Who Runs Publishing?

[Paul Whybrow]

I came across this survey of diversity in publishing, which is eye-opening and rather depressing to read.

Where Is the Diversity in Publishing? The 2015 Diversity Baseline Survey Results

If you're white, not disabled and straight, then you have the right profile to get a job at a literary agency or book publisher. I've previously ranted about the disparities in publishing, which appear to be rooted in the early 20th-century; how you look might affect your marketability.

I'm boggled at how it came to be, that nice, heterosexual, able-bodied, white women are the arbiters of literary taste. Can they be expected to show a lack of bias, acting in an even-handed way to represent a diverse range of writing talent? If you wonder what I'm going on about, try imagining a situation where the majority of people in publishing were black seniors, age 50+, or that most literary agents were ex-trawlermen without a college education, or that the bulk of publishing executives and assistants were physically disabled. What sort of books would they favour?

Nothing is going to change soon, that's for sure, though, I'll hazard a guess that tokenism will increase, with a few more minority employees being taken on to satisfy employment law quotas and to look politically correct.

But, given that our manuscripts are probably going to be read by a middle-class Caucasian female in her thirties, should we slant our stories towards subjects that might interest them? If my fantasy groupings were in charge of the slushpile, we'd write plots including African Americans, salty fishermen and characters who are amputees or in wheelchairs.

I've sometimes looked at my cast of characters, wondering whether they'd appeal to Perdita, 34, educated at Oxford University and who started off at Armstrong-Struthers Literary Agency as an editorial assistant, but is now a newly-appointed agent, looking for "Offbeat crime stories with a quirky hero and a strong regional location." After all, my novels are set in Cornwall, my detective protagonist is a semi-hippy copper, and his investigating team include an amusing Asian and a martial arts expert who is lesbian + there's kinky sexual activity & a gratifying love story + my hero bakes cakes (and, here's the clincher), he owns a cat!

Am I pandering to whoever might read my story?

Should we have to?

Do you consider such factors when writing your stories?

Just remember, the first hurdle to leap is whoever reads your manuscript, so wouldn't it be wise to think of what they might like?

​

​

 

[Emurelda]

I write what I enjoy and believe that if I'm good enough for the market and with some luck, I may be picked up. But I might be considered naive too. So...

 

[Katie-Ellen]

They're looking for what they think they will SELL. They might get it wrong or right. They might be chicken, trying to play safe with a formula. I think they probably are, very chicken right now, and their revolution pro-diversity is a safe, box ticking one. The story, the writing must be still always king, whoever the writer is. But if there's a lack of diversity in publishing, it also reflects on the reading market. Turn it round for a change. Would a black, gay, disabled reader buy a novel with a white, straight male hero? Why wouldn't they, if there's a great story? If they wouldn't, when we're all human, wrestling with human problems of one kind or another, the problem goes wider. And are enough young people still reading fiction, full stop? How many even want to?

 

[AngryPI]

I hate quotas. I think it creates pigeon-holes that require us to fill positions based on a modicum of merit and is there to prove there is divisiveness--building resentment. I do realise there are substantial gains to be had from employing-with-provisos, but I think/believe with natural integration, it's only a matter of time before we get the results without having to shove the matter down our throats. I don't want handouts, I want my name/work to represent me. Not my culture, my skin colour and my genealogy. Time will tell, but it is inevitable--in my eyes at least--that this society is thoughtful enough to bring this about organically.

If I write anyone--anyone at all--they are generally based on how I create them. Any colour can be a murderer, any level of ability can an asshole and any gender can be powerful or weak. I try to make my characters like real people--full of flaws and defined by their story. Nurture not nature for me.

 

[Amber]

I came across this survey of diversity in publishing, which is eye-opening and rather depressing to read.

Where Is the Diversity in Publishing? The 2015 Diversity Baseline Survey Results

If you're white, not disabled and straight,

I'm not sure what to say about this survey besides--it sucks. It's suckery is obvious to me but maybe it isn't obvious to everyone. It's important your data is valid if you want to support a claim. If you care about diversity, the cause isn't served by passing around easily shredded data. Or, if the claims made from the data are ridiculous.

