![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Rules for commenting: Lia Silver is an open, public pen name of mine. Please do not name or drop hints regarding other pen names of mine. Just trust that I have them, and the characters are as I say they are. Same goes for other authors. No outing. You don't need to know Milly Taiden's real name to discuss the fact that she is 1) an enormous bestseller, 2) totally ignored in all these discussions, 3) most or possibly all her heroines are Latina.
I put this up as a comment at Kirkus, where it was completely ignored. Probably because I brought in that least respectable of authority doings,* self-publishing. However, if anyone would like to discuss my point, please discuss.
[* ETA: I have no idea what that was supposed to mean, other than "things authors do." I haven't slept in three months and am on lots of drugs (medication, not recreational) and autocorrect isn't helping. It recently informed me that I need a socialist. I need a specialist. My country needs a socialist.]
Kirkus article on why the reviewer can't be bothered to read books featuring anyone other than white or straight characters
My comment: "I self-publish romance under pen names and while I don't know the readership of traditionally published books, the readership of self-published romance has a huge - possibly majority - contingent of people of color. In particular, there are a LOT of black women who love romance, and they read widely - not just African-American romance. Also, white readers who read self-published romance seem 100% fine with reading about heroines of color, in my experience. There have been no differences in sales of my books with heroines of color vs. white heroines.
Milly Taiden's heroines are all (or almost all) Latina, and she is HUGE - currently # 6 of Amazon's PNR (paranormal romance) authors. She is definitely not just read by Latina readers. Terry Bolryder (# 3 on Amazon's PNR bestsellers) has heroines who are mostly African-American. Zoe Chant (# 12 in PNR) has a number of heroines of color, plus some heroes. Or just look here.
Not looking at self-pubbed authors gives a very skewed picture of racial demographics of both readers and writers of romance. I enjoy paranormal romance so that's mostly what I'm looking at, but check out the top paranormal romance authors on Amazon. Many are self-published, and many have heroines of color. (Some heroes of color too, but not as many as heroines.)"
ETA: I forgot to add that while LGBTQ is obviously also a an issue of diversity in writing, it is a different one from the issue of the race of protagonists in romance. FF and MM romance novels are different genres than MF romance novels. While African-American romance can be a subgenre, the race of the protagonists does not typically change the genre of a romance novel the way that their gender does. For instance, Terry Bolryder's dragon menage books often have two white heroes and a black heroine. Their genre is "paranormal menage romance," and would be that if everyone was black, everyone was white, or the heroine was Asian and the men were Latino. If it was a MMM menage, then it becomes a different genre.
What this means, among other things, is that there are reasons why some readers might only read MM or FF or MF that have nothing to do with bias - they just aren't into the genre. If a reader said, "Hey, I love TS Joyce [an excellent PNR writer who usually or always has white protagonists], who else should I read?" I would rec them Marjorie Liu [an excellent PNR writer with multiracial protagonists] because the race of the protagonists should not make a difference in their enjoyment. I would not rec them a MM or FF writer with white protagonists unless they said they liked that too, because gender does tend to make a difference in people's reading enjoyment. It's a genre. If someone tells me they like historicals, I'm not going to rec them contemporary.
My experience with my own readers bears me out on this. Readers who like my MF romance books with white heroines like my books with heroines of color. (I know this because sales are identical regardless of the heroine's race, while other factors make a huge difference in sales. For instance, heroes who shapeshift into amusing tiny animals don't sell anywhere nearly as heroes who shapeshift into large manly animals.) But readers who like my MF books often don't even read my romance books with FF or MM main relationships. And vice versa. Different genres; I like all three, but I am probably in a minority there. Most people I know only like one or two, or at least have a strong preference for one.
However, if readers like my fantasy and sf (as opposed to paranormal romance), I'll rec them other fantasy or sf that's similar to mine with no regard to the genders in any subplot romances, because in those cases the romances are secondary to other elements and most readers won't care what genders are involved. Readers who love Swordspoint (which has a primary MM relationship) are probably responding to it being a fantasy of manners, and will enjoy books like Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell or Sorcery and Cecelia, which have primary MF relationships but are also fantasies of manners.
