Romance publishing and the production of culture

69

Poetics 14 (1985) 69-93 North-Holland

ROMANCE

PUBLISHING

John MARKERT

AND THE PRODUCTION

OF CULTURE

*

The surge in romance publishing that is taking place in the United States during the first half of the 1980s is the result of changes that have occurred in the structure of the romance publishing industry over the past two decades. This paper argues that these structural changes first inhibited and then promoted change in the content of romantic fiction. The study applies the productionof-culture perspective described by Peterson in this issue. It will be argued that the six contingencies outlined by Peterson have, to varying degrees, influenced the content of romantic fiction. In addition to the endogenous variables identified by Peterson, an exogenous variable, the social world, is invoked to explain the popularity of content forms.

1. Introduction The romance novel is experiencing unprecedented popularity in the United States. An estimated 25 million women regularly read these books in which the predominate theme is the attainment of love and marriage (Thurston 1983, n.d.; Radway 1984). These women spend $1.5 million a day on romance novels (Kirkland 1983, 1984) and read on the average 20 books a month (Markert 1984a). ’ In terms of volume and sales, romantic fiction accounts for between 40-5055 of all mass market paperback books published and sold in the United States (Span 1984; Davis 1984; Jennings 1983, and Berkowitz 1983). Over 1,000 new romance titles were released during 1984 in print runs of between 300%500,000 copies. This is double the output of 1980, and a six-fold increase from 1970, when 180 titles debuted (Markert 1984b). The phenomenal growth of romance publishing in the first half of the 1980s is the result of structural changes within this industry over the past two decades. Initially, romantic content was constrained by the structure of the * This project was supported in part by the National Science Foundation and Vanderbilt University. The author would like to thank Richard A. Peterson, Daniel Cornfield, and Barrett Lee for their critical comments on earlier drafts of this paper. Author’s address: J. Markert, 2119 Elliott Avenue, Nashville, TN 37204, USA. t Preliminary findings from a random sample of 500 subscribers to Romantic Times, a romance ‘fan’ magazine with a circulation of 70,000, indicates romance novel consumption is nowhere near the 75-100 books a month cited by those within the industry. Based on a 42% response rate, my findings are: 31% read 6 or less romances monthly; 10% 7-9; 21% 10-19; 17% 20-29; 8% 30-39; 5% 40-49; 6% 50-74; 2% 75-99. 0304-422X/85/$3.30

0 1985, Elsevier Science Publishers

B.V. (North-Holland)

70

J. Markert

/ Romance publishing

romance industry. Change in content occurred as shifts in these structural arrangements took place. The success of the ‘new’ content indicates the industry met an unsated demand. Structural changes, then, first inhibited and then promoted changes in the content of romance novels. The changes in content to be examined are the transition from the sexually chaste ‘sweet’ romances of the 1970s to the more sexually frank ‘liberated’ romances of the 1980s. The more liberated theme of the romance novel which was debuted by Candlelight Ecstasy Romances in December 1980 - is a major reason for the popularity of these novels today. This analysis of romance publishing utilizes the production-of-culture perspective. This perspective seeks to explain facets of production which have constrained or facilitated the transformation of cultural objects (Peterson 1976). * Six distinct constraints on production are identified. These constraints include, law, technology, industry structure (interorganizational dynamics), organizational structure (intraorganizational dynamics), occupational careers, and market. 3 Neither law nor technology were found to have significantly influenced changes in the production of romantic fiction, while the other four have, to varying degrees, influenced both the growth of this industry and shaped the content of these novels. The six constraints identified by Peterson are endogenous variables because they explain changes taking place within the industry. An exogenous variable, the social world, is added to Peterson’s model, while at the same time standing outside the production perspective. The social world is broadly defined in this study to include attitudes and values taking place within society. This exogenous variable is helpful in explaining degrees of success for innovative content in the marketplace. The study begins with an examination of Harlequin Books and how they established supremacy in the romance market in the 1970s.

2. Harlequin: Cupid’s publisher The paperback revolution began in the United States in 1939 when Simon and Schuster formed Pocket Books (Tebbel 1978). Pocket Books copied and improved upon the success of Penguin Books in England, which had been founded four years earlier. The success of these early paperback publishers

’ For a detailed explanation of the production-of-culture perspective see Peterson in this issue. 3 In business, market is used to designate (a) a geographical area of demand for commodities, or (b) the course of commercial activity by which the exchange of commodities is affected. Peterson employs the term market more narrowly, as the perception of an audience by entrepreneurs. To avoid confusion, market will be used in its classic sense unless otherwise specified to denote the perception of an audience by entrepreneurs within an organization.

J. Markert / Romance publishing

11

paved the way for the boom in mass market publishing following World War II. This boom can be gauged by the number of new paperback firms that started between 1947 and 1955. Among the new paperback publishing houses that started production during this period were New American Library (1948) Scholastic Books (1948) Pyramid (194991977) Harlequin (1949) Fawcett (1950), Ace (1952), Ballantine (1952), Penguin (American Editions) (1952), and Berkley (1955). All these houses, with the exception of Pyramid, continue to be dominant mass paperback publishers today (Crider 1982). It was during this early period of growth in mass market paperback publishing that Harlequin was formed. Harlequin is a Canadian-based publishing house, established in 1949. Like many of the other publishing firms that began during this period, Harlequin was at first a publisher of mass market general fiction and nonfiction. Most of Harlequin’s early titles were reprints of male-oriented westerns, mysteries and thrillers, and included books by such authors as W. Somerset Maugham, Arthur Conan Doyle, Agatha Christie, and Edgar Wallace (Harlequin Books 1979). The romance stage of Harlequin’s enterprise began in late 1957. At this time, Harlequin published its first Mills and Boon reprint, Hospitaf in Buwamba. Mills and Boon Limited is a London-based publisher established in 1908. The firm was well-known for its hardcover romances, all written by women, most of whom were British. The company began concentrating on romance hardcover books as early as 1930, primarily distributing them through libraries. But in the 1950s branch libraries in England began to close and the major source of sales for Mills and Boon romance novels was cut off (Tebbel 1981, see also Guiley 1983). Looking for a new outlet, Mills and Boon contacted Harlequin. As a fledging paperback publisher in the 1950s Harlequin no doubt found the reprint option attractive, as the books would have already been ‘tested’ in Britain thereby allowing Harlequin to select proven sellers for release in North America. Harlequin’s list of Mills and Boon romances increased steadily over the next few years, until 1963 when Harlequin released its last title by a non-Mills and Boon author, an autobiography by Kate Aiken. The following year, Harlequin Romances were all Mills and Boon authors. Yearly romance titles rose to 96 and remained at that level until 1973 when Harlequin launched another line of romance novels under the imprint Harlequin Presents. This imprint annually added another 48 romance titles to Harlequin’s production list. There would be no further changes in production until the 1980s. The distinction between Romances and Presents is discussed below. 2.1. Content and the world Two types of ‘contemporary’ romance list. The early 1960s were predominately

novels dominated Harlequin’s sixties ‘nurse novels’, so-called because they

12

J. Mark&

/ Romancepublishing

reflected the occupation of the heroine. The name derives from a potpourri of titles that featured romantic relationships between nurses and doctors, such as Emergency nurse, Career nurse, Calling nurse Grant, and Desert nurse. This began to change in 1965, and though nurse romances continued to dot Harlequin’s list well into the 1970s the primary occupation of the heroine in the second half of the 1960s and after was in other ‘female’ occupations (secretary, teacher, governess). The setting was usually exotic. Nurse heroines often took jobs in the jungles of Africa, or on Polynesian-like islands. Post 1965 contemporary heroines likewise met Mr. Right while traveling in some distant land, usually during their vacation. Like the movies of the 1960s these novels offered the women readers a taste not only of romance but an opportunity to travel, an opportunity that the audience was not exposed to on television during this period (see Cheatwood 1982). Harlequin’s 1960s romances shared at least one other distinguishing feature _ sexual encounters were chaste. A lot of kissing and some heavy breathing occurred in these novels, but there was no description of sexual activity (Guiley 1983: 75). No sex occurred outside marriage. What there was was implied after marriage, at the very end of the novel. These books, as a publisher at Harlequin described them, stood for ‘hardcore decency’ (Jennings 1983). Harlequin’s sexually chaste novels have come to be known as ‘sweet romances’. They continued to dominate Harlequin’s list throughout the 1970s.

