Once upon a time mass-market paperbacks dominated popular fiction publishing. You could walk into book stores, drug stores, grocery stores, even cigar stores and lunch counters, and find spinner racks stuffed with paperbacks. Romance, mystery, thriller, sci-fi, westerns, historical epics, you name it.
It all began in 1935 when English Allen Lane had a brainstorm, allegedly after spending the weekend visiting Agatha Christie and her husband. He launched Penguin books with ten books in paperback, including Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Links. In 1939 Robert de Graff started the first American mass-market line when he began Pocket Books. As this 2014 New Yorker article by Louis Menand pointed out, “[t]he key to Lane’s and de Graff’s innovation was not the format. It was the method of distribution.”
From the 1940s into the early 2000s they were a big part of publishing, and where indeed everywhere.
When I began buying fiction as a teen in the 1970s, all my purchases were mass-market paperbacks. I had built a small library by the time I met my future wife (at an after school job we both had while in high school, no less) and loaned her some novels to read once we started dating, after having discovered we had a mutual passion for books.
Mass-market paperbacks were usually 4 inches or so wide, and 6 to 7 inches tall. Paper quality even in the 1960s and 1970s wasn’t great, but by the 1980s it had improved quite a lot, being more durable and often better printed than previously. They were still quite popular. Many of us waited to buy the mass-market paperback version of a new release by a favorite author, which was usually a year after the hard cover was published. Non-fiction was also published in mass-market. That was the format I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance in while I was in college.
The thriving “paperback original” market persisted into the 1980s and early 90s. For a new genre author, it wasn’t uncommon to be initially published “only” in paperback.
So it surprised me when I began working at the library in 1987 that my branch had no paperbacks in its collection. None of the branches did. Apparently a decision had been made some time before I had been hired to stop buying them. This lasted for several years, so if a book was a paperback original we didn’t have it on our shelves. Patrons were disappointed, but the library had decided not to buy books in paperback because they wore out quickly. It cost money to put a new book in the computer system, as well as affix barcodes and spine labels. It wasn’t until sometime in the 1990s my library system began purchasing library books again.
It was hard because neighboring library systems did purchase them during that time, and we’d hear about it. Librarians want to provide “materials” (books, music, and later, video) which their patrons ask for and typically hate disappointing people.
We did have a collection of donated paperbacks, which we dubbed “Bring-Backs,” which filled a rollout cart with side shelving, and was a hit with our patrons, often being emptied out and needing to be restocked. Fortunately, we always seemed to have enough donations to keep it going.
When the library finally did resume purchasing paper backs in the 1990s, it was just a few at first. It took years for us to build up a collection. And yes, they did wear out faster than a hardcover. But if that was the only way a particular book in demand was available, we bought it. Patrons were pleased, save for the few holdouts who disapproved of the “pulp novels” and “lurid” romances we bought. Eventually, mass market paperbacks had a sizable presence on our library fiction shelves alongside hardcover and trade paper backs.
Mass-market paperbacks are still around, especially in romance and mystery, though sales continue to decline.
I’m self-published and all my print editions are 5.25 inches by 8 inches, so are close to the old mass market-size. We still have a large collection on custom built shelving at our house as well. Below is a photo of a part of those shelves:
Mystery and thriller readers still love to read in print, and that includes paperbacks, though more often the larger trade format is what is available.
I attended Left Coast Crime in Seattle this spring, and there were newly released paperbacks among the hardcovers. My haul of book giveaways included these paperbacks, one of which was the current “tall boy” mass-market paperback.
As an indie mystery author myself, I’ve been surprised to see my print sales being a greater percentage of my overall book sales, in contrast to when I published urban fantasy novels.
As far as I know, print sales are still a very substantial part of a traditionally published author’s sales. Publishers Weekly summed up print sales for 2023 in this article.
Now we turn to two excerpts from the Kill Zone archives dealing with paperbacks, by Michelle Gagnon and Mark Alpert.
