This blog is also a post on my official Facebook page, in response to a spirited debate there:
Well, let’s see now. What you’re looking at are the cover of a free giveaway edition of OUTLANDER, at left, and the cover of a recent edition of Entertainment Weekly, further down on the right, featuring a shot of Caitriona Balfe and Sam Heughan as Claire and Jamie Fraser.
(BTW, the cover on the left was written by me. Random House, a few years ago, decided to do targeted giveaways of OUTLANDER by street teams at public events, and they asked me what I thought about the cover for this promo edition. I didn’t like any of the sketches they’d shown me. They got fed up with me/ran out of time and asked me what I’d like on the cover, so I wrote that little thumbnail run-down of the contents, and the resident genii of the art department promptly turned it into an appealing cover.)
OK.
1. What I’m seeing in the comments from folks about this on (my Facebook page) is a pretty sharp divide over the EW cover, at right, with a lot of people charmed or excited by it, and a lot of people disconcerted or displeased by it. (Make Note of this; we’ll be coming back to this point….)
2. Of the latter group, a large number object on moral or aesthetic grounds, considering the photo to be "smut," "soft porn," "raunchy" or otherwise unsuitable for public consumption by right-minded people.
3. Another large subgroup objects on commercial grounds, expressing the fear that a) this photo is a serious misrepresentation of both the Outlander TV show and the books it’s based on, and b) that viewing this cover will cause the uncommitted public to forever shun Outlander in all its forms because the photo is not properly representing the depth, complexity, historicity, and (as one person put it), "the appeal of married love and lives well-lived." (Stop and think for a minute. Cover blurb: "A gripping story of married love and lives well-lived!" Ooo, I must have that….)
4. Am I perceiving things correctly? (Let me know if I’m misrepresenting anyone’s views here…)
The Romance Issue
OK. Before we get started here with My Thoughts (That sounds pretty pompous, doesn’t it? <g> Still, it is my book, and this is my webpage, so I think I get to have an opinion…). Let me briefly address the Romance issue (since "It looks like a cheesy romance novel!" is one of the oft-expressed negative opinions on the EW cover).
A. I like well-written romance novels. I enjoy reading them, and have no hesitation in recommending them to people—you’ll find several romance authors on the Methadone List on my website (If you haven’t been over there, it’s under the "Resources" tab, you’ll find "The Methadone List:"
http://www.dianagabaldon.com/resources/the-methadone-list/
which is a list of books I feel comfortable in recommending to anyone who asks me "So what am I supposed to read while I’m waiting for the next Outlander book?!?").
B. I don’t write romance novels. Besides being roughly four times the size of the usual romance novel, my books are not (with the exception of OUTLANDER itself) courtship stories, and romance novels are. (Romance novels do not have sequels; when the main characters are mated, that’s The End.) The two unbreakable genre "rules" of a romance novel are that the story should be mostly concerned with the relationship of the two main characters, and that it should have a happy ending (though this term is slightly elastic). Well… sometimes you might get an optimistic ending from one of my books. Sometimes not so much… And while there are all kinds of relationships going on in my books (any novel has relationships), they often aren’t that sort, nor are they the main focus of the story.
C. All of this notwithstanding, I have seen my books sold as Romance fairly frequently over the years. (I’ve seen them sold as Literature, Fiction, Historical Fiction, Science Fiction, Fantasy, Romance, Mystery, Military History, Gay and Lesbian Fiction, and Horror— all with reasonable accuracy.) Largely as a counsel of desperation by marketing people unable to think of any other way to draw anyone’s attention to enormous books that can’t be described. "Romance" is the single easiest aspect of a story to evoke, which is why you see couples on movie posters, TV ads, and book covers, no matter whether the film or book in question really is primarily a romance, or not.