‘,.>

2”

I5 10 5

\.. ---. 1YGU

-.-._.____ 1961

1462

------------_~"~~e

-.- ~__ 1963

1965

Novels

Harlequin titles: 1960-1969.

'----._.____ -..___

1964

----- -Conteiq,,rary Novels -.-._.-.-.mks other than ranance Fig. 1.

'.

novels

1966

1967

lYF1969

J. Markeri / Romance publishing

13

The Harlequin heroine is typically a virginal young girl - on rare occasions as old as 25 or 26 - who has seldom enjoyed more than a few kisses from the opposite sex. She is neither beautiful nor talented. Her primary occupation, when she has one, is associated with traditionally female occupations. The hero is always her social superior; he is typically older (32 to 39) handsome, dressed in stunning clothes; he is usually well-to-do, if not wealthy, a successful business entrepreneur, and more often than not, the heroine’s boss. The heroine’s sexual desires have remained latent, and are awakened by the hero. Despite the stirrings of passion he elicits, however, sexual intimacy is rarely contemplated outside the marital state. Marriage is the heroine’s ultimate objective in life (Douglas 1980; Modleski 1980; Guiley 1983, and Crider 1982: 1399140). The focus on marriage in these novels has been widely criticized by feminist scholars, who seem to see the marital state as further evidence of the subjugation of women (see Douglas 1980; Modleski 1980). It is not, however, the focus on marriage in the Harlequin novels that flies in the face of social change in sex roles taking place during the 1960s and 1970s but the treatment of marriage as the woman’s principal means of self-fulfillment. This stereotypical sex-typed behavior can best be illustrated by the concluding scene in Rose Elver’s Golden apples (1978) where the hero fires Vera, his prospective bride, from his ad agency at his proposal of marriage, and announces, I’m not having my wife working in the agency and no argument, Vera’. ‘No argument about that ‘, she replies. Finis. 4 The sexually chaste, male-dominate/female-submissive characterization in these novels was increasingly out of sync with changing attitudes toward sexual relations during the 1970s. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s there was widespread social disapproval of pre-marital sexual activity (see Corry 1970; Chafe 1977, and Yankelovich 1974). Sexual attitudes began to change in the late 1960s. At first these changing attitudes toward sex roles was confined to young people on college campuses in the United States, and is often popularly referred to as the Youth Movement, or alternately as the Sexual Revolution (Markert 1979; Flacks 1971). In this climate of social upheaval, women began to collectively reassess their place in society. The leading women’s organization was the National Organization for Women (October 1966). In its early stages this organization was also confined to a small group: Primarily middle-class women, with high levels of education, who had the potential for pursuing professional careers (Mondale 1978: 170). The Women’s Movement challenged the dominant world view, particularly with respect to traditional women’s roles, especially the woman’s right to sexual pleasure and skepticism toward the homemaker idea (Mondale 1978: 185; Chafe 1977: 110). These attitudes began to pervade American society during the 1970s (see Chafe 1977; Corry 4 Cited by Douglas

(1980).

14

J. Markert / Romance pubhhmg

1970; Eshleman and Cashion 1983, and Melville 1980). The content of Harlequin’s novels did not change dramatically during the 1970s. A slight change in content did occur, however. For some years prior to 1973 Mills and Boon had been releasing books in Britain that were slightly ‘spice? than those reprinted under the Romance imprint by Harlequin. These books, later to be debuted by Harlequin in North America as Presents, described in greater detail the actual seduction scene, and this description intimated that the hero and heroine engaged in sexual activity prior to marriage, though only if there was a firm commitment to marriage (Orr 1984). There was some debate among Harlequin’s editorial staff during 1971-1972 whether the American population was ready for the more sensual Mills and Boon romances. However, the idea to introduce the more sensual theme in North America was initially rejected at the editorial level. This advice, thenpresident W. Lawrence Heisey (1984) states, was ‘inappropriate’. Heisey’s perception that the more sensual Mills and Boon romance would do well in North America was based on their success in Britain. This, after all, had been the basis of Harlequin’s selection for the Romance line. For some reason, however, the editorial staff felt this ‘pretest’ pattern was not applicable to the more sensual Mills and Boon novels. Heisey pretested the Presents series in the United States to ascertain whether or not the American population was ready for these books. He did this by blind sampling. In blind sampling the consumer chooses between two or more unidentified products. The consumer was asked which they liked. The response, Heisey states, indicated ‘It was clear they should be published’. Indeed, Heisey goes further. He states that ‘some very good books had been held back from the basic series. They should have been published earlier’ (Heisey 1984). It is difficult to determine with any degree of certainty why Harlequin editors were reluctant to introduce the more sensual Mills and Boon romances to the North American audience, since few people are available today who were in decision-making roles a decade ago. Some conjecture is certainly in order, however. First, Harlequin was doing well with Romances and had not deviated from the chaste theme of these books since they were introduced in 1957. Second, the editors perception of the reader was derived from the success of the existing line. The Harlequin readers liked the less sensual, sweeter novels; they were viewed as housewives not exposed to the sensuality of Presents (sex before marriage). Also, at the time Harlequin considered Presents (1971-1972), American romances, as we will see, were also sweet. Even though change in sexual relations was beginning to pervade American society, the overall view of the romance reader (and one which continues only slightly abated today) was of, as Carol Thurston (1983) put it, ‘an uneducated, emotionally deprived housewife, who when she’s not reading romances, spends her time lost in the syrupy fantasyland of television soap operas’.

