Author needs your help

[mortalcoils]

Sorry if this is the wrong place (or, indeed, thing) to post, but I'm after some advice. I'm perhaps best known as an author of slightly edgy/very edgy teenage novels, e.g. Hellbent, Henry Tumour and The Knife That Killed Me. Over the last couple of years I've also written 4 books for younger children, beginning with The Bare Bum Gang and The Football Face-Off. All 4 books are about the same group of children, and are aimed at 7-10 year olds. They are published by Random House, and got really nice reviews from all of the broadsheets. However, they haven't exactly set the world on fire, commercially, and I've been told it's because the titles, which all feature the dreaded words 'Bare bum Gang', have been putting people off. I've been told as a fact that book clubs won't have them because of the 'bum'. The books are really quite sweet, albeit rather rude, in a fart/poo kind of way. So, what do you reckon - should I ditch the bum, or keep on trying?
Regards
Anthony McGowan
(apologies again if this isn;'t the kind of thing that belongs here.)

Totally agree with Roisin there is nothing for young fluent readers. I had to buy The Magic Treehouse books from Amazon. There are Corgi Pups/Young Corgi,Dinosaur Cove,Jeremy Strong and a few Roald Dahls too and not a lot else.

If you could write quality non Rainbow Fairy type books for young readers with a smattering of pictures and concepts that a 5 or 6 year could easily understand they'd bite your hand off. The parents of children such as these are often left to sort their books out(ie buy in a lot of cases as libraries have a short supply at this level).Schools are a little bemused and generally focus on the children still on scheme.

Hassled at your son having enough of Horrid Henry.

Guess what my two pounced on in the library-Sat yup two massieeeeeeve volumes of HH stories. Thankfully dd wasn't around. I quickly jumped in with "you've read all those" but alas on closer inspection they bloody well hadn't-how many has that woman written?????? Just when you think you've reached the end another 10 come into circulation. They appear out of the cracks everywhere 2nd hand shops,libraries,book sales. Surely she must be thinking of retirement soon [clutching at straws emoticon]. To add insult to injury they weighed a ton, I had to lug them home in my rucksack.

For the op my son adored Secret Seven/Famous 5,they also love things with facts hence the popularity of The Magic Treehouse/Dinosaur Cove.

Yes, the bare bum is a real turn off. Is it relevant or intrinsic to the gang or just a cheap trick to draw in the Underpants crowd?

I'm surprised Random House ran with it, actually. Someone must have been asleep that day. It's a shame because I'm sure the stories are fun.

Was your editor very young?

(Also surprised they let it through as 'bum' is not transferrable for US market.)

Phew! Well, thanks everyone who commented here - that is really fantastically useful. Just to clarify a couple of points - most of my work is aimed at teenagers, and tends to be quite intellectually challenging, as well as controversial - Hellbent is a retelling of Dante's Inferno, Henry Tumour is Shakespeare's Henry IV part 1, and The knife that killed me is the Iliad recast.
The Bare Bum Gang books were intended as a counterweight to Horrid Henry, in that the gang are essentially good, and their adventures/schemes always intended to promote the generally happiness of humankind. I also wanted a to put in a second level of (essentially nostalgic) humour for the adults I hoped would be reading along with their children (as do i with mine). As I pointed out, the reviewers from the Guardian, Times and Telegraph saw that, but obviously it doesn't penetrate through to the ordinary book buyers and readers. The lesson to me is clear: the cover is more important in attracting readers than good reviews. I should perhaps also point out that i wanted a more retro, Enid Blytony type cover, but I also always defer to the experts at my publisher - the biggest and best around.
So, thanks again for that incredible advice-storm. My thinking cap is on!

I have a 10 yr old boy who won't read much fiction. I spend a lot of time looking for books that he might like. At the first sight of Bare Bum I thought great a book he might consider. DS is a very bright boy who will read fact/science books till they come out his ears (did you know a goldfish will turn white if you keep it in a dark room) but fiction is a real challenge. I gather this is common for boys.

He loves the Wimpy kid books and captain underpants. More boys may be attracted to a book with the word Bum so I am not sure you should drop it. I am off to research it for DS.

Hi there

I am a children's bookseller so (I would certainly hope) have a pretty good insight on what children of that age and their parents are buying.

I think the problem with the appearance of the books (and I know that a book shouldn't be judged by it's cover but it often is with younger readers) is that it doesn't stand out in any way on the shelf. I agree with dropping the 'Bare Bum Gang' bit - whilst most adults appreciate that many boys do love a bit of toilet humour, some are reluctant to buy anything too obviously 'bum' like for gifts for grandchildren/godchildren/friend's children etc incase it offends the parents (even though it is a gift for the child!).