What I mean to say here is— I have a LOT of experience in having my books called bodice rippers and seeing them published (in countries where I don’t have any personal control over the covers) with Really Strange covers. (The Korean one with the pink soap bubbles, at right, was one of the weirder ones, though I admit it didn’t have a heterosexual couple gazing into each other’s eyes….) Cover image courtesy of the Ladies of Lallybroch.
So. Let me say upfront that everybody sees things through the lens of his or her own experience, background, prejudices, and expectations. That includes me. I do, however, Just Possibly have a little more experience in this arena than do most of y’all (who commented on Facebook). So what I’m saying here is not intended to disrespect anyone else’s opinion, nor yet do I intend to come off as condescending, Marilyn <g> (a person who commented on Facebook)— it’s just that I probably have a wider perspective on the issues than most of y’all probably do, just by virtue of having been in these trenches for the last twenty-five years.
What I Think—The EW Cover
Awright. So here’s what I think, anent the EW cover:
a) I think I’ve seen racier underwear ads (mostly in Vogue).
b) If you honestly think this cover is "smut" or "soft porn," then all I can say is that y’all should maybe get out more. If you’ve ever watched television in the U.K., you’ve seen more explicit things than this three or four times in an evening. If you’ve been watching the TV version of "Outlander," (as theoretically you have) you’ve seen much more explicit sexual encounters on several occasions. Were these not "smut?" Is it OK to watch "soft porn" in the privacy of your home, but intolerable that other people should glimpse it on a magazine cover?
c) Starz promoted Season One with "The Kilt Drops (date)," in print ads, ads on the sides of busses and ads the height of ten-story buildings. I didn’t see a word of protest that this was "cheapening” our beloved story, or reducing it to the "level of a Harlequin Romance?"* Why were you totally OK with that bit of sexual innuendo, while the words "Bodice-ripper" (on the cover of a single magazine) makes you foam at the mouth? Is it OK to enjoy male-directed sexual innuendo (and grope kilt-wearing men), while it’s All Wrong to see female-directed sexual references in print?
d) For that matter… look at the Facebook post under (previous to) the one we’re discussing. This is from the EW site, but it shows a still from the show, at right, that I’ve seen reproduced all over the internet since last year. It shows Jamie and Claire in a pose that’s explicitly either pre- or post-sex, and (apparently) totally naked. Did I hear a word of protest about this? Why, no, I didn’t. I heard mass swooning and sighing. So—
e) Evidently (for some) it’s the juxtaposition of "bodice-ripper" and "kilty pleasure" with the photograph on the EW cover that gripes you. Well, I’m totally with you, there— but as I say, that’s been happening to my books ever since the first publication of "Outlander." For a great many people (and virtually all marketing people…), "historical romance" equals "bodice-ripper," and they don’t see or intend anything negative by that term; they just figure that’s what you call "that" sort of book. Stubborn resistance will gradually wear them down, but you have to keep at it— take it from one who routinely rewrites the cover copy on her ads and books…
f) For those complaining that the EW cover doesn’t properly express the depth, complexity, etc. of the story (books or show)… well… no. It doesn’t. Would you like to suggest a pictorial cover that a) would express that, and b) would appeal instantly to a wide audience? It’s one image; there’s no conceivable way for a single image to encompass this story, or a fraction of it. A magazine cover is meant to do one thing: attract eyeballs. With luck, said eyeballs will zip to Jamie and Claire, but will also see the word "Outlander."
g) The giveaway cover that does more or less describe the contents accurately is not one that would work on a magazine like EW. The Atlantic Monthly, maybe, but not EW. Question of style and audience, aye?
h) It’s one magazine cover. To assume on the basis of this that the whole world will gasp in horror and make a note circled in red to Avoid Watching Outlander, at all costs, is… perhaps a trifle over-reactive.
i) (Returning to Point 1, above…) God bless those of you who did express outrage, concern, or dissatisfaction, whatever your motives for doing so. <g> Because nothing— and I do mean nothing— makes more effective publicity than controversy. By objecting and writing blog posts and heated comments, you’ve done more to stimulate interest in the show (and by extension, the books) than the EW piece could ever have achieved had it been received with universal approbation by fans. So thank you!
