News: YA section divided?

I've noticed it now for a few months. The not-so-subtle change. The in-your-face signs.

The YA section in Barnes and Noble has changed, and not for the better, in my opinion.

It used to be that there was a shelf for New Releases, then YA fiction, nonfiction and series. But a new division has thrown itself into the mix: Paranormal Romance.

I understand that paranormal romance novels have been cranked out at an alarming rate this past year, but do they really deserve their own section? At the Barnes and Nobles I've visited, it's the same few occupying a whole two to three shelves on their own (Torment, Hush, Hush, Halo ... the list goes on). I honestly wouldn't mind this new division if it wasn't being thrown in my face. I don't like that the regular YA fiction has been cast aside to neighboring shelves, entirely separate, getting less recognition. It's as if they're the rejected books, even though we very well know they're not.

So why make such a big visual division?

Maybe it's just me that's unhappy about the change. Maybe it's because I don't enjoy reading paranormal romances. But what do you think? Yea or nay?

Here's an article about the change.

Embracing e-books?

I don’t normally type up random posts for this blog, as I prefer to keep it primarily about my book reviews. However, I came across an interesting article that I thought I’d share – don’t worry, it’s book-related.


“Barnes and Noble didn’t evolve enough.”

If you didn’t already know, Barnes and Noble has been steadily losing money and shares – so much so, that it put itself up for sale.

According to the article, Amazon and other online booksellers stole a vast amount of business from Barnes and Noble because of their accessibility, good reputations, and overall cheaper prices. While this makes perfect sense to me, I have one problem:

"My hunch is that B&N never really embraced the Internet or e-books, tied as it was to the old-fashioned world of physical books and stores. As B&N focused on managing decline, a much more nimble Amazon could concentrate exclusively on the new world it was forming. B&N needed to destroy its business model to prevail. Now it is probably too late. There is a lesson for all businesses here."

Call me old-fashioned, but I much prefer a tangible book, with pages I can delicately turn, than an e-reader like the Nook or Kindle. I’m not at all against e-readers, because I do understand their functionality, practicality and appeal, but I am against the promotion of there only being e-readers. I’ve never quite understood why it has to be one or the other: e-readers/e-books or, well, books. Personally, I feel the two can co-exist. I don’t think one needs to outshine the other; each has their pros and cons.

As for Barnes and Noble, its decline wasn’t nearly as rapid as Borders’, so it must have been doing something right. I think when it comes down to it, people are siding with what’s most inexpensive, the best deal. Sure, you’ll drop a good two to three hundred dollars for an e-reader, but after that initial cost, books will be a steal. Regular books, however, will continue providing comfort for the old-fashioned, but at much higher prices.


So what do you think? Should Barnes and Noble be catering to the e-reading future? Can e-books and books co-exist?