Year in Review: 2009

I considered a few different approaches for my 2009 year end book review, but I figured nobody would be interested in reading a list of all 178 books I read last year, so I axed that idea. Instead I'm talking statistics -- specifically the various statistics from my 2009 reading habits that interest me. Probably none of you are interested in that either, but it interests me and it's my blog so I'm doing it anyway. Feel free to move onto the next item on your feed reader.

Total Books Read
As I already mentioned, in the year that was 2009 I managed to read a total of 178 books. This is nowhere near how many I've read in previous years, but I actually figured the number would be much lower. 2009 just felt like a busy year, but apparently I squeezed in more reading time than I'd thought.

Single-Title vs. Category vs. Short-Story
Of those 178 books, 3.4% (6) were anthologies, and another 9.6% (17) were short-stories* that were not part of an anthology. I also did a fair amount of category romance reading, and apparently I'm in love with the Harlequin Blaze line. (This is not really news to me, or anybody who knows me.)

Category romance made up 23.6% (42) of the books I read, and of those books, 90% (34) were Blazes. I expect this latter percentage to change a bit in 2010, simply because thanks to Lynn and SuperWendy, I'm discovering a new-found affection for the Harlequin SuperRomance line.

*I categorize books by length into the following groups: short stories (<20,000 words), novellas (20,000-40,000 words), and novels (>40,000 words).

Series vs. Stand-Alone
A whopping 60% (107) of the books were part of a series of connected books, which means that either I just love series, or simply that a large number of authors like to write connected books. I actually think both of these reasons are at play.

Pubbed in 2009 vs. Pubbed Prior to 2009
Only 45.5% (81) of the books were first published in 2009, indicating that I accomplished a fair amount of TBR shelf reading, as well as checking out recommendations of older books. The downside is that I have fewer books to choose from when making my selections for the AAR Annual Reader Poll.

New Reads vs. Re-Reads
Probably the number that most amazed me: only 5% (9) of the titles I read were re-reads. Normally this number would be significantly higher, if just for the holiday re-reading alone. But this year I wasn't able to find the time to re-read any of my annual holiday favorites, much to my disappointment.

Books Reviewed
Here's a number I'm quite proud of: I reviewed a total of 28.7% (51) of the books I read. Yay me! (Actually I wrote reviews for 53 books, but 2 won't be published until this year.) After 10 months of reviewing for AAR, I'm still loving it, although I suspect given my new job, the number of reviews I'm able to turn in will drop down a bit.

Borrowed vs. Bought vs. Freebies
Of the 178 books I read, I borrowed only 15.2% (27) of them, which quite surprised me, and almost all of the borrowed books I read in the first half of 2009. The latter half of the year was categorized by me borrowing quite a few books, and returning the vast majority of them unread.

I received 19.7% (35) of the books for free by reviewing them for AAR, and purchased a total of 65.2% (116) of the books I read. Holy crap! So that's where all my money went.

Print vs. Electronic
After receiving my Sony Reader in late-October, I managed to squeeze in 34 ebooks into my reading schedule, accounting for 19.1% of my reading. Ebooks made up the overwhelming majority of my reading from November and December, so I expect this percentage to skyrocket in 2010.

Genre/Subgenre Breakdown
Contemporary Romance: 50.6% (90)
Erotic Romance: 17.4% (31)
Romantic Suspense: 11.2% (20)
Historical Romance: 9.6% (17)
Mystery: 5.6% (10)
Women's Fiction: 2.8% (5)
Para Romance / Urban Fantasy: 2.3% (4)
Non-Fiction: 0.6% (1)

So, which genre/subgenre do you think is my favorite? If you answered Romance/Contemporary, you're right!

Grade Breakdown 
As usual, I had a pretty damn good reading year. This is because I almost totally rely on reviews and recommendations from fellow readers before trying a new author, and I pretty much have my strategy nailed.

I must add, however, that my number of C, D, and F reads were higher than in years past. There are two primary reasons for this: 1) I started reviewing for AAR, thus becoming unable to rely on reviews before trying a new book, and 2) my entry into ebook reading prompted me to take many more chances with books and authors that were unknowns to me. I discovered many new fantastic authors, but I also discovered a lot of average or crap reads. But enough about that. On to the statistics*!