J. Markert / Romance publishing

15

Heisey’s decision to introduce Presents in 1973 would prove to be the correct one; within two years Presents was outselling Romances (Orr 1984). Despite this success with the new line, Harlequin maintained production at 48 titles a year. I suggest that the reason Harlequin did not capitalize on its more sensual theme was because Harlequin was beginning a period of expansion into diversified fields. The diversification began in 1976 and continued through 1980. During this period Harlequin acquired a member of diversified companies, including the Ideals Publishing Corporation of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, a publisher of inspirational magazines and books, cookbooks and greeting cards; Marshall Editions of London, an international book packager; the Miles Kimball Company of Oshkosh, Wisconsin, a mail-order business of gifts, household goods, books and assorted products, and Lauffer Company, a North American publishing group that puts out entertainment and teen magazines. In addition, Harlequin Magazines was established in New York City and acquired substantial holdings in numerous speciality magazines, including ARTnews, Antique World, Weight Watchers Magazine, Photo Life, and Snow Goer Magazine (Guiley 1983: 156-157). This diversification turned managements attention away from its primary product, romance novels, preventing close monitoring of changes occurring in American romance publishing during the second half of the decade. 2.2. Distribution

and marketing

innovations

From its inception Harlequin had been a Canadian firm. It was not until 1970 that Harlequin arranged for widespread distribution of its product in the United States through Pocket Books. At the time Harlequin’s romances did not differ grately from the romances being released by American publishers, with one important exception: Harlequin’s were contemporary, American romances were historical; that is, American romances were set against a historical background and depicted romances occurring in some bygone era, such as Edwardian England or Napoleonic France. The novels were otherwise very much alike: Sweet, sexless, with stereotyped ‘fifties’ heros and heroines. Nevertheless, between 1971 and 1980 the number of books sold by Harlequin rose from 25 million in 1971 to just under 200 million in 1980, The different setting of the novels is not enough to account for this growth. Harlequin’s success is more the result of an astute distribution and marketing campaign than changes in content. In 1971, W. Lawrence Heisey was appointed president of Harlequin Books. One of the first tasks Heisey faced was to acquaint the American public with Harlequin’s romances. 5 Two problems confronted him. First, bookstores were s Information cited.

in this section is based on an interview

with W. Lawrence

Heisey, unless otherwise

16

J. Markert

/ Romance publishing

reluctant to accept his product, as they were reluctant to accept mass market softcover titles at this time (see Tebbel 1981: 35). Second, Harlequin was still a small company and had little money to spend on formal advertising. Heisey solved both problems by recognizing who the audience was. It was basically the same audience he had experience with in his former position as a marketing and advertising executive at Procter and Gamble - the housewife. 6 Bypassing, or at least minimizing the effort to place Harlequin romances in bookstores, distribution was concentrated on select retail establishments. Harlequin concentrated on supermarkets and chain variety stores, such as Woolworth’s. In short, Harlequin distributed their product at those retail outlets which were most likely to be frequented by housewives. Having placed the books within reach of the potential audience, Harlequin still had to acquaint the public with its books. Media advertising, the tradition method of informing the public of a new product, was cost prohibitive to the small company in the early 1970s. Product sampling was not. In retailing, producers sample what they refer to as the ‘point of purchase’. The point of purchase is one way to ascertain how many customers might be interested in trying a specific product. The point of purchase is based on the principle ‘one person, one item’. This insight - one person, one book - lead to Heisey’s major marketing innovation: Advertising by product line rather than single title release. Unlike most book publishers at the time, Harlequin did not have a range of fiction and/or nonfiction. They published exclusively romance novels. These novels also tended to be content standardized, with proven consumer interest, the books first being ‘pretested’ in Britain under the Mills and Boon imprint. Thus, if you can arouse interest in one book, you can arouse interest in the series, a point, Heisey says, which ‘seems terribly obvious today, but it wasn’t then’. It was this insight which led Harlequin to capitalize on its romance line, while most pulishers were attempting to arouse interest in a particular title or author. In an attempt to ‘hook’ the consumer on their romance line, Harlequin employed numerous giveaways. One of these was to distribute 2 million copies of the book Dark star, originally published in 1969, to dealers at no cost in 1973. This book was sold to customers for fifteen cents (Crider 1982: 139; Shatzkin 1982) at a time when mass market paperbacks sold from between $0.95 and 1.46, on the average (Statistical Abstracts 1981).

6 Mann’s study has been criticized because it was undertaken at Mills and Boon’s bequest, and because the questionnaires he sent out were from a mailing list comprised of the names of readers who wrote and asked for the Mills and Boon/Harlequin catalogue. The validity of Mann’s survey may not extend to an accurate identification of Harlequin readers (which the author, in his introduction, cautions against), but it is important because in the publisher’s forward entrepreneurs at Mills and Boon/Harlequin perceived the results as representative of its audience.

J. Market-t / Romance publishing

17

For those that might be reluctant to spend even fifteen cents, Harlequin gave away outright millions of other books, among them 5 million copies of Violet Windspear’s Honey is bitter (1973). These books were not given away at random; they were given to the specific audience Harlequin wished to attract, the housewife, and they were delivered to the housewife in a unique way. In arrangements with Procter and Gamble, Heisey gave away record numbers of selected Harlequin titles with the purchase of various Procter and Gamble household products. One such product was Bio-Ad laundry detergent. Packed inside each box of Bio-Ad was a Harlequin romance (see also Crider 1982: 138). Heisey indicates there were numerous such giveaways similar to Bio-Ad. The success of all these giveaways was to establish Harlequin as the primary producer of romance novels in the eyes of the consumer. This appears to have been achieved by 1976 (Guiley 1983). It was at this time that Heisey abandoned the gimmicks for the more traditional source of promotion: Media advertising. The basic philosophy which guided Harlequin’s giveaways was transferred to advertising. No single author or title was promoted. Rather, focus was on the line: The romantic theme of Harlequin books. And like the giveaways, the product was aimed at a specific audience. Almost all of Harlequin’s $1.1 million advertising campaign was devoted to daytime (Monday through Friday) television programming (Orr 1984). 7 Much of Harlequin’s success in the 1970s was based on a standardized product line (content) and an overall perception of its specific audience. Harlequin thus sold romances, and sold them to women. Harlequin issued ‘romantic fiction in good taste’, and the consumer knew exactly what she was getting every time she bought one, regardless of title or author; a romance with a happy ending (marriage), without explicit sex or offensive language (Guiley 1983: 156). This standardization of content and the ‘fine-tuning’ of distribution to select retail establishments was a major factor in Harlequin’s success; it allowed (1) a more precise estimate of the number of books to be printed; (2) a clearer perception of the prospective consumer, since consumers at retailing outlets other than books stores are more likely to be female, predominantly married, who are more likely to be ‘pleasure readers’ (Yankelovich 1982: 183-186) and (3) introductory offers and advertising to focus more narrowly on the specific consumers most likely to enjoy Harlequin’s product.

3. American romances in the seventies: Something different Harlequin’s a generally

’ Harlequin’s

domination of the romance industry in the 1970s was facilitated by condescending attitude among American publishers toward the

advertising

budget

was also substantially

higher

than other publishers’.

78

J. Markert

/ Romance publishing

genre. Little time or attention was paid to romance novels by American publishers. Most publishers during this period produced a potpourri of titles. There was no concentration on romantic fiction. The combined romance output for publishers in the United States during the first half of the 1970s can conservatively be estimated at between 60-70 romantic titles a year, a fraction of Harlequin’s yearly output. This output would increase to roughly 300 titles a year by the end of the decade. Yet despite this increased output American publishers were unwilling to intensely compete with Harlequin’s brand of contemporary romances. Instead, American publishers would offer a different product. With only a few minor exceptions, American romances during the decade were historical; that is, romances that are set in a historical context. These early novels were otherwise similar to the Harlequin ‘sweets’. The historical setting of American romances would remain unchanged throughout the decade, though the sweet theme of these novels would increasingly give way to a more sensual theme. The transition from the sweet historicals to the sensual historicals began in 1972. 3.1. Signs of change: From sweet to sexy There were three historical sub-genres being produced in America during the late 1960s early 1970s: Regency, Gothic, and Romance Mystery-Suspense. ‘Regency’ romances are broadly defined in the American book trade to include any ‘period’ romance novels, such as the Regency period in England (1811-1820) the Victorian (1837-1900), Edwardian (1901-lo), and even the Napoleonic (1804-1815) and pre Civil War Antebellum South. The plot in the period romances revolves around the misunderstanding and clashes between the hero and heroine (Mansfield 1981; Guiley 1983). In contrast, the gothics have a strong mystery element, typically situated in foreboding Gothic-style structures: Castles, ruins, abbeys or manor halls (Guiley 1983; Jennings 1983). Romance mystery-suspense novels are similar to the gothics by emphasising a strong mystery element; however, overall, romance suspense has fewer dark, foreboding Gothic elements (Murray 1983; see also Guiley 1983, and Jennings 1983). Despite the somewhat different settings, all three sub-genres describe the same chaste social world that Harlequin depicted. ’ The transition from sweet to sensual historicals first occurred at Avon Books in 1972. Avon, like many American publishers during this period, was producing some romances in limited numbers. In the process of sifting manuscripts submitted ‘over the transom’, Avon editor Nancy Coffey selected Kathleen Woodiwiss’s manuscript Theflame and the flower. The publication of Woodiwiss’s manuscripts in 1972 would alter American romance publishing. * This chaste social world view was influenced (1984b).

