Welcome to the blog of the Consulting Editors Alliance. This is our forum for sharing views on the wonderful, bizarre, enormously frustrating and satisfying (depends on the day) world of book publishing and our roles in it as freelance editors, writing collaborators, and ghostwriters. Please join the conversation!

Friday, March 18, 2011

Really? What year is this?

Sadly, we actually DO still need to discuss the difference between reporting on male achievement vs. female. Still.


  1. Talk about invisibility...writing about who won something by writing about who didn't! I seem to recall reading not long ago a flurry of discussions around the large number of women working within publishing. So is what's happening within the walls of the industry one thing, and what's happening outside them another? Or are they part of one large economic/social issue? I don't know. But it's interesting to look at.

  2. 2nd thoughts on my comment: I read the LA Times article (http://lat.ms/g3DyaR), and it's in the opening paragraph only that Franzen's book is mentioned, along with other writers who didn't win (fyi: all male). The second paragraph and half of the third goes on to describe Egan's book/win, and the rest of the article is a rundown of other winners. So I think my earlier comment about "invisibility" is unfounded. But I'm curious whether anyone thinks the LAT should have taken a different tack with the opening, or whether it was actually a powerful way to start because it highlighted the fact that a work by a female author bested 4 male contenders?

  3. Toni's comment after reading the LA Times piece just shows once again that it's never a good idea to take the word of a secondary source without going to the original itself. My take on the Times piece is that the reporter was pointing out what a big deal it was for Egan to beat out a writer and novel that had received so much ink. She happens to be a woman but I don't think that's the point. It would have been a big deal if any lesser known/publicized/hyped author/novel had beaten Franzen for the award. And the piece went on to offer some very complimentary remmarks about Egan's book. In no way was it indicating or implying that Franzen got robbed. And, finally--the illustration I saw for the piece at the Times's online site was a photo of Egan and of her book jacket, not a photo of Franzen.