So you’re browsing through the bookstore. Any bookstore. Not looking for a particular title, just a good read.
And you spot a new novel by one of your favorite authors. Let’s say John Grisham (or insert name of your fav). You grab it, run home, eagerly dig in—and find it has nothing to do with the law, or conspiracies, or underdogs, or anything you usually associate with that author. Maybe it’s about a young couple establishing a worm farm.
Or maybe it’s Emma Holly sans sex. Or J.K. Rowling writing about a group of middle-aged people, murderers all. :poof:
Whatever. :shock:
Do you give it a chance? Toss it? Do you buy the name? Do you keep reading because it’s one of your favorite authors and you like their writing, or figure you wasted your money because you expected something else?
The subject is pseudonyms.
I’ve been considering pubbing non-erotic romance under a different name.
Why?
Because the common belief is that readers not only have definite expectations from certain categories and lines, but from the authors they’ve previously read. If you’re Jane Doe, and you write erotica, and that’s what they like, they’ll look for you. That’s the ‘heads’ side of the coin.
On the ‘tails’ side, if your name is already attracting a following, they’re likely to follow you to another arena. But if it isn’t the show they thought they were paying for, they may be pissed or disappointed, may not stay.
Then again—they might.
I haven’t quite made up my mind, and yes, I’m interested in your thoughts, if you have an opinion.
This whole subject gives me hives. Dammit, why can’t we just write??! :neutral:
Julie Garwood and Jude Deveraux (esp Garwood who went from historical to contemp. suspnse) made the cross over. I think as long as readers KNOW what they’re getting, they’ll give you a chance. Just my 2 cents.
I’m the wrong person to be answering this because I have no autobuy authors. Each book gets judged/bought on its own merit. So while I *may* be interested in checking out a story in a new genre by a favourite author, they’d prettymuch be starting from scratch with me. Fer instance, I like Emma Holly, but only her erotic historical romances (including the fantasy/steampunk one.) But her paranormals (vamps) and contemps, I’m not interested in. One the other hand, I did give them a try…. before i decided they weren’t for me. :-P
If you’re writing in a similar genre (comedy romance, erotic romance, romantic suspense, *my* preference would be, keep them all under the same name. If you’re going from straigth romance to thriller/w romantic subplot, I’d got with similar sounding names, ie: Raine Weaver, R. Weaver.
Thanks for the opinions, ladies!
Good points, all duly noted. :yesyesyes:
My gut answer to your last question is “Writers can’t just write for the same reason take-out coffee cups can’t go without warning labels that its contents may be hot”. Some people just don’t pay attention while they, nevertheless, blame others for their own mistakes. Enough people, apparently, so that CYA measures need to be taken to protect those who are simply doing their jobs.
But if that many readers are going to blame a writer for disappointing their expectations, then a strange sense of entitlement is rampant in the general readership. It means an author’s name no longer represents the person who wrote the story but the story itself, the product…and not even the quality of writing by this person, but the *kind* of product it is. “Stephen King” becomes a label about as stripped of personhood as “Rice-a-roni”. And if this is the case in the World of Writing, then adopting another name to write in another genre may be the wisest thing to do. Your name isn’t your own;it’s a clue to the kind of story that lies behind it.
Well, that sounds bare-naked cruel. Pun intended.
On the other hand, I know of one writer for young adults who did not change her pseudonym, even though she wrote science fiction, post-apocalyptic fiction, and some stories that were paranormal in nature. Two of her books are on my all-time favorites list. And because they were written so well, I gave her other books a look-through. I didn’t read them, however, except one, because their storylines didn’t appeal to me; and that one disappointed me not for its story but for the lack of quality in the writing.
So I read according to the story line, and, now, according to the quality of snippets I read here and there inside the book. But I wonder if I’m an oddball in this habit. Whether or not I am, I think I do this more because I’m a skin-flint. I don’t like to put down good money on a bad read.
>>Your name isn’t your own;it’s a clue to the kind of story that lies behind it.
Damn I like her entire answer *sigh* though I did read somewhere (Jaye linked to it earlier this week her name escapes me) that in the early days King and Roberts took different names because of limited publishing slots vs their production levels(Bachman and Robb), now of course, it’s a well known secret.
Go with your gut :waving:
Tough Choice. I’m loving the conversation though.
Welcome, Jenna!
Darn good points!
It IS a tough choice…
And tricky! I’d still be writing romance with a bit of suspense, sometimes the paranormal…it may just come down a matter of how much heat is contained in the story.
Stephen King claimed he did the Bachman books because he wanted to publish more often than his publisher was willing to do. The Bachman books, however, are a bit darker than his usual.
I think Nora’s switch was for the same reason–although, again, the J.D. Robb books are MUCH different than her usual romances.
Then again, I tend to look at a book, read the blurb, peruse some of the contents, before I put the $$$ down–I don’t care WHOSE name is on the cover. :neutral: