Thoughts from a Reader-Girl: Were books better back in the day?

As I set aside my 4th half finished book this week I started thinking about the quality of books these days and it got me wondering and has me ramblings as well it seems. lol

Are romance books--as a whole--worse than they used to be even a few years ago?

For me the answer, I think, is yes.

Now before I get into it. I know there are some amazing books being released. And I do read them. I like a lot of what I read. Please don't get me wrong on that.

Individually there are still lovely books being written. 

With this post I'm talking the genre as a whole not individual titles.

It used to be that I really didn't have to worry when I picked up a romance book.

Maybe 1 in 50 wouldn't really work for me.

There were so many strong books that got 4-5 stars.

And just a handful that got threes. Rarely did I feel like I needed to DNF a book.

But then something changed.

The industry started taking on a more frantic feel a few years back.

(after indie became a stronger option)

The push to get more and more books out there faster and faster.

To stay competitive. To keep up.

To keep your books hitting the shelves and best sellers lists...constantly.

And I think that's taken a hit on the genre as a whole.

Now days I'll maybe get 1-2 five star books out of 50.

I'll get a bunch of 4 stars as well. Which I'm totally okay with. 4 star reads are great :)

But what has me bothered is how many land in the 1-3 star range.

Ones that are just okay. And ones that flat out struggle. 

Those used to be so rare.

This week I've had a DNF, a 4 star (it was really good) and the 4 meh-ish books that while not terrible just aren't anything special or noteworthy.

2 of those by authors I adore.

I think part of it is the ungodly rush to produce faster and faster.

Regardless of if you're publishing indie or traditional.

I have authors I used to go crazy over that now I can barely get through their books.

And something a lot of them have in common is how many books those authors are now putting out each year.

Instead of 1-3 books they're doing 6-12+ books in multiple series with multiple publishers plus indie ones as well.

There are authors out there that can manage such a schedule and still put out incredible books but they're rare cases, I think.

I've seen some brag about hitting the 16 book mark in a year.

(not just released but written in that time as well)

I have an author in my feed who posted this week about how they still had three releases before the end of the year and two of those they hadn't even started while the third wasn't finished either.

There's no way the quality isn't going to suffer with that.

And I totally get the urge to keep your name and books out there. I do!

But, personally I'd rather fewer books from my favorites than a slew of mediocre ones that were rushed through in order to keep an insane schedule that's either self inflicted or brought on by the publisher.

I want the confidence I used to have when grabbing a book by an author I liked instead of the hit or miss quality that's now becoming the norm with more and more of them.

Past Thoughts