*Pretty sure none of you who’ve used this particular disparagement regarding the EW cover have ever seen a Harlequin Romance, nor do you know what they are. I have, and I do. (Besides being a lifetime member of the Romance Writers of America (RWA)— and the Science Fiction Writers of America (SFWA), and the Author’s Guild, and a few other organizations— I used to judge finalists in the Historical Fiction category for the RITA Awards (the RWA’s award for excellent romance fiction **)). One of the best historical romance novels I found was THE PRISONER, by Cheryl Reavis. It’s a Harlequin Historical, (published in 1992) and it’s a great book; if you ever find a copy on Alibris or Abebooks, I recommend you grab it. Harlequin romances have very strict guidelines as to length and content. So do sonnets and villanelles. Neither length nor guidelines have anything to do with the quality of writing or story.
** When OUTLANDER was published in 1991, it was nominated in four different RITA categories (it was also nominated for the Nebula ballot, FWIW). I told my husband at the time that it wouldn’t win any of the categories, and I was right: at the time, RITA judging ballots had numbers from 0-6, with 6 being, "This is the best book I’ve ever read; I wish I’d written it myself," and 0 being "This isn’t a romance." Back in the day, they showed entrants what their scores were: mine were evenly divided between 0′s and 6′s. I did win the "Best Book of the Year" award— that was an award voted on by the membership at large (rather than judged), and at the time, there were no genre limitations; any book could be nominated.
Feel free to share your brief comments about this entry or any of my other blog posts. Note that ALL comments are subject to my review for suitable content and approval, which may take several days or longer, depending on my schedule. (In other words, your comment may not appear immediately.) Thanks!
Related articles:
- Outlander: EW goes inside the wild, sexy world of the Starz hit, by Lynette Rice for Entertainment Weekly. Posted on February 25, 2016.
- Outlander author Breaks Silence on EW’s Sexy Cover, by James Hibbard for Entertainment Weekly. Posted on March 1, 2016.
This blog was originally posted on my official Facebook page on March 4, 2016.
So,when I saw those Different Covers on FB from Ew, I’m like Whoa……..not in a Bad way…….and yeah, your right…….in past I’ve seen Racier stuff in different mags…………hell, I a subscription to Playboy and just got the current one with no nudes in it……yeah my Hubby isn’t crazy Bout that let me tell you……….I Love the books…….have all 8 books, the Graphic Novel, the O. C . and I think one Lord John Novella……..this past Xmas was an Outlander Xmas……… and am working on…..maybe my third page in my coloring book……even got a former coworker hooked on the books……..Love the way Mr. Moore and Crew have taken your novels and interpreted them……yeah, ok……Outlander n Thank Gawd, DIA,,,,, but still, I really Don’t see the Stink in the Covers of the mags…….and Yeah, you are right……they make a fuss….Maybe some people need to get out more. OR just shut up ,sit down and read the Books……..Jeez Louise………I love them all…….and will be sorely upset when they come to a close, However, I know That Anytime I want to go Back To Scotland, all I have to do is pick up a book and Start all over again………..
Keep Up the Great Work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank You So Much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Regina
Dear Diane,
I love your books and I applaud the historical work and detail you put into your books. However as an Oculoplastic surgeon I have to point out a glaring error in your latest book. Lord Grey’s eye injury did not involve the orbicularis muscle ( which is a muscle that surrounds the eye in the eyelid proper). The injury involved the inferior rectus muscle and injury is a typical one seen in the eye after a blow to the eye where the inferior floor of the muscle is broken the inferior muscle is entrapped. In fact it is a called a blow-out fracture.
He would not to able to look up and possibly have limited downgaze but would still be able to look from left to right.
I can sort of see how Claire could have fixed the entrapment of the inferior rectus muscle however the pain would have been incredible.
