Books Aren’t Pink

There is in the publishing industry a definite bias towards women. They dominate the industry. An industry that used to be run by men, is now run by women. Women also dominate the independent author movement. Smashwords and K-lytics, for example, focus heavily on romance fiction, which is basically fiction by women for women, as well as other female dominated genres.

Why Men Don’t Read: How Publishing is Alienating Half the Population” is an excellent article by Jason Pinter. He explains the reason for the men-don’t-read bias and critiques it. I happen to think he was right on target, and his article was published over 10 years ago. Quite honestly, nothing has changed. And if anything has only gotten worse.

When push comes to shove, publishers may grudgingly admit that maybe men do read, but they’ll immediately add — they don’t read fiction!

I think that’s about as true as the fact horses have feathers.

Men do read fiction. I won’t believe anyone who tries to tell me men don’t read Clive Cussler, or Lee Child, or Tom Clancy, or William W Johnstone. Or when they were boys didn’t read Sherlock Holmes, or Tarzan, or Doc Savage. I just won’t believe it.

Porter Anderson, in a 26 December 2013 post on Jane Friedman’s blog, “Men Don’t Read Fiction? BULL! — Writing on the Ether”, explodes the publishing myth that men don’t read fiction. Do take a read. It’s an excellent post. The most important take away, IMO, is that books aren’t pink.

I think part of the problem is the ever increasing focus on women in our society. A focus that is seen as a way to right their previous inequality. We’ve seen an explosion of genres and categories that target women. Starting with the very explicit Women’s Fiction.

There’s nothing wrong with marketing books to a particular demographic. Nothing. In fact, it’s good business. But if it’s good business to market to women, why isn’t it also good business to market to men? After all, men have money. They also want to spend it. Why lose half the population to video games and TV?

Take me, for instance. I’m a man, and I read. I even read fiction. In fact, I mostly read fiction. And I buy an awful lot of books. I certainly can’t be the only guy who does.

In an exceedingly insightful paper written by Kate Summers and published in the Spring 2013 (Vo. 52, No. 3) issue of RUSA, Ms Summers provides us with information that supports what we already know but fail to act on: men and women are different — and have very different reading interests and habits.

Summers points out that the culprit in fostering the bias against the male reader may in fact be the public school system. The very system that is supposed to encourage girls and boys to read.

She notes the belief that 

…boys’ under achievement in reading is a result of a school curriculum that is “biased towards girls’ reading interests” or a product of the predominance of female teachers versus male teachers, which contributes to boys’ perception of reading as being a feminine pursuit.

Young boys, who certainly don’t want girl germs, aren’t going to be interested in fiction geared towards girls. Why? Because boys have very different interests vis-a-vis girls.

Summers cites a classroom study of 6 boys, which just so happens to coincide with my own experience: namely, that boys will read fiction that ties in with their interests.

Early on, I was fascinated with dinosaurs. Consequently, I liked stories that featured dinosaurs; such as, Danny and the Dinosaur and The Shy Stegosaurus of Cricket Creek. 

As my interests developed, so did my interest in fiction on those topics. For example, when I developed an interest in sailing ships, I read sea stories.

If you want boys to read fiction, find out what they’re interested in and give them fiction to read on those subjects. It’s as simple as that, really.

Girls will read Betsy, Tacy, and Tib; and the boys will read Star Rangers. And all will be well with the world. Which is a good thing.

So if we were to have a new BISAC fiction code for Men’s Fiction (one doesn’t exist now, while women have FIC044000 FICTION/Women) what would be the characteristics of this category, or genre? What would make it different from Women’s Fiction?

Based on the information cited in Ms Summer’s article, I put forward the following as a starting point.

Men’s Fiction would in general

        • Be written by men
        • Have a male protagonist
        • Contain elements of the genres preferred by men, such as adventure, humor, horror, and science fiction
        • Have believable characters with whom they can identify
        • Be realistic fiction that deals with the contemporary problems of people

Which means if male authors want to attract male readers they need to re-think their reliance on the kick-ass heroine as the protagonist. While the kick-ass heroine may attract some male readers, as a whole men don’t like female main characters. This is because men have a greater need to identify with the protagonist than do women. Something to think about. It may also be why most kick-ass heroines are quite masculine.

Robert E Howard, for example, recognized the fact that men don’t relate to female main characters. He paired his kick-ass heroines with a man. She might be the star, but there was a man there so Howard’s mainly male readers wouldn’t get turned off. 

Erle Stanley Gardner noted that one of the reasons for the popularity of Sherlock Holmes was due to “the extreme masculine atmosphere and the yearning for freedom.” 