Maybe play up the children having adventures part of the story on the cover - if you drop the Bare Bum title you could even consider having more photographic covers.

There is a lot of toilet humour on the shelves at the moment but not so much fantasy for younger children after you have 'done' 'Beast Quest' - maybe that's something to consider with your next books.

Do you go into schools to promote your books? That's often a good way of reaching your target audience.

Good luck with it.

So I showed it to my DS (10) and he said it looked 'amusingly weird' and he would like to read it. He hasn't even asked what the book is about. I guess though if most parents are put off by it you will probably need to reconsider. Personally I look for things that might attract my DS.

Another hole in the market is books for bright boys who avoid fiction. Appealing to boys love of random facts (did you know that goldfish are the only creatures that see ultraviolet and infrared. Also did you know that you can't split infinity.)

I am practically forcing DS to read The Graveyard at the moment and whilst he thinks it is ok there is noooo enthusiasm for it.
Wimpy Kid on the other hand is read and re read till the cows come home.

Merrylegs (and others)The bare bum bit is relevant to the first story. It's about a group of boys, one of whom has a sister who wants to join their gang. They try to get rid of her by saying that to join their gang she has to show them her bare bum, thinking she'd run a mile. She wants to join so much that she actually does show her bum. But the boys still don't let her join. She then wreaks a terrible revenge, and the boys are humiliated by being christened the Bare Bum Gang. It then turns outr that the boys desperately need the girl (Jennifer) to help them beat another, nasty, gang at football, as she's the sportiest person in the school. She joins them and the day is saved. It's basically a feminist parable, all about boys learning that there is, in fact, a point to girls.
Madamehooch - the books are quite adventure-driven, and the toilet humour is mainly charming rather than gross. My next book is a science-fiction comedy aimed at 9-11 year olds ...
Drosophila (and one or two others) Thanks for the kind words. My 10 year old would rather read wimpy kid books than do anything else on earth, but they were a good stepping stone on to more challenging things. The Graveyard book is really, really good.
I am a bit dismayed by the conservatism of many of the voices here, particularly the apparent addiction to The Book People's selection. I know they're cheap, but just look at the adult books they promote - great if you're an Alan Titchmarsh fan - perhaps you all are. But remember, most of the children's books they sell are the children's equivalent of Titchmarsh - harmless, comforting mental wadding. Or the latest Jordan. You're much beter off hiting the library.

Hi mortalcoils

I can understand your frustration and, indeed, I share it in the shop when I recommend a book for an adult to buy a child which I know the child will love but the adult will not buy because they are worried about offending other adults. That, unfortunately, can only be changed by encouraging adults to bring children into bookshops to choose books for themselves and by booksellers and other professionals reading as many different types of children's books as possible so that they can make whole hearted recommendations.

I was not in anyway suggesting that the toilet humour be 'tamed down' or the content of the book indeed be in any way changed. Your post did suggest that you were more concerned with the commercial aspects of your books particularly about whether the words 'bare bum' should be referred to in the title. This is why I suggested a possible re-branding. In a similar way, there are some younger vampire books pre-Twilight which did not seem to take off but which have been rejacketed to make the most of the vampire phenomena. It doesn't make the books any less good - it is just making them more marketable.

Let me know when your new book is out. I'd love to read it

"The Bare Bum Gang"
The Big Gang Bang is what springs to mind... Nothing sweet about that. Please ditch the bum ..... I would not buy a book with such a title.

Although I appreciate that most sensible adults might not think in those terms when chosing literature for their kids.

I must say that I find it very hard to find suitable books for my seven year old boy (soon 8). He is not too keen on the beast quest series, he is bored by Roald Dahl, he is not keen on reading football related stories. He now reads TinTin.

I thank that's v harsh re THe Book People. They and Red House have a vast range of fantastic books for kids. This month alone The Book People are selling Judy Blume,Adrian Mole,Jacqeline Wilson, Philip Pullman's Dark Materials Trilogy,Michael Morpurgo,Jeremy Strong,Charlie Small,Enid Blyton,The Little Prince,Flat Stanley I could go on as the list is endless. I'm not sure I'd call any of those the equivalent of Alan Titchmarsh .