The first problem is it's three years old. Publishing is changing too quickly for this survey to be of any use except in a historical sense.

Also, the article starts by talking about the number of diverse books yet fails to define a diverse book. Responsible social scientists define their terms.

What region? North America? Does this mean the United States or does it mean Canada or does it mean both? Now let's look at those numbers.

79% Caucasian according to the link you posted. The last U.S. Census has the white population at 76.9%. This is without Canada's data, if it should be included.

There is a surplus of women in publishing. YAY! We rock. I have to ask myself, are there men who have been pushed out of publishing because they're men? I'd be interested in reading an article on that. I don't think it happens though. Women like men and enjoy working with them. You realize of course male writers are still taken more seriously than women writers right? They usually are.

According to statista, the population of the United States has about 3% of not hetero people. This doesn't sound right to me. I thought it was about ten percent. The Pew Research Center is saying about 4 percent. The survey posted on this website says that non-hetero people count for over 11%.

Disabled people in the U.S. account for about 20% of the population. The survey shows the publications surveyed account for about 10%. There are other reasons besides a lack of willingness why disabled people might not be in publishing. I'm not sure what the stat would be for traditional 9-5 employment for disabled people but it's not 100%.

My definition of an industry with diverse employment is an industry that represents minorities and other under served populations not by employing more than what occurs in the population but about the same amount. It seems if anything, we need more men in publishing and maybe more disabled. A responsible researcher would have factored in the number of people who are disabled but not seeking employment.

I looked at how they did this study. It's about on the same level as a questionnaire designed by a high school student.

But if their information is correct then publishing is diverse.

then you have the right profile to get a job at a literary agency or book publisher. I've previously ranted about the disparities in publishing, which appear to be rooted in the early 20th-century; how you look might affect your marketability.

This is true no matter where you go or what we're doing, even when we don't want it to be true, don't you think? I was once in a room full of cover models. I'd never seen anything like it. They were so beautiful. Obscenely beautiful in every conceivable way. They didn't seem real.

Beautiful people never starve and never lack for a place to sleep. Of course, you're not talking about cover models but "normal" people. Well, probably a good idea, given the knee jerk human response to beauty that we put our best foot forward if we want something from someone else. Common sense.

But if I recall, you self-publish and so you're free of all that nonsense. That must be awesome.

I'm boggled at how it came to be, that nice, heterosexual, able-bodied, white women are the arbiters of literary taste. Can they be expected to show a lack of bias, acting in an even-handed way to represent a diverse range of writing talent? If you wonder what I'm going on about, try imagining a situation where the majority of people in publishing were black seniors, age 50+, or that most literary agents were ex-trawlermen without a college education, or that the bulk of publishing executives and assistants were physically disabled. What sort of books would they favour?

A lot of James Patterson.

Nothing is going to change soon, that's for sure, though, I'll hazard a guess that tokenism will increase, with a few more minority employees being taken on to satisfy employment law quotas and to look politically correct.

But, given that our manuscripts are probably going to be read by a middle-class Caucasian female in her thirties, should we slant our stories towards subjects that might interest them? If my fantasy groupings were in charge of the slushpile, we'd write plots including African Americans, salty fishermen and characters who are amputees or in wheelchairs.

Well. I imagine it's difficult trying to figure out what interests women but for a while now one of the things that has interested white women has been white men. Sometimes black men or Asian men, if we can get away with it. Or, maybe even a black woman or an Asian female if we're willing to cross that line.

Also, we have fathers, brothers, children and friends. The interests of those we care about are our interests.

It's not the interests of men that publishing is known not to support.