After a time, even the most happily married man begins to feel squeezed by his responsibilities to his family. He may be tied to a job he doesn’t like. He may have doctor bills. And chores like cutting the grass, or painting the house. There are dirty diapers, lack of sleep, and the Terrible Twos.

Holmes and Watson were blissfully free from all those things. Their extremely masculine world is something every guy dreams of — no matter how much he may love his wife and kids. Fiction about two carefree guys, doing guy things, will attract male readers — of any age.

Gardner also wrote

Every story, or rather, every type of story that has succeeded has the common point of a single man, unaided, overcoming difficulties by the inherent power that is within him and attached to him.

I don’t think Gardner’s statement applies to women’s fiction, but it sure as heck applies to men’s fiction. That is every man’s dream: To conquer the impossible without any help or aid. It is the essence of the adventure story, a genre much preferred by men — not women. And may be why the female dominated publishing industry doesn’t get guy fiction: it’s alien to them. So they foster the myth that men don’t read fiction.

Men, however, do read fiction. But they aren’t as social about their reading as women, which may account for all those surveys which say men don’t read. Men simply don’t answer them, or they answer them as they think they’re supposed to answer them. But men do read and they do tell other men about the books they’ve read. I’ve gotten lots of great book suggestions from men. Which I wouldn’t have if men didn’t read.

With the advent of e-readers, there is a new privacy when reading in public. No longer can the world see your book cover. This may work to the advantage of men. They can read their guilty pleasures, Conan the Barbarian, Doc Savage, and Longarm, and not get questioning looks. Something to think about.

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy reading!

Share This!
Facebooktwitterpinterest

Men’s Fiction Revisited

A knowledge and understanding of history gives a person a depth of perception that is noticeably missing from those who are only savvy with current events.

There was a time when men had fiction that catered to them, catered to the things that men find interesting. Today, though, this isn’t so much the case. Yes, a man can find contemporary novels and stories written with a male audience in mind. However, in my experience, they are few and far between.

Some time ago I outlined what Men’s Fiction might contain. I’d like to revisit the concept of Men’s Fiction and why I think it is of vital importance that a BISAC category for Men’s Fiction is created — and soon.

A cursory search of the internet will reveal the concern in the publishing industry over the statistics showing a decline in book buying and reading in the States.

Personally, I’m not convinced the stats portray an accurate picture. As the now defunct Author Earnings website repeatedly demonstrated, book buying is quite healthy. 

The reason for the discrepancy lies in the fact that most indie authors don’t use ISBNs, which is how the book industry keeps track of inventory. Thus all those books with no ISBNs are never counted. They are invisible to the bean counters sitting in the treasure rooms of the corporate publishing houses.

What the stats actually reveal is a decline in purchases of traditionally published books.

As for those surveys showing a decline in reading and that men aren’t reading fiction, I’ve previously discussed male reading habits. One of which is that men tend not to be social and demonstrative in their reading. Which means men simply may not be accurately represented in the survey results.

I know men who read, and men who don’t. I know women who read, and women who don’t. I know men and women who never touch fiction. And those who only read fiction.

The simple fact of the matter is that the surveys may not be accurate.

Another factor which is likely to throw a spanner into those stats on book buying are the folks who basically buy used books and only used books. As a case in point, I rarely buy a new book from a corporate publishing house. Yet, I do buy a lot of traditionally published books — virtually all used. New books are just too dang expensive.

In addition, today the frugal book buyer is having a field day with all the free books that are now available on the internet — and I’m talking about the freely available public domain books one can find on Project Gutenberg, Project Gutenberg Australia, Faded Page, and archive.org. As a further case in point, I have downloaded books and magazines by the hundreds from these sites. All for free. After all, I’m retired and living on a fixed income.

Personally, I think reading is alive and well — and I think the male reader is nowhere near needing life support.

However, that doesn’t mean there aren’t problems. Which is why I think the book industry and indie authors need to be careful not to exclude the male half of the population. The book industry and indie authors need to make sure that there is fiction boys and men will actually read, not stuff the industry hopes they’ll read.

Male readers prefer, for the most part, the genres of adventure, humor, horror, and science fiction. They also tend to shy away from books that are focused on relationships (such as romance).

The male reader also has a strong preference for main characters who are men, men he can relate to, and for male writers. This may be due in part to the current stereotype that reading fiction is something only women do. And thus boys especially need the male writer and male main character to avoid being seen as a “sissy”.

