Jeremy lassen ([info]jlassen) wrote,
@ 2007-08-29 22:29:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Part of the Problem?
Am I part of the problem in SF publishing? I'm starting to feel like Gordon Van Gordon Van Gelder here. Anybody care to speak in my defense? I personally am the one who came up with the front cover list that they find so problematic. Never mind that EVERYBODY'S name is on the back cover. Nobody has been relegated to the the ghetto of "just" the contents page. The contents page, which, by the way, happens to be a 50% gender split. Sigh. Will I ever be allowed back to Wiscon?

(Post a new comment)


[info]cmdrsuzdal
2007-08-30 06:21 am UTC (link)
I followed a little of the discussion... dunno, from a female perspective it's certainly a little depressing to hear that even though the story split is 50/50 the women are simply not going to sell the book since they simply aren't as popular as the male authors, which seems to be the gist of the explanation.

For sure, I certainly don't ever expect to see a similar anthology with a similar TOC with five female names on the front, unless it was specifically themed that way.

So... it's not fair but if y'all have to sell books and women don't sell books I guess there's no point in complaining about it, is there?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]lagringa
2007-08-30 03:34 pm UTC (link)
Okay, may I interject from the perspective of yet another publishing person?

It isn't that female sf/ writers aren't popular, or even that those particular female writers aren't popular.

It is that when you are presenting a book to the buyers at B&N and Borders, the only thing those two buyers - the two buyers who will constitute the largest part by far of your print run - the only thing those two buyers care about is how the author they see listed on the front cover modeled in their system for previous sales track record. And while all of the female authors presented in this anthology are amazing writers, they don't have a great sell-through at B&N and Borders. If one of the female authors were Diana Gabaldon or Laurell K. Hamilton, they would be on the cover.

Now, personally, I probably wouldn't have included Lucius Shepard, as he actualy doesn't have a great sales model. But he is a Nightshade house author, so jason and Jeremy are obligated to put him on the cover. If the anthology included Liz Williams - another Nightshade house author - they probably would have included her on the cover as well.

They need to do what is best for the book as a whole, not for any individual writer in particular, regardless of gender.

My two cents.


(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]coalescent, 2007-08-30 03:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lagringa, 2007-08-30 03:45 pm UTC

[info]jonathanstrahan
2007-08-30 06:29 am UTC (link)
The only thing that disappoints me about this, Jer, is that this is what people are talking about when they discuss Eclipse 1. I may be being insensitive, and I realise that as a white anglo-saxon male I'm part of the majority etc, but it seems a fairly minor point to me. No-one's discussing whether it's a nice cover (which I think it is), whether it's an impressive ToC (which, again, I think it is), whether it's a good book or not (which, though I am biassed, I think it is) - it's about who got listed on the front of the book in order to sell it. I'm really not sure why that matters to anyone really. Aren't there more important things to worry about?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]coalescent
2007-08-30 08:06 am UTC (link)
I would love to talk about whether or not it's a good book. Unfortunately, that's going to have to wait until I've read it ...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]ktempest
2007-08-30 06:06 pm UTC (link)
all you white men want to talk about is your own problems!

Also, who is on the front cover is obviously important, as jason says that's what will sell the book. It's the first thing a bunch of people are going to see, and people will judge the book by it, despite all attempts by idioms everywhere that tell us not to.

However, most of us cannot talk about whether the book is good because as Niall pointed out, we ain't read it yet.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]tekanji
2007-08-30 10:32 pm UTC (link)
I'm really not sure why that matters to anyone really.

It matters to me. I don't buy things that look like sausage fests because I find that male authors, on average, tend to write stories with cliched female characters who fall into many of the sexist tropes that ruin fantasy for me. The vast majority of my SF books are written by female authors simply because the male ones have burned me so many times I don't want to risk my money on them.

Aren't there more important things to worry about?

You do realize that by pulling out that line you lose at the internet. This is a person's livejournal. LJ's are places to talk about things that we have interest in. This is obviously a topic that people have interest. Ergo, it's worth talking about.

