I recently documented the marketing mistakes that I made when I released my novels. I have been very fortunate to receive some great marketing coaching from Octavia Randolph, author of the Circle of Ceridwen saga — a series of eleven novels set, like my Cuthbert’s People novels, in the Anglo-Saxon period in England. After extensive discussions, Octavia has made a number of suggestions about how my series should have been marketed, and I am considering reissuing the books with a number of changes in order to take advantage of that advice and hopefully grow my audience and my sales.
Thanks Amanda. My problem is that I think genre is the least interesting thing about a book, and I am trying to navigate a market that things genre is the most interesting thing about a book. But I know you are right about being clear about the genre, even if you are hoping to catch readers who would not normally read that genre at all.
I can only speak for myself, but here are my thoughts.
I like the new synopsis. It captures the tension of the time period.
I like the new series name. "Cuthbert's People" never evoked anything for me (mostly because I didn't get the reference), and I think "The Daughters of Twyford" would do a better job preparing readers for the fact that we're focusing on a few main characters here rather than a whole settlement. It also gently prepares readers to read about women in this time period, whose possibilities in life were often tied to their marriages.
Regarding whether you should bill yourself as a historical fiction writer, or a theme writer, or any particular kind of writer, my advice is this: If I like an author enough, I'll follow them to genres I would never typically explore. I think making yourself known for historical fiction, which you partly chose because it allows for examining the themes you enjoy, is a good first step. If you later write a thematically similar book in another genre, loyal fans will follow.
Thanks Joseph. Getting loyal fans to follow from one genre to another is half the problem. The other half is getting people to look at a book outside their normal genre. A quixotic quest perhaps, but I keep trying to play both angles, perhaps at my peril.
Thanks Amanda. My problem is that I think genre is the least interesting thing about a book, and I am trying to navigate a market that things genre is the most interesting thing about a book. But I know you are right about being clear about the genre, even if you are hoping to catch readers who would not normally read that genre at all.
I can only speak for myself, but here are my thoughts.
I like the new synopsis. It captures the tension of the time period.
I like the new series name. "Cuthbert's People" never evoked anything for me (mostly because I didn't get the reference), and I think "The Daughters of Twyford" would do a better job preparing readers for the fact that we're focusing on a few main characters here rather than a whole settlement. It also gently prepares readers to read about women in this time period, whose possibilities in life were often tied to their marriages.
Regarding whether you should bill yourself as a historical fiction writer, or a theme writer, or any particular kind of writer, my advice is this: If I like an author enough, I'll follow them to genres I would never typically explore. I think making yourself known for historical fiction, which you partly chose because it allows for examining the themes you enjoy, is a good first step. If you later write a thematically similar book in another genre, loyal fans will follow.
Thanks Joseph. Getting loyal fans to follow from one genre to another is half the problem. The other half is getting people to look at a book outside their normal genre. A quixotic quest perhaps, but I keep trying to play both angles, perhaps at my peril.