I personally hate this reliance on toilet humour to sell books for boys(not suggesting that is what you do). It seems lately to be the in thing.I hate it,it's a real presumption that all boys won't touch any books unless there are bum references. It really sends a bad message on how we view boys as readers. I also think there is a danger that boys will get a constant diet of bad quality fiction just because it has bum references in it ie a bum joke does not a good work of fiction make.

Boys are just as capable as girls of reading a wide variety of books. Some boys need to be enticed into reading I except that but after that they need encouragement to branch out. We started out with HH to entice them in(friends went with Captain Underpants)and interspersed with others, now they love everything,they're not particularly drawn to bum,bogey books above all others. If they're around they might pick one but they'd be attracted by a vast array of other books too. They'll go for HH one week then the next they'll pick something else. DS has currently expressed an interest in Mr Gum if we'd fed him a constant diet of bum books I'm not sure he'd be doing that now.

I think a lot of parents are coming to this conclusion having sat through hours of Captain Underpants,Horrid Henry etc and avoid them all. I think you're a victim of that.

Apologies for the appalling grammar in the 1st sentence,3 kids home on hols,quick typing......

I don't have an issue with your titles at all but the covers are appalling. There is no humour in them

My 9 year old said he would be put off by the childishness of the cover ad think it was for younger kids

I suppose it was fairly predictable that someone getting such harsh criticism would want to criticise something back.

It's a bit nobbish to ask for honest views then start lashing out at us for using book clubs...which I don't, fwiw.

Have we offended you Anthony? My comment was not judging the content at all, neither I nor my sons have read your book. You asked for comments on the title and many have commented on the cover because that is what you see when you look on Amazon. I think you have had some very helpful and constructive criticism.

Having now shown the covers to my 8 yr old he thought they looked babyish and at the same kind of level as Captain Underpants/Horrid Henry and therefore too young for him. He is reading Artemis Fowl, Harry Potter and whatever he can sneak out of his older brothers rooms (Viz annuals and football biographies mostly - god help us if he writes a book review at school!). I don't think he a particualarly advanced reader, pretty average really.

There is some fantastic children's writing around, but i think there is a bit of a gap for boys of this age. So good on you for looking to fill it.

Victor/Battery - Offended? Not at all. I love a bit of argy-bargy, and it would take more than a vigorous debate with the mumsnet pussycats to offend me. I was merely responding as vigorously as I could to the interesting points made. I shall certainly feedback the views expressed here to my publisher.
And just to recap, my concern was that the books got really, really nice reviews from the sort of people who know about children's books, eg Amanda Craig at the Times, but only sold modestly (not that badly, just not world-beaters). I wondered why. You've told me: bad covers, iffy title. Thanks very much. But then some of you also hit your computers in a grumpy mood, strain forwards into your elasticated polyester trousers, grind your teeth, flap your jowls and spoil for a fight. Happy to oblige!

Pussycats?

Straining elasticated polyester trousers?

Considering you came on to MN to ask our advice on why your books are not selling, that is actually very rude.

You write that you concern is that the books got "really, really nice reviews from the sort of people who know about children's books, eg Amanda Craig at the Times"

Which implies that we do not know anything about children's books, despite the fact that two posters have stated that they work in that field (An ex-teacher and literary coordinator, a children's bookseller).

Er, Anthony, you've just alienated a huge part of your target consumer there. Not good.

'A huge part' meaning our huge arses in our straining elasticated polyester trousers.

lol, will you be showing this thread to your publisher? i can't think of any reason why the public might not be with you 100%.

ps can your run that tweet by us again?

fwiw i mostly buy books as presents and wouldn't get a book with bum in the title because it's a bit coarse. we say 'bottom' in this house. [prim]

Oh come, come - don't tell me the mumsnet crowd can dish it out but not take it? I'm a little disappointed at your lack of gumption. Weeping into your hankies because some poor cur snarls against the lash, or bites the wagging finger. Seriously, though, do you only ever talk to people who agree with you? Don't you enjoy a little cheeky banter? Or are your lives really so unremittingly grim that anything other than total agreement opens up a bottomless, echoing cavern beneath your feet, into which you fall, flailing, open-mouthed in shock and horror?
And of course there are posters here who know lots about children's books. Who denied it? My point was only that people who know about books have read mine and thought they were good. Which bit of that statement disses the mumsnet literati? (None of who have read the books.)

And why are you so angry , Anthony?

We can take it, Anthony. And my life is busy and fulfilled, thanks for your concern.

I am laughing actually that you imagine my life being unremittingly grim because I took offence at your rude tone.

Discussion is good, hearty discussion great, bit of argy bargy fantastic.

But we do like it to stay polite. Very British, I guess.