Author's Gender

[M.Austin]

So while reading up on one of my favorite agents, Donald Maass, I came across something that I found odd:

Q: What do you wish the slush pile would deliver to you today?


[I][B]DM:
A Huck Finn-like fantasy featuring a raft trip down the Mississippi, with magic.

An African-American Lord of the Rings.

A noir novel featuring a Muslim detective–but not about terrorism.

An American epic like Of Mice and Men about today’s underclass, illegal immigrants.

A ghost story that’s truly contemporary—but not recycled Eighties horror.

An historical novel that weaves in scientists and big ideas.

A New York in mid-Century novel along the lines of Empire Rising.

A dog novel as great as Call of the Wild.

A literary romance with a heroine for all time and a tragic ending, written by a man.

The next The World According to Garp, about an idiot savant.

So I was curious why exactly it couldn't be written by a woman? I know it can be, but what gives males an upper hand in writing about a heroine?

Edited to give the entire list.

[Elysium]

Well, there aren't that many romance books written by males. When thinking about romance, people generally associate the genre with female writers.

[jvc]

I think maybe he was commenting that not many men write this type of story, and, more often than not, it is women who write them, and read them.

[Sage]

I suspect it's just so that he can say, And can you believe a MAN wrote it?! when marketing.

Should this maybe go to Novels, not YA?

[raburrell]

I'm going to go ahead and officially feel a little annoyed. Haven't a clue what he's getting at; men write/sell better?
Will peel off my outrage cloak for a moment and try to think of an example from the classics; Anna Karenina might fit, I suppose. Moll Flanders? Daisy Miller?

eta: have fed my hormones a cookie - they're chilled out now

[jvc]

Originally Posted by Sage

I suspect it's just so that he can say, And can you believe a MAN wrote it?! when marketing.

Should this maybe go to Novels, not YA?

Yep, might be a better fit in novels. You can move it over there; you're the boss

[jvc]

Originally Posted by raburrell

I'm going to go ahead and officially feel a little annoyed. Haven't a clue what he's getting at; men write/sell better?

I don't think he was saying men write and sell better than women. I think he was saying it is rare for a man to write this type of story (at least well and for it to be popular) and that it'd make a change for a man to do it. It's just more common for women to write them and for them to become best sellers. I could be totally wrong, though

[raburrell]

Originally Posted by jvc

I don't think he was saying men write and sell better than women. I think he was saying it is rare for a man to write this type of story (at least well and for it to be popular) and that it'd make a change for a man to do it. It's just more common for women to write them and for them to become best sellers. I could be totally wrong, though

Yeah, mine is probably a hormonal reaction. But I do think there's a subtle implication that the same story wouldn't have equal merit coming from a woman, which is where my WTFBBQ reaction originated. Backing out of thread now, a bit sheepishly.

[Sage]

I remember seeing this list before, on the Maass website. Is it back? I thought they changed what they were looking for every other month.

Oh, maybe this is from an interview or something?

[ChaosTitan]

Yeah, I've seen this list before. It was the Huckleberry Finn one that struck my memory bell.

[CACTUSWENDY]

I might be out in left field here, but it is my understanding that there are males that use pen names of females that write mushy stuff.

The reasoning for it is the publishers think female readers will buy from a female writer. I might be talking out of my hat....but that is what I've heard.

I found some of the other examples of what Maass wants to be a little interesting too.

[Brutal Mustang]

Originally Posted by jvc

I don't think he was saying men write and sell better than women. I think he was saying it is rare for a man to write this type of story (at least well and for it to be popular) and that it'd make a change for a man to do it. It's just more common for women to write them and for them to become best sellers. I could be totally wrong, though

Yep. In the romance genre, male writers are the underdogs. Actually, I heard there are some out there, but like us gals, they use pen names.

[jvc]

Originally Posted by CACTUSWENDY

I might be out in left field here, but it is my understanding that there are males that use pen names of females that write mushy stuff.

The reasoning for it is the publishers think female readers will buy from a female writer. I might be talking out of my hat....but that is what I've heard.

I found some of the other examples of what Maass wants to be a little interesting too.

It's an interesting subject, to be sure. Do you use a pen name or not if you're a man writing for a target audience of women (or vice versa)? Will women shy away from these types of stories if the cover had a male name on it? And didn't JK Rowling do this, use the initial J, instead of Joanne, because the publishers thought boys wouldn't want to buy her type of books if they were written by a woman?

[ElaraSophia]

Originally Posted by raburrell

Yeah, mine is probably a hormonal reaction. But I do think there's a subtle implication that the same story wouldn't have equal merit coming from a woman, which is where my WTFBBQ reaction originated. Backing out of thread now, a bit sheepishly.