by the censorous

climate of the 1950s. See Markert

79

J. Market? / Romance publishing

Woodiwiss’s novel was spicer, more sensual than any of the romance sub-genres being published at the time. The flame and the flower is an historical novel set in early nineteenth century London; it opens with an attempted rape followed by an actual rape. The hero, Captain Brandon Birmingham, forcefully takes the heroine’s (Heather) virginity and makes her pregnant. Her relatives demand a shotgun wedding. Thus married, Heather and Brandon spend almost the entire book certain of each other’s hatred and resentment, only to discover, some 400 pages later, that they are actually deeply in love. In spite of its initial violent sex and the subsequent avoidance of sex, readers consider it to be a sexy, sensual book because of the erotic tension Woodiwiss sustains thoughout the novel (Guiley 1983). 9 Coffey decided to publish Woodiwiss’s manuscript because she liked it. She felt the novel was written from the female point-of-view and thus perceived the book to be of interest to a female audience. Changing sexual mores occurring within society was not a conscious factor in Coffey’s decision to publish. At best, Coffey recognized that gothics dominated the romance market and the Woodiwiss novel offered consumers of the genre ‘something a little different’. However, in the final analysis, Coffey’s decision to publish was based on her own taste preference: ‘I like it. I always feel that others will like it if I do’ (Coffey 1984). Coffey expected The flame and the j7ower to do well, since it was ‘a good novel for female readers’. That The flame and the flower quickly became a phenomenal best-seller surprised Avon, as did the boom in romance fiction which it touched off (Coffey 1984; see also Guiley 1983: 65). Two years later Avon repeated the success they had with Woodiwiss’s first book (which by then had sold two million copies) publishing a second novel by Woodiwiss, The wolf and the dove (1974) and two novels by Rosemary Rogers, Sweet savage love (1974) and The wildest heart (1974). The success of these sensual historical books led Avon to increase its romance titles. In 1975, Avon added a third sensual historical author, Laurie McBain, and released six books in the new genre, with sales topping eight million. The readers were waiting for more, so much so that when Rogers’ Dark fires came out in 1975 it sold two million copies and went through five printings before the advertising campaign even started. 3.2. Growth in sensual historical romances:

Capitalizing

on the new market

By the end of 1974 the success of Avon’s new sensual historical confirmed in the marketplace. Nevertheless, other publishers 9 These books would be dubbed by feminist scholars and the popular the heroine often had her bodice ripped historicals as a more neutral term.

‘bodice rippers’ because

romances was were slow to

press, ‘horny hystericals’ or off. I have chosen sensual

J. Markert

80

/ Romance publishmg

respond to imitating the new product. Surprisingly one of the first to enter a product line copying Avon’s content was the male-oriented publisher Playboy Press. The idea emerged on the editorial level. Mary Ann Stuart was the editorial director for Playboy Press in 1975. Stuart decided to introduce romances under the Playboy label based on her liking of the Avon product. ‘I had read some of the Rosemary Rogers books’, she says, ‘thought they were wonderful, and thought we ought to try something along that line’ (Stuart 1984). Management was hesitant, but not unwilling. Concern was expressed over the idea of introducing fiction aimed solely at women when ‘ the company had always thought of itself as primarily in the entertainment business for men. They were just a little concerned that it wouldn’t work with the Playboy name’ (Stuart 1984). lo Stuart persuaded management to try. She argued by presenting sales figures for the novels at Avon. She also referred to the trend in ‘grown up’ westerns, citing specifically the popular movie McCabe and Mrs. Miller. Thus, to Stuart, the social world was important. She felt the more adult themes in Avon’s historical romances showed more awareness of the world, were more in tune with reality than either the chaste gothics or sweet contemporary romances of the time. Her invocation of the social world was made in her presentation to management, however; her own decision to imitate the Avon product was based principally on her own liking of the novels. Stuart received a tentative go-ahead from management. She was permitted to sign up a limited number of romance authors whose books Playboy would release in order to ascertain whether or not the sensual historical romances would be successful. Among her first signed was Barbara Bonham. Bonham’s first novel, Proud passion (1976), was submitted in 1975 over the transom. At any earlier time, Stuart says, Bonham’s novel would have been returned as not fitting into the type of publishing Playboy normally did. However, because Stuart had just convinced management to try a few novels in the sensual historical style, Bonham’s manuscript was, says Stuart, ‘fortuituous’. The novel was reprinted several times and ended up with more than half a million copies in print by the end of the year. Proud passion was one of the biggest books of original fiction ever published by Playboy Press. The success of Bonham’s novel resulted in a clear go-ahead by management for Stuart to increase production of sensual historical romances. Initially, Playboy was constrained in the number of romances they were allowed to publish by their contract with Pocket Books, the distributor for their romance line. The limit imposed was five books a month. In 197881979 the distribution contract expired, and Playboy immediately went to 10 books a month. At the time of the sale of Playboy Press to Berkley Publishing in 1982

lo Playboy’s

concession

was to remove their familiar

bunny

logo from the book jacket

81

J. Marker1 / Romance publishing

350 300 250 200 150 100 75 50 25 0

Phase I: 1970-1971

I v/A

Phase II:

1 GothicdRomance Sweet

1972-1974

Phase III:

Phase IV:

1977-1979

Regencies

suspense

Contemporaries

19751976

m

Sensual

Historicals

Fig. 2. Yearly American romance production estimates by sub-genre and phases: 1970-1979. (The exact number of romances in the various sub-genres is difficult to gauge, primarily because until the end of the decade there were no fixed production schedules. However, based on a review of the trade literature and comments provided by editors in the course of this study, we can roughly estimate the number of romances produced in the various sub-genres. The figures can be considered a ‘best estimate’.)

Playboy was publishing 15 sensual historicals monthly. ii Other publishers were slow to imitate Avon’s product. It was not until Playboy started filling the paperback best-seller lists in 1976 that other houses began to imitate these spicy historical romances. It was almost as if, says Stuart (1984) the other houses suddenly said, ‘Hey, if they [Playboy] can do it we can too!‘. Almost every paperback house in the United States was publishing at least some sensual historicals by the late 1970s. Sensual historical romances began to dominate the romance publishing industry. As these novels gained in popularity with publishers, other sub-genres decreased; gothics nearly disappeared from the shelves of bookstores. The shifting emphasis in romance publishing is best depicted in the above figure. Phase I represents the dominant ‘sweet’ theme of romances in the early 1970s; phase II, the entrance of Avon’s sensual historicals; phase III, the entrance of Playboy, and phase IV, the widespread competition in this sub-genre at the end of the decade. The increased production of regency romances during this latter phase is almost entirely due to the emphasis by Fawcett Books to meet the demand for sweet historicals which was no longer filled by other publishers. ‘t The sale of Playboy itself.

