It is so helpful to look at this perspective. I am currently writing my dissertation on reading romance and relationships (specifically, using romance as an adjunct to sex and couples therapy), and it’s meaningful to me to hear that it doesn’t matter- legitimacy comes from its readers, not ages old statistics. Would love to connect with you some time to talk romance.
I just stumbled across this—I am also in the process of writing my dissertation (though mine is on adaptation and agency). I would love to read yours someday :)
I defended in July 2024. So thankful to be done. If I can support you in any way, let me know. I got support from the right people, and we pay it forward. I have guides for picture things down to how to change the page numbers (which may seem like a no-brainer, but when you literally have no brain left because you have been writing for days, weeks, months, it’s hard to conceive of what to do). Good luck to you and I am serious, happy to set up a zoom to talk shop.
I loved this piece! I did medical research for years and learned quickly to start with who funded the research when reading a paper to cite. RWA was built from the ground up to funnel authors to agents and publishers. For years, you weren’t legit (ie. couldn’t attain PRO status) unless you had a traditional/Harlequin contract.
In the mean time RWA had plenty of courses and memberships to sell you until you were ‘good enough’ to be trad published. They had a huge interest in showing their readership just how lucrative the market was and how many books could be sold. Imagine getting your healthcare from your local drug dealer because that was their model. Were their courses good? In some cases, absolutely! And I was lucky to have people in my local RWA chapter support me. But because I was always indie published ( first book out in 2011) some people in those groups also went out of their way to tell me I wasn’t really an author. Those same women blanched when I naively mentioned how much I made on Amazon (Harlequin wasn’t publishing digitally yet).
Meanwhile Harlequin was telling their authors they should never consider a Harlequin contract as a source of income. Meaning you got your $1000 payment and didn’t expect to make more. No royalties because your book virtually disappeared the month after it was published.
I have a podcast talking to romance writers about their reading habits. I would love to have you on and talk about their reading habits state of the industry, especially in light of the current economic situation. Personally, I’m reading voraciously to avoid dealing with reality. 😂
I get your point on it not needing to be a billion dollar industry for interest in romance to be legitimate. I think, though, there's value for writers in understanding it sells better than other genres. At a writer's conference I attended in October 2024, several publishers revealed that roughly 70% of their revenue comes from publishing romance. As a writer, as an excellent writer no less, it rankles to have other writers look down on me because of the genre I choose to create within. One publisher said to me, "Be proud of your genre. It helps keep the lights on at the publishing houses so we even still exist to publish anything else. Other writers should be thanking romance writers, not looking down on them." Too, romance readers are among the most voracious. I know many that read 3-5 books a week and can't wait to consume something new and interesting within this space. I've never met a sci-fi fan or a literature fan that read more than a book or two a week. There's also the misconception that romances can't be true literature. They tout 'Pride and Prejudice' and the like as flukes. In reality, many romance writers are masters of the craft and worthy of recognition.
That’s so insulting to be the reason other authors can get published despite selling less than a dozen books, while the same authors looks down on you for the genre you write!
It does make me a little anxious to read that we don't need similarly impressive data, assuming I'm understanding you correctly. I'm not sure if the battle that was started decades ago has been won yet.
If I'm recalling it right, the point of the billion-dollar-industry data was to get the mainstream to acknowledge that stories "written by women for women" have leverage and power behind them, in the area where the old mainstream most valued leverage - in the bottom line. And thus could not be dismissed or ignored at least on that level.
Although we've come a long way, both in overall gender affirmation and in publishing, I feel like the old mainstream is still controlling publishing, and even has significant influence over indie publishing. It feels like romance is still being pushed to the fringe and effectively punished. I guess I don't think we've come so far that the mainstream offers leeway to romance the max that it could or should.
I'm not disputing your data, I swear! I'm just worried about the we-don't-need-data part. I agree we don't need data to assume that our literature is worthy. We don't need to prove it to ourselves.
But we do kinda need something to break through the still-existent barriers out there. Romance stories are still being forced into covert niches in a way that thrillers, horror, and "literary" women's fiction are not. I think to some extent romance is still treated as the undesirable cousin everybody puts up with because he brings all the treats to the party.
All that not to argue with you, but to voice a concern that I don't think the battle to assert relevance for the romance genre is over - yet.
Great article! It’s amazing to me (though it probably shouldn’t be) that this narrative took hold from such ancient / unreliable non-data.
This is not an ad I swear… but have you ever taken a data stroll in Publisher Rocket? That’s the closest thing I can think of to being able to see sales figures in real time regarding keywords used in Amazon book sales, how the ranking works, and average monthly earnings. If nothing else I find it utterly fascinating to see what people are searching for and precisely what it yields.
It is so helpful to look at this perspective. I am currently writing my dissertation on reading romance and relationships (specifically, using romance as an adjunct to sex and couples therapy), and it’s meaningful to me to hear that it doesn’t matter- legitimacy comes from its readers, not ages old statistics. Would love to connect with you some time to talk romance.