In other words: the people who think the race or ethnicity of the protagonists in genre romance is a dealbreaker for readers are generally wrong. I guess unless the readers are unusually racist. I do not assume that readers are unusually racist, and I wish that mainstream publishing and reviewers would stop assuming that. (Yes, I am biting my tongue to not state the obvious conclusion.)
Anyway, the fact is that due to racism within the industry, romance readers are underserved when it comes to traditionally published romance novels with racially diverse protagonists, but they are gobbling up self-published romances with diverse protagonists. That may be the cause or it may be because self-published books are cheaper or there may be some other reason, but the only people who appear to be refusing to read romances if the heroine isn't white seem to be concentrated in powerful positions in mainstream reviewing and publishing. No wonder so few diverse romances are traditionally published!
ETA 2: Feel free to link this! I would love to get more discussion going.
I put this up as a comment at Kirkus, where it was completely ignored. Probably because I brought in that least respectable of authority doings,* self-publishing. However, if anyone would like to discuss my point, please discuss.
[* ETA: I have no idea what that was supposed to mean, other than "things authors do." I haven't slept in three months and am on lots of drugs (medication, not recreational) and autocorrect isn't helping. It recently informed me that I need a socialist. I need a specialist. My country needs a socialist.]
Kirkus article on why the reviewer can't be bothered to read books featuring anyone other than white or straight characters
My comment: "I self-publish romance under pen names and while I don't know the readership of traditionally published books, the readership of self-published romance has a huge - possibly majority - contingent of people of color. In particular, there are a LOT of black women who love romance, and they read widely - not just African-American romance. Also, white readers who read self-published romance seem 100% fine with reading about heroines of color, in my experience. There have been no differences in sales of my books with heroines of color vs. white heroines.
Milly Taiden's heroines are all (or almost all) Latina, and she is HUGE - currently # 6 of Amazon's PNR (paranormal romance) authors. She is definitely not just read by Latina readers. Terry Bolryder (# 3 on Amazon's PNR bestsellers) has heroines who are mostly African-American. Zoe Chant (# 12 in PNR) has a number of heroines of color, plus some heroes. Or just look here.
Not looking at self-pubbed authors gives a very skewed picture of racial demographics of both readers and writers of romance. I enjoy paranormal romance so that's mostly what I'm looking at, but check out the top paranormal romance authors on Amazon. Many are self-published, and many have heroines of color. (Some heroes of color too, but not as many as heroines.)"
ETA: I forgot to add that while LGBTQ is obviously also a an issue of diversity in writing, it is a different one from the issue of the race of protagonists in romance. FF and MM romance novels are different genres than MF romance novels. While African-American romance can be a subgenre, the race of the protagonists does not typically change the genre of a romance novel the way that their gender does. For instance, Terry Bolryder's dragon menage books often have two white heroes and a black heroine. Their genre is "paranormal menage romance," and would be that if everyone was black, everyone was white, or the heroine was Asian and the men were Latino. If it was a MMM menage, then it becomes a different genre.
What this means, among other things, is that there are reasons why some readers might only read MM or FF or MF that have nothing to do with bias - they just aren't into the genre. If a reader said, "Hey, I love TS Joyce [an excellent PNR writer who usually or always has white protagonists], who else should I read?" I would rec them Marjorie Liu [an excellent PNR writer with multiracial protagonists] because the race of the protagonists should not make a difference in their enjoyment. I would not rec them a MM or FF writer with white protagonists unless they said they liked that too, because gender does tend to make a difference in people's reading enjoyment. It's a genre. If someone tells me they like historicals, I'm not going to rec them contemporary.
My experience with my own readers bears me out on this. Readers who like my MF romance books with white heroines like my books with heroines of color. (I know this because sales are identical regardless of the heroine's race, while other factors make a huge difference in sales. For instance, heroes who shapeshift into amusing tiny animals don't sell anywhere nearly as heroes who shapeshift into large manly animals.) But readers who like my MF books often don't even read my romance books with FF or MM main relationships. And vice versa. Different genres; I like all three, but I am probably in a minority there. Most people I know only like one or two, or at least have a strong preference for one.