Press was due to an internal

reorganization

and not problems

with the press

82

J. Mark&

/ Romance publishing

It would not be until 197551976 that publishers would start imitating the successful innovations in content introduced by Avon in 1972, and still another year or two before these novels would begin to be produced in any quantity. The failure of American publishers to respond more readily to the innovations introduced by Avon is the result of negative attitudes by managers toward romantic fiction. Romance publishing was not a major industry in the late 1960s-early 1970s. Emphasis in American paperback publishing during this period was on quality reprints of hardcover originals (see Shatzkin 1982). Nor did American publishers perceive a large audience to exist for romance novels. And since Harlequin was apparently meeting the needs of romance readers in the 1970s by producing these novels in some quantity, American publishers perceived the market at near saturation (Sullivan 1984; Edwards 1984, and Duffy 1984). Thus, rather than invest the amounts required to compete with Harlequin, American publishers appear to have been satisfied with their small but cosy niche in historical romances. This perception of a limited market for romance novels was aggravated by a demeaning attitude by management toward romantic fiction in general. There were few women editors in the early 1970s (Coffey 1984; Sullivan 1984, and Duffy 1984), and even fewer women in managerial positions (Nevler 1984). This male domination of the publishing industry influenced the negative perception of these books and those that edited them; it was, as one editor put it, generally ‘condenscending’. Because of this attitude editorial assistants, often women functioning as secretaries, were given romance manuscripts to edit. The feeling seems to have been, as Leona Nevler put it, ‘that women knew how to choose the right [romance] book’. The negative attitude of management toward romantic fiction circumscribed the attention paid by publishers toward changes occurring within the genre. The fact that there were no editors specializing in the romance field further hampered the response of American publishers to observe innovations in content, since there was no one watching the field closely. It was only after the novels of Woodiwiss and Rogers had achieved remarkable success in the marketplace that other publishers began increasing their production of sensual historical romances. The success of Avon’s later romance novels in the marketplace (1974-1975) and the successful entry of Playboy (1975-1976) prompted other publishers to enter the romance field. The decision to increase romance production during phase four was primarily top-down. Management hired editors or promoted editorial ‘assistants’ within house to guide the selection of romance novels. The decision for determining the specific content of the romance novels was left largely to the discretion of the editors, since management, while they realize romance novels were garnering increased sales, were generally unaware of the reasons why (Sullivan 1984; Nevler 1984; Nichols 1984; Edwards 1984, and Duffy 1984).

J. Markerr / Romance publishing

83

Five of the ten women working in publishing prior to 1978 in my study advanced from assistant editors to editor or senior editor positions in charge of romance novels; three other women moved from editor to senior editor or editorial director. The general in-house attitude toward romantic fiction - and the women who edited these books - continued to be condenscending. This attitude coupled with the general inexperience of many of the new romance editors resulted in a strictly imitative product; editors were neither encouraged by management to innovate existing romance themes, nor were the editors secure in their new positions to be aware of trends, or, if they were, to take on management and argue for innovations in content. Despite the increased production of the sensual historical sub-genre, American publishers never succeeded in capturing more than a 20% share of the romance audience. One reason for this is the hesitancy of management to back their product with sufficient capital. Another reason for the failure of American publishers to increase their market share was the hesistancy of editors to develop the innovations in content introduced by Avon. The only major change in American romances in the 1970s was the level of sensuality in these novels. The single-most sexual acknowledgement in these novels, found in 96% of the historical romances, is the expression or recognition by the heroine that she has sexual needs of a physical nature (Thurston n.d.). With this exception, hero-heroine relationships remain rooted in traditional fifties values. Males, much like their contemporaries in the Harlequin sweets, are the aggressive sex, have extensive sexual experience, are typically older (30), handsome, wealthy, and initiate the sexual contact; female heroines, on the other hand, tend to be submissive though ‘spirited’, are younger (16-21), sex-typed by occupation, virginal, lack sexual experience or awareness and are depicted, more often than not, as innocent in the ways of the world (see Guiley 1983; Thurston nd., and Markert n.d.). The fact that male-female relations remain otherwise unchanged would indicate the popularity of these novels was rooted in their more sensual plotting. Unlike the Harlequin sweet romances, which tended to ignore changing sexual mores, American romance publishers in the 1970s were both in sync and out of sync with changing norms and values. American romances were in sync insofar as they dealt with an increased awareness of sexuality; they were out of sync in the manner in which they treated sexuality (rape), and in failing to recognize other changes in sexual relations occurring between men and women during these years. The more limited consumption of these novels and the particular treatment of sexual relations suggest these books appealed to younger women (under 30) who had higher levels of education, since these two variables have been found to significantly affect one’s willingness to experiment sexually (Melville 1980). Thus the sensual historical novels provided, especially in the early to mid 1970s when there was still considerable ambiguity surrounding the emerging attitudes

84

J. Markert

/ Romance publishing

toward sexuality, a chance for women to explore in fantasy changing social attitudes toward sexual expression (see Cawalti 1976). As the 1970s progressed and attitudes toward sexual expression became less ambiguous and more candid, the sensual historicals were increasingly out of sync with social norms because of the treatment of rape which, as Judy Sullivan (1984) former editors for Gallen Books, observed, had by the end of the decade become politicized. The rape theme, which in the early 1970s was a mechanism for expressing sexual fantasy without acknowledging the woman’s willingness to breach social norms by engaging in sexual relations outside marriage with more than one man, had by the late 1970s become a social issue and could no longer be treated on a fantasy level. Nevertheless, women who wished to read romantic fiction had but two choices: The sexually chaste novels of Harlequin or the more sexually descriptive sensual American romances. When an alternative to these two extreme treatments of sexual relations was offered by Dell in 1980, the readers enthusiastically responded. The romance novels of the 1980s more accurately reflect the social world today and this fact is a major reason cited by editors for the popularity of romantic fiction in the 1980s. However, the introduction of the new ‘liberated’ theme and the rapid proliferation of these novels in the 1980s are the result of structural changes within the romance industry.

