Since November 2009Editor Article: Pseudonyms
July 21st, 2010 by Leah
One of the most baffling things surrounding chick lit (and undoubtedly other genres) is the pseudonym. I can absolutely understand why some authors like to choose themselves a pseudonym when changing the genre/tone of their books - Madeleine Wickham/Sophie Kinsella is a prime example. What I don’t understand is the secrecy surrounding some well-known pseudonyms. I could reel off quite a list of authors I know for sure are pseudonyms as well as a list of possible authors writing under a pseudonym. I won’t, because I respect their privacy, but I sure as heck will question it.
There are a few authors whom we know about who write under pseudonyms. Madeleine/Sophie is a prime example. Chris Manby also writes under Olivia Darling and Anna Maxted now writes under the name of Sasha Blake (which was probably the worst kept secret in publishing history). All of those were for a genre change. Madeleine Wickham’s earlier books were more women’s fiction than chick lit whereas her books under Sophie Kinsella are light-hearted chick lit books. Chris Manby and Anna Maxted’s books under their own names are chick lit whereas their works under Olivia Darling and Sasha Blake are big, fat blockbusters of books. Josie Lloyd also fits under the same category. She wrote novels by herself before writing with husband Emlyn Rees before a genre change means she now publishes under Jo Rees. I find all of those name-changes perfectly acceptable because the fact is we now know who exactly they are.
What really gets me is when there’s so much secrecy about an author changing her name to help promote her books because her books under her own name didn’t sell well or whatever the reason may be. As a reader I want to know who these authors are. I want to be able to do an author interview with them or email them to tell them I loved their book without feeling cheated because they aren’t who they say they are. If, for example, Katie Fforde wrote under a different name I would want to know because I adore her books and would want to read anything she’s written. The same goes for a number of authors I suspect of having different pen names - I, the reader, would want to know so I could seek out all of the books a certain author has had published.
Surely if a well-established chick lit author decided to write something different to her usual stuff then the best way to market her new stuff would be to tell everybody exactly who that person really is so that people who love the author can buy her new work? The entire Anna Maxted affair was really stupid. We were told that she was writing under the pseudonym of Sasha Blake but that the publishers didn’t want anybody to know. Why? Why, why, why? The fact is, it has all come out now so why did the publishers feel so strongly about keeping it a secret? Wouldn’t the publishers have been better off telling us all from the off that Anna Maxted had decided on both a genre change and a name change and that if we wanted to buy it, you could find her under the name of Sasha Blake? Easy. And there’s no need for secrecy. I felt a bit of a fool when we posted up our interview with mysterious author Sasha Blake only to find that everyone knew it was Anna Maxted.
What makes it even worse is that when I buy a book I always look for an author photograph and a biog just to get a feel of the author. When they’re missing, it becomes blindingly obvious the author in question is undoubtedly writing under a pen name. They might as well have a neon sign on the cover declaring “I am not an actual person, I’m writing under a pen name!” in big letters. I would very much like if anyone could tell me just what use using a pen name is. People are more likely to buy a book by an established author than they are an author they’ve heard absolutely nothing about and can’t find any information about, either. Be honest, authors, and tell us who on Earth you are. We don’t care if you had poor sales or if you’re writing a different genre now, just tell us who you are so we can get all of your books. Easy.
Posted in Editor Article | 6 Comments »
I know what you mean but I think the secrecy has nothing at all to do with readers, maybe the publishers don’t want a bookseller to not order a book by an author they know hasn’t sold much books in the past.
Good points, and I agree that every author has a reason for writing under another name if they decide to do so. Most of the time it has nothing to do with previous sales - usually it is because they are switching genres and don’t want to confuse their established audience. If Sarah Dessen suddenly decided to write thrillers, a lot of her loyal readers would pick up her book but might not like the genre.
Not every writer who doesn’t put their photo in the book is writing under another name - a lot of us just don’t want to have our photos on our books. I write under my own name and didn’t put my photo in my YA just because. It’s on the website if anyone is really dying to know what I look like
It is silly and frustrating isn’t it? If anything, I want to cheer for a favorite author that decides to take a risk with another genre. That says a lot to me about their talent and if they pull it off, even better!
Louise has a good point, but I hate to think that booksellers are even worse than us readers. We often judge by the cover, I guess that they judge by the name. Sad.
I can see how it might be frustrating for fans, but it really isn’t about secrecy, or pulling the wool over your eyes. It’s actually about making the most of our wonderful authors. For example, we know that having someone writing in two distinct genres confuses the retailers. So, by giving the author two names, cover styles, etc., we are actually giving them equal opportunities to succeed in both fields. In other words, rather than trying to confuse the retailers and consumers, it’s actually about trying to make it all clearer.
Furthermore, as a publisher, we have our hands tied by market forces. Because unfortunately retailers would rather take a chance on a new author than on someone whose sales have struggled in the past. It’s the tyranny of EPOS (electronic point of sale) which tells them what’s worked and what hasn’t. When we believe in authors, we want to give them every chance. And if that means changing their names, then we’ll do it.
And let’s not forget, this has always been the case. And sometimes a change of name makes all the difference to someone’s career. Let’s not forget that ‘Currer Bell’ was the name on the jacket of the first editions of Jane Eyre…
x
Authors used always to write under a variety of different names - it was considered quite normal in the 1970s. Don’t know why. But the author’s name, sex, race or age shouldn’t matter when you’re judging whether a book is good or not, so I don’t think author photos or, indeed any biographical detail, should be considered necessary. It’s the story that counts, and as long as no-one’s trying to deceive anyone (eg releasing a book that’s already been published under a different name, which you might already have bought) authors should be able to call themselves what they like. I’d quite like to see all review copies sent out in the same colour jackets with nothing but the title of the book and no author name at all until the review is written - too much judging going on that has nothing to do with the quality of the book itself!
Leah you make very good points and I wish they’d just tell us who they are. it annoys me.