Dudes Don't Read: The Book Biz's Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?

By now we know the book business could be spiraling into the trash heap of history along with the CD business and the US auto industry. The layoffs and the handwringing are well documented, and the problems that plague publishing are too numerous to recount here.

But as a guy who has worked in the book world for several years, I'd like to take this opportunity to call attention to my pet peeve about publishing. When the dust settles, the "restructuring" is over, and industry leaders have had a chance to look at themselves in the mirror I hope they'll think about it.

When I talk to book editors they repeat the mantra almost religiously: "Dudes don't read." They've all resigned themselves to the fact that women buy most of the books -- especially novels -- and so it's become a self-fulfilling prophecy. They're right. Dudes aren't reading. But is it our fault? Or have publishers just given up trying to publish and market books that we'd want to read?

Just glance over a list of book deals on Publisher's Marketplace and you'll see houses acquiring the same stuff day in and day out -- almost all of which fits into pre-existing niche categories dominated by female readers.

A good example is Jane Austen-related books. In three years in my current job I've seen The Jane Austen Book Club, Jane Austen's Guide to Dating, Jane Austen in Boca, Jane Austen in Scarsdale, Austenland, The Lost Memoirs of Jane Austen: A Novel, Confessions of a Jane Austen Addict, Lost in Austen: A Create Your Own Jane Austen Adventure, What Would Jane Austen Do? and, appropriately, Jane Austen Ruined My Life.

I joked with my cubicle-mate when Twilight became big that it was only a matter of time before we had a Jane Austen vampire book. It didn't take long. In June Publisher's Marketplace announced Jane Bites Back, pitched as "the humorous, sassy account of Jane Austen as a modern-day vampire," to be published by Del Rey Books.

After The Devil Wears Prada there were dozens of "assistant lit" books. After The Nanny Diaries there were dozens of "nanny lit" books. As the former assistants and nannies get married and have kids there are now "mommy lit" and "divorcée lit" books.

Meanwhile, it's gotten to the point where a lot of the more business-savvy literary agents won't even bother to represent a young male novelist anymore. If they do actually sell a guy-centered book, it's usually a direct-to-paperback deal with practically no publicity budget. (Something like I Just Want My Pants Back by David J. Rosen.)

When, by some freak occurrence, publishers somehow land a commercial male novelist who's at the top of his game they seem to have no clue how to market or publicize the books -- especially to male readers.

Exhibit A: Jonathan Tropper. You've probably never heard of him even though he's optioned almost all of his novels to major Hollywood studios for millions of dollars. He's still never cracked the bestseller list, but I don't blame him. His second novel The Book of Joe was hilarious and should have appealed to men and women, but just look at this cover.

This cover would never pass the subway test. In other words, no dude would be caught dead reading that book in public. Basically, the publisher chose to make their product man-proof.

Now, there are exceptions to what I'm talking about. There are the already established authors like James Patterson, Stephen King, and John Grisham of course. And there are even some agents and some editors willing to gamble on a young male author once in awhile. A lot of times the gamble doesn't pay off, so who can blame them for being risk averse? Still, can the publishing industry as a whole survive into the future while essentially ignoring young male readers? If dudes like me are not buying books now, what happens when we get older? When female readers have aged-out to the point they're reading "retired lady lit" will that signal the End of Days for commercial fiction?

Where are the badass young male writers of today? Would Hunter S. Thompson or Kurt Vonnegut or Brett Easton Ellis or Jay McInerney or Alex Garland or Chuck Palahniuk even get book deals if their debut novels were written today? How can we make reading novels -- and writing them -- cool again for guys under thirty?

I'm not sure of the answers, but I hope the current publishing shake-up will force people to consider them. Maybe someday I'll walk into a book store and see a book I might actually want to read alongside The Friday Night Knitting Club and The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society. Or at least I'll be able to go on Amazon.com and download one onto my Kindle.

Comments

[bfister]

That damned mob of scribbling women. They're ruining our culture and making all the money on dreck. - how's a dude supposed to survive in a climate like this? Nate Hawthorne

[pons1595]

The science is inconclusive as to why women read more fiction than men, but it has to do with essential differences between male and female, probably within the realm of emotional sensitivity and empathy. The differences can be easily seen in early childhood. As a former elementary teacher, I saw it consistently for over 25 years in the classroom. The sorry state of American fiction with its pandering to a female audience may have something to do with it also.

[Doogie1]

As a male former editor, I was pigeonholed into acquiring "boy books" throughout my career. Over the years, at various houses, the list shifted toward romance and female oriented books. Why? "Women buy 70% of the books; men don't read." These reasons were all given by female bosses. As it became more and more difficult to acquire my type of books, I began to feel squeezed...and invariably felt like it was time to move on to greener (more male friendly) pastures. My female bosses didn't read the books I acquired, didn't like them personally, and disliked them professionally. I wouldn't blame agents or the marketing department--the agents were as chagrined as I that they couldn't find homes for their wonderful male-oriented fiction or non-fiction authors. It was the sales force, the publisher, and the editorial directors. Now, not every writer has to be a literary star to attract a male audience. There are plenty of good writers out there writing tough, dark, outrageous, funny, sexy fiction that men will never get a chance to read because publishers seemingly lost interest in servicing that part of the market except with the lowest common denominator junk (and I worked on plenty of that, too). So is it a self-fulfilling prophecy? Have men lost the reading habit because there's seemingly nothing out there for them? There's always the possibility that the women are right--that books for a male readership don't sell. But the question is why?