4. Romance publishing in the eighties: Boom years Harlequin’s decade-long domination of the romance industry would be increasingly challenged by American romance publishers during the 1980s. Between 1980 and 1983 Harlequin’s share of the North American market dropped 40%; Harlequin book returns, which throughout the 1970s remained at 30%, doubled to 60% in the first three years of the decade (Berkowitz 1983). During this same period of time American romance publishing would experience a period of explosive growth, both in the number of titles released yearly and in the number of publishers specializing in romantic fiction. The challenge to Harlequin began in the second half of 1980. 4.1. The Silhouette/

Candlelight Ecstasy challenge

The decision by Simon and Schuster/Pocket Books to enter the romance publishing business was precipitated by the termination by Harlequin of its decade-long distribution contract with Pocket Books. Harlequin’s decision to terminate its contract was prompted by Harlequin’s desire to have its own sales force, one dedicated exclusively to promoting the Harlequin product (Orr 1984). In response to the withdraw1 of Harlequin from Pocket Books, Simon

J. Markerr / Romance publishing

85

and Schuster created Silhouette Books, since ‘Simon and Schuster was not about to let a lucrative chunk of business slide out the door’ (Guiley 1983: 162). The concept for Silhouette was developed by Richard E. Snyder, chairman and chief executive officer of Simon and Schuster, and Ron Busch, publisher and president of Pocket Books. Feeling that Harlequin’s success in the United States was created by Pocket Books’ sales force and distribution system, they utilized their knowledge of this system to create Harlequin’s major competitor in the United States (Guiley 1983: 162; Galloway 1984). To underscore this marketing expertise, Silhouette Books featured a tag line in most of its pre-launch promotional material aimed at book retailers reading, ‘When it comes to romance, experience is the best teacher’ (Maryles 1980: 51). Silhouette Books was a mirror image of Harlequin. Their content was ‘sweet contemporary’. The only variation on Harlequin’s content was to accentuate an American theme: The setting of the romance was to take place in the United States, and Silhouette’s heros and heroines were to reflect American values. This ‘Americanization’ of the romance novel facilitated access to manuscripts. Says Kate Duffy, editor-in-chief at Silhouette: ” ‘Of course the books were like Harlequins. That’s what the writers had been reading for years, and that was our competition. These were writers who’d submitted to Harlequin and were turned down on the basis of their manuscripts (because they were set in the United States) or the fact that they were American [Harlequin authors were predominately British]. We had a whole raft of writers who had manuscripts sitting on their shelves and no outlet for publishing them.’

The ‘Americanization’ of contemporary romances was certainly one factor which contributed to Silhouette’s strong positioning against Harlequin. It was not the only factor, however. More important was the backing by Simon and Schuster/Pocket Books. The strength of this large publishing firm allowed Silhouette to do three things to help the new line. First, it hired P.J. Fennell, Harlequin’s vice-president of marketing and sales in North America, as the president of Silhouette Books (Maryles 1983: 51). Second, it secured the services of Janet Dailey from Harlequin, who, between 1976-1980, had become one of Harlequin’s best-selling authors, and used Daily’s recognized name to help pull the new line through its infancy stage (Guiley 1983: 209-211). l3 And third, Silhouette debuted Romances with a $3 million television advertising campaign (Maryles 1980), spending $1.1 million of this for air time in just one month between mid-May and mid-June when the line debuted. Another $1 million was also spent on other forms of advertising (Dahlin 1981:

I2 Cited by Guiley (1983). t3 Dailey was one of the few American authors published through at the time Harlequin was diversifying. It is another advantage of changes in content.

by Harlequin Books. Dailey slipped example of Harlequin’s failure to take

86

Markeri / Romance publishing

35); this burgeoned to $22 million by 1982, not only more than Harlequin spent but more than the entire United States publishing industry spent in domestic advertising (Guiley 1983: 162). The entrance of Silhouette in the sweet contemporary market proved to other publishers that Harlequin’s domination was not sacrosanct. Nevertheless, few romance publishers were willing (or able) to invest the large amounts of capital Silhouette had to enter the competition with Harlequin. Changes in romantic content introduced by Dell showed other publishers how to enter the marketplace without large amounts of capital. The changes in content introduced by Dell’s Candlelight Romances would alter the content of romance novels in the 1980s. Dell was one of the few American publishers at the turn of the decade that had not switched to sensual historical romances. The house continued to publish a limited number of sweet contemporary romances, called Candlelight, as well as some sweet historical romances. Romance novels were not expected to generate significant profit for Dell, and hence the publisher paid little attention to the genre. Thus, referring to her position as the new editor of Candlelight Romances in 1979-1980, Vivian Stephens (1984) could say, ‘The line wasn’t really looked at to make any money or make a statement for Dell. It was just there’. This lackadaisical attitude toward romances by management allowed Stephens room to experiment. New to publishing, Stephens wasn’t exactly sure what was expected of her. i4 However, after reading some of the sweet romances the house released, she had a ‘gut feeling’ they were not really in tune with attitudes and values in society at the time. Says Stephens (1984): ‘The books didn’t really interest the women I thought wanted to buy the books. I was in my mid forties and rather enjoyed them. But they had nothing to do with my fantasies. So I consciously decided to make the books a little racier. I didn’t ask anybody anything. I just sorta had it in mind.’

Still, Stephens was unsure exactly what she wanted to do. Her ideas began to coalesce with the submission of a manuscript she found in the slush of unsolicted material. ‘Then one day 1 got in a book. It was very sensuous.. The book was called Morning rose, evening sauage. That was the book that preceded the [Ecstasy] line. I thought, “What the hell. I’ll put it out. And if I get any negative feedback saying it’s too sensuous than of course I wouldn’t do any more books.” ’

I4 Prior to coming to Dell, Stephens had been a researcher for a series of nonfiction books put out by Time-Life. In 1982, Stephens was hired by Harlequin to ‘update’ their sweet content; she was which debuted in 1983. In October 1984, responsible for Harlequin’s American romances, Stephens left Harlequin in a dispute over content control.

87

J. Market-i / Romance publishing

The lack of negative reaction reinforced Stephens’ decision to put out another sensual contemporary. Another manuscript crossed her desk about this time, a novel by Jane Castle. The book, Gentle pirate, would go beyond the merely sensual and liberate the romance novel. It was the launch book for the new Ecstasy line. The hero and heroine in Castle’s romance more closely approximate people in the social world in the 1980s. The hero is an ex-Viet Nam vet, missing one arm. He is 28, not perfect, not extraordinarily handsome, but with a keen sense of humor. The heroine is the wife of a former Marine, killed in combat. The heroine’s relationship with her former husband was less than ideal: He had been a wife abuser. Stephens published the novel, she says, ‘because all the things that are in it are right now, the world today’. The reason the book was released under a separate imprint, rather than incorporated into the existing Candlelight series, was because Stephens felt the reader should be warned that these books were more sensual (Stephens 1984). The novel sold out of its first printing within weeks and paved the way for the growth of the Candlelight Ecstasy line, as well as ushering in a period of rapid growth in romance publishing over the next few years. The success of the Ecstasy line can be seen in the overall production increases for the series: 1980: 1981: 1982: 1983: 1984:

6 romances December. 6 romances 6 romances 8 romances 8 romances

per month: per per per per

4 sweet contemporaries,

2 regencies;

Ecstasy

introduced

in

month: 2 sweet contemporaries, 2 regencies, 2 Ecstasies. month: 2 regencies, 4 Ecstasies. month: all Ecstasies; Ecstasy Supremes added, I5 4 every other month. month all Ecstasies: Ecstasy Supremes increased to 4 every month.

4.2. Growth and the new content Between 1981 and 1984 some 32 separate romance lines debuted. Two-thirds of the lines which appeared in this four year period imitated the ‘liberated’ contemporary theme introduced by Ecstasy. The other one-third were historical lines, but even the historical romances incorporated the new ‘liberated’ theme into the novels, turning from the sensuality (rape) that marked these books in the late 1970s. The rapid growth and imitation of the new liberated theme was facilitated by changes that began to occur in romance publishing at the close of the preceding decade. First, management was more closely monitoring the sales potential of romantic fiction, and second, editors were more closely monitoring changes in romantic content.

I5 Ecstasy Supremes extend the romance from the traditional 1OO,ooO-plus words. The content remains basically the same.