Seriously, your preferences != the only valid thing to discuss. There's an easy solution if you don't think the subject is worth your time: don't read or respond to it. Simple, isn't it?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2008-02-21 09:37 pm UTC

[info]mevennen
2007-08-30 07:57 am UTC (link)
>even though the story split is 50/50 the women are simply not going to sell the book since they simply aren't as popular as the male authors

Perhaps not this particular set of female authors. If they'd had a contribution by, say, Laurell Hamilton (FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT, please note), it would probably have shifted tons. But the TOC is the TOC for good reasons (and no, I'm not in this antho).

All I can say is that I've never had a whiff of sexism from the folk at Night Shade and in fact, remarkably little from any of the men in the industry (though I have had some flak from a couple of women in the industry, go figure - I'm afraid I can't go into detail on this one). My 2p, anyway.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]lagringa
2007-08-30 03:40 pm UTC (link)
See my comment above - I agree with you comepletely.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]cmdrsuzdal
2007-08-30 05:10 pm UTC (link)
I love Night Shade. I love Jeremy (not like *that*, but he does give good recommendation) I wouldn't think they were doing this on purpose by any means.

But I was surprised that the as far as I saw the responses fro J&J didn't mention for a second whether anyone had even noticed the imbalance or had any thoughts about it aside from the sales numbers. Even a "yeah, noticed that but what can ya do?" In fact I'm pretty sure those involved mentioned that they really, truly never noticed. Which left me feeling a little contrary. Hence the post :)

FWIW, now that I've seen the TOC I may even pick the book up, Sterling, Beagle and Shepard didn't really entice me and I've never read Nix or Ford.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]pigeonhed
2007-08-30 08:08 am UTC (link)
It was asked in the discussion if all the names were on the back, as this perhaps lessens the impact of the all male front cover and highlights the excellent ToC somewhat.

I'm afraid I still have to wonder why even one of those women couldn't have been listed on the front though. If the guys are the biggest names, highlighting them is only going to re-inforce that.

Garth Nix is also a curious case. In the Uk he seems only known as a YA author, so is he going to sell Eclipse to YA readers? Is he going to attract non-YA readers?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]bondgwendabond
2007-08-30 10:36 am UTC (link)
Garth Nix is HUGE -- his YA books have huge cross-over to adults.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]pigeonhed, 2007-08-30 01:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ninebelow, 2007-08-30 02:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rosefox, 2007-08-30 02:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]nihilistic_kid, 2007-08-30 02:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bondgwendabond, 2007-08-30 02:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jlassen, 2007-08-30 04:18 pm UTC

[info]bondgwendabond
2007-08-30 10:34 am UTC (link)
I am very glad to hear all the names are on the back... and this is a fabulous-looking line-up. Obviously, I'm buying it anyway no matter what.

But if you're going to put names on the front, it would have been nice to see _one_ of the ladies there too. The issue for me is that I actually _am_ more likely to buy SF stuff if I see a woman's name on the front, because this is not an isolated problem. I'd definitely be more inclined to turn it over and check out who else was in it if there was one.

I'm not saying this is right, I'm just saying it's a strategy that has evolved in response to reading in a field where the boys often get so much more weight than the girls. The decision here was clearly made from a sales perspective, not an icky gender one, and that's cool, but maybe there's a way to do both in the future?

Anyway, kudos on a great-looking book.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]jlassen
2007-08-30 04:26 pm UTC (link)
It's frustrating, but still a simple fact of numbers. I didn't get a Connie Willis or Ursula Le guin, nor any other "sales-wise" high profile female writers. Perhaps this is one thing we can try and do better in Eclipse Two.

I know Jonathan reached pretty far and wide for this one (As shown by the final contents), but the deadlines were tight and not everybody we asked could meet them.

Thanks for the kudos. I'm excited about this one.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]bondgwendabond, 2007-08-30 04:29 pm UTC

[info]mssrcrankypants
2007-08-30 10:51 am UTC (link)
Not meaning to start a flame-war, but don't the previous two posters see anything wrong with the plea of "even one would have been nice"? Doesn't that smack of tokenism to you?