However, if readers like my fantasy and sf (as opposed to paranormal romance), I'll rec them other fantasy or sf that's similar to mine with no regard to the genders in any subplot romances, because in those cases the romances are secondary to other elements and most readers won't care what genders are involved. Readers who love Swordspoint (which has a primary MM relationship) are probably responding to it being a fantasy of manners, and will enjoy books like Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell or Sorcery and Cecelia, which have primary MF relationships but are also fantasies of manners.
In other words: the people who think the race or ethnicity of the protagonists in genre romance is a dealbreaker for readers are generally wrong. I guess unless the readers are unusually racist. I do not assume that readers are unusually racist, and I wish that mainstream publishing and reviewers would stop assuming that. (Yes, I am biting my tongue to not state the obvious conclusion.)
Anyway, the fact is that due to racism within the industry, romance readers are underserved when it comes to traditionally published romance novels with racially diverse protagonists, but they are gobbling up self-published romances with diverse protagonists. That may be the cause or it may be because self-published books are cheaper or there may be some other reason, but the only people who appear to be refusing to read romances if the heroine isn't white seem to be concentrated in powerful positions in mainstream reviewing and publishing. No wonder so few diverse romances are traditionally published!
ETA 2: Feel free to link this! I would love to get more discussion going.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
It is cool to see series like Jeannie Lin's stuff, but there seems to be less of that and more how to kidnap a highland lord.
ETA: Wow. That Kirkus post is really rambling and unclear! It's not making me want to read their reviews. Talk Sweetly to Me did come to mind though, which is, incidentally, self published.
From:
no subject
ETA: That's my point: you'd come across more diversity if you read more self-pubbed books. That's where the diversity is.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Fortunately, some of my friends (like you) tend to rec diverse stuff, so that helps, but knowing that the main reviewer for NYT basically has no fucks to give about diversity is not encouraging (or surprising, but still...)
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I will look up Jenkins! Thank you.
ETA: If there were someone like Zoe Chant doing historical, like tropy short adventure stories, but no shapeshifters, I'd be likely to enjoy those.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
To be clear, I do like romance plots too! I just find longer format with a bit of other plot helps me care when the boning starts, ect.
From:
no subject
(I have basically just figured out that if I like an author's works, then I will /usually/ also like the works that they like. Particularly in terms of Romance authors. So I now have a sort of collection of Romance authors who point me towards other good romances, though I seems to be getting a lot more contemporary with diverse leads than the historicals I started with, but I don't really care because I have apparently found the sub-genre of geeky/fannish romance novels and it is currently making me extremely happy.)
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
It's also currently free. Latina game programmer heroine. Start of a series (though the others aren't published, yet). Utterly adorable.
To One Hundred: http://www.amazon.com/One-Hundred-dirtysexygeeks-Book-ebook/dp/B016CIAUPI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1454152171&sr=8-1&keywords=to+one+hundred
Also the start of series to come. Neuro-diversity. There is discussion of suicide, as a warning. Main couple met on a Firefly message board.
One Con Glory: http://www.amazon.com/One-Con-Glory-Sarah-Kuhn/dp/0578060752/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1454152333&sr=8-1&keywords=one+con+glory
Just got this one, haven't read it, yet, but it was recommended by at least two people who usually have good taste in these sorts of things.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I keep going O_o at that article omg.
From:
no subject
Applauds! And yes, it does (so does mine).
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
ETA: Also, I didn't comment on your comment because I didn't think I had anything useful to add to it.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
So -- BBW romance, where the heroine is fat. Multi-person romance, where the girl gets TWO guys (or more). And apparently romance with multi-racial pairings (or threesomes) or people of color.
The thing that sort of boggles my mind is that this has been going on for years now, and the romance publishers have failed to pick up on the fact that they can look at what's selling super well in self-pub as FREE MARKET RESEARCH for what they should be rolling out. What's selling super well? WHO'S BUYING IT and why aren't they buying from us? Why are publishers not interested in these questions?
I mean -- sure, you don't want to alienate the people who have moral objections to three-ways or whatever. THAT IS WHY YOU HAVE MULTIPLE LINES. Or even multiple imprints. You can have a Christian romance imprint that specializes in bonnets and modesty and chaste kisses and mail-order brides to manly men on the prairie. You can have another imprint where women have hot, hot sexytimes with two dudes who want her so much they're willing to share her, in between turning into a dragon and a tiger and counting their billions of dollars they made as corporate CEOs.