Gender issues aside for the moment, if we want boys to read — we writers have to give them something they will actually read. They aren’t going to read books about androgynous main characters. Or books where the main characters are female. They just aren’t. If we want to capture those young male readers, we need to give them boys and men they will respect and we need to give them storylines boys are interested in. It’s as simple as that.

This year I’ve been exploring and reading the fiction of the old pulp magazines. I’ve discovered writers such as H. Bedford-Jones, Talbot Mundy, Erle Stanley Gardner, Max Brand, Seabury Quinn, Alison V. Harding (almost certainly the pen name for Lamont Buchanan), and Hugh B. Cave. I’ve gotten reacquainted with Carl Jacobi, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Frank Belknap Long, and E. Hoffman Price.

The above writers (save for Harding) all made their living from writing fiction — and writing fiction for men. In fact, Blue Book magazine at one point proudly declared that their stories were “for men, by men”. Pretty doggone clear who their audience was!

So what have I gleaned from my reading of pulp era fiction?

The main character is always a man. He’s strong, smart, and very capable. He is a man of good morals, and is polite and considerate, unless unduly provoked. Then he is liable to deck his antagonist. Or he may deal him a witty barb that figuratively knocks him out. The pulp fiction hero is what every man would probably like to be. There are no angst driven heroes in pulp fiction. There are no heroes who are physically or mentally challenged. We’re thinking Jack Reacher types here.

There’s frequently a love interest. The woman is, surprisingly, given all the stereotypes, a strong personality who can go toe to toe with the hero. She is a woman who is strong and capable. A woman the hero can and does admire — that’s why he falls in love with her.

However, men have a need to be a knight in shining armor; a protector of those who are not as physically strong as they are. And they also have a need to pursue their love interest. If the woman is easy to get, then she really isn’t of interest as a mate. 

So even though the woman with whom the hero is in love can drink, swear, and dispatch a dozen bad guys, she will need to be pursued and at some point she will need rescuing. And rescue her he will. The rescue is the ultimate display of his love for her and also proves to her she wasn’t wrong in her choice of him for her mate.

Pulp fiction is often laced with humor. Men love a good laugh, and pulp fiction provided it. Laughter helped to ease the tensions of a hard day at the office or on the assembly line.

Action. Almost all of the stories are filled with action. Pulp fiction heroes are men of action. They aren’t navel gazers.

Adventure. Pulp fiction stories and novels are mostly tales of adventure — regardless of the genre. Men live for adventure. There’s a bit of the wandering spirit in all of us guys.

What I found in reading pulp fiction surprisingly corroborates the research Kate Summers presented in her article “Adult Reading Habits and Preferences in Relation to Gender Differences”.

Which to my mind means the pulp writers and magazine editors knew their readership and gave them what they wanted. Strong men. Strong women. Humor. And plenty of action and adventure.

The corporate publishing industry is dominated by women. And evidence shows they have little interest in catering to the reading preferences of men. Which is a shame, as they are leaving a huge revenue source untapped.

Which leaves us with the men writers who are independent author-publishers. What does pulp fiction teach us men who are indie authors? I think it means, if we want to tap into an audience that is starving for good stuff to read, that we write Men’s Fiction. 

Fiction with strong, intelligent, and wholesome male leads. Fiction with women who are the equal of the hero, but are also all woman. Not the kickass heroine who is too often a man in drag. Fiction with plenty of action and adventure.

Pulp fiction was commercial fiction. It was written and published to make a buck. It was meant to be disposable, casual reading. It was pure entertainment. Pulp fiction was not meant to be great literature, but then Shakespeare wasn’t intentionally writing great literature either.

We men who are indie authors, could also do a world of good by writing fiction for boys. Because if boys learn to love reading, then we writers have them for life. 

Kate Summers concluded her essay noting that while gender equality is important, when it comes to reading, and especially reading for leisure, it might be better if we just gave men and women what they want to read. I’m sure glad a woman wrote that.

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy reading!

Share This!
Facebooktwitterpinterest

Men’s Fiction

There is in the publishing industry a definite bias towards women. Jason Pinter’s excellent article in the 25 May 2011 HuffPost, “Why Men Don’t Read: How Publishing is Alienating Half the Population”, explains the reason for and critiques this bias. I think he is right on target.

What’s worse is when publishers grudgingly admit that maybe men do read, they’ll immediately add — but they don’t read fiction!

I think that’s about as true as the fact horses have feathers.

Men do read fiction. I won’t believe anyone who tries to tell me men don’t read Clive Cussler, or Lee Child, or Tom Clancy, or William W Johnstone. Or when they were boys didn’t read Sherlock Holmes, or Tarzan, or Doc Savage. I just won’t believe it.