Recently, Dorchester Publishing, one of the country’s oldest mass market publishers, announced that it is abandoning traditional print books in favor of digital format and print on demand.
That announcement reminded me of a conversation I had with an editor at a conference a few months ago. She predicted that in the coming digital shakeup, hardcover print runs would be smaller, trade paperbacks would boom, and mass market books would vanish entirely.
I was skeptical. After all, the great thing about mass market books is that they remain almost as cheap (or cheaper) than digital downloads, and they’re ideal reading material for all of those places you wouldn’t take your Kindle/iPad: the beach, the tub, the pool. So why would this be the first format to fall to the digital ax?
The fact that Dorchester is the first to make this shift is particularly bad news for Hard Case Crime, the imprint that has revitalized the pulp fiction industry with semi-ironic works by major novelists such as Ken Bruen and Stephen King. Going digital stands in stark contrast to what publisher Charles Ardai was attempting to achieve–a return to the era of dime store novels you could tuck in your pocket. (On a side note, how ironic is it that Ardai, who made his money via the dotcom boom, is deadset on producing books in print?) In response to the Dorchester move, he’s apparently considering moving the entire imprint to a different publisher.
I was encouraged to see that in the article, a representative from Random House expressed faith in mass paperbacks. These days, most midlist and debut authors are only offered a mass market release. If that shifts entirely to digital content, it would be a shame. For me, the best part of the publishing process was the day that I opened a box to find a stack of novels with my name on the cover. I’m not sure that opening a pdf file would convey the same thrill.
Michelle Gagnon—September 2, 2010
My third novel, Extinction, will come out in paperback on Tuesday. I’m a big fan of paperbacks in general; of all the books I buy, only about twenty percent are hardcovers. The main reason is the price difference. Whereas the list price for the hardcover of Extinction is $25.99, the price on the cover of the mass-market paperback is only $9.99. The difference isn’t quite so extreme after discounting — Amazon, for example, sells the hardcover for $18.80 and the paperback for $8.99 — but it’s still pretty significant for all but the wealthiest book-buyers.
Paperbacks are also lighter and more portable. They fit inside the pockets of my winter jacket. They’re easier to hide (in case you’re embarrassed about what you’re reading). And they take up less space on your bookshelves, which is an important concern if you live in a smallish apartment with a spouse, two kids and all their paraphernalia. (Electronic books would be even better in that respect, but I just don’t feel comfortable reading them. I can’t really relax when I’m holding a screen. I can’t ignore the screen’s presence, which makes it hard for me to get lost in the story.)
Don’t get me wrong — hardcovers have their place. When I buy a book as a gift, I never get a paperback if the hardcover is available. And I love certain authors so much that I just can’t wait for their paperbacks. (I’m talking about you, Lee Child. And you too, Dennis Lehane.) But I’m a pretty patient guy. I’m dying to read Gone Girl, but I’m willing to wait a few more weeks until the paperback comes out. I’ll bide my time by reading a classic or two. (I’m reading Blood Meridian now. What a freaking amazing book!)
Speaking as a writer now, I love being published in hardcover. I’ve been lucky to have gorgeous book jackets for all my novels. And it feels good just to hold the hardcover — it feels substantial, weighty, lasting. But I’m a relatively unknown writer trying to reach new readers, so publishing paperbacks is crucial to broadening my audience.
Over the past year I’ve noticed that a few very famous authors are eschewing the hardcover route for some of their books and putting out paperback originals. Stephen King did this last summer with Joyland, which was a fun read (definitely not weighty!) and had a great pulpy cover. Taipei, a serious literary novel by Tao Lin, also went straight to paper.
And there’s one more advantage to paperbacks that I haven’t mentioned yet: the teaser. After I finish reading a fantastic paperback, I love turning to the last pages of the book and getting a sneak preview of the author’s next novel. I’m pleased to say there’s a teaser at the end of the Extinction paperback, previewing the prologue and first chapter of my fourth book, The Furies. That novel will be published — in hardcover — next month.