A Range: 15.8% (30)
B Range: 55.8% (106)
C Range: 21.6% (41)
D Range: 2.1% (4)
F Range: 1.1% (2)
DNF: 3.7% (7)

*Anthology stories were graded individually, and these figures do not include re-reads.

****
Okay, I'll stop boring you all now. (And if you're still reading, I give you props -- you're probably a stats weirdo like myself.) I'd originally planned to include my favorite reads from 2009, but this is already a hellishly long post, so I'll save that for another day soon.

So tell me: How did your 2009 reading year shape up?

Rambling Ponderings on Authenticity

Sometime back, somewhere in my Internet travels, I read a comment by an aspiring author that said something like:

"Because I'm a virgin I've been worried that my sex scenes won't be very good, but your comments have given me back my confidence!"

I admit, my first reaction upon reading that was to think, yeah right, those scenes are going to suck bad if she's never even experienced sex herself.

Then I pondered my very bitchy cynical reaction.

I'm all for authors having the freedom to write about experiences they've never had -- occupations, places, people, etc. If all authors only wrote what they themselves had directly experienced, the book world would be a hell of a lot less diverse than it is. I want to read about firefighters and treasure hunters and lawyers, and most authors have never, and will never, hold one of these jobs. I want to read books set in Alaska and New York City and 18th century London, and I don't particularly care if the author hasn't ever lived in that place, in that time, as long as the setting feels authentic to me as the reader.

But here's the thing: Even if an author researches her butt off, she's still likely to get some of the details wrong. There are just some things that you don't know until you experience it firsthand -- and you don't know what you don't know -- so it's almost inevitable that an author will get something wrong. It may be a minor thing, or it may be a major thing, but either way, if it's a subject that you, as the reader, knows very well, the inauthenticity of it is going to pull you out of the story.

Then again, the majority of readers won't have a clue that the author got something wrong, nor will they care. Because, like authors, most readers haven't had firsthand experience with all the occupations and places featured in books. I've never been a firefighter or treasure hunter or lawyer; I've never been to Alaska or New York City or 18th century London. So the only time this issue arises for us readers is when the book we pick up happens to be one of those featuring something we are intimately familiar with. Otherwise we remain happily clueless.

As I see it, the big problem facing the virgin writer above is that the overwhelming majority of her readers have experienced sex, and they're going to know if she gets it wrong.

But, wait. It's not like Romance Novel Sex is completely realistic in the first place, is it? We have Magically Orgasming heroines and Expert Sex God heroes, and romance couples never get sand in uncomfortable places after sex on the beach. There's no awkwardness or pain or messy bodily fluids or not-so-sexy noises. It's a perfect, rose-colored view of sex, and much of it ain't exactly realistic, although I do think the realism has improved over the years.

So, if the writer in question relies on the conventions of the genre, will her sex scenes read authentically to readers?

Part of me thinks she could fake it, but the bigger part of me thinks the scenes will feel "off" in some way. Why? Because, as a reader who started reading romances long before having sex, I know that I didn't really "get it" until I experienced it. Sure, I understood the basic mechanics from sex-ed classes, and I'd read a gazillion romance novel sex scenes, but it was all still rather hazy and indistinct. It didn't click until I did it. Hell, it didn't fully click until I'd done it a lot more than once.

TMI? Anyway, moving on...

What about female m/m authors? The m/m romance and m/m erotic romance genres are rapidly growing, and it seems like most of the authors and readers are heterosexual women. Do these authors' m/m sex scenes read inauthentically given that they've never experienced m/m sex, let alone what it's like to be a gay man? As I'm not a gay man, I don't really know. But that's exactly my point: If most of their readers are straight women, they're not going to know either, will they? Which means that most readers aren't going to be bitching afterward about how the author "got it all wrong." And hell hath no fury like ticked off readers.

Which brings me back to my main conclusion: That the biggest problem the virgin writer is facing is the fact that she's relying on books, research, and her imagination, whereas most of her audience will have firsthand, intimate experience with the subject at hand. Even with Romance Novel Sex conventions on her side, she's fighting an uphill battle to convince readers of the realism of her sex scenes.

Thoughts? Agree? Disagree? Do you think authors can ever write a truly authentic experience they've never had?

_________________
For further reading on the subject of writing and authenticity from a reader's perspective, check out Lynn Spencer's post All in a Day's Work, and Rike Horstmann's Familiar Territory.