(AND BOTH LINES CAN HAVE PROTAGONISTS OF COLOR. Good grief.)
From:
no subject
I don't exactly do market research, but I can sort of see who's reading my books based on Facebook friends (who often have photos), emails, mailing list sign-ups that show people's last names, etc. Based on that, my readership (for books for adults) is about 80% female, BBW more often than not, and of all races, but with a higher proportion of black women than in the general population of the US. Like, maybe a quarter of the total? Hard to say, but definitely more than 13%.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
But yeah. In terms of readers where I do know their race… I have some African-American heroines, but proportionately a LOT of African-American readers. Black women read a lot. Women read a lot. I also have a lot of white readers, and they are definitely not boycotting my books with heroines of color.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
It's still dumb from the perspective of trad publishing, though, KWIM? And they're definitely not doing it out of a philanthropic sense that the pie is big enough to share. They just don't think that set of pies is worth anything.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
But yeah, there is a bit of a Gold Rush going on at Amazon right now for romance writers.
From:
no subject
The absolute best thing about self-publishing is that it lets readers find stuff that hits their sweet spot, stuff that trad publishers won't publish because it's not "marketable" enough.
Trad publishers fail miserably at catering to a broader reading audience. That is where self-publishing shines and is at least a part of why it is taking off like a rocket. Trad publishers have to pick and choose, and they do so with an eye towards "what will sell the most copies and make us the most money." And let's remember, most of that money never goes to the author. It goes to pay for the "machine" - the expenses of the publishing house.
The self-publishing stigma is fading, but you still see it - and I agree that's why your comment got ignored. There is still the incorrect assumption that something published outside of trad publishing must be of low quality.
But anyone who thinks trad publishers have better quality writing than self-publishers is deluding themselves - that wasn't even true decades before self-publishing was taking off. A lot of dreck got published, and still gets published, by trad publishers. You are no more guaranteed to like a book published by Tor or Baen than you are a book published by the person who wrote it.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Perhaps their data is just really out of date. Or I suppose it could be a self-sustaining cycle: a company sells only white books -> attracts a majority white audience specifically interested in white characters -> company believes that's the only thing that sells. Etc.
From:
no subject
I think it's self-sustaining. Publishers often don't let authors write romances starring black heroines, so they don't often exist in trad publishing, so anyone who wants to read or write romances with black heroines goes to self-publishing. It's not a different market, it's the same market but only one area is meeting the demand with a sufficient supply. (There is an African-American romance market in trad publishing, of course, but there's clearly a supply-demand issue.)
I also think trad publishers don't market/publicize diverse books enough or correctly, so there's an uneven playing ground: the white books may genuinely do better because they're better supported. In self-publishing, the playing ground is even so the books do equally well.
From:
no subject
the white books may genuinely do better because they're better supported.
That's a very good point. If publishers expect a book not to sell well, they don't put effort into it, and then it doesn't sell well. Surprise!
From:
no subject
I need a specialist. My country needs a socialist.]
Yes. completely.
Anyway, everything you've said makes total sense to me. I suspect that trad publishers are going to change though, assuming they get their head out of their asses. Look at the TV landscape - a lot of the top shows have PoC leads. No one thinks it's that big a deal anymore, except for a few crazy outliers. Eventually publishers will start looking at the sales figures of self published books and decide they want the pie back.
Romance isn't a genre I tend to read, but I do know when I choose a book, the skin tone of the protagonists isn't even a blimp on my radar. My sole concern is does this sound interesting. (Which is why, once I finish the non-fiction book I'm reading, my next will be "A Brief History of Seven Killings" written entirely in Jamaican dialect.)
From:
no subject
I want the remaining tarnish on the idea of self-publishing to get polished off, so that writers no longer feel like they need to go and seek out trad publishing to call themselves "successful."
Personally, I think creators (be that music, words, visuals, whatever) need to see that they no longer need all the middle men - that they can create and market their art directly to the public and make a living.
From:
no subject