Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
DO READERS NEED to be told what is good fiction and what is not? Consider a world where JK Rowling could call herself Joanne Rowling, author of Harry Potter, or her book The Casual Vacancy could have been critically analysed without referencing what she had written before? Did those who wrote harsh criticism of her adult novel get smug satisfaction for pulling the hugely successful author down?
Either way her book was always going to be a number one bestseller for curiosity value if nothing else. Last week, the UK’s Sunday Times revealed the infamous author had written a book under a different name, a man’s, no less. So, is it a master stroke and marketing dream writing a crime novel under the pseudonym, Robert Galbraith, and what exactly has she highlighted?
Writing under a man’s name has liberated her. I wonder is it the fact that the book only sold 1,500 copies that pushed for the lid to be lifted.
Ms Rowling may feel a certain sense of approval that her work achieved merit under a different pen name but she has nothing to prove to herself or anyone. Despite the huge marketing machine that made her Harry Potter novels massive success, she gave hours of pleasure to millions of readers no matter what the critics thought. That is the true merit of being a good writer.
But I ask the reading public to consider the real Robert Galbraith, because he is out there and so is Joanne Rowling. Consider their plights for a moment before you decide to purchase your next read. JK is going to cash in hugely now as her coup has created enough excitement and nobody is going to criticise a work that has already been given the critics seal of approval because surely that would be admitting that the Emperor’s New Clothes were really his birthday suit.
It is sad that she had to use a man’s name to achieve critical acclaim in this new genre but this is not a feminist issue as there are plenty of successful men writing women’s fiction under female pen names. What it does say is that readers and critics can pigeon-hole authors depending on their names and herein lies the problem.
Prejudice exists and petty snobbery and standards are rife in all forms of the arts – especially literature. For anyone who doubts this perhaps consider the experiment carried out by The Washington Post in 2007. One of the world’s most acclaimed violinists, Joshua Bell, played in a subway station at rush hour on his $3,500,000 violin.
The pieces he played were by Bach and he had played them two nights previously to a packed theatre where seats were $100 a piece. However taken out of context few noticed him play in the subway. Even fewer stopped to throw him a coin. In fact it was only the children who had no pre-conceived opinions on good or bad music that seemed to be interested in what he was performing. One little child who stopped was the most anxious to listen but was pulled along – no doubt he is of similar spirit to the little boy who laughed at the Emperor’s New Clothes.
(YouTube/WashingtonPost)
The experiment carried out by JK begs two major questions. Do we need to be told what is quality art or literature as we get older? And how does the real Robert Galbraith feel? After spilling his heart into a novel, crafting it for hours, finally getting a publisher to take it and after getting that publisher to market it as hard as possible and putting it in the hands of top reviewers – is he meant to be delighted to sell 1,500 copies?
In this day and age he would not work back his advance which was probably somewhere between £5,000 and £10,000 – if he was lucky. Not exactly a fortune for a year or more work. So spare a thought for the real Robert Galbraiths out there that don’t have a trump card like JK and be true to your own taste – not what you are told is good art.
Michelle Jackson is the author of five bestselling novels and co-author of What Women Know – a book of wisdom for women. She is a teacher, travel-writer and panellist on TV3 Midday. For more information see www.michellejackson.ie . Her new novel is 5 Peppermint Grove and available in all good bookshops now published by Poolbeg press €9.99.
She didn’t “identify herself” there was a leak from the firm of lawyers she uses. You don’t severely criticise a firm of lawyers in a marketing stunt and acuse them of being unable of keeping things private.
Very true . They ducked up cause if they didn’t she’s in for one hell of a legal bill .
She wrote under JK rather than Joanne so that boys would read Harry Potter. Lots of boys refuse to read books written by women or books that have any “girly” colours or designs on the cover.
Not if they’re raised correctly they don’t!
Got nothing to do with how boys are raised.you boys will play with dolls and such quite happily, but at 12 or 13 they have a rep to protect!
Blame lynx ads if anything!
It is more the rep than anything. They don’t want to be seen reading that stuff. A lot of children only visit libraries when brought there by school and they don’t want to be seen taking girly books back to the classroom. It’s all about marketing. Pepsi max and diet Pepsi are the same but one is marketed at men and one at women!
Why not teach young kids to read good books (regardless of what gender wrote them) by reading withem instead of letting them watch tv with ads like that? :)
Good books are about opinion and tastes. People should be happy to see their children wanting to read anything and not decide what is good for them! In my experience, young children will read anything but from about 10 upwards girls will read whatever they want but boys either stop reading as much or stick to the whole “boyish” stuff.
