E freebies for men—plus sex, looks and the book biz
The first five of “100 Must-Read Books” mentioned by the The Art of Manliness site are The Great Gatsby, legally e-free in some countries; The Prince, free everywhere; Slaughter-house Five, free to U.S. residents via Wowio; Nineteen Eight-Four, free in some cases, outside the Bono-dumbed States; and The Republic, free universally. Jack Valenti’s ghost must be having a fit.
Related: Yes, marketers have won the war over editors at many houses, as suggested by the latest from a GalleyCat reader. Supposedly, male writers “are being asked for headshots now with their manuscript submissions, from major houses.” At least with e-books, author photos aren’t quite as big a part of the ballyhoo. No back covers.
Sex and the Redo Department: Lookism hurts and helps women, too—in fact, probably much more than men. Sara Neslon, the trendy editor of Publishers Weekly, knows it. The left photo runs in PW today, and the photo to right accompanied a 2005 writeup of her. The PW blogging area runs its share of beefcake pictures, beyond covers. Perhaps more interesting to Sara than ePub, eh?
Also of interest from GalleyCat: “Why can’t men write anymore?”: An alternative answer.
(Thanks to LISNews for the pointer to the Art of Manliness list).
May 15th, 2008 at 6:52 am
Whether an author looks glamorous, scholarly, or lycanthropic probably can influence the sales of a book. E-books can easily incorporate multiple images of an author if publishers and authors wish to include them in the future. Dan Ariely, a researcher in behavioral economics, wrote the best seller “Predictably Irrational”. He created thirteen different mock book covers and asked bookstore patrons which they preferred.
One of the mockups had a false photo of a “strikingly” good looking model identified as the author. This photo was not used in the final published book. There is an author picture on the back flap but apparently it is not an invented identity. An ethical question is raised when fake author portraits are used. Often the narrator of a book is a carefully crafted imaginary being and perhaps some authors feel justified in extending their creativity into the “real” world.
The author V. C. Andrews died in 1986. “Her novels were so successful that after her death her estate hired a ghost writer, Andrew Neiderman, to write more stories to be published under her name” says Wikipedia. What kind of author portrait should be used for these books? A female, a male, a casket?
May 15th, 2008 at 7:22 am
Great info, Garson, thanks. I’m not disputing your premise. The question is whether or not some publishers might be overdoing things in asking pictures to be submitted with photos. What’s more, in the case of PW, could “beefcake” have meant less room for and interest in “meat” (as in substance)? David
May 15th, 2008 at 7:24 am
Ethically I wouldn’t have a problem with hiring a spokesmodel to pretend to be the writer of a book that was actually written by somebody else. So long as I didn’t find out.
Plenty of pulp series were written under house names by squads of different writers. It would just be taking it that logical next step and creating a face to go with the fictitious author.
May 15th, 2008 at 8:14 am
Bill Monks notes that “Plenty of pulp series were written under house names by squads of different writers.” Another domain with malleable artistic credits and concocted identities is the cinema. The pseudonym Alan Smithee is sometimes used by a director when a film is “is taken away from her/him and recut heavily against her/his wishes in ways that completely alter the film” according to IMDB (Internet Movie Database).
Occasionally an author is strangely “cloned” in Hollywood. Two authors, Charlie Kaufman and Donald Kaufman, are listed in the screenplay credits for the 2002 movie “Adaption”. Both of them were nominated for a Golden Globe Award and for an Academy Award. This only proves that non-existence does not prevent award nominations.
As the website IMDB notes “The credits include Donald Kaufman as the co-writer. He is also featured as a character in the movie, and the movie is dedicated “In loving memory” of Donald (at the end of the credits). But Donald is just a fictional character himself.”