Kristina Lloyd of Erotica Cover Watch has a fun post about an erotic romance anthology for women that went from a bottom-seller to best seller when they changed the title and cover art.
Cecilia Tan, editor of the anthology, got in touch with Erotica Cover Watch to tell about this ‘victory for the female gaze’. When MILF Fantasies was first released as an ebook early in 2009, it barely sold. Cecilia was informed it was one of Ravenous Romance’s worst selling anthologies. Then the book was repackaged, the pretty woman on the cover vanished and along came three young dudes baring their rock hard abs – result! Within days, the book shot into RR’s top ten.
She explains a bit of publisher insider strategy and adds
Ravenous Romance are primarily an erotic romance publisher. As we know, there’s beefcake aplenty on romance covers because, in catering explicitly to women, the genre doesn’t have to worry about deterring male consumers. But RR are also publishing straight erotica such as Young Studs (contributors include names familiar to anyone who reads smut: Rachel Kramer Bussel, Elizabeth Coldwell, Andrea Dale, Sage Vivant) and, because these are ebooks, again the publisher needn’t fret about passing guys going all weird at the sight of another guy with his kit off. As Cecilia wrote: ‘What [RR] have found is that the ebook audience is so overwhelmingly female that the “normal” rules of erotica publishing (you know the ones, the ones that say a woman has to be on the cover) Do Not Apply.‘
I think this is progress. Sure, we want to see men and couples on covers that exist in spaces other than those reserved for women. We want men to be sexualised in the way women are sexualised. We want het erotica for men and women to be represented by men and women on the covers. It’s called equality. And if ebooks can nudge erotica publishing in that direction, I’m happy.
Oh, one last thing, dear to my own personal, self-interested heart. Lloyd concludes here post with
Ravenous Romance are boldly targeting their erotica at women – and the strategy is clearly successful.
Look what’s riding high in their charts right now: The DILF Anthology
I mean, no one would dream of designing a book like that to market to straight men, would they?
Far be it from me to complain about that!
Submitted by 3102 (not verified) on Tue, 2009-08-04 07:33.
Interesting. I've seen covers for erotica and erotic romance with male torsos on them for years. Nothing new here.
Within days, the book shot into RR’s top ten.
So they sold what? 10s of copies, 100s or did they sell 1000s? Only impressive if numbers are posted to show how the original sales results compared to current sales after the cover and title change.
----
Sorry to be such a wet blanket but that original post seems to be more about a PR plug for Ravenous Romance as a publisher than an accurate depiction of the current erotic romance/erotica marketplace. And, Figleaf, your post kind of reinforces the misinformation that Ravenous Romance is doing something new and improved when they are in fact the new kid on the block and many before them have already pushed through the erotica coverart barriers.
----
Ellora's Cave reported sales revenue in the 10s millions 4 or 5 years ago and they are the ones that really started to push the coverart envelope as well as the erotic romance/erotica trend that the NY publishers have jumped onto (although I will admit that NY publishers were already doing that with their romance covers). According to the Washington Post, Loose ID, another e-publisher, grossed 1.3 million in 2008 with similar covers for their erotic romance and erotica content.
And let's not forget, Samhain Publishing, Liquid Silver, Changeling Press, etc. These e-publishers have been all been around longer than Ravenous Romance and have used similar types of coverart to go with their erotic romance and erotica offerings.
So what exactly is the progress here? I mean there is progress and I'm happy about it but the male body for erotica coverart thing isn't exactly new.
[HI Amousie. Sounds like I may not have clipped enough from their original post. Lloyd and her co-blogger Mathilde Madden are generally very clear about the difference between erotic romance titles, which are consumed mostly by women and have long put men on their covers, and mainstream "erotica for women," which gets lots of crossover sales to men and therefore, they claim, have avoided men on the cover in order to avoid losing sales to men. But with the consequence, the authors say, of alienating or patronizing women readers. Lloyd and Madden write for both genres and numerous publishers. If Ravenous Romance is new in those markets then it sounds like their original cover was a newbie mistake that might illustrate their case more than it refutes it. But seriously, thanks for your input. I'll be more cautious about including context in future posts, and I'll definitely look out lest I unintentionally transmit viral marketing campaigns. --fl]
Submitted by 3102 (not verified) on Tue, 2009-08-04 16:50.
Figleaf, have to disagree that the RR example makes L & M's point. The title in this case was MILF Fantasies. That title clearly says PORN not erotica, not erotic romance.
If you change the title and slightly alter the coverart. Make the female image slightly smaller, move the two male chests forward, you now have an erotic romance or erotica cover featuring either a poly romance or a menage encounter: MMF or MFM.
As far as the DILF title is concerned, I've never heard that term before. My personal inclination is to equate it with visual porn but I just don't have the same response to the word as MILF. The cover: absolute standard romance or erotic romance coverart for both NY and small publishers. I bet if I researched it I could find that stock image used by a mainstream publisher within the last year.
---
Final aside: if you have a chance see if you can find the different covers for Emma Holly's Menage. Originally an erotica offering from Black Lace in the late 90s. There are at least 4 different versions that I know of with the latest version released around 2006-2007.
1. Dark hair woman with shoulder length hair in a bra with a choker necklace looking up at the camera.
2. Blonde woman with long curly hair down to her ass in a thong with elbow length gloves on.
3. A stylish cartoon woman fully dressed with a glass of champage in her hand.
4. A naked male chest leaning over a female. Female not focal point because author name and book's title are over her.
The cartoon image is a hoot. Never in a million years would I think this was an erotica offering based on the packaging. I believe the naked male chest repackaging was because erotic romance was the latest, biggest bestest thing at the time and the publisher wanted to tap into that customer base.
Yes, I spend way too much looking at coverart for the different genres and their designations/trends. It's very interesting and sometimes telling. Maybe somebody in academia make a coffeetable book on the subject. I'd love to know how my impression stack up and how stock images & computer technology have affected the coverart. Sorry, way off topic.
(I have 4 designations: porn, erotica, erotic romance, and romance. And yes they are very different definitions in my book although they can/do overlap on occasion.)