ONWARD!

I’m guessing that one is about someone who bathes at night?  In front of a stained glass window?  Or something?  I mean, the cover must tell us something about the book right?  Oh, that there’s a dark haired woman in it.  OK.  (Because even the most egregious of fantasy covers usually at least shows you stuff that’s in the book.  Big, buff dude with sword? CHECK!)

Oh, and it looks like I already mentioned the above cover in the previous post.  The fact that there isn’t more overlap in two random samples probably says exactly what I want it to.

So, there’s obviously something going on, at least in some marketing departments.  They are signaling something here, but what?  That even in moonlight it’s still warm enough to wear a short shirt?

More with the backs.  I’m guessing these are supposed to be “classier” but uhh.  Does she strip a lot for plot reasons?  Is she a concubine?  Does this belong on the fantasy section or did it sneak over from romance?  I guess not, because there’s not a dude on the cover.  Maybe it’s some kind of new genre about self-romance?

I know I’ve heard this series mentioned favorably by urban fantasy readers… but I have a sneaking suspicion most of them are really reading them as paranormal romances.  I just can’t take it seriously with those covers.  I mean, the Dresden Files books have atrocious photo-realistic covers as well, but at least the dude is dressed.  Is this making me sound like a prude?

<.<

>.>

But seriously.  These covers are not pinups how?  Maybe that’s intentional and there’s no shame.  So that’s cool too.  But I’m just saying.  I mean, I guess fantasy covers have been decked out with half naked dudes forever, so this really should be cool, but it’s somehow unsettling.  It definitely feels like I’m in the romance section half the time.  Which is fine, except that’s totally not where I was trying to be.

Yes, this bookstore files horror with fantasy and sci-fi.  That might explain some of this (horror includes some paranormal romance type stuff like the Laurell K. Hamilton books, etc. these days), except that I’m pretty sure all the covers in question are ones I’ve seen in other books stores that don’t jumble stuff up.

So the one of the left looks like a standard fantasy cover.  Then the next two… midriff exposed? CHECK.  Photorealistic?  CHECK.  Girl leaning on sports car? WTF.

OK.  The one on the left.  Umm.  Maybe?  Kinda?  If the LOWER BACK TATTOO wasn’t, you know, existing?  But then the one on the right?  She doesn’t even deserve for her entire face to be seen evidently.  Because.  The belly tattoo evidently tells you all you need to know.  Which is probably true?

So what am I getting it?  I think I’m being genre-ist.  I think paranormal romance should be filed under romance.  Why?  Because … I’m going out on a limb here … but I *suspect* that most people browsing the fantasy/sci-fi (and even the horror section, where some of this also dwells) are not looking for romance.  Because then they would be in the romance section.  Because uh, Wheel of Time filed under romance?  I mean, there is a ton of romance there.  Right?  So it should be in romance right?  No.  Because why?  Because I’m too tired to explain it to you if you really need me to.  Maybe later.

Urban fantasy works in fantasy just fine.  The epic themes, confrontations & characters are all part and parcel of the fantasy world.  Hell, Zelazny did what we’d now call “urban fantasy” with his later Amber novels IIRC.   So far, the Dresden Files are the only modern urban fantasy I’ve read that I think fits here.  I’m sure there’s more. *fingers crossed*

Publishers/whoever labels books to be sold:  please stop.  Paranormal romance != urban fantasy.

That is all.

Oh no, wait.  Also: I hate photo-realistic covers.  Even the ones that “fit” in fantasy/sci-fi (and they work much better for sci-fi).  Especially when you can tell that the cover model was obviously someone’s friend or relative because uh… how else would they get the job?  (Hey – my main character looks like your ugly little sister – the one with the weird shaped head that always dated drunks – let’s use her for the cover!   Yeah.  I’m gonna bet a quarter that no one ever says that.)

Isn’t the point of sf/fantasy to take you AWAY from reality, not bring you closer to it?  (Hence I get why UF/PN covers have these covers… because they want to make it seem more like real life.  BUT STILL.)

I put “ruining” in quotes because well,  it’s all relative isn’t it…?

So, am I getting at?
Well, let’s start with an illustration.  I picked out four books, somewhat at random, on my last trip into a leading bookstore.  Some of them are from the fantasy/sci-fi section, and some are from the romance section.  Can you guess which ones are which from the covers below (click for bigger version)?

Which are not like the others?

No, it’s not a trick question.  Well, at least on the most basic level or two.  Beyond that, sure, but then again that’s the point of my post isn’t it?  No, I’m not going to tell you the answer right off the bat – please post guesses in the comments – NO GOOGLING (or binging, etc.) please.

Now, I have nothing against any of these authors, I picked them specifically because I’ve never heard of them and can be an impartial jerk.

Oh right, what is my issue?  WELL.  They all look kinda like romance covers, don’t they?  The difference being most romance covers have some hot sweaty man meat on there too (but not all, as evidenced by the cover(s) above).

So, maybe the content of these books is fantasy/sci-fi (in the genre term, not the general – everything non-fiction is a fantasy in the generic) but the covers really look like they are trying to sell them as romances.  Which makes me wonder – who the fuck is the target audience for these covers?

Women?
Do female fantasy readers want to see their (theoretically) empowering heroines dolled up like sexmeat?  Remember, this is fantasy/sci-fi, not romance.

Men?
Point of clarity: If men want porn they’ll get porn.
If men want romance then uh, well, they won’t be in the F/SF section. I’d bet money that most men would be somewhat embarrassed to be seen reading a book with a cover like that.

Who then?
*shrugs*  You got me.  One thing I know is that it sends a definite signal about what these books are going to be like – they all seem to follow the Laurell K Hamilton model of awesome badass hot chic who is involved in passionate (“passionate” seems to be a keyword on the back covers) relationships.

Look.  Let me clue you in here “urban fantasy publishers”: fantasy has romance.  It does.  I enjoy a well written romantic subplot within the context of a fantasy novel.  However, once that romance (and its “passion”) becomes the central area of focus (by weight of words), I think you’re treading into romance land.  Now, this is probably a point of contention BUT, for me, there’s a somewhat clear break.  If 51% of your plot is “passionate”, in the romantic sense, then you’ve got a romance. Hell, that % could be even lower, 35%? I dunno.  My point is, just because something is set in a UF/F/SF setting, that shouldn’t guarantee the shelving in F.   I’m not saying any of the books above should be shelved in romance – again I have no idea what is inside – I’m just saying, they look like they should.

I’m rambling and probably not making my point well.  So I’ll continue.

Another thing I noticed is that UF by male authors seems to always have a guy in a trenchcoat on the cover (SHUT UP BETHANY!  I’ll do something else for the cover…or get rid of the jacket.  Goddamm trenchcoat zeitgeist.).  UF by female authors tends to have covers like…well, in the picture above.  Make of that what you will.

Oh.  And I’m still not convinced that UF should be shelved in F/SF.  Seeing the Twilight books shelved in the F/SF section in one store…I think it broke something deep inside.  OK, I know that’s technically different, because those should be shelved in the kid section.  But seriously, UF is blowing up like crazy lately you know?  I think it’s just about big enough for it’s own bed.  Right btw. horror & F/SF.