Once More Around The Old Block

 

Author Carolyn Haines stops by with another thought-provoking post in her guest blog series. It's amazing all the work she gets done. She teaches, she has a new book in her successful Bones series coming out in June ... just a few weeks now!

... she's writing the next Bones book, she's just put this year's Daddy's Girls Weekend to bed after months of planning ... it makes me tired thinking about it all. Oh yeah, and she runs a horse farm. And that's just the stuff I know about ...

 

ONCE MORE AROUND THE OLD BLOCK

by Carolyn Haines

An incident that occurred in recent weeks has put me thinking about issues of gender, equality, the literary establishment, and the perception of female writers. Since I’m writing this on Mother’s Day, I think it’s an appropriate topic.

I gave a speech with another writer, a male, at a library. The good news is that the event was covered by two newspapers. The bad news is that a reporter for the major daily in the area dispatched me with one line from a Wikipedia entry. One line. “Alabamian and former newspaper reporter Carolyn Haines, a prolific writer of romance and mystery novels.” The rest of the article, about 800 words, was about my co-speaker. A female reporter for the same newspaper did a more balanced story.

My co-speaker, who writes humorous general fiction set in the South and is indeed a fine writer, is the bigger name in non-mystery circles, no doubt. But a female reporter managed to put some balance in an article. But the same cannot be said of a community newspaper reporter, also a male. I fared a little better in the local reporter’s article. A whole paragraph, to a much longer story including even where my co-speaker went to college.

Two male reporters, all about the male writer. One female reporter, a more balanced story.  Was it my gender, the fact that romance (albeit they were romantic mysteries) was mentioned, or was it the label “mystery” that made two male newspaper writers decide that I wasn’t worth a few paragraphs of copy.

Back when I was a journalist my editor would have gnawed my ear off for such a blatantly unbalanced piece. Then again, journalism isn’t what it used to be in the 1970s when good reporting brought a crooked president down.

Certainly this isn’t the first time, or the last, that a female writer will be given short shrift. It’s happened to much bigger writers than me. Jodi Picoult made a dynamic stink about it recently. (Yay!)

But this is 2012, and surely things have changed. Then again, I’ve heard the words “War on Women” repeatedly in the last month. By god, I believe it’s true. I believe there is a concerted effort to keep women “in their place” or at least relegated to a lesser place. And I think these male newspaper writers are unwitting accomplices in this prejudiced attitude. On this Mother’s Day, I’ve just passed another birthday. I am of an age where I’m pretty sick and tired of this BS. I’ve heard this kind of crap for a long time.

When I was working as a reporter and covering a tense story of a knifing in a high school, I was told by a superintendent of education that I was “unnatural.” That a “normal woman” would be at home taking care of her husband and kids. I was “abnormal” and “unnatural” because I held a job. A man’s job to be more exact. I wasn’t a secretary or bank teller or school teacher or nurse (everyone knows these are women’s jobs.)

The problem wasn’t that I was an “unnatural” female. The problem was that a tragedy had occurred and it would not look good for the superintendent. But the first line of defense was to attack my gender and the fact I was doing a “man’s job”-- in his opinion. 

When I worked in PR at a university and asked for a raise, I was told, “You don’t need more money. What you need is to get married and let your husband take care of you.” These are clearly gender biases. But this latest newspaper reporter—I’m just not sure where to file it: gender bias or genre bias. Maybe both.I’m a woman who’s chosen to write in genres that some people don’t value. Had either male reporter bothered to read any further in the Wikipedia entry—or heaven forbid, gone to my web site--they would have learned that I’ve also written general fiction, short fiction, crime fiction, and biography. I’ve been given the cold shoulder by elitist bookstores where I’ve been told their clientele doesn’t “read mysteries.” Oh, really. Perhaps they just buy them elsewhere.I found these figures on the National Romance Writers of America website. These are recent totals of sales in each genre.

Romance: $1.358 billion
Religion/inspirational: $759 million
Mystery: $682 million
Science fiction/fantasy: $559 million
Classic literary fiction: $455 million

Statistics fascinate me. Of course, they can be manipulated to tell any tale the author chooses. So I won’t attempt to interpret them. They are what they are.

I work at a university, so elitism toward popular fiction is no stranger to me. Mostly I have a good sense of humor about it and just realize that those who disdain a career in mystery writing would likely give a lot to have one. And I educate my students to the stupidity of this kind of peculiar vanity. To define one’s intellect by the books one reads is hysterical to me.