Porter Anderson, in a 26 December 2013 post on Jane Friedman’s blog, “Men Don’t Read Fiction? BULL! — Writing on the Ether”, explodes the publishing myth that men don’t read fiction. Do take a read. It’s an excellent post.

I think part of the problem is the ever increasing focus on women in our society, as a way to right their previous inequality. We’ve seen an explosion of genres and categories that target women. Starting with the very explicit Women’s Fiction.

There’s nothing wrong with marketing books to a particular demographic. Nothing. In fact, it’s good business. But if it’s good business to market to women, why isn’t it also good business to market to men? I’m a man, and I read. I even read fiction. In fact, I mostly read fiction. I certainly can’t be the only guy who does.

In an exceedingly insightful paper written by Kate Summers and published in the Spring 2013 (Vo. 52, No. 3) issue of RUSA, Ms Summers provides us with information that supports what we already know but fail to act on: men and women are different — and have very different reading interests and habits.

For example, Summers points out that the culprit in fostering this bias against the male reader may in fact be the public school system.

She notes the belief that “boys’ under achievement in reading is a result of a school curriculum that is ‘biased towards girls’ reading interests’ or a product of the predominance of female teachers versus male teachers, which contributes to boys’ perception of reading as being a feminine pursuit.”

Young boys, who certainly don’t want girl germs, aren’t going to be interested in fiction geared towards girls. Why? Because boys have very different interests vis-a-vis girls.

Summers cites a classroom study of 6 boys, which just so happens to coincide with my own experience: namely, that boys will read fiction that ties in with their interests.

Early on, I was fascinated with dinosaurs. Consequently, I liked stories that featured dinosaurs; such as, Danny and the Dinosaur and The Shy Stegosaurus of Cricket Creek. As my interests developed, so did my interest in fiction on those topics.

If you want boys to read fiction, find out what they’re interested in and give them fiction to read on those subjects.

Girls will read Betsy, Tacy, and Tib; and the boys will read Star Rangers. And all will be well with the world.

So if we were to have a new BISAC fiction code for Men’s Fiction (one doesn’t exist now, while women have FIC044000 FICTION/Women) what would be the characteristics of this category, or genre? What would make it different from Women’s Fiction?

Based on the information cited in Ms Summer’s article, I put forward the following as a starting point.

Men’s Fiction would in general

  • Be written by men (perhaps women using a male pen name)
  • Have a male protagonist
  • Contain elements of the genres preferred by men, such as adventure, humor, horror, and science fiction
  • Have believable characters with whom they can identify
  • Be realistic fiction that deals with contemporary problems of people

Which means if male authors want to attract male readers they need to re-think their reliance on the kick-ass heroine as the protagonist. While the kick-ass heroine may attract some male readers, as a whole men don’t like female main characters. This is because men have a greater need to identify with the protagonist than do women. Something to think about.

Robert E Howard recognized this. He paired his kick-ass heroines with a man. She might be the star, but there was a man there so his mainly male readers wouldn’t get turned off. 

Erle Stanley Gardner noted that one of the reasons for the popularity of Sherlock Holmes was due to “the extreme masculine atmosphere and the yearning for freedom.” After a time, even the most happily married man begins to feel squeezed by his responsibilities to his family. He may be tied to a job he doesn’t like. He may have doctor bills. Chores like cutting the grass, or painting the house. There are dirty diapers, lack of sleep, and the Terrible Twos.

Holmes and Watson were blissfully free from all those things. Their extremely masculine world is something every guy dreams of — no matter how much he may love his wife and kids.

Gardner also wrote:

Every story, or rather, every type of story that has succeeded has the common point of a single man, unaided, overcoming difficulties by the inherent power that is within him and attached to him.

I’m not sure this applies as much to women’s fiction, but it sure as heck applies to men’s fiction. That is every man’s dream: To conquer the impossible without any help or aid. It is the essence of the adventure story, a genre much preferred by men — not women.

I don’t know if I’d get anywhere marketing books as Men’s Fiction. I suppose I can give it a try. There is, after all, #MensFiction on Twitter.

Men do read fiction. They aren’t as social about their reading as women, which may account for all those surveys which say men don’t read. But they do read and they do tell other men the books they’ve read. 

With the advent of e-readers, there is a new privacy when reading in public. No longer can the world see your book cover. This may work to the advantage of men. They can read their guilty pleasures, Conan the Barbarian, Doc Savage, and Longarm, and not get questioning looks. Something to think about.

Comments are always welcome! And until next time, happy reading!

Share This!
Facebooktwitterpinterest