The Second Time Around (Or Third or Fourth or . . .)
Reissues are not new in romance fiction. Who knows how many times Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice has been reissued? I checked Books in Print to see how many editions were currently available, and I stopped counting at 56. Harlequin’s reissues of Nora Roberts’s Silhouette titles have been packaged and repackaged singly and in varying combinations for years–ten reissues, mostly in twofers, in 2009 alone. Romances published originally in hardback routinely are reissued a year or so later in paperback.
But the slow economy has reissues growing like kudzu. September boasts more than 200 reissues of romance novels from all of Jane Austen’s novels to modern classics like books by Georgette Heyer, Daphne DeMaurier, and Victoria Holt to older titles by current favorites such as Linda Howard and Teresa Medeiros. Debbie Macomber’s October Christmas reissues are a small industry on their own. It doesn’t take an economics major to recognize that reissuing titles is a boon to publishers, but what do they mean for readers?
Surely I’m not the only one who has picked up what I thought was a new book by an author I like only to discover when I start reading it that I have already read the book. Most romance readers read a lot of books. I read a couple of hundred a year in a bad year, and that has been true for much of my reading life. At a conservative estimate, I’ve read 9000 romance novels. I don’t remember all the titles, and I don’t even always remember enough about the story to recognize it from the back cover copy. I do get irritated when I buy a book I’ve already read. For one thing, it means there’s another book I didn’t buy. And that book may be by a midlist or debut author for whom each sale matters. I know it’s unlikely, but I would love to see something like the symbol Nora Roberts uses on her new releases adopted to identify reissues.
On the other hand, reissues have definite benefits for readers. Loretta Chase’s Lord of Scoundrels consistently ranks at the top of readers all-time favorite romances. It was published originally in 1995. Readers who were introduced to Chase from such lists or through her popular Carsington books (2004-2007) find it much easier to find LOS since it has been reissued. I bet I’m not the only Judith Ivory fan who cheered when she learned that Black Silk (2002), first published under the name Judy Cuevas, was an August reissue. And Susan Wiggs’s newer fans are discovering through reissues that Wiggs wrote terrific historicals well before she wrote her recent romance/women’s fiction hybrids.
Then there are writers whose later books earn them a greater popularity than their earlier books achieved. I know many readers who fell in love with Eloisa James’s Desperate Duchesses who are delighted that her first two books, Potent Pleasures and Midnight Pleasures are being reissued. Christina Dodd’s first Fortune Hunter books, Trouble in High Heels and Tongue in Chic, are fairly recent publications (2006-07), but Dodd’s even more recent paranormal series, Darkness Chosen and The Chosen Ones, have earned her significant numbers of new readers. I expect new fans will be pleased to try Dodd’s sexy contemporaries.
Large numbers of romance readers are rereaders, and paperback books, which more than 90% of them buy, suffer from repeated rereading. Covers come off, pages yellow, and leaves come free from their binding. Reissues give rereaders a chance to replace battered, tattered copies with bright new ones. I have Georgette Heyer and Mary Stewart books that I had to stop rereading because they were so fragile; some of them are more than thirty years old. It is a joy to replace those books with readable books with great covers.
Even among current bestselling authors, some have been on my autobuy list for decades. I started reading Mary Balogh and Jo Beverley with their first books, Mary Jo Putney with her second, and Nora Roberts in 1985. I have books on keeper shelves by all these writers that I have been rereading for a couple of decades. Replacing the Roberts books has been easy, but I am looking forward to replacing books by the others. Beverley’s very first book, Lord Wraybourne’s Betrothal, will be reissued next month. MJP’s Thunder and Roses will be reissued in November. And Mary Balogh’s A Precious Jewel in December. Beginning in March with Dark Angel and Lord Carew’s Bride (my favorite Balogh) and continuing through 2012, all those coveted older titles of Balogh’s will be reissued. All of these will go on my TBB list.
Just this month I replaced worn out copies of Teresa Medeiros’ s Breath of Magic (1996) and Touch of Enchantment (1997) and Lisa Kleypas’s Someone to Watch Over Me (1999). By December, I’ll have new copies of all Linda Howard’s Mackenzie books. I get almost as excited about these new copies of old favorites as I do about new books. And, of course, a crisp new copy is an irresistible invitation to reread.
What do you think about the increase in reissues? Are there books that you long to see reissued? (I’m keeping my fingers crossed for Connie Brockway’s As You Desire since the front cover fell off my copy the last time I reread it.)
Oh, I get *really* irritated when I accidentally re-buy a book. Not only for the reasons you state, but if I’ve grabbed the book to read somewhere on the go and don’t figure it out until I’ve left the house, then I’M STUCK SOMEWHERE WITHOUT A BOOK TO READ!!! Which I think we can all agree is tragic.
I’m more careful these days, and I will even occasionally check an author’s website from my phone to make sure I’m getting the right book. But I’m also finding out about new authors with deep backlists, and some books should just never go out of print.
It bugs me though when it seems like the publishers are almost *trying* to trick you into thinking it’s a new book. Changing the titles, for instance. And I’ve picked up a few that turned out to be 2 or 3 categories printed together but in a way that wasn’t obvious — like instead of putting all the titles on the cover, they make up some omnibus title, and then aren’t completely clear about them being separate books on the back blurb– or there isn’t a back blurb. Stuff like that.
I really like how Nora Roberts’ “first edition” (for lack of a better term) paperbacks have a special little logo, so you know.
I always check the pub date now, not only to guard against re-reading. Sometimes I feel like I’m being scammed by a popular author’s early work that wasn’t so great (and probably should not have been re-released, LOL). I know my own writing has changed, and I can definitely see the difference in some of the books I’ve bought. But since I didn’t pick up romance reading until 2003 after a very, very long hiatus, most re-releases are brand shiny new to me.
It’s made me a much more careful buyer. When I first got back into romance reading I would grab anything I could get my hands on by a new-to-me author. Now, I’m a bit more selective and do a little more research. I very rarely buy a book on the fly now. If I’m unsure I wait. Otherwise, it could get very, very expensive.
I’m thrilled about the Mary Balogh re-issues. There was a time I would have paid big bucks for her backlist and am so glad I just waited it out.
I think re-issues are a great thing, but like you I really think it should be made clear to the customer. An angry customer can turn into a customer no more!
I do like reissues, but I’m also now careful to check publication dates. Like you, Janga, some of my Georgette Heyer’s were so old they were falling apart. It’s lovely to see those reissues from Sourcebooks.
I try to check publication dates just for this reason. *LOL* Sometimes I get tricked–and I get VERY annoyed.
I’d like to see Lorraine Heath’s Destiny series reissued, but only because I’m having to be creative in how I obtain copies for myself. *LOL* So far I’ve got 2 of the three.
On the whole, I’m annoyed with so many reissues.
There are a lot of writers with new and wonderful stories who may not get published because another book is being reissued.
Not only do I feel for the writers, but as a reader, I’d like a chance to read more books and not have my choices limited by this practice.
Ditto for movies.
I wonder if publishers make enough money tricking people into buying older books to offset the loss of goodwill they earn by doing it? I buy a lot of romance re-releases, because I didn’t read romance for a couple of decades and then came back to it — the library, used books or re-releases are the only way I got to read Laura Kinsale, or the backlists of authors like Chase, Balogh and Roberts whom I have come to love. There clearly is a market for re-released books, and I wish publishers would recognize that and not try to disguise the product as something new.
Love how Nora Roberts dealt with that, using the logo for new books!