55-60,000

word

norm

to

88

J. Markeri

/

Romancepublishing

400 350 300 250 200 150 100~ 75, 50 25 0 [II{

Regencies (sweet) p=A

1-1

Sweet Contemporaries

Fig. 3. Yearly American

romance

production

estimates

Sensual Historicals Sensual Contemporaries

by sub-genres:

1980-1983.

The ‘condescending’ attitude that characterized managements opinion of romances during the 1970s began to change in the late 1970s as sensual historical romances started making a profit for the publishing houses. The explosive growth in romance publishing in the 1980s further muted this condescending attitude. Editors indicate that management is treating them with more respect, if only because publishers are realizing the amount of profit generated by romance novels. The positioning of women as editors in the late 1970s is important in understanding the growth of the liberated format. For the first time women were responsible for monitoring changes occurring in romance publishing. The money-making potential of romantic fiction prompted management to more readily respond to changing market conditions, judged primarily by sales. Because editors were in a position to more closely observe trends in romance publishing, editors were able to build on Dell’s initial innovation. The initial imitation of the Ecstasy product remained problematic, however. The sensual contemporary novels introduced by Dell in 1980 were unique. Sensual historical writers were familiar with the sensual aspect of romances, but not the contemporary theme; sweet contemporary writers were familiar with the contemporary aspect of romances, but not the sensuality. Had the Ecstasy line been a blend of sensuality from the historicals with a contemporary theme of the sweets, writers could read both types of books on the market and imitate the new line. However, the sensual contemporary novels introduced by Stephens were more than a straight blend of these two themes; these novels depicted a world totally different from those captured by either

J. Market-t / Romance publishing

89

the sensual historicals or the sweet contemporaries. Guidelines were thus initiated on the editorial level to help ‘guide’ writers in developing the ‘liberated’ format of the Ecstasy novels. These guidelines were extremely detailed, instructing the writers as to the age of the hero and heroine, the setting, details of the plot - such as the amount of sensuality to be described and so forth. 4.3. Perception of the market The monitoring of Ecstasy’s success in the marketplace by management helped foster the growth of romance publishing after 1980. The monitoring of Ecstasy’s content innovations by editors helped foster the growth of the liberated contemporary theme. However, the thematic innovations by Ecstasy radically altered the perception of the romance audience. This led to a 2-3 year period of uncertainty as to the composition of the romance audience. It was during this period that widespread experimentation with content forms occurred. In the one year period between February 1982 and February 1983, this uncertainty resulted in the failure of 3 of the 5 lines which attempted to develop the liberated theme. In the post Avon period of the 1970s the perception of the audience by entrepreneurial managers and editors did not significantly change. The romance audience was perceived as basically female housewives, though the sensual aspect of the historicals was thought to appeal to more sexually aware females. Exactly who read the sensual historicals was never clear, though there was widespread agreement by entrepreneurs at both levels that the audience was limited. In the post Ecstasy period of the 1980s both these perceptions were dramatically altered. Ecstasy introduced a female heroine that was older (late 20s-early 30s) divorced or widowed, sexually experienced, l6 and career-oriented. Love was still the sine qua non of the novel, but the married state was no longer the principal objective of the heroine; indeed, love is not often obtained without considerable soul searching as the heroine attempts to reconcile her career with matrimony. The popularity of the new theme resulted in a reconceptualization of the romance audience, and the new reader was largely perceived along the same lines as the new heroine (Markert 1984b). This reconceptualized audience led editors to believe the audience base was larger since the novels were more in keeping with changes in society, especially working women and divorcees. But Ecstasy, unlike Avon a decade earlier, introduced numerous new themes: Divorce, careers, older heroines, etc. Thus many editors appeared I6 The more sexually experienced heroines of the post 1980 period should not be interpreted as the result of promiscuity but, rather, the increased appearance of divorced and widowed characters in these novels.

90

J. Markert

/ Romance publishing

unsure exactly what the specific innovation was that most appealed to readers, and this was aggravated by a general unawareness of demographics defining the ‘new’ reader. The result was a potpourri of lines which attempted to marginally differentiate themselves by focusing on different dimensions of the new theme: For example, Second Chance at Love emphasised divorced women; Intimate Moments career-oriented females; Finding Mr. Bight the heroine’s choice between two sexually compatible males; Loveswept humor, and so forth. The rapidity with which publishers responded to Ecstasy’s innovations itself the result of structural changes within the industry ~ did not give editors an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the reasons for Ecstasy’s success. Editors were forced to establish guidelines since writers (and editors) were as yet unfamiliar with what was required. The earliest guidelines were largely failures because editors had to judge, often with limited audience input and with only a hazy perception of the reader, what it was the consumer liked in the early Ecstasy novels. There were fewer failures after 1983. One reason for this is that readers were giving more input to editors about what they liked and disliked by directly communicating with the editors in letters or interacting with editors at romance conferences. “Another reason fewer lines failed after 1983 is that editors could see, in the success or failure of other lines, what was and was not working in the marketplace. 5. Conclusion: The constraints in concert Peterson (1982) suggests the various constraints on production typically work in concert. To a substantial degree they do: One or more constraints affect, and in turn are affected by, other constraints. The reciprocal influence of the various constraints in the present study is most noticeable in occupational careers and market, both of which affected, and in turn were affected by, industry and organizational structure. Technological constraints were found to be nonexistent in this study. Legal constraints were minimal, though the recent approval by the U.S. Justice Department of the sale of Silhouette Books to Harlequin (October 1, 1984) may prove crucial in Harlequin’s ability to reestablish monopolistic control of the romance market. ix ” Increasingly in the post-1980 period editors encouraged input by inserting requests for reader comments in the front of the book. ‘s During its period of expansion in the late 1970s Harlequin attempted to purchase Pyramid Books but was dissuaded from doing so by the U.S. Justice Department. No such obstacles were encountered by Harlequin this time, and the sale was approved in record time. One reason for the action by Justice in 1984 was that Silhouette approached Harlequin, rather, in the case in 1979, Harlequin approaching Pyramid. The sale price of Silhouette was considered by Harlequin executives to be a meager $10 million (Galloway 1984). In return, Pocket Books regained the tights to distribute Harlequin in the United States.

J. Markert

/ Romance publishing

91

For Harlequin, the industry level arrangements with Mills and Boon in the 1960s would prove to have a significant organizational level influence. By reprinting romance novels from Britain, Harlequin was assured of having an undisturbed flow of manuscripts without the tedium of sifting through a host of unsolicited material. At the same time, the Mills and Boon arrangement allowed Harlequin to more clearly pinpoint its specific audience. This allowed Harlequin to focus its distribution and advertising campaign toward those consumers most likely to be interested in their product: The housewife. Distribution arrangements with Pocket Books would facilitate the dispersement of Harlequin novels thoughout the United States. It would not be until 1980, when Harlequin terminated its distribution contract with Pocket Books, that the Harlequin brand of contemporary romance would be challenged in the United States. American publishers of romantic fiction in the 1970s perceived Harlequin as dominating the romance market. This perception was intensified by a demeaning attitude toward the genre on the part of publishers in the United States and the lack of editorial expertise, since there were few editors responsible for monitoring the romance market. The successful innovations introduced by Avon in 1972 would result in an increase in the production of romantic fiction by U.S. publishers after mid-decade. The money-making potential of the novel, seen in the success of the sensual historicals, resulted in changes in occupational careers; for the first time women were responsible for monitoring changes in romantic fiction. The less demeaning attitude by management toward the genre and the positioning of women in editorial roles would prove significant in the 1980s. Nevertheless, in the 1970s both entrepreneur managers and editors persisted in viewing the romance market at near saturation. The content innovations introduced by Dell in 1980 - itself the result of Dell’s organizational structure - and the successful challenge to Harlequin’s contemporary brand of romances by Silhouette altered the perception of the market. Women romance readers were no longer perceived strictly as housewives, but extended to include older single and divorced women, as well as married women who had now moved out into the workplace. Growth in the market was perceived as possible. Numerous lines debuted imitating the successful novels introduced by Dell’s Candlelight Ecstasy line by varying the ‘new’ theme slightly to differentiate their product from one another. Changes in production, then, help us to understand why the romance industry has grown so rapidly in the past decade, as well as the failure of producers to compete prior to that period. However, the production perspective does not fully explain the success of emerging content forms. To explain consumer response it is necessary to extend the production perspective to changes in attitudes and values taking place within society. I suggest the more sensual variety of romance novel by Avon and the later liberation of the romance novel by Dell touched a cord in the romance

