough to keep buying the series and they are willing to piss off a few peeps to get there.

If this one isn't even 'labeled' that is either the stores fault or whoever 'stock'ed the store

[jmc-bks.livejournal.com]

You're right -- if it sells, publishers/marketers will keep doing it.

In this case, I'm not buying the next book -- I've requested it through my library. The first was good enough that I'd like to read what comes next, but not so good that I'm willing to shell out TPB $$, especially in light of the romance/not-romance thing.

And my "no-impulse buys" moratorium has begun in earnest.

[coolredwyne.livejournal.com]

Sadly I think that is really what will have to happen to see it stop.

Like that LL Foster thing. WHY give her another name if you are gonna slap a romance label on her anyway? Other than to see if it kills the sells of the author, well you do it to 'll foster' not lori foster.

So really the only people who get screwed are the reader and the author. Serious bad marketing there... LOL I am annoyed again I should go finish my rant that is still in draft.
Well in my opinion...

[jmc-bks.livejournal.com]

I haven't read Lori Foster in awhile. Saw the LL Foster book out at Halloween and wondered if it was her. The difference between the two names isn't enough IMO. If she wants to explore a new genre or subgenre, make a clean break or stay with the same name, not that half-way mess. How many books had JD Robb released before it was acknowledged that Robb = Roberts?

From Carrie http://lovelysalome.blogspot.com

[carrielofty.livejournal.com]

I was at a B&N in DC and found 6 copies of Kim Stanley Robinson's new paperback in the romance section. Even had "science fiction" on the spine. I wonder if the mistake would have been named if his name was George or something rather than Kim.

[(Anonymous)]

OTOH I've discovered a number of interesting books through mis-shelving or not realizing what I was picking up. I've also learned to expect the unexpected when I pick up paranormal/urban fantasy--some is self-contained romance, but much of it's darker or has a more equivocal ending.

In terms of plot, I don't mind being surprised by a book, including the ending. However I too have a moratorium on impulse buying, not because of plot conventions/shelving/genre expectations but because of writing style and misleading cover copy. I'm sick of reading ditzy chick lit copy on meaty books, and generic plot summaries on character-driven novels, and gushy praise on poorly-written, typo-riddled books. Gosh, I sound grumpy. A few wall-bangers in a row will do that.

RfP (http://www.readforpleasure.com)