But do, if you can in a reprint fix the error of the muscle. This is a common problem after a blow to the eye, one I see a hundred of in a year and common in children actually.
Keep writing, all my friends have been given gifts of your books year after year. Kathleen
My first of Diana’s novels (Cross Stitch) was given to me in the Lake District of England by couple I was on tour with that were in their 70′s. I had runaway from home on a soul searching missions due to a very vivid dream I had about sea stacks off the Northeastern coast of Scotland 10 years before (I didn’t know this at the time of the dream of course)…
…
No matter what anyone calls Outlander (romance, historical fiction, fantasy) no matter if it controversial magazine covers or very bunt statements of scandal Diana’s has touch countless millions with her books, opened up world unto itself that life happens to her characters just like it does for everyone else (time travel not withstanding)
Diana’s books have seen me through the hard times and the good times and time when I just needed to know that there is a really good place to go where Jamie is Claire’s life blood and Clair was the woman who owned his soul.
Thank you Diana for all the wonderful years of reading and writing that you’ve inspired me to…You’ll always be my hero…
Your story is really interesting, loved reading it.
Carlene…Wow! That’s a story and a half. Write it!
Carlene,
I have never before had the pleasure of becoming completely entranced by someone’s comment on a post. After reading it for the third time, I had to reply. I hope you are a writer, or that you will be in the near future. From someone who has spent their life devouring books of all genres and is not easily impressed, I cannot wait for the day I purchase your first book. Your brief story hooked me almost immediately and left me feeling surprisingly bereft at its abrupt end. I must know its next chapter…does he still pursue you? Have you ever given in? Even briefly? Or wanted to? Have you found another partner to share your life with and if so, does he or she know about Scotland? Have you ever been back?
It feels ludicrous to be so invested in a story after a few paragraphs!!! Please, I beg you, answer my questions, whether it be the instant satisfaction of a reply or the sweet agony of waiting for the book, as a true lover of a great story, I must know what happened next! (And, of course, what your penn name is/or will be…)
I hope to see your book on Diana’s Methadone List soon…
It is a shame that both covers can’t be used.
I prefer the cover that you made. It says it all. I also think it appeals to me more because I have read and love your books. I spend more time reading than watching television.
I do have eyeballs. The EW cover certainly attracts them. Balfe is beautiful. Heughan is…. Well, I dare say he renders me speechless.
Diana, your cover would have made me read your book a lot sooner than I did, had I seen it. Again I am proved that people who are paid to do there jobs don’t know what they are doing!
I really love your books. I have just read the first one and am ready to start the second one. I think that your writing is wonderful. I appreciate the details of the characters and of the historical context that you do provide. I hope to actually visit Scotland, more now than I did before.
The thing about people is everyone has any opinion, as you already know. I think what you are doing is great and the more people that see your wonderful work the more they will get that, in my opinion, the books are more historical novels.
Thank you again for your wonderful mind and keep writing and standing up for your amazing work!
To me it seems that that magazine cover should be left up to Sam and Caitriona. It’s their comfort with that sort of display of their bodies that matters. Besides, we sometimes forget that promotion of the show is largely out of Diana’s hands and that the show and the books are two different entities because the show is so well done. It’s not the show writers who determine network promotion, and the show will still be true to the nature of the books, even if the promotion isn’t.
The beauty of your books is that each reader can hone in on what piques his/her interest more, and this can be different across many types of people. My best friend got me hooked on your books many years ago, and when we discuss them, I invariably recall something that he doesn’t and vice versa. The physical descriptions and heated romantic relationship are vivid for me, while the battle strategies and intrigue are vivid for him.
Those who had a conniption fit over the EW cover obviously selectively tune out the physical nature of the relationship between Claire and Jamie. Many of us swoon over it. My husband, the smart man that he is, bought it for me as soon as he found it, knowing full well where I stand on this issue. Yes, you can see much worse in ads in magazines and on any public beach in America (and maybe worse in other beaches across the globe). And, yes, if they consider this soft porn, well, bless their hearts – they really need to get out more and experience life in all its vitality and passion.