The editor is going to put women's names on the cover because he thinks those names are going to sell books. If he's involved in the cover design, it's because the publisher thinks he can make a good case about who should be on the cover and why. If the argument were "well, we need a woman on the cover because we don't have any women on the cover" rather than "Gwyneth Jones* on the cover will sell you some books," then he'd be engaging in tokenism and not in trying to help the publisher sell the book.

Publishers buy books they think they can sell. They put covers on books because they think those covers will help sell the books.** And while there are a lot of terrific women including in the TOC of this particular book, none of them have the same level of fame as the five men chosen for the front cover. The cover design is interesting enough that people who like SF are pretty likely to pick the book up and see the flipside. I suspect they won't be shocked and outraged to discover that there are stories by real, live women in the book and not just men as the front cover clearly must be leading them to believe.

*Jones was one of my choices in the poll; I chose her over Garth Nix.

**I, too, am mildly dubious about the inclusion of Garth Nix on the cover because he's known almost exclusively as a YA writer. He's a very popular YA author, though, and if the idea is to attract the eyes of teens moving into adult lit or to attract the parents of teens who've read Nix, it could be a good option. But his reputation is as a writer for teens.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]pigeonhed
2007-08-30 12:24 pm UTC (link)
I don't like tokenism, but my point has always been simple: if only the top names are highlighted, they will remain the top names and nobody else will become a top name.

The fact is that publishers need to appeal to as many people as possible to sell books. Each of those five male names will arguably appeal to more people than any of the female names, but the combined effect of five exclusively male names counteracts that by alienating a portion of its potential readership. Whether this was considered only the publisher can say, whether they decided that x readers attracted by the list outweighed y readers put off only they can say. Or,and this is what concerns many of those commenting,maybe it just didnt occur to them that some readers might be put off by an all male list.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]jlassen, 2007-08-30 04:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bondgwendabond, 2007-08-30 02:54 pm UTC

[info]mizkit
2007-08-30 11:33 am UTC (link)
It wouldn't have even occurred to me that they were all men listed on the front cover. I can't decide if this means I'm hopelessly brainwashed or if I don't give a shit as long as they can write and their names will sell books. Obviously I prefer the latter interpretation.

That said, I have no idea who the last two guys on the list are, and there are a couple of the women whose names I would recognize, but heck, I'm not the target audience anyway, as I pretty much don't read short stories. So it's just as well you weren't trying to target me.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]irishkate
2007-08-30 01:34 pm UTC (link)
H ey - I've been eaten for not noticing these things and told it makes me prejudiced. The only name I recognised was Nix and I noticed the poll pretty much agreed with the choice on the front cover.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]nihilistic_kid
2007-08-30 01:40 pm UTC (link)
Big Name Onlyism is part of the problem, yes, and silly a well. Margo Lanagan is known for her short fiction and her star is on the rise. Beagle is on his way down — when you're known for one big book and haven't done much exciting other than be a Big Name on lots of covers, how many people are really going to go for it.

The people who buy short story anthos are ultimately not some subset of a novelist's fans, they are some subset of the people who like to read short stories. Who is tearing up the short story scene these days, to the extent that the Big Pubs are friggin' launching her via collections? Lanagan. It's the same idea as putting someone who will be hot on the cover of Rolling Stone, and not, say, Rod Stewart.

And putting her on the cover wouldn't have been tokenism, it would have been smart.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]seajules
2007-08-30 03:53 pm UTC (link)
I'm a fan of Beagle's, but I have to agree with this statement. Short forms are not the man's strong suit.

I read a lot of short fiction, and Margo Lanagan is definitely a name to watch. Putting her on the cover would indicate the anthology series is paying attention to the rising stars in the short fiction front, rather than nabbing novelists and hoping they can do well with a shorter wordcount.