Paul you may have a some point but there’s reality to deal with too.
I think she did it because she wanted to know if she really was any good as a writer without the huge PR machine to back her up.
I can see why. Just look at the amazon reviews of the Galbraith book. Before it was known it was her under a pen name the reviews focused on the actual book. After the leak it became a character assassination of her. Most people leaving negative reviews hadn’t even read the book.
Her lawyers scored a massive own goal as I don’t think it’ll be long till Ms Rowling is under new representation.
You hit the nail on the head
I’d love to know what JK has done to deserve the title “infamous author.” Seems a tad dramatic.
Steven king writes under a different name ( Richard Bachman) why isn’t he criticised? It gives someone freedom to change genres it find out how they’d do without the game of their name. Either way she’s a great author. I don’t understand the need for news to focus on slandering people for such stupid things when there are more important things in life to focus on.
That’s probably why she did it. She’s so closely linked with the Harry Potter series, and rightly so, but it shouldn’t mean that we assume she can’t do anything else. If it’s anywhere near as good as Harry Potter then it’ll be fantastic to see what else she can come out with.
Men writing the soap and movie story lines for female characters has resulted in improbable dumbed down sexual behaviour being depicted.
I think there is far more to it than that. Some of the best writers in the world, or the history of writing, can write outside their gender/ race/ or faith, a few good examples being Roddy Doyle or Joss Whedon, who are often rightfully complimented on their writing of women, or Ernest Tidyman, the creator of Shaft, and one of the few white people to receive an NAACP award. (A lot of people were surprised to learn he was not black.)
A good writer can write anything. Sadly, with soap operas, and movies, far too often they do not employ a ‘good’ writer. A lot of the time it is frustrating to see certain soap operas write atrocious storylines.
Sadly, what can often really mess up any kind of fictionalised TV show, is the actors involved. There is a great series on blip.tv talking about Charmed (that old TV show with Alyssa Milano, and Shannen Doherty) which delves into how the show was completely ruined by the three lead actresses(all women). Once they became producers on the show, it went from a show with potential, to absolutely horrendous. The main problem was it tried to masquerade itself as a show that ‘empowered’ women, when actually, it was a show that demeaned them, and had them condemn male sexist behaviour, whilst the 3 lead women committed far worse, sexist and misogynistic behaviour towards men. Sometimes the writers have to contend with huge, undeserved, egos, whilst trying to do their job, and a great script can get tossed in the bin if an actor/ actress won’t do it.
There are a pseudonyms here too.
The woman is a seriously talented writer. Many kids first books to read were the Harry Potter series.
When I was a kid and saw books the size of the Harry Potter ones I would have tried every trick in the book (no pun intended), to avoid reading it so its great that pretty much all my nephews nieces etc have read them.
There are many top writers who use pseudonyms. And a lot of good books dont immediately sell well. When it comes to books I think word of mouth is the best form of advertising.
Good article, I agree with the last paragraph in particular. JK may feel miffed, rightly or wrongly, but at least she was and is fortunate enough to have a willing and large audience for her work. I don’t know if this was a PR stunt driven by greedy publishing houses or a genuine indiscretion on behalf of some silly lawyer, but the end result is the same. You can’t argue with success.
…few pseudonyms
Why do you say she is an ‘infamous’ author?
At least JK Rowling hasn’t resorted to writing tetchy articles about fellow authors to generate publicity for their own books.
Great marketing ploy
It was a publicity stunt. And it was quite badly done.
She doesn’t need a publicity stunt: if she wanted the book to sell by the sh1tload all she had to do was put her name on it from the start
Why didn’t she use her own name and smile all the way to the bank. If she has too much money lots of charities would gladly accept the proceeds. She knows she can write.
Maybe a personal challenge.
Plus she gives millions to charity anyway, and she chooses to stay living in the UK thereby paying a hell of a lot more tax than she would if she became a tax exile. Bono take note.
Yeah, I saw that interview she did on The Daily Show, and it was inspiring and commendable. She spoke about how she lived off of benefits while writing Harry Potter and being out of work with a child to raise, and she said the reason she stays in the UK is because she can pay taxes, give to charity, and, essentially, pay back the money that helped her get to where she is.
She’s a nice lady. I have to admit, I never read any of her work, but I wish her well in her endeavours.
She didn’t, it was a very well executed publicity stunt!
Sorry for the typos (bleedin’ iPhone!)
The same reason i do….
have your say