Keep up the amazing work! Your talent with story-telling is much appreciated, especially for those of us who savor “adult” tomes that aren’t written on an 8th grade level.
I would imagine that having your books made into a TV show is like sending your child out into the world, and hoping they do well, and not having a lot of influence in what happens in their lives after that. And I think we longtime readers feel very invested in the outcome, so I can imagine some would be shocked to see there baby semi-unclothed on a magazine. I’m glad of the hype for the show to keep the viewership and have it renewed every year.
On a lighter note, for General Hospital fans, a new character has what I am guessing is an Outlander shout out as part of a new character’s name. I will leave it fans of both to figure it out. But this discovery lead to me having a conversation with my carpool mate that had us talking about Dragonfly in Amber.
Then, in a weird coincidence, when I got back to my desk after lunch I had an interoffice envelope from a division in another state, unknown sender, with a copy of not just any Outlander book, but Dragonfly in Amber. I’m guessing I lent it (one of my babies) to someone so long ago that I have simply forgotten about it. Or since our Interoffice service has known to be so slow, that the book has been forward time travelled from a dark distant past!
Oh, and a comment on genre assignment, if a bookstore a long time ago, hadn’t decided the first run paperbacks of Outlander were Romance, I wouldn’t have discovered the series as early as I did, which would have been a shame! I was hitting the bookstore on the way home before my long train ride, and really was just in the mood for something long, but I read the little opening about people going missing, and was hooked! I picked up a copy of Cross Stich a the Culloden gift shop, and the series looked like it was the only non-official-history book on offer at the time.
Well said!
Personally, I didn’t take offense to EW’s cover. But then again, I’ve read every one of Diana’s books and have not been offended once in reading them!
I’m an avid reader and yes, have read my share of romance novels. Well written can be in any genre of publication.
Carry on with your writing Diana, I’ll keep buying them as long as you have the energy to write them!
In re the cover controversy:
Well, they are married, the characters at least. And it does appear from this cover that we have interrupted a moment of marital intimacy. So let us politely avert our eyes, or perhaps, flip through the magazine for another peek? Such a conundrum. Well, we can certainly read any of the eight novels in the privacy of our own imagination. I mean, surely there’s a difference between seeing this on a magazine cover and seeing this in our mind’s eye. Right?
Very cheesy a turn off for anyone interested in the series.
First of all, I’d like to thank you for your wonderful work. Your books got me through some pretty tough times. Brilliant writing and a true joy to experience. And the television series is the best adaptation I’ve ever seen.
The cover controversy is such nonsense, and I agree with you on each point. Concerning the “porn” notion, I wonder if these folks would be offended by Michelangelo’s “David” if they were touring the Accademia Gallery Museum in Florence…seems to me the cover is also art, but simply a different medium and a different environment. I liked it, but then, I’m comfortable with the human body, and I know the story.
It’s a bit sad for the protesters really. Did they believe the magazine would be jerked from the sales racks? In voicing their opinions, they probably only managed to increase interest in(and sales of) the magazine. After all, we are a curious species…we’ve just got to see what all the fuss is about.
Thank you. I couldn’t see what all the fus was about either. If you read books about relationships at all, you get sex along with it, because isn’t that one of the foundations of a great relationship? I am impatiently awaiting the next big book, ravidly reading daily lines, and counting down the days to April 9th!!! I’ve never met you in person, Diana, but consider you a good friend!
“A gripping story of married love and lives well-lived!” — I love it! Seriously, I’m kind of a prude, and the EW cover doesn’t bother me.
