What is the term for a book that is more mind-candy than anything?
Dime-store novel?
Don’t get me wrong, it may be enjoyable. I often like ‘B’ movies. I often like the books of this nature too. I’m just looking for a nice description.
I think that the word “pulp” applied to books at one time meant literally a low-budget book, because it meant that book was published on cheaper paper. In the science fiction genre, there were several publishing lines that were always associated with low-rent printing and storytelling: DAW SF, Pocket Books, Ace Doubles.
Well, kid’s books. Nancy Drew, the Hardy Boys. Some of Stephen King’s stuff. (Not all)
Potboiler? Or is that too perjorative?
I dunno…“B” movie is pretty perjorative too.
Airport Novel seems to describe the “mind-candy” sort of novel.
Movies were called “B movies” because they were produced more cheaply to fill out a program. Back when the movie studios owned the theaters too–before they were busted up like AT&T in the 80s–they would show a complete evening’s entertainment. The main event of the evening was the “featured” film, which is why “A” movies are called “features.” The evening’s program would also include short subjects–fictional/entertaining, as well as documentary/newsreels–and B movies, or “programmers”: movies leading up to the feature.
So, there really isn’t anything exactly like that in publishing. I suppose, if you parallel the cheaply-produced aspect, it would be the public domain titles: the “classics” that publishers don’t have to pay royalties on. But the answers offered above–airport novels, pulp, etc–are distinguished by their popularity as much as by their pulpiness. While, in the movie analogy, the features were definitely FAR more popular than the B pictures, which were practically designed to just come and go unnoticed; it was rare that a B picture transcended its status and became a hit.
So, depending on how far you want to stretch the analogy, I don’t see any real parallel in publishing at all.
I’d suggest either dime novel or drugstore paperback.
I don’t know about anybody else, but I always equated these with genres: mystery (Agatha Christie, Erle Stanley Gardiner, Ellery Queen), Westerns (Luke Short, Louis L’Amour), romance (any Harlequin). Cheap, easily found pretty much anywhere books are sold (and some places they weren’t normally), quick to read and probably just as quick to write. Somebody made a buck off them, but didn’t expect much more than that, I would imagine.
Wouldn’t the midlist titles be a parallel: the books that are published but not (heavily) promoted and not expected to reach any best-seller lists?
Beach book, or beach read.
This makes sense.
The best-seller lists are full of books that are heavily promoted but fit a B list in terms of quality – James Patterson, Dean Koontz, Patricia Cornwell, etc. I wouldn’t call these people A-list writers, except in terms of sales.
So yeah, I think a midlist book could be equivalent to a B movie.
So what’s the movie equivalent of a popular book that is generally accepted as crap, er, not well-written? Blockbuster?
I agree with Spoons and consider my most recent re-acquaintance with John Saul as an apt example for this thread. And don’t get me wrong, not only do I lurve most of his stuff, but it’s always found much cheaper (and with greater easy availability) than the A-listers. I really appreciate that. 
That’s what I came into say. Since it’s already said I’ll add “bodice rippers”.
I’d say midlist is the best equivalent. It’s more a reflection on the expectation of sales rather than the quality of the book. It’s the publisher’s way of saying “this is the kind of thing you’ll like if you like this kind of thing.”