Corrected: Literary Criticism vs. Book Consumerism

Two very different things with two very different outcomes.

Note: The first version of this was glitchy and repeated a paragraph and a sentence. It’s fixed.

As summer winds down, I keep thinking about how there wasn’t a book that dominated the season. In past summers, there always seemed to be a title that most people you knew were talking about. Last summer, in my world, that book was Sandwich by Catherine Newman. There was also All Fours by Miranda July and Margo’s Got Money Troubles by Rufi Thorpe (my personal favorite). Much to the chagrin of the uber literary, the genre of the summer is romantasy, which will most likely be the genre of the fall, too. While it’s not personally appealing to me as a reader, I respect that so many people have immersed themselves in romantasy books. They’ve found something they love, and it involves books. That’s a good thing. It should also provide publishers with a window into what many consumers want right now: an escape.

Romantasy books aren’t made for critical praise. Instead, they serve a dedicated fan base that continues to grow. There are midnight release parties, book conventions (some of which have gone quite wrong, but you can read Lady Whistlethreads for the tea), cosplay, and more. Yes, it’s reading, but it’s also an experience.

This leads me to today’s topic: Literary Criticism versus Book Consumerism. This week, The Baltimore Banner published a column titled, “Books are having a moment. So why are we getting rid of literary criticism?” You can read it here. I believe the columnist answers her own question in this piece.

There’s a massive international community of readers and writers finding connection and conversation on social media. The New York Times estimated that the #BookTok hashtag on TikTok was responsible for the sale of 20 million books in 2021 alone. The #Bookstagram hashtag on Instagram has been used more than 100 million times, and the pages of Threads and Bluesky are alive with blind items about bookish happenings.

Book consumerism conflicts with literary criticism because many people turn to social media for book recommendations, just like they do for other products such as beauty and fashion. Fewer individuals click on book reviews. To be honest, I am one of those people. I’ll skim a review if the book looks interesting, but 95% of the time, I buy books because I read about them in a newsletter, saw them on Instagram, heard about them on a podcast, or they appeared in a listicle. Listicles are especially useful because I use them as a shopping list for books. When I’m browsing in a bookstore, a book’s cover often draws me in.

When I was in college and just starting my publishing career, I read The New York Times Book Review cover-to-cover. During my time at the Big Five publishers, every department was required to read the major book review sections in magazines and newspapers. That feels quaint now, as we all compete for media placements or engaging social media campaigns.

Yesterday, The Washington Post published a story about fewer Americans reading for pleasure. I buy books like crazy, but finding time to read them is difficult. I suspect the same is true for other book lovers. There’s a big difference between binge-watching a show on Netflix in a day and reading a book over several days. Couch rotting (Gen Z’s term for being a couch potato) after a long week of work requires much less mental effort. Granted, I read a lot because of my job and grad school, but that’s not the same as reading for fun.

The mistake publishers often make is constantly catering to readers instead of consumers. As I’ve written several times, there is a place for literary fiction and literary criticism, but those fields are becoming niche. Why did the Associated Press decide to stop publishing book reviews? Probably because the reviews aren’t generating enough clicks, and the AP can save money by not paying book critics—and because people are discovering books elsewhere. This seems to be a reality many are reluctant to accept. Still, if we look at beauty brands, fashion brands, food & beverage collaborations, and how new music artists break out, we need only to look at our phones to see how consumers discover products. Most of the time, these are not the same people who read The New York Review of Books. It’s not to say one group is better than the other; they’re just different.

A book consumer is someone who does not choose what to read based on literary criticism. They are more like the people profiled in this New York Times article about how romantasy—especially Harry Potter fan fiction featuring Dramione—has taken over bookstores. (I'm not here to debate the author of Harry Potter; I don't share her beliefs.) The comments on the article are full of everything I dislike: snooty people criticizing fan fiction and claiming that only literary fiction matters. These are the same people who live and breathe literary criticism. That’s their choice, but the truth is that if the publishing industry wants to stay profitable and sustainable, it needs to give more thought to book consumers. What cannot continue is publishers releasing books from authors who see literary criticism as the ultimate authority. Yes, writers seek validation—don’t we all?