I've sometimes looked at my cast of characters, wondering whether they'd appeal to Perdita, 34, educated at Oxford University and who started off at Armstrong-Struthers Literary Agency as an editorial assistant, but is now a newly-appointed agent, looking for "Offbeat crime stories with a quirky hero and a strong regional location." After all, my novels are set in Cornwall, my detective protagonist is a semi-hippy copper, and his investigating team include an amusing Asian and a martial arts expert who is lesbian + there's kinky sexual activity & a gratifying love story + my hero bakes cakes (and, here's the clincher), he owns a cat!

Perdita is looking for something she can sell. Period. Perdita has to eat and must pander to the interests of her stomach before what sounds like a very shrewish set of ovaries.

Am I pandering to whoever might read my story?

I don't know if you are. I haven't read any of your writing. If you are pandering, I'd stop. Readers can tell when they're being pandered to.

Should we have to?

Pander? No. Never pander. Write about what people are interested in? Only if you want people to read what you write. That's how easy it is. If you want people to read what you write -- write what they want to read.

Do you consider such factors when writing your stories?

I don't have to. I'm a white woman. Of course I'm en vogue.

Just remember, the first hurdle to leap is whoever reads your manuscript, so wouldn't it be wise to think of what they might like?

They're people.

 

[Carol Rose]

The amazing Shyla Colt is a member of our RWA chapter, and spoke to us last year about diversity in romance writing. She's an African-American and writes truly memorable IR (interracial) romance. She began writing it because every romance she read had heroines who were blonde, blue-eyed, and white. She's none of those things, so she started writing about women she could identify with.

I wish I had her talk verbatim (and her permission to share it, of course) to post here. It wasn't at all militant or in-your-face. It was about awareness, and included ways every writer can incorporate diversity into their writing, whether they write a hero or heroine of a different race than their own or not.

The word "diversity" doesn't only encompass race, of course, and that was her main point. And often, simply making sure the characters in a story are aware of the issues out there is enough. Showing that awareness gives readers a richer experience, and one that is more realistic of the population in general.

 

[Katie-Ellen]

@Amber said I have to ask myself, are there men who have been pushed out of publishing because they're men? I'd be interested in reading an article on that.

Saw this one yesterday.

He wasn't hiding. 'Withholding his full identity was a way “to reassure myself that the voice worked”, he says.'

Those issues are present in my finished thing, for sure. I'm writing as a man who (only) occasionally encounters racism. He has Irish ancestry, like me, and also, on the maternal side, a grandfather who came from Trinidad. The reader won't even find that out till page 70 because the story he is telling is not about any issue as such, though it is about identity. HE makes no issue with it himself UNLESS someone else tries to make an issue of it. A racist sergeant for instance. And then - he is only 23 but he is formidable - what a sergeant he is going to be one day, or Inspector, or...
He flattens them. Quite right too.

Some might say I have no right to write such a character. Appropriation or something. I can't and won't apologise. I see him in my mind's eye. I didn't plan it that way. Not interested in making any point about anything. It's just how he came alive on the page.

 

[Amber]

@Amber said I have to ask myself, are there men who have been pushed out of publishing because they're men? I'd be interested in reading an article on that.

Saw this one yesterday.

He wasn't hiding. 'Withholding his full identity was a way “to reassure myself that the voice worked”, he says.'

Those issues are present in my finished thing, for sure. I'm writing as a man who (only) occasionally encounters racism. He has Irish ancestry, like me, and also, on the maternal side, a grandfather who came from Trinidad. The reader won't even find that out till page 70 because the story he is telling is not about any issue as such, though it is about identity. HE makes no issue with it himself UNLESS someone else tries to make an issue of it. A racist sergeant for instance. And then - he is only 23 but he is formidable - what a sergeant he is going to be one day, or Inspector, or...
He flattens them. Quite right too.

Some might say I have no right to write such a character. Appropriation or something. I can't and won't apologise. I see him in my mind's eye. I didn't plan it that way. Not interested in making any point about anything. It's just how he came alive on the page.