Mark Alpert—March 22, 2014
***
- How about you? Did you read in mass-market? Do you still?
- What are you thoughts on the decline of mass-market paperbacks? Do you wish the format still flourished?
- When it comes to print books, do you prefer hardcover, trade or mass-market?
- If you are a published author, generally speaking how do your books do in print?
I did read mass-market paperbacks. I loved searching through them at the grocery store before checking out. Now I read ebooks, not because of the stories but because of the format. Ebooks simply take up less space.
I’m the same, Priscilla. The beauty of ebooks is your bookshelves have no limit.
I read about 60 books per year. I hate to say it but 40 of them will be kindle. My library has a good selection, free, I always have my phone with me, I can read at 3 a.m. (without turning light on), kindle tracks # of days, weeks, and books I read, I can highlight passages and email it too myself, and I can see what passages others liked.
The format for me doesn’t matter as much as the story.
For my favorite author Stephen King, I get the Kindle and then wait till I find it at used bookstore.
Non fiction and comic trade paperba cks is the exception. I prefer them in book form. I have noticed that the binding doesn’t hold up to repeated reads.
I wish it was not the case but new books are too expensive for a few hours of entertainment.
If there was no Kindle, I would still need to borrow books from the library as I couldn’t afford that much every year.
I do think Kindle prices should be lower for bigger authors.
Great points, Warren. The Kindle makes reading so convenient. I’m the same way about non-fiction and graphic novels—print is my format of choice for those two.
When POD became an option for indie authors, I tried to match MMPB as closely as possible, because at the time, that was my primary competition in print. I have shelves of MMPBs as well as trade. My only complaint is that these days, they run the print so far into the gutter that it’s a struggle to hold the book open with one hand (the other is generally occupied with an appropriate libation for the time of day.)
That’s a great point about the print being run into the gutter, Terry. It can make it difficult to read one-handed, which is one of the advantage sof the MMPB format.
Thanks for the stroll down memory lane, Dale. Those spinner racks were great fun to browse. When I was younger (and had better eyesight), I read mostly MMPB. When the shift started to trade paperbacks, I resisted b/c I liked the smaller size for portability and storage. I doubted trade paperbacks would catch on—more expensive than MMPB and take up as much space as hardbacks. Which shows how accurate my predictions are!
Bad eyesight switched me to trade (larger print) and Kindle (adjustable font size). The price of hardbacks is over my budget and they’re too heavy to hold.
My books are 6X9 trade paperback with an easily readable font size, although not “large print.” Other authors said 75-90% of their sales were ebooks, but my sales average is about 50/50, some months paperbacks are up to 75%. Must be my demographic (Boomers and older). Plus at personal appearances, people like a signed book.
On plane trips, I used to prefer Kindle but these days too many charging plugs are non-op so I always take trade paperbacks—their battery never runs out.
I made the same prediction, Debbie. But I’m glad I was wrong and the trade format is helping keep print alive. Thanks for the sharing your sales percentages. Good point about not needing a batter for a paperback 🙂
I no longer read mass market paperbacks. I WANT to, and prefer it, but aging eyes have required the switch to e-book format (plus digital is usually cheaper). As I’ve noted here before, one of my fondest memories is going to the bookstore every month or so to look for the latest Star Trek (Original Series) paperback and I’d come home with it like I’d won a prize (exception were the occasional Trek books which featured little or no Spock—he must figure prominently into the story or I have zero interest—not that I didn’t love the whole crew, but Spock was the be all and end all that drew this non-sci-fi person into the Star Trek universe).
I still buy my non-fic in print because I need to be able to search and highlight it, and that’s much more conveniently done in print. Plus my non-fic purchases tend to be historical reference and depending on how long ago the book was written, may not even have an e-book version.
Dale I love the idea of custom book shelves. I’ve got that on my to-do list!
The fact that any book can become a large print on an e-reader is a definitely huge plus, BK.
The custom-shelving is great—we had a friend who is a carpenter make them for us way back when we bought the house.