Gillian
@MyGillianWill on twitter. The State Of Wyoming, a political comedy serial on kindle. http://amzn.to/1QPUBJa
After the first episodes seen on AXN Romanian channel, I fell under the spell…
I started to read the books, finished all eight and, like an automaton, whenever the key is turn in my head, I go and pick up the book with the scene I remember in that very moment and start it again …. I don’t go to that specific part popped-up in my memory, but start to read the entire story. And every time is like the first time…
I can’t get enough of the two amazing character you created, Jamie and Claire, Diana and I bow to your richness of feelings and emotions you are so masterfully able to transfer to others , from the love’ first sparks to the absolutely unique mother/child ties, to your capacity of interlace the eighteen’s century Scotland history with the amazing adventures of the two heroes, adventures that, even sometimes make me feel a little uncomfortable (being well above the human limits – at least for Claire) act like a drug to me and, a little surprising, don’t make me substitute myself to Claire – like one does when admire so much a book or film hero, thus wanting to escape from the real life. They just feed me every time with boldness and strengths, with hope that every hardship could be overcome, bit by bit, step by step with faith and stubbornness …
Thank you, Diana, for opening to me, besides the fascinating part of Scotland history, an endless source of joy and soul enrichment, for enabling me to read again and again Outlander books like I’d never read them before
“Does it ever stop? The wanting?” (of reading them over and over…)
Luminita
Diana Gabaldon’s books have captivated my imagination as well as my spirit! I came upon the Outlander Novels quite by accident when a young woman from my local Barnes and Nobel suggested the series. She tried to explain that they were the hottest thing going since the series started on Starz T.. Since I view a limited amount of Television, and did not have cable at that time; I took her word for it and purchased that first book, Outlander. Midway through the novel, I was captivated by the detail of daily life which Diana obviously researched. I am officially addicted to the series and have recently received, The Exile as a gift from my very patient husband! I have read all of her other novels to this point in chronological order! Unfortunately I am
one of those people who cannot read anything out of order!
I am writing today in hopes of finding a few elusive titles from this series…Lord John and The Hellfire Club, The Succubus, and The Haunted Soldier. This would complete the series and hold me over until the publishing of the next novel! Please let Diana be quick!
I do not use Facebook, U Tube and I don’t tweet!! Sorry, but I am a conscientious objector! (or so says I!)
Thank you for any useful information!
Dear Barbara–
Hellfire Club, Succubus and Haunted Soldier are three Lord John novellas. All three are collected together in the book LORD JOHN AND THE HAND OF DEVILS. Hope you enjoy them!
Best,
–Diana
Let’s have a tempest in a teapot! If this cover upsets you obviously haven’t read the Outlander books because
there are more thought provoking incidences between those covers. Some will make you cringe, cry, yearn, grieve, and pray for more. Get over it there are more pornographic images on the daily news report. Never will one photo show the complexity of Outlander.
I agree that most people need to get out more. I can’t believe it’s 2016 and people are so scandalized by a magazine cover. Also, I 100% agree with your thought, Diana, that no one picture or cover can convey the depth of your stories and characters. I think it’s also a good move to show off this type of picture to the EW audience — otherwise they might not have tuned in to the show or heard of your books!
I think the problem people have with the EW cover may be because of the way it reflects on them. Here all along they’ve been telling people that they’re Outlander Fans and when someone asks “What’s Outlander?” they respond with “Historical,Time Travel, Romance.” A pretty calm, generic description. Now someone walking through the grocery store sees the magazine cover and goes “OMG she’s reading THAT??!!” Busted!
But as we all know, the novels are so much more than bodice rippers. Hopefully the grocery store goers won’t judge us too harshly and maybe even spent their time in line googling Outlander and finding out what it’s really about and will possibly tune in for the TV series.
I own a travel agency sell Outlander Immersion tours to Scotland in addition to other trips to Scotland and Ireland. Am I worried that this will smudge my reputation? Not really. Most of the time when I try to tell people what Outlander is about, I ask if they’ve seen the commercials about the WWII nurse that touches stones and falls back through time. A lot of times they say yes. Now people will just know that she has a good time when she’s in that other time! “Thank you Sassanach, truly.”