Does the author matter?
WHEN DISCUSSING NOVELS, IS THE GENDER OF THE AUTHOR RELEVANT?
When I wrote “Brutal Mediocrity: or why no one will ready Harry Potter or the Hunger Games in 100 years” it was pointed out that all the authors I talked about were women. Which I hadn’t thought about. I mean, Harry Potter is an amazing series — does the gender of the author affect that? Twilight series is mediocre at best — would it not still be if a man wrote it?
In talking about books, I tend not to consider the author much less their gender. I don’t see how it’s relevant. Would Discworld still be as awesome if a lady wrote it? Probably, but who knows? It doesn’t seem that the gender of the author is the right conversation to be having. Especially when talking about whether or not a book will still be read 50 or 100 years from now.
The whole gender bias idea in literature — while interesting — is a bit over my head. I mean can you think of anyone in the last 20–25 years who’ve had an impact like J.K. Rowling, Stephenie Meyer and E.L. James? Dan Brown kind of came close with The Da Vinci Code and Christopher Paolini’s Eragon series tried, but neither of them achieved what Rowling, Meyer and James have achieved.
Also in that blog, I mentioned Marie Corelli, a novelist at the turn of the 20th century. She outsold Conan Doyle, Wells and Kipling combined. As I also pointed out she’s being relegated to obscurity. Not because of her gender — you only have to try reading one of her books to see why her books are not widely read any more.
Bestsellers and sexism
Is it really fair to judge a novel by the gender of its author? Shouldn’t it be more about the quality of the storytelling and the prose? And whether or not you care about the main characters?
Whether the author is male or female shouldn’t matter. In fact, it does not matter. People don’t buy novels because of the author’s gender, they buy novels to be entertained. If a novel does that then good, if not then you’ve probably wasted your time.
Why this is not a reductionist point of view
I get the feeling someone may feel ignoring the author is wrong, and that ignoring their gender is impossible. To which I obviously disagree. I don’t think looking at a book on the merits of what’s between the pages is anything other than the best approach.
If you’re in a classroom then the author’s life may be relevant, especially when studying the classics. Society and culture have changed drastically in the last 20 years alone, never mind 4–500 years. So there are times when the author’s life can provide necessary context. Outside of that, though, and the curiosity of readers who want to know who it was that created fascinating stories — does the author’s life matter? Does the author matter?
Is there any value in making it about gender instead of about the story?
This is what it comes down to: what’s more important the story or the gender of the author? I believe reducing the author down to their gender is the wrong move. It shouldn’t be “Oh, she’s a woman that’s why you don’t like her writing.” but rather: “Oh, her target audience are readers who can relate this character, no wonder you don’t like it.”
That to me is a much better conversation because you’re not then reducing the quality (or lack thereof) down to the author’s gender. Which is reductionist, and definitely not okay.
There are cases when the author does matter to the reading of their book, but it cannot be their gender — that reduces them to a biological lottery and ignores who they are as a person and as a writer.
Thank you for reading.
