"Women writers ... domestic ... dulled ... depressed"?

[TashaGoddard]

There is a certain amount of furore going on in the UK today about comments made by Toby Litt and Ali Smith about women writers. More info can be found through the link below (which contains some responses from women in the literary business and links to other comments, including the original one from the two authors concerned).

http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,1444493,00.html

So... what do you think? Is it possible to make sweeping generalisations about 'women writers' and, if so, can you do the same for men? Do you prefer women writers over men, or visa versa, or do you take every piece of writing on it's own merits?

[Roger J Carlson]

So... what do you think? Is it possible to make sweeping generalisations about 'women writers' and, if so, can you do the same for men? Obviously it's possible. And it's probably true. Remember Sturgeon's Law: "Ninty percent of everything is crud." That qualifies as "most."

The article didn't say published work, it said "submissions." Since a large number of women still don't work outside the home, it stands to reason that much of it would be "domestic." If you polled slushpile readers, you would probably find that most fiction written by men is about workplace angst and most fiction written by young writers would be about highschool. And many inexperienced writers equate 'depressing' with 'good literature'.

The dismissive thing here is the assumption there is something called "Women's Writing." If there were, JK Rowlings, VC Andrews, PD James, and Barbara Cartland would all be in the same section of the book store.

Do you prefer women writers over men, or visa versa, or do you take every piece of writing on it's own merits?I don't make a distinction. I read mostly fantasy and science fiction, and while much of this field used to be dominated by men, many women have broken in. In fact, it was many years before I knew that Andre Norton and CJ Cherryh were actually women. (I guess I'm slow.)

[firehorse]

And many inexperienced writers equate 'depressing' with 'good literature'.

Writers by necessity are more sensitive to the world around us (well, most of us); women are socialized to be particularly sensitive; does sensitivity equal depression?

I read about a study that found that clinically depressed people had a more realistic worldview than those who weren't clinically depressed. I wonder if it works both ways: are people who have a heightened sensitivity to the world necessarily depressed? And if so, are they (we) writing things that less-sensitive people simply find depressing?

I meant for this to be a parallel concept to women who write about domestic issues because that is their primary experience. I don't think I've succeeded :gone:

[mistri]

Even the most domestic of settings can be home to great drama, depending on how it's dealt with.

Besides plenty of women write science fiction/fantasy (just as an example), and I'd hardly call that a domestic/dull genre.

One of the respondents to that article says that Toby Litt and Ali Smith actually said they were disappointed with the level of submissions overall - not just those from women writers.

[Fresie]

Excellent article!

Do you prefer women writers over men, or visa versa, or do you take every piece of writing on it's own merits?

I don't look at it this way. I divide all writing into two categories: creative or not. Inspired or not. Breakthrough or not. In both categories, there're enough men and women. Real creativity, real God-sent genius is unisex. Not creative, uninspired, mediocre -- yes, here, IMHO, men and women produce crap of different kinds. Uninspired women writers, I agree, can be "dull, domestic and depressed". Just as mediocre men writers can be (IMHO, my pick) "dull, over-analytical and preachy". So I see it as the difference between the "truly creative and mediocre" categories, not men/women.

Thanks, Tasha!

[mommie4a]

I have no preference when it comes to which gender wrote what I want to read or already read.

On the issue of what women write about, Maureen Dowd had a Sunday NYT oped a couple of weeks ago called Dish It Out, Ladies. In it, she lamented how few women are featured on oped pages. That may be a result of the oped page editors, who is submitting or both. But it goes to that question about what do women have experience with, what do they write about the most.

Although I confess that I don't follow this philosophy as much as I wish I did, I do believe we really need to push our own boundaries sometimes, beyond what's been successful and comfortable, and into areas we dream or fantasize about or just have never explored. I have no idea if I'm Idol material, but I know that if I get into the finals, I absolutely, positively am going to have to write about things I've never written about before and I'm going to have to write in styles I've never tried before. And I can't wait to have that opportunity to push me to new places I might be too timid otherwise to try.

[Kallahan]

It was a great Sci-Fi writer who once wrote, "It is true that 90% of sci-fi is crud, but thats because 90% of everything is crud."

Let me clarify, 90% of authors are not up to the standards of Stephen King. wether they are female or not makes no difference, even to the ratio.

[jdkiggins]

Whether a man or woman writes something doesn’t come into play when I’m choosing something to read.



I read all of David Peltzer’s books about his horrible beginnings with his family. His story is full of domestic violence and depression. He is most definitely a man, not only for living through his experience, but also for writing about it. Are we to say that if a woman wrote a story similar to his it would have any different reaction?

I hope that’s not the case.



Some writers may write only what they experience, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Beginning writers are always told to write what they know. If that is what they feel comfortable writing, then why not.



I have written about personal experiences with hopes that even one person may be helped in some way by reading something I’ve written. I also write suspense, thrillers, romance, and a bit of humor.


It sort of bothers me that women’s writing is thought of this way. Does that mean I will now have to pick a generic male pseudonym in order to have my work get an eyeball. I don’t think so!

:Clap: :Clap: to any man who writes what these people think only women write and to any woman who writes what others think we shouldn't.

[abwallace]

There is a certain amount of furore going on in the UK today about comments made by Toby Litt and Ali Smith about women writers. More info can be found through the link below (which contains some responses from women in the literary business and links to other comments, including the original one from the two authors concerned).

http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,1444493,00.html

So... what do you think? Is it possible to make sweeping generalisations about 'women writers' and, if so, can you do the same for men? Do you prefer women writers over men, or visa versa, or do you take every piece of writing on it's own merits?