I just stumbled across this—I am also in the process of writing my dissertation (though mine is on adaptation and agency). I would love to read yours someday :)
Send me an email: jennifer@greenbergcounseling.com
I defended in July 2024. So thankful to be done. If I can support you in any way, let me know. I got support from the right people, and we pay it forward. I have guides for picture things down to how to change the page numbers (which may seem like a no-brainer, but when you literally have no brain left because you have been writing for days, weeks, months, it’s hard to conceive of what to do). Good luck to you and I am serious, happy to set up a zoom to talk shop.
Fascinating! Love the Mean Girls memes. 🩷 We definitely don't need to justify reading romance with bad data.
I loved this piece! I did medical research for years and learned quickly to start with who funded the research when reading a paper to cite. RWA was built from the ground up to funnel authors to agents and publishers. For years, you weren’t legit (ie. couldn’t attain PRO status) unless you had a traditional/Harlequin contract.
In the mean time RWA had plenty of courses and memberships to sell you until you were ‘good enough’ to be trad published. They had a huge interest in showing their readership just how lucrative the market was and how many books could be sold. Imagine getting your healthcare from your local drug dealer because that was their model. Were their courses good? In some cases, absolutely! And I was lucky to have people in my local RWA chapter support me. But because I was always indie published ( first book out in 2011) some people in those groups also went out of their way to tell me I wasn’t really an author. Those same women blanched when I naively mentioned how much I made on Amazon (Harlequin wasn’t publishing digitally yet).
Meanwhile Harlequin was telling their authors they should never consider a Harlequin contract as a source of income. Meaning you got your $1000 payment and didn’t expect to make more. No royalties because your book virtually disappeared the month after it was published.
I have a podcast talking to romance writers about their reading habits. I would love to have you on and talk about their reading habits state of the industry, especially in light of the current economic situation. Personally, I’m reading voraciously to avoid dealing with reality. 😂
I get your point on it not needing to be a billion dollar industry for interest in romance to be legitimate. I think, though, there's value for writers in understanding it sells better than other genres. At a writer's conference I attended in October 2024, several publishers revealed that roughly 70% of their revenue comes from publishing romance. As a writer, as an excellent writer no less, it rankles to have other writers look down on me because of the genre I choose to create within. One publisher said to me, "Be proud of your genre. It helps keep the lights on at the publishing houses so we even still exist to publish anything else. Other writers should be thanking romance writers, not looking down on them." Too, romance readers are among the most voracious. I know many that read 3-5 books a week and can't wait to consume something new and interesting within this space. I've never met a sci-fi fan or a literature fan that read more than a book or two a week. There's also the misconception that romances can't be true literature. They tout 'Pride and Prejudice' and the like as flukes. In reality, many romance writers are masters of the craft and worthy of recognition.
That’s so insulting to be the reason other authors can get published despite selling less than a dozen books, while the same authors looks down on you for the genre you write!
I love this data-based approach. Thank you!
It does make me a little anxious to read that we don't need similarly impressive data, assuming I'm understanding you correctly. I'm not sure if the battle that was started decades ago has been won yet.
If I'm recalling it right, the point of the billion-dollar-industry data was to get the mainstream to acknowledge that stories "written by women for women" have leverage and power behind them, in the area where the old mainstream most valued leverage - in the bottom line. And thus could not be dismissed or ignored at least on that level.
Although we've come a long way, both in overall gender affirmation and in publishing, I feel like the old mainstream is still controlling publishing, and even has significant influence over indie publishing. It feels like romance is still being pushed to the fringe and effectively punished. I guess I don't think we've come so far that the mainstream offers leeway to romance the max that it could or should.
I'm not disputing your data, I swear! I'm just worried about the we-don't-need-data part. I agree we don't need data to assume that our literature is worthy. We don't need to prove it to ourselves.
But we do kinda need something to break through the still-existent barriers out there. Romance stories are still being forced into covert niches in a way that thrillers, horror, and "literary" women's fiction are not. I think to some extent romance is still treated as the undesirable cousin everybody puts up with because he brings all the treats to the party.
All that not to argue with you, but to voice a concern that I don't think the battle to assert relevance for the romance genre is over - yet.
Note to Shelf Love: Thank you for saving me from spreading bad data in my upcoming book, "Write & Sell a Well-Seasoned Romance."
I so appreciate this deep dive! I'm new to your newsletter so feel free to kick me to the archives, but have you delved into the claims from NPD/Circana about romance growth in 2022 and 2023? https://www.npd.com/news/press-releases/2022/romance-is-the-leading-growth-category-for-us-print-books-this-year-npd-says/ https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/bookselling/article/92735-book-sales-continue-to-slow-down-in-first-half-of-2023.html
Great article! It’s amazing to me (though it probably shouldn’t be) that this narrative took hold from such ancient / unreliable non-data.
This is not an ad I swear… but have you ever taken a data stroll in Publisher Rocket? That’s the closest thing I can think of to being able to see sales figures in real time regarding keywords used in Amazon book sales, how the ranking works, and average monthly earnings. If nothing else I find it utterly fascinating to see what people are searching for and precisely what it yields.