Oh yeah. The statistics weren't about authors--they were about those working on the business side of publishing. Yes, this totally makes sense and I've always assumed there are male authors posing as women to get their books published and read. As the article you posted a link to says, it was his publishers decision. I don't think I care so much what tricks authors or publishers employ to get themselves read and/or published as long as they aren't plagiarizing. I can't fault them for savvy marketing.

I do care about misinformation and I care about diversity a lot. That diversity website should be ashamed of themselves. If the population of non-hetero people is estimated at 4% (I think that's low) and the incidence of non-hetero people in those surveyed is 11% then that does NOT mean that the publishing business lacks diversity. It means that there is about 2.5 times the highest estimate I could find in the population of non-hetero people. That's amazingly GOOD.

And...that's how you hurt a good cause. Shoddy work. Shoddy reporting. Shoddy analysis.

The study/questionnaire/survey monkey POS cited in the original post was a series of demographic questions given to people working in the publishing industry. It took these brain children a year to conduct this study. It has FIVE questions on it. These are the five questions.

1 - Race?
2 - Gender?
3 - Sexual Orientation?
4 - Disabled?
5 - What department do you work in?

Seriously? They needed to ask about themes those working in the publishing industry were interested in seeing, they needed to see how comfortable they were taking certain themes, fighting for certain themes.

When a book written by a male author is promoted as being written by a female author -- or when it simply isn't being made clear -- those making the decision are recognizing something that is true among readers. Part of what creates the suspension of disbelief is our idea of the author. Writers see this when (IF) they have family members read their writing. Or when writing is given to a fellow writer to read. Or taken to a critique group. To say our perception of an individual's writing can't be impacted by something as small as whether we think they're a man or a woman would be closing our eyes to a simple truth. Anything that impacts the credibility of the storyteller has the potential to make the reader less willing to read. So, whatever it takes. It doesn't say a great thing about us that we prefer certain material from certain people but ... it's easy to see why it's true.

Your story sounds interesting. When you say you are writing as a man, do you mean writing from the pov of a man? Or that you intend to publish under a man's name?

I know a man who writes from a female pov all the time and sometimes he tackles difficult issues. It's hard to figure out how he does it but apparently he uses his imagination. Readers like to be comfortable.... before they get wrapped up in a story and are willing to be made uncomfortable ... don't they?

They are two different topics ... The first, the one brought up by the posted link in the original post is "How diverse is the business side of publishing?" Not only do I think that question wasn't asked effectively it certainly wasn't answered effectively and if I had my way they would take all their survey monkey toys and go home never to be heard from again.

The second topic would be ... "Why do readers/people have certain expectations of authors based on their gender?"

There's a theory in psychology and quantum physics called The Observer Effect. Sometimes it's called The Hawthorne Effect. What it says is that the response of anything is changed by the mere fact of being observed. It means, we will often change our behavior if we know we're being tested. People who track what they eat (observe what they eat) tend to change how they eat. Observing the gender of an author does change our expectations. We can't help it.

 

[Marc Joan]

If I were king for a day, I'd pass a law that all authors should remain anonymous, on pain of death. They would be identified only by numbers; no photographs, videos or recordings would be permitted. Then people would have to focus on the writing and on the writing alone, which is all that matters. That would be the perfect solution, not least because I'd get to behead loads of publicity seekers.

 

[Amber]

If I were king for a day, I'd pass a law that all authors should remain anonymous, on pain of death. They would be identified only by numbers; no photographs, videos or recordings would be permitted. Then people would have to focus on the writing and on the writing alone, which is all that matters. That would be the perfect solution, not least because I'd get to behead loads of publicity seekers.

That sounds wonderful.

 

[Katie-Ellen]

Yikes, how very bloodthirsty, sirrah. I am not a number. I am a free man! Real people are stories too.

POV @Amber.

 

[Amber]

Yikes, how very bloodthirsty, sirrah. I am not a number. I am a free man! Real people are stories too.

POV @Amber.

Yeah. That would be hard. I have enough trouble understanding women.