I take every piece of writing on it's own merits, and it doesn't matter to me if the author is male or female. But this post did remind me of something my husband had told me. A co-worker, male, does not read books written by women. Novels written by woman = novels about women and he didn't find that very interesting. So I guess you could make sweeping generalizations about men writers as well. But not I.:)

Toni

[Julian Black]

...this post did remind me of something my husband had told me. A co-worker, male, does not read books written by women. Novels written by woman = novels about women and he didn't find that very interesting.I haven't met very many men who will not read books by women at all (although yes, I have met a few). Back when I was working in a bookstore, however, I noticed that many men were much more inclined to pick up books written by authors with masculine or androgynous names. I don't think they were aware that they did so, either.

Needless to say, I've taken this into consideration when coming up with pseudonyms...

[firehorse]

This is a bit of a tangent, but who here has read She's Come Undone? Absolutely the best job I've ever seen of a man writing as a woman. He says it took him eight years to write, but wow, the finished product was worth it.

And yes, I read it before it was on Oprah. I had the fortunate quirk of fate to work on it during a temp job with a publishing house.

[mommie4a]

Sarah, I read it before Oprah too. I agree - Lamb did a great job. I remember actually looking at his name on the cover a few times in disbelief that a man had written it. (I thought the ending wrapped too pat and quickly but otherwise, I enjoyed the book a lot.)

[Mistook]

I've never understood why men avoid women's writing. To me it seems like a great opportunity to see how the other side thinks - to find common ground - gain understanding - etc.

I have to write female characters, I need to know how they think. I'm intrigued by women's portrayals of both genders.

I think it's true of both sexes that the novel writers (and the screenwriters) tend to depict the opposite sex as in need of completion by the first sex. The difference from writer to writer is in which virtues are played up, and which failings are played down.

Me, I'm trying to write the most self-sufficient, independant chick that could ever exist, and I still can't resist giving her a father figure and a crush.

[TashaGoddard]

I think that there are definite differences between women's and men's writing. That is not to say that there aren't men who can write 'like women' and women who can write 'like men', or indeed writers who can manage to write without their gender being apparent.

My husband tends to read more male writers and I tend to read more female writers. If you did a scientific sampling of the books we read, you'd probably find that he reads 70-80% men and I read 60-70% women. However, neither of us has sat down and said 'I will only read books written by people of my own gender.' and we're both open to anything.

I think the reason I seem to prepare women writers (in whatever gender) is that they seem to be able to build the characters a lot better (at least in the sense of what I'm looking for in a character, perhaps). And I think that a lot of the time that does involve getting the 'dull' (or more correctly the every-day) stuff right. Women seem to be more able to portray the small-picture elements whereas men are better with the big-picture things. That doesn't mean that all women write about is housework and running a home and all men write about are wars and politics. There's just a different angle, perhaps.

My husband and I both love the [I]Empire series by Raymond E Feist and Janny Wurtz and we have both read the whole series probably at least five times, if not more. What's interesting is that when we reread we both skip over different bits. I tend to skip over the battle scenes, while he tends to skip over the romantic bits and the intracies of estate management.

I had assumed when I first read about those comments about women's submissions to this book, that both the authors in quesiton were men. But Ali Smith (who I'm afraid I'd never heard of before - oops) is a woman. And they have got plenty of women's writing in the final book, it seems. I think what got to me was the implication that the domestic was not a valid thing to write about. The domestic can, as many people have said, bring huge amounts of drama, emotion, pathos, etc. One book that springs to mind is Brick Lane by Monica Ali, which is very domestic really, but a fantastic book (IMO). None of saw the submissions that Litt and Smith were talking about, so they might well have been a bunch of crud.

[Galoot]

http://www.aimface.com/ikons/IKON83940068434ed75aa0bae430b7b3079f07b90d0c0c.gif

If there's any difference between a man's writing and a woman's, it's only because typing while wearing Playtex dish gloves is very difficult.

http://www.aimface.com/ikons/IKON83940068434ed75aa0bae430b7b3079f07b90d0c0c.gif (It's a joke! Some of my best friends...)

[Fractured_Chaos]

http://www.aimface.com/ikons/IKON83940068434ed75aa0bae430b7b3079f07b90d0c0c.gif

If there's any difference between a man's writing and a woman's, it's only because typing while wearing Playtex dish gloves is very difficult.

http://www.aimface.com/ikons/IKON83940068434ed75aa0bae430b7b3079f07b90d0c0c.gif (It's a joke! Some of my best friends...):whip:

Get back to work!



:wag:

[Jamesaritchie]

There is a certain amount of furore going on in the UK today about comments made by Toby Litt and Ali Smith about women writers. More info can be found through the link below (which contains some responses from women in the literary business and links to other comments, including the original one from the two authors concerned).

http://books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,1444493,00.html

So... what do you think? Is it possible to make sweeping generalisations about 'women writers' and, if so, can you do the same for men? Do you prefer women writers over men, or visa versa, or do you take every piece of writing on it's own merits?

I think you can make certain generalizations with some truth. From what I've seen, most of the submissions by women writers do lean in the direction this article points out. What it fails to mention is that most of the submissions by male writers also have serious problems, just in another direction.

But the top ten percent or so of submissions, whether by men or women, do not suffer from the male/female biases.

I read mostly male writers, simply because I like to place myself in the shoes of the protagonist for the duration of the story, and I find most action/adventure novels that have a female protagonist are laughably unrealistic.

But I do enjoy women writers, simply in other areas. I love Joyce Carol Oates, Bobby Ann Mason, Agatha Christie, P. D. James, Nora Roberts, and a dozen or so other modern day women writers, along with a few 19th century women writers.