I also think Maureen McHugh would have been a good choice for the cover, precisely because she's not a name you see often. As a result, there's the urge to grab whatever has her name on it, because who knows when that'll happen again?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]connorfc, 2007-09-04 06:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]danima, 2007-08-30 08:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]danima, 2007-08-30 08:29 pm UTC

(Anonymous)
2007-08-30 01:59 pm UTC (link)
Welcome to the club, Jeremy.

Looks like the anthology will be a good one. Keep up the good work.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2007-08-30 02:01 pm UTC (link)
Oops, I forgot to sign my name to that last post. (Thought I was on the Nightshade board, where it's automatic.) So let me welcome you again to the club.

---Gordon V.G.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]ktempest
2007-08-30 06:12 pm UTC (link)
I'm really afraid to know what club this is. Oh shit, I'm about to say something REALLY snarky and I don't wanna, so I'll just stop.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]pantryslut, 2007-09-04 08:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ktempest, 2007-09-04 09:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]pantryslut, 2007-09-04 08:41 pm UTC
oh, god, do we really have to fight about this?
[info]eac
2007-08-30 02:54 pm UTC (link)
I find it depressing that we have to have a fight about the number of women's names on the front cover of one anthology. Are women SF writers really in such a fragile state? (Note that I know nothing about the markets.)

When I saw the poll I knew it was going to be a gender problem, but I almost certainly wouldn't have thought of it myself. I think the first thing people do with an anthology that looks interesting is read the back and flip to the TOC. I certainly don't think you've buried the women here.

On the other hand, I'm not much of a short story reader, and except for the fact that it's Nightshade's book, only Jones' name on the front cover would have absolutely moved me to pick up the book.


(Reply to this)


[info]onyxhawke
2007-08-30 03:25 pm UTC (link)
Did you see?

http://mizkit.livejournal.com/269917.html

Smart lady.

$$$ makes the world go round, you can eat fair food, but 'fair' business feeds no one.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]lagringa
2007-08-31 01:18 pm UTC (link)
I agree completely.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]sclerotic_rings
2007-08-30 03:28 pm UTC (link)
Hhhhhhh. It's nice to see that in a business that's desperate for new readers, or in fact for anyone to be reading SF and fantasy who doesn't have plans to write it as well, that everyone has their priorities in order. After all, it's important that we give more attention to the correct people who should be hyped on the front cover than, you know, making sure that the fucking book actually gets purchased and read.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]coffeeandink
2007-08-30 03:34 pm UTC (link)
And of course who is hyped on the front cover has no relation to browsers in stores actually picking up the book, purchasing it, and reading it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]sclerotic_rings, 2007-08-30 03:37 pm UTC

[info]ktempest
2007-08-30 06:03 pm UTC (link)
No, you won't be allowed back to WisCon. I'll make sure of it! We'll put some angels with flaming swords outside of the Concourse and they'll be wearing Nightshade t-shirts so they'll know exactly what you look like!!

ahem.

Though I feel that Jason's response was less than stellar, I don't think you guys are as bad as Gordon van Gelder. After all, I *like* you. That's really the only barometer you need.

I do think that it's a problem whenever you have a situation such as this and you choose to only represent one gender on the cover because that sends a message. many people will only see the message "Buy this book for these awesome authors!" but others will see "We feel that only these authors are the most important and they are all men!" It's a problem if it was done unconsciously, just because unconscious bias is so last month. If, when choosing who would go on the front, you gave a thought to the fact that there were no women but really, truly felt that the book would sell more with those five names and despite the inclusion of women, then I don't know that anyone can ask you to do more. Well, they could ask you to include one of the female authors, anyway. Only you can tell me if you and/or Jason felt that the loss of sales from people who went "Ugh, no women on the cover!" would be less than the loss of sales from not including one of those names and putting Kathleen or Eileen or Gwyneth or Ellen there instead.

*patpat* do not be sad, my friend. I'm sure they will let you back into Wiscon. But they may talk smack about you in all of the panels.

(Reply to this)


[info]jamiam
2007-08-30 07:32 pm UTC (link)
Dude, just say you're sorry, it didn't occur to you at the time, you're appropriately embarrassed etc. etc., and you'll try to keep it in mind next time.