For years as a college student and then struggling journalist, I read mass market paperbacks because they were cheaper. I had to wait that year for my favorite authors’ books to come out in paperback. Or I checked them out at the library. As an author I’m traditionally published in three genres, one of them being Amish romance. Because of the demographics for this genre, a huge portion of my sales are in the mass market editions. Unfortunately the discount stores that typically carry this edition are no longer doing it. According to my publisher they’re trying to catch the #booktok wave and stocking more books made popular in that manner. Consequently the publisher has decided to discontinue publishing Amish romances because of dwindling sales (caused by other reasons as well). Readers in this genre tend to be older women and home-schooling mothers. They can’t afford 30 bucks for a hardback. It’s more of a distribution issue than a popularity issue, which grieves me. But I’m reminded that publishing is a business so I’m trying to be nimble and pivot as needed. Mystery/suspense has always been my favorite–to read and to write–so here I go!
I’m sorry to hear that your publisher is discontinuing their Amish romance line, Kelly, but glad to hear you are jumping into mystery/suspense!
Thanks for the stroll into my paperback past, Dale!
I had a sizeable collection of mystery paperbacks when I was a kid. Read every waking moment almost . . . when Mom & Dad weren’t assigning chores, that is.
These days, about 85% of my reading is on my Kindle, just because of price and space to store paper books.
Happy Saturday!
You’re welcome, Deb! I also usually had my nose in a paperback until it was time for chores 🙂
Have a great weekend!
This reminds me of another thing with the types of covers–I think most of us who grew up reading the Hardy Boys can remember the famous “blue spine” hardcover versions they came out in. Then later on (the late 70’s or 80’s, I’m not sure) they came out with “The Hardy Boys Case Files” but they opted to use MMPB style for those. I was bummed that they didn’t follow the hardcover distinction, even if they didn’t want to make the hardcovers exactly like the original series.
Those blue-spine covers were so distinctive. Really stood out on our library’s shelves.
Nice history, Dale.
My (self-published) paperbacks are also 5.25×8″. I like that size a lot. It feels good in the hand, and it allows space for slightly larger font sizes and leading (line spacing). I just checked, and my copy of “The Hunger Games” is almost exactly the same size. But I think my typeset looks better. 😉
Typeset matters 🙂
I do love those golden age mass market PBs (1950s especially) with their lurid, colorful covers. I have a nice collection, including all the stand alone John D. MacDs.
I also have a number of Hard Case Crime editions.
The golden age MMPB covers are so striking. I also really like the Hard Case Crime editions.
In the late 90s, my small publisher made the mistake of moving into the paperback market in bookstores. The arrival of the first stripped covers for a full refund ended that fantasy. They were bleeding money. They returned to trades.
Yikes! I can see where returns could be especially hard on small publishers.
I started as a paperback writer in the 1990s for Bantam, and then the entire division was wiped out. I like MM paperbacks and they are affordable.
I have a number of SF/Fantasy MMPBs from Bantam’s Spectrum line—and feel so much nostalgia for those bygone days.
Interesting history. Thanks, Dale. I still buy print, though have always stayed clear of MMPBs. My fingers just can’t stand the texture of the paper for some reason. Thankfully, the trade paperbacks don’t bother me and are much easier on aging eyes.
You’re welcome, Rose. I’ve notice a difference in paper between MM and trade paper myself.
Good memories, Dale, of going to the drug store and looking through the MM books on the spinning rack. I like to read fiction in ebook format. Although I get most of the ebooks from the library (it’s easy and cost efficient), I buy books written by authors I know. And I still buy paperback copies of fiction that I really love, and almost all my non-fiction is paperback.
I don’t have the stats on my own paperback vs. ebook sales, but I’m guessing mine is more than 75% ebooks.
Great looking book shelves! What a wonderful idea to have them built for you MMPB library.
Thanks, Kay! We were fortunate to have a carpenter friend who built them for us, as a gift no less.