Now, my lovely husband, like most men, does not read that much. It’s a fact that most men just don’t really do books, they are more of a Sunday paper type. When we go on holiday, I get through 4 books in a week and he manages 50 pages and the whole of the previous week’s Sunday paper (sports section). Of course it’s slightly different if the book is football based, or he does like his biographies. The Brian Clough story, the Damned United went down very well.
Anyway, I know that our book has a bias towards chick lit but it does have a male market, which Phil’s readers will support I am sure. And, of course, a bloke wrote 50% of it so he must know his gender pretty well….though he’s telling me he’s getting this chick lit stuff more and more, and I wonder why he’s interested in my Grazia magazine (only joking!).
Anyway, the other half got hold of the newly printed and cover updated version of the book the other day. He’s seen the other one but only as I have passed it on to one of my readers (and therefore lost in time as I’ve only got one back and that wasn’t read) anyway the comment that followed me down the stairs the other night was,
“Its not very big, is it?”
“Not very big, in what way exactly.”
“Well, you said it was 80,000 words, but this doesn’t look very much.”
Teeth gritted I responded, “What were you expecting?”
“Well, its only 226 pages and I was thinking more 400 ish.”
I did point out the print is abit small which might push it up a few, but the main response I held in but thought was “you try writing 80,000 words, mate.”
With this in mind I picked up some of the other chick lit books I’ve got a home and looked at the font size and number of pages. And yes they vary considerably, but, ironically the one I am reading at the moment “Juliet, Naked” by Nick Hornby is actually slight larger font but…wait for it….246 pages. Vilified, me?
So, my small book is now waiting for our next holiday for him to read. It has been promised but we shall see. Shouldn’t be hard, as it’s so small, should it?