VIDA Statistics redux: Two Possible Solutions and One Offer4 comments

February 29th, 2012

After thinking about the VIDA statistics yesterday, I have been mulling strategies for solving the problem.  One solution bandied about, convincingly, is obvious: hire more women editors.

As someone who scrolls through job listings regularly, and who also reads up on who has been hired where, I noticed a discrepancy: many people are hired for editor jobs for which I never saw an advertised position. In other words, jobs are not publicly listed. Applicants come from informal solicitations, word of mouth, inside: in other words, networks. If you are not in the network, you will never have a chance to put your hat in the ring. As many editors are male, they tend to have male-dominated networks (so goes the theory).

Ergo: either more women need to be in these networks or publishers should make it a practice to publicly post their job opportunities, and look at applications that come from people they do not know.

Another way to amp up the numbers would be to help women approach publications and pitch ideas for articles and reviews. It took me years to figure out how to do this.  In some cases, it is surprisingly easy to get an idea to an assigning editor.

Good resources to learn how to pitch publications are  mediabistro’s “How To Pitch” features and Freelance Success. These are two (subscription required) sources that I used to learn the ropes. I was also aided by other more experienced writers who shared with me their queries (and I have since done the same for less experienced writers who ask me for this help, as well as offering  workshops).

Are you a woman hoping to publish in more publications? Here’s an offer. Look at where I have published (many clips are found here) and here. If you have an idea for one of those publications, contact me. I’ll write back and tell you the story of how I landed the assignment. update: I posted more detailed information about pitching here. 

The Latest VIDA Statistics: What Are The Interesting Questions To Ask?1 comment

February 28th, 2012

The VIDA Statistics for 2011 were published today, and the numbers look bad for women, who write or are written about far less often than men.

The discussion of women contributors to big literary publications, and how often books by women are reviewed, is tiresome but necessary. The statistics, laid bare, are striking. I’ve written about the dearth of women in literary journalism before, in a piece called “Where Are The Queens Of Non-Fiction?”

But what story do these statistics tell? The most common backstories are these:

  • male editors prefer to assign men stories, and reviews by male authors
  • the publications don’t take women seriously
  • the publications, and the editors, are sexist
  • topics that women want to write about are deemed “less serious and important” than ones men write about
  • fewer women are mentored and encouraged in the world of these publications than are men
These are all possible explanations, narratives and analyses of the piece charts VIDA produced.
There are other compelling arguments to make as well:
  • women don’t pitch stories to these publications as often as do men
  • women do not self-promote themselves enough to get the attention of these publications
  • women have a harder time taking rejection, and thus get discouraged more easily than do men.
 I have a horse in this race, so I’m glad the discussion comes up a few times a year, explanations are bandied about, and people weigh in to add to the list of possible reasons and solutions.
Could it simply be that publishing remains an old boys club? That, to a greater degree than other professions–say law or medicine or academia–it has resisted including women its highest ranks? I’m tempted to make this conclusion.
Then the next question becomes, for me, a more interesting one: why? why has publishing been slower than other areas to include women? It is certainly more female-friendly in cliched ways than many other professions. Is it because it is more of a closed world, reliant on networks and informal connections?  What is it about literary publications, or publishers, or editors, that leads to this rather puzzling situation?

Inbox: A Reminder2 comments

February 26th, 2012

Mary Beard wrote a terrific post about her email inbox for the TLS called “A Don’s Life”

Six year ago I wrote a snippet of fiction based on my inbox. I pulled up the old file after reading Beard’s piece. I suppose it would be of most interest to professors who have done online dating?

INBOX

 118. re: letter of recommendation? Avi. “Just checking to see if you’ve written that letter of recommendation yet.”

117.Continental.com  “We do not have any specials from Cleveland this week.”

116. re: Tonight! Dave. “Thanks for your nice words. I had a good time too. I guess I just don’t have the emotional energy. I hope you have a great rest of your summer.”

115 re: Candidate Interview Schedule. “Anne: I know you’re very busy, but please ensure you can attend the interview with our latest candidate on July 28.”

114. Our Trip.  Mom and Dad.  “We will be at the Omni Downtown Baltimore from 5:00 pm July 11 until approximately 10:30 July 14. We will be reachable via email. The hotel room number is 314. Toll Free Number is 800 443 7014. The direct line is 330 865 7908.

113. Tonight! Dave. “I’ll see you at 8:00 tonight, and just to show how intrepid I am I will drive there one-handed and with my eyes partially closed!”

112. letter of recommendation? Avi. “Would you be willing to write me a letter of recommendation?”

111   GET YOUR RECEIPTS IN SOON! Cigna Insurance. “Our records show that you have not”

110. How about Saturday? Dave. “I love your emails. The prospect of meeting has me a-flutter.”

 

Noisy Writing Is Nothing NewNo comments yet

February 25th, 2012

Awhile back I jokingly suggested on twitter that we should replace the phrase “Luddite” with “Franzen.” Sure enough, Franzen  serves as the metaphor for the “great writer who has no truck with technology” in the opening of this piece,  in today’s New York Times, “A New, Noisier Way of Writing”

The article caused me to roll my eyes at the newspaper. This might be because my essay from last month, “Why Authors Tweet,” makes the opposite argument. I disagree with much of the piece, but this line best sums up its misunderstanding of history and writing:

“But if the writing world becomes just another segment of the market economy, with writers compelled, as they increasingly are, to be entrepreneurs and marketers, its essential character will change.”

What essential character would that be? One that is “outside the market economy”? Okay right now you are thinking: Emily Dickinson! To which I reply, “Yes, yes but is she not always cited, because she is the exception to the rule?”

Writing is of the world. Always has been. So too are writers. Chances are, if you have read a piece of writing, it has been part of the market. Authors eat and shit and, yes, waste time on the internet (or watch too much tv or drink too much or whichever daily struggle you imagine), just like the rest of us. It is the world that writers need, else of what would they write?

The idea of solitude is one born of the noisy world; you cannot have one without the other. The noise is what writers make signals out of. Coelho and Naipaul and Franzen–the writers cited in the piece? Their books are their intellectual property, for which they have signed contracts, exchanged grubby dollars.

Read literary history and try to find that writer secluded from the market, the author who didn’t have to promote himself.  Yes, even before the age of twitter, the space apart, the mind unfettered, the silence of pure art– myths every one.

Hating commerce and the business of life is a very worldly stance, anyway: you can’t have one without the other. And speaking of which, see this very noisy and hilarious post, Things Jonathan Franzen Says Are Bad For Society”

 

 

 

New Lingua Franca Redux1 comment

February 23rd, 2012

I’ve been chatting, thinking, scheming. I am wondering how cool something like this would be. (For my earlier thoughts about my dreams for a NLF, see the previous post)

THE NEW LIBERAL ARTS (title placeholder):
AN ONLINE MAGAZINE THAT IS LIKE TAKING A COURSE (subtitle placeholder)

Table Of Contents

COURSE CATALOG:

Fall 2012: THE HISTORY OF THE BOOK
Spring 2013: WHAT YOU NEVER LEARNED ABOUT AMERICAN HISTORY
Summer 2014: ?
Fall 2013: ?

COURSE CONTENTS

Prerequisites:

–One editor pick, updated daily, arts and letters daily-style, of the best content on the web relevant to this course.

Remediation

Three Videos, Talks or slideshows of profs or other experts explaining one aspect of the topic

Required Readings

Three longform (4000 words) features that all incorporate newly digitized archival materials with ideas about why they matter to us today. Or are just really cool.

Recommended Readings:

Thumbnail reviews of ten books to read if you want to learn more about the topic.