And, uh, try to keep it in mind next time.

Please come back to WisCon.

(Reply to this)


[info]ramurphy
2007-08-30 10:27 pm UTC (link)
I have the honor of having been called, in the media, a "left-leaning liberal feminist". Now then, the person who called me that intended that description to be a disparaging one, but indeed, it is entirely accurate.

You know what? I don't read science fiction except by accident. Know what else? I don't read short stories except by accident. So I don't know -any- of the authors listed, front or back. My opinion is based, then, solely on whether you're a bad guy for listing five men on the cover and not listing the five women on the cover.

And I don't think you're a bad guy. I think that if the male writers are better known and will draw more readers, then they're the ones whose names ought to be highlighted. I think the discussion is somewhat absurd, truth to tell. As a left-leaning liberal feminist, I must say that an anthology of short stories by science fiction writers is not, in my opinion, a political statement and shouldn't be made into one by insecure people desperately trying to show how fair-minded they are.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]lagringa
2007-09-01 01:34 pm UTC (link)
Oh my God - AMEN!

This discussion is ridiculous.

Where are the folks outraged at the lack of Asians on the cover or the lack of African Americans in the book at all? Everyone looks at things through their own particular bias lens and this is no different.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]maryrobinette
2007-08-31 03:55 am UTC (link)
That's a gorgeous cover.

(Reply to this)


[info]annafdd
2007-08-31 06:04 am UTC (link)
I'm really bothered by the tone of this discussion, because I'm pretty damn sure you're one of the good guys.

So I'll try to ask a question: if it had occurred to you that you had no women on the cover early enough, would you have stopped and thought about it? Would it had been a problem? Would there had been panicked discussion in your editorial corridors with people scratching their heads and wailing?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]lagringa
2007-08-31 01:21 pm UTC (link)
I know that it didn't occur to most women readers I know outside the blogosphere - women who work in publishing and bookstore primarily - and when I pointed it out to them, they kind of scratched their heads and said "Huh. Oh, well, who cares? As long as the book sells." And yes, some of the women I showed it to were pretty rabid feminists.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
(no subject) - [info]annafdd, 2007-08-31 01:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tekanji, 2007-09-01 01:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]lagringa, 2007-09-01 01:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tekanji, 2007-09-01 02:09 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]lagringa, 2007-09-01 02:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tekanji, 2007-09-01 02:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]lagringa, 2007-09-01 02:51 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tekanji, 2007-09-01 03:05 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]lagringa, 2007-09-01 10:28 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tekanji, 2007-09-01 10:39 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sinboy, 2007-09-03 06:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2007-09-01 12:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2007-09-01 12:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lagringa, 2007-09-01 01:40 pm UTC
Cover names
[info]mattkressel
2007-08-31 02:40 pm UTC (link)
I ran into this problem for Sybil's Garage No. 4, in that I couldn't fit all the authors' names on the cover and thus had to decide which ones to put there. I was worried that some authors might feel this was unfair being listed as "& more." In some ways, writing is a name game, a struggle to get people and publications to recognize your name. Not being listed on a cover could, I imagine, be bothersome.

I haven't decided what the cover will look like for issue 5, but I've considered putting everyone on the cover this time (all 16 or so people), or no one. Putting the most popular authors there is a difficult trade off. You hope that the names will cause people to pick up the book/magazine, but you run the risk (see this thread) of angering the "and more" people for reasons that go beyond gender. Would you buy a magazine that had NO names on the cover?

For our upcoming anthology, PAPER CITIES, we opted to put only the editor's name on the cover, Ekaterina Sedia, and all the names on the back. Yes, having Hal Duncan's and Catherynne M. Valente's name in big bold letters will sell books, but what of the nineteen other authors who have AMAZING stories (cough, cough, plug, plug). Plus, the cover is so beautiful looking that the names would have covered up too much of the image. So we opted to put all the names on the back. Maybe we'll sell a few less books that way, but it's very fair to all involved. And, well, how hard is it to turn a book over?

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…