I am indeed a “genre slut,” because I’ll read any kind of story that is compelling and well written. I don’t care what label is slapped on it. I guess the bottom line here is: Don’t judge a book by its cover (the author probably had very little say-so on the cover), and don’t judge an author by the genre she writes in, or her gender.

In 2012, this shouldn’t have to be said, but it does.

 

Carolyn Haines is the author of the Sarah Booth Delaney Mississippi Delta mystery series. Among her awards are the Harper Lee Award for Distinguished Writing, the Richard Wright Award for Literary Excellence, and two of her books were listed in the top 5 mysteries of the year by Library Journal--in 2004 (Hallowed Bones) and 2006 (Penumbra). She is a former award winning journalist and runs an animal rescue. She urges everyone to please spay and neuter their companion pets and adopt from shelters. 

Comments

[Carole]

Right on, Carolyn! I hope you send a link of it to the 'journalist' and his bosses at the newspaper. It would be a lovely slap in the face to their professionalism.

And for the record, MOST of what I read are mysteries and thrillers. I just recently got back in to 'chick-lit.' But I've never been normal.

Love your work!

[Hank Phillippi Ryan]

Hey, Carolyn! And welcome--

Well said, of course. As a reporter, I have gotten the "little lady" response way too many time..although I always see it as a clear indication the guy has something to hide.

And how many of us have heard the "when are you going to write a real book?" question--on of Femme Toni's favorites. :-)

Sigh--I missed the Jodi Picoult...what did she say?

[Kathy Bergold]

Very well said, Carolyn. That was one of the most biased articles I've ever read. A pox on that reporter! (and the editor for approving it for publication.) Your books are beautifully written no matter the genre and I enjoy each and every one. Thanks for sharing your talent with us.

[Marie]

Carolyn, you hit the nail on the head with all your points. The male reporters and their editors were unprofessional to release such biased, poorly researched and poorly written material. They are also out of your league and they know it. You could investigate, report and write them under the editor's desk without blinking an eye.

[Marcia Talley]

Carolyn, you are so right. Sisters in Crime has been working hard for twenty-five years to raise public awareness of women who write crime fiction and to gain equality for us in the industry. We -- clearly (and sadly) -- have a long way to go! But statistics like those you cite can help smash the stereotypes.

[Brenda Joyce Jerome]

Excellent, just excellent! Well stated.

[Daniel]

Carolyn,

I've heard you rail about this in the past. The same thing happens on a regular basis in the film community, unfortunately. Writers in Hollywood, in the main, get treated like red-headed stepchildren, but female writers have it even tougher. Especially if they are writing in what's considered a "male-specific" genre like action or war films. This bias also extends to female directors.

Case in point, Kathryn Bigelow, one of Hollywood's best directors, encountered massive resistance from Hollywood execs when she wanted to direct 'The Hurt Locker'. It ended up winning Best Picture a couple of years ago.

Another sore point that you and I have talked about in the past is the fact you live and work in the South. The South for all it's many good things, is not known for it's enlightened attitudes toward women, because of the religious issues and the dominance of the often backwards- looking GOP political structure.

Male patriarchal attitudes dominate both religious and political life here. Not to say that it doesn't exist elsewhere, only that it is more prevalent and in-your-face in the South. After living 15 years here, I see it every day and in every way.

[Sandy]

BRAVO !!!

[Terri Dunn]

Well said!!! When I read that article, I couldn't even believe the editor allowed it to be published, it was so biased. Guess the editor is a man.......

[Monica Helton]

Well said Carolyn! I read that article and the reporter who wrote it and the editor who approved it should be ashamed of themselves. I hope you post a link of this blog to that reporter and his editor.

Someone needs to learn how to be a good reporter and someone needs to learn how to run a newspaper. And yes it is worse here in the South.

[Thomi Sharpe]

Amen!

[krisneri]

Welcome back to the Femmes, Carolyn. Great blog!

[carolyn haines]

Thanks, to all of you. Support does take a little of the sting away. Some days I have to wonder, "is it me?" And I think that's one of the most insidious parts of this kind of prejudice.

[Dana]

Amen, Carolyn--and well said! Whether it is "gender bias or genre bias," it still stinks. And it stinks worse that we still have to bring attention to this in 2012. It's not the label: it's the story. It's not the label: it's the person.