Validation today takes many forms, and it’s rarely a book review. What about the podcast hosts who loved having you on? And what about the newsletters that recommend your book? Yes, writers want to be validated—don’t we all? Validation comes in many forms these days, and it is rarely in the form of a book review. What about the podcast hosts who loved having you on? What about the great listicle your book was on in Glamour’s book coverage online? How about the newsletters that recommend your book?

Here are the top 30 books from USA Today’s Bestseller list this week:

This list serves as a strong indicator of what book consumers are purchasing. The top two titles are by successful, high-profile women in business. I know this because I just googled them. Looking at the list, you can see that maybe a handful of the top 30 books have been reviewed. Otherwise, you’re relying on word-of-mouth, good marketing, and non-traditional promotion—though I think social media campaigns are pretty much standard now. There are also authors on the list with robust platforms (there’s that word many of you dislike). As for Danielle Steel, alert her fans about a new book, and they will buy it. My mom was a hardcore fan. Danielle Steel's books were the only ones she read. Is that a bad thing? No. Conversely, my father was an avid reader of literary criticism and owned a collection of quite heavy nonfiction books. Mom = book consumer. Dad = literary guy.

Something that doesn’t occur nearly enough in the book industry is author education. That’s why some outdated ideas about what should happen for a book to be successful stick around. Allow me to inform you that:

• Reviews don’t impact sales as much as you’d think. Let go of the idea that it is the only way a book can sell or legitimize an author.

• Most advertising is a waste of money. There are rare instances, depending on the book, when social media ads or boosted posts lead to sales. No one knows how those ads will perform, so testing them is not a bad idea. Other ads—especially digital ads on media sites/in media newsletter verticals—lead to clicks but not sales.

• You can do everything to create awareness for a book, but you can’t force a consumer to buy it.

• Literary criticism has its place in the industry, but most consumers ignore it (sorry, but it’s true).

• Publishing is a slow industry in a fast world. That must change.

• The time frame to promote a book must last longer than the months leading up to publication and the month following publication. Promotion could easily continue for 6-9 months or more, depending on the book.

• Book consumers are usually good with 3-4 sentences about a book, which is why listicles work so well.

• Big media is super competitive. Focus on what’s realistic for a book, not pie-in-the-sky media hits. A publicist knows who will pass. Their time should be spent on what will work instead of contacting the NYT books desk for the 5th time about the same title.

• Your next book is only as good as your previous book’s sales. You can get a review in the NYT, but you also may only sell 500 copies. Focus on outcomes, not wish lists.

• Publishers need to allow employees to be more experimental. Just because something has “always been done that way” doesn’t mean it can’t change.

• Bookstore events aren’t always a good idea. It’s expensive to go on a book tour, and if you go to cities where you don’t have a built-in audience, it can be bleak.

• Genres that work well now may not work in a year.

• Celebrity endorsements don’t do much for sales.

I’ll finish by saying that most of the retail landscape moves product quickly, but book publishing does not. The best thing that can happen to a book is for it to become a topic of discussion on various platforms and in person. People may be reading fewer books for fun, but maybe publishing can change that. Maybe.

END NOTES:

What I’m Reading/Listening To: “Gwyneth: The Biography” by Amy Odell. I’m seven chapters in, and I think Gwyneth Paltrow might be the most privileged celebrity I have ever read about.

What I’m Watching: This seems to be the most popular feature of this newsletter, so let me give you a rundown of what I’m watching or have watched:

Watching—with my 17yo daughter, of course:

A Sorority Mom's Guide to Rush! on Lifetime: O.M.G, these moms who are way too invested in their daughters’ sorority choices. I love it.

Welcome to Plathville on Hulu: My favorite toxic Christian family is back for a seventh season. I can’t stop watching. They are nuts.

Watched:

Stalking Samantha: 13 Years of Terror on Hulu: This three-part docuseries chronicles the decade that Samantha Stites was stalked by a guy who eventually kidnapped her. To hear her detail how she handled this is quite something.

Cold Case: The Tylenol Murders on Netflix: I was a kid when the news broke that people died from taking Tylenol laced with cyanide. What I didn’t realize was that even after the safety lids were in place, it happened again. It’s interesting to watch how this was investigated, what was missed, and whether the person they suspected of the crime actually did it.