I think it's more to do with a sense of the exotic. If the quote had been something like, "A dark thriller, with a tight-knit group of SAS troops on a dangerous mission, written by a woman" it would feel to me as if he was asking for a possible alternative viewpoint to the norm, and a sense of something a little different as a result, rather than saying that a woman would do it better. I think here, too, all he's saying is that he wants a slightly different viewpoint and focus from the majority of what he receives, and not implying anything about quality.

[Kitty27]

EEEK!

AA Lord Of The Rings? With African mythology and locations?
I am so there.


I think he meant that it would be something out of the norm for a man to write a romance novel,not that a man would sell or be better than a woman.

[Nateskate]

In the context, evidently the list he's giving is addressing things that are rare. So, is it that males don't write these kinds of novels, which I don't think is the case. Or is he suggesting he would like to see a romantic novel that is seen through a masculine lens, meaning slightly different than what would appeal to a traditional romance audience?

[Selah March]

I feel like I'm repeating myself from the "PW snubs women" thread but...

When Maas asks for a "literary romance novel with a tragic ending," he's not asking for genre romance, i.e Harlequin, Avon, etc. By definition, "literary romance" is not "genre romance," and genre romance ALWAYS has a happy ending. It's part of the definition.

That's why Nicholas Sparks' books are considered to be commercial fiction by those in the industry.

So, basically, he's looking for a more literary Nicholas Sparks with a "heroine for all time" and a tragic ending.

Add an historical setting, and you've got Cold Mountain.

[Toothpaste]

We are having a chat about gender in publishing over at the roundtable. I'm personally not going to be quite as forgiving as everyone else here. I truly think that in this list, the assumption is that if a man wrote the story it would have more depth and not just be a flaky romance, that it would sell better, and more people (including men) would read it.

And let's examine Selah's conclusion that "basically, he's looking for a more literary Nicholas Sparks with a "heroine for all time" and a tragic ending". The implication is that a woman therefore can't write such a book, otherwise this agent wouldn't have specified the author be male. It's as if it's common knowledge that a man writing a romance is more literary than a woman writing it.

There you go. Feel free to lock me in the stocks now!

[Lady Ice]

Maybe he's suggesting that it might be less wish-fulfilment. Because the man doesn't imagine himself as the heroine, he can distance himself from romance a bit. He's not going to go in for hormonal love scenes. Obviously not all women do this, but there is a temptation to tailor to a fantasy instead of genuinely telling a tragedy- and it's natural. That's why some male writers write about beautiful mistresses and tough men.

[Mara]

Yeah, that's pretty stupid. Even if men and women _tend_ to write differently, that's the average of a group, not individuals. There are plenty of men who write "like women" and plenty of women who write "like men." Writing style is not restricted by gender.

If it's sales, I don't see why there can't be an opposite-gender pseudonym in either case. Some people do this already.

[Toothpaste]

Lady Ice - I just disagree with that sentiment. An author is an author first, their gender second. If an author veers into fantasy at the expense of the story then that's not such a good author. Men are just as capable of romanticing female characters and loving a positive ending, in fact most men I know are far more romantic than the women I know.

[ChristineR]

I think a lot of men write category romance, but like many women who write category romance, they use a romantic pseudonym. So my feeling is that he is looking for a "male" take on a "woman's" issue also.

I agree it's strange though--I can think of many novels written by men that fall into this category.

[Lady Ice]

Originally Posted by Toothpaste

Lady Ice - I just disagree with that sentiment. An author is an author first, their gender second. If an author veers into fantasy at the expense of the story then that's not such a good author. Men are just as capable of romanticing female characters and loving a positive ending, in fact most men I know are far more romantic than the women I know.

Men do it too, of course. In a lot of books, the gender isn't really noticeable but in romance, it is noticeable. Romance is basically escapist fantasy- that's why it's so popular and why when you're feeling down you can just pick up a nice romance. In romance, the fantasy is the story.

It might also suggest that men nowadays don't really write good heroines. Not necessarily true, but he might think that.

[Shadow_Ferret]

Originally Posted by Toothpaste

We are having a chat about gender in publishing over at the roundtable. I'm personally not going to be quite as forgiving as everyone else here. I truly think that in this list, the assumption is that if a man wrote the story it would have more depth and not just be a flaky romance, that it would sell better, and more people (including men) would read it.

And let's examine Selah's conclusion that "basically, he's looking for a more literary Nicholas Sparks with a "heroine for all time" and a tragic ending". The implication is that a woman therefore can't write such a book, otherwise this agent wouldn't have specified the author be male. It's as if it's common knowledge that a man writing a romance is more literary than a woman writing it.

There you go. Feel free to lock me in the stocks now!

I don't think he's saying that at all. I don't think there's any sexism involved in his statement other than maybe he hasn't seen one come across his desk and he'd like to. I certainly don't believe he's implying that women write flaky melodramatic romances and a man will somehow write something more indepth.

I think we're all just reading far too much into this.

[Toothpaste]

Then why did he specify a man?