92

J. Markerr /

Romance publishing

these novels in record numbers.

the product sumers would indicate that tudes

Thus

given

then, helps account for consumer response. Had introduced Avon and not coincided with wider society, less likely that conresponded. fact consumers would forms successfully incorporated changing place in society, least segment

innovations

other publishers these content changes into novels produced by their firms and thereby perpetuated the whole cycle first in sensual historical and in ‘liberated’ romance production.

References Berkowitz, P., 1983. Harlequin’s formula romance books face stiff battle in newly competitive industry. Wall Street Journal (July) 21, 25. Cawelti, J., 1976. Adventure, mystery, and romance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Chafe, W., 1977. Women and equality: Changing patterns in American culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cheatwood, D., 1982. The Tarzan films: An analysis of determinants of maintenance and change in conventions. Journal of Popular Culture 16, 127-142. Cheffins, R., 1969. The constitutional process in Canada. Toronto: McGraw-Hill. Coffey, N., 1984. Editor-in-Chief. Berkley-Jove Publishing Group. (Former Editor, Avon Books.) (Interview.) Carry, J., 1970. A U.S. sex revolt, it’s mostly talk. In: A. Etzoni, ed., Social Profile: USA Today. New York: Van Nontrand Reinhold Co. pp. 130-138. Creighton, D., 1970. Canada’s first century: 1867-1967. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Crider, A., 1982. Mass media publishing in America. Boston, MA: C.K. Hall. Dahlin, R., 1981. The editors: Giving readers the goods. Publishers Weekly (December) 26, 28-32. Davis, K.C., 1984. Two-bit culture: The paperbacking of America. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Douglas, A., 1980. Soft-porn culture. The New Republic (August) 11, 25-29. Duffy, K., 1984. Senior Editor, Pocket Book. (Former Editor-in-Chief, Silhouette Books.) (Interview.) Edwards, E., 1984. Editor, Second Chance at Love and To Have and To Hold. Berkley-Jove Publishing Group. (Interview.) Eshleman, J.R. and B.G. Cashion, 1983. Sociology: An introduction. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & co. Flacks, R., 1971. Youth and social change. Chicago: Markham Publishing. Galloway, D., 1984. President, Harlequin Enterprises. (Interview.) Guiley, R., 1983. Love lines: A romance reader’s guide to printed pleasure. New York: Facts on File Publications. Heisey, W.L., 1984. Chief Executive Officer, Harlequin Enterprises. (Former President, Harlequin Books.) (Interview.) Harlequin Books, 1979. Thirty years of Harlequin: 1949-1979. Toronto: Harlequin. Jennings, V., 1983. ‘At long last, love.’ In: Helene Schellenberg, ed., Writing romance fiction: For love and money. Cincinnati: Writer’s Digest Books. pp. l-10.

J. Marker1 / Romance publishing

93

Kirkland, C., 1983. The social context of romance authorship. Presented at the Fifth International Conference on Culture and Communications. Philadelphia, PA. Kirkland, C., 1984. The media subculture of romance writers. Annenberg School f Communications. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania. Ph.D. Dissertation. Mansfield, E., 1981. Elizabeth Mansfield’s personal guide to romance fiction. Romantic Times 2, 15. Markert, J., 1979. The bureaucratization of the alternative youth programs of the sixties: A decade of change. Group and Organization Studies (December), 485-495. Marker& J., 1984a. Romancing the reader. Romantic Times 18, 21. Markert, J., 1984b. Beyond gatekeepers: Romance publishing and the production of culture. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. Ph.D. Dissertation. Markert, J., n.d. Historical romances: Facts and factors. Journal of Popular Culture. (Forthcoming.) Maryles, D., 1980. S&S to debut silhouette with $3-Million TV ad campaign. Publishers Weekly (May) 11, 51-52. Maryles, D., 1983. Love springs eternal. Publishers Weekly (January) 14, 53-57. Melville, K., 1980. Marriage and the family today. New York: Random House. Mondale, J., 1978. Women and Social change. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Modleski, T., 1980. The disappearing act: A study of harlequin romances, Signs 5, 435-448. Murray, J., 1983. Call of the cliffhangers. Romantic Times 9, 11-34. Nevler, L., 1984. Editor-in-Chief, Ballantine Books. (Former Editor, Fawcett Books.) (Interview.) Nichols, C., 1984. Senior Editor, Loveswept (Bantam Books). (Former Editor, Second Chance at Love (Berkley-Jove Publishing Group).) (Interview.) Orr, K., 1984. Director of Public Relations, Harlequin Books. (Interview.) Peterson, R.A., 1976. ‘The production of culture: A prolegomenon’. In: R.A. Peterson, ed., The production of culture. Beverly Hills: Sage, pp. l-22. Peterson, R.A., 1982. Five constraints on the production of culture: Law, technology, market, organizational structure, and occupational careers. Journal of Popular Culture 16, 143-153. Radway, J., 1984. Reading of romance: Women, patriarchy, and popular literature. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. (Forthcoming.) Shatzkin, L., 1982. In cold type: Overcoming the book crisis. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Span, P., 1984. Romance writers chase the elusive happy ending. The Wall Street Journal (July) 5, Statistical Abstracts, 1981. Bureau of the Census. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Stephens, V., 1984. Editor, American Romances (Harlequin Books). (Former Editor, Candlelight Ecstasy Romances (Dell Publishing).) (Interview.) Stuart, M.A., 1984. Retired. (Former Editorial Director, Playboy Press.) (Interview.) Sullivan, J., 1984. Editor, Judy Sullivan Presents (Walker Books). (Former Editor, Gallen Romances (Richard Gallen Books).) (Interview.) Tebbel, J., 1978. A history of book publishing in the United States, Vol. 3, The golden age between two wars: 1920-1940. New York: R.R. Bowker. Tebbel, J., 1981. A history of book publishing in the United States, Vol. 4. The great change: 1940-1980. New York: R.R. Bowker. Thurston, Carol, 1983. The liberation of pulp romances. Psychology Today (April), 14. Thurston, Carol, n.d. Popular historical romances: Agent for social change? An exploration of methodologies. Journal of Popular Culture. (Forthcoming.) Yankelovich, D., 1974. The new morality: A profile of American youth in the seventies. New York: Random House. Yankelovich, D., 1982. Consumer research study on reading and book publishing. Prepared for the Book Industry Study Group. New York: Book Industry Study Group.