[longnow]

Duders don't not read be-cause if by to read means, like looking at words,
well, all I know is that I's a picture duder maself and barally functionally
illustrated.

[randomscreenname]

Well, a few books that were, uh, "dude"-friendly definitely were published in the past year. First one I'd think of is Beautiful Children by Charles Bock. It got a lot of raves and a lot of publicity and I think may even have been a bestseller. The book's website is beautifulchildren.net, and I see from a quick visit there that he got some rock poster guy to do the paperback cover, so maybe that's something.

Also Donald Ray Pollock's Knockemstiff got a lot of pub and great reviews and is a book especially for guys. I think he toured with Chuck Pulniche... the Fight Club author.

Yeah I do think it's hard to get guys to pick up a book, but I have to say, there's definitely strong male writers out there doing work that's worth being read. And yeah, somehow some of it's even being published by corporate houses and getting attention.

[dunlow]

"The bullet went in clean but where it came out left a hole big enough to cram a
fist." Jonathan Tropper didn't write that. I read the first chapter of The Book of
Joe. I would describe his style as luscious. The rose deserves to be on the cover
of the book. And he calls himself Jonathan. He should use a pseudonym like Johnny
Tropp, I am going to finish the book, Before its over, I'm sure my eyes will
grow moist from shared feelings. Holy Christ!

[cardcheat27]

I totally agree. As a young, male, novelist with a book being published by Crown in the spring, I know I'm lost in a sea of vampires, nannies, and desperately single shopaholics. When my editor asked what authors I would like to send my novel to for blurbs, I thought, um...Irvine Welsh? Otherwise I'm at a loss. These days, I buy most of my fiction from England, where they still publish male-centric novels. Check out John King and go from there.

[Mel-Davis]

Check out Guys Lit Wire, a blog created by a group of reviewers, editors, and writers with the express purpose of getting good books into the hands of boys and young men: http://guyslitwire.blogspot.com/

And by the by, men who don't read Jane Austen don't know what they're missing. She's not a "women's writer" or a romance writer (as too many folks who have only seen soppy movie versions of the books tend to think) -- she's a satirist, and a wickedly sharp one.

[benblack75]

Good God- any "dude" who insists on only reading books geared to men is destined for failure on just about every level.

[reggieb]

I confess to reading crap. Crap is a form of escape.

[Fleurdamour]

God forbid there should be one area of life where women dominate. But I don't even think you're right, at least not where GOOD literature is concerned. Everything you mentioned above is crap that will be remaindered within six months of release, because it's trendy and aimed at making a quick buck on a fad. I would not be caught dead reading, or writing, "chick lit" and I have always considered that term demeaning and misogynistic. It sets women's writing apart from men's as coming from a "chick," a term of derision. Our writing doesn't even get to be called "literature," it's reduced to "lit," perilously close to "lite." Considering lasting works of literature, men have seldom considered women to be able contributors, because our sensibilities are so different. Women can enjoy a well-written war novel, but a lot of men seem to have difficulty reading an emotionally dense character-driven work based on complex emotional relationships. If you can't find anything new to read, turn to the classics. They've stood the test of time for a reason and they're written for all of humanity, not just one gender.

[NWReader]

The publisher's tendency to buy what's already selling isn't limited to fiction. I self-published a non-fiction book because the buyers all gave me the same reaction: looks great, it's not what is selling today. By the time it was rolling off the presses, however, it was exactly what my market was looking for, and has sold very well for me. I'm at the end of my second printing and have earned nearly twenty times what I could have expected, had I sold it to a publishing house. The moral of the story? Look beyond the big names publishers, and stop buying schlock. They'll buy what we're buying.

[ESerafina42]

I'm not a guy, and with the exception of a couple of the Jane Austen books, most of the stuff you mention (including Twilight) is crap, in my opinion, yet somehow I manage to find a lot out there to read that doesn't seem to be geared specifically towards women. And what's the thing with the cover of The Book of Joe? So it's got a rose on it. Big deal. Why are men so worried that someone will see them reading a book with a rose on the cover? Get a little self-esteem, "dude," so you don't worry so much about what other people think.

By the way, the flip side of what you're complaining about is J.K. Rowling having to put her initials on the Harry Potter books because her publishers were CONVINCED that boys would never read a book written by a woman. Pretty sad, especially since it's probably true - at least until they were already hooked and didn't care.

[TucsonEd]

My husband doesn't read fiction. Light reading for him is Shakespeare. He has subscriptions to Archeology magazine, Cooking Light, Food and Wine and also reads Guitar and Tech magazines. Most of his free time though is spent playing guitar and composing music. Perhaps he is more the norm than men who do search out "manly fiction" to read.

[klondiker]

Really interesting post!!

I can see how what you said applies to so-called "popcorn lit" - the Shopaholics, the Jane Austen knock-offs, the Grishams, etc.

But, how does it break down with serious literature? Is there still a gender divide for the latest by Toni Morrison, Updike, Roth, etc?

Also, would you attribute this to a possible creative rut in this country? Is there such a rut? It seems to me that 30 years ago, the most interesting novels were being written in the U.S. But, now, it seems that UK and Europe (and to some extent, Canada) and Indian expats seem to be producing the most interesting works. I don't read a lot, but in recent years the best novels I've read have been by people like Ian McEwan, Zadie Smith, Alan Hollinghurst, etc.