PD James is a guy, right? (I: Do men and women write differently?)

This Thursday is International Women's Day. To raise awareness of The Stella Prize writers, readers and booksellers all around the country will be discussing the proposition: "Do women and men write differently?" This question was, in part, inspired by the widely-reported comments of VS Naipaul last June; Naipaul maintained that no female writer was his equal - not even Jane Austen - and he could tell within a paragraph or two the gender of the writer.

Recent statistics from VIDA, a women in the arts lobby group, show that gender bias in the representation of women in major literary magazines continued throughout 2011. Closer to home, over a year ago now, Sarah L'Estrange interviewed Susan Wyndham from the Sydney Morning Herald about its representation of women writers. Wyndham examined the previous six issues of the SMH literary pages and was horrified to discover the bias towards men (via publisher Sophia Whitfield's blog).

So what, if anything, has changed?

Not much, according to James Tierney, AWW participant and blogger, who conducted a two-month audit of substantial reviews in The Australian and The Sydney Morning Herald from October 8 to December 3, 2011

Tierney writes: "More than a year after it became a matter for fresh controversy, less than a third (29%) of the books reviewed in the literary pages of The Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian each Saturday are written by women*. The gates were opened a little wider for XX reviewers, but not by a great deal (35%)."

Tierney goes on to ask: 

Why is this a problem? Surely the only thing that matters here is the literary quality of the works under review and, in the best judgement of the responsible editors, this is where the best work lay. 

Well, no. To accept that, I’d have to accept that the best work is generally done by men and that simply does not reflect my reading experience. 

Tierney makes the point that, if women are being overlooked for reviews based on something other than literary merit, the consequences are far-reaching.

I don’t know this for sure but I suspect that the literary review pages of our major newspapers determine -at least in part- the bookish agenda. This leads me to a truth so obvious that it almost doesn’t bare saying but let’s give it a go nonetheless: books that are reviewed well are more likely to be considered by literary judges for inclusion on prize lists, long & short.

If less than a third of books reviewed are by women, is it any wonder that our main literary prize, The Miles Franklin, has been awarded to women only twice since 2001? (Read Tierney's complete article here.)

So why are women under-represented in the pages of our literary journals and major media outlets? Is there something intrinsic to women's writing that makes it less worthy of critical attention?

A few weeks ago, I began canvassing opinions on The Stella Prize question in order to share those opinions on Thursday night when Kirsten Tranter hosts a panel at the Carrington Hotel in Katoomba with fellow authors Tara Moss and Claire Corbett. I approached several eminent bookbloggers wondering whether they would be willing to write on the topic. Only one, Kim from Reading Matters, got back to me, saying she wasn't willing to go near that "hot potato".

A number of women I contacted agreed that men and women writing differently. One, an aspiring local travel/memoir writer, commented via Twitter that she almost never read books by women; her perception was that in her preferred genres (nonfiction and travel-memoir) women didn't publish much. When directed to The Guardian's quiz to see whether she could accurately determine if something was written by a woman, she reported 7/10 accuracy. She claimed women's writing tended to be "soft" and stood out. 

Could VS Naipaul right? Can we tell if something is written by a woman within a few paragraphs? Are being "soft" and/or "sentimental" common to female writers, characteristics anathema to our traditional aesthetic of what constitutes "quality"?

While posting flyers for the Stella event, I sought the opinion of a number of men, including a bookseller and an artist, both of whom answered, "Of course, men and women write differently," but that didn't mean they deserved less attention, they said. The artist went on to say that the situation with Fine Arts isn't so different: there are many examples of female artists, in his opinion, famous in their day, who are nevertheless now virtually forgotten except in relation to their more famous husbands or brothers. 

Peter Karsten from Katoomba Book Exchange had even more to say. He agreed to put down some rough thoughts on the topic for the AWW blog and have them published here (unedited).

Karsten writes: 
As I see it, women’s writing would be different from their male counterparts, insomuch as depending on the genre. That having been said, the genre would determine the difference and or the same writing style, influence, method and manner of the female author in question; as a woman could write with male and or female authority.


Thus it would be a skill needed in today’s society that will determine success or failure in reaching a targeted audience-whether it be male or female. The woman could use a male pseudonym to attract attention to her works, and gain a certain male following by subconscious suggestion that she is a male writer and or not use her full name.

As an example: J. K. Rowling of Harry Potter fame, does not use her first name-Why? It is a subconscious effort to attract the male reader, (now as she is well known-her readership is male and female) but also a marketing ploy to some degree. Also of note are male writers, like P. D. James, who also don’t use their first name either. With these examples, there are many male and female writers who use their initials.

But is this deception necessary in today’s society - if it is a deception by the male and more importantly by the female author?

The answer is simply – NO – Why? The woman of today needs self-recognition of her efforts, and as her writing skills improve and her ability to deliver strong and authoritative word in written form expands, so to will she gain more recognition through efforts in her chosen genre.

For my own part and reading influence mainly in Science Fiction and Fantasy, I have actually found no difference in writing style, but there is a difference as the main character/s are female, not male, with male characters playing secondary roles. It’s as though there is a merging of styles in these genres; could it be that female writers are in their own way are developing a male form of writing in this so-called male dominated world, in order to compete for the slice of the financial pie?

As an example, male cooks bringing out cookery books, which in the past has been female dominated, we see this merging as this genre has both male and female authors, and there is no difference in presentation and or writing style.

So where does this leave the female writer in general? Is there a difference in the written word by female authors?

I said in the beginning, 'woman’s writing would be different', the word ‘would’ is the key; because it is up to the woman to determine the difference in writing style as apposed to a man’s.

All in all I personally am not worried about the so-called difference; communication is the key to understanding, and the written word has a power all on its own, whether written by a man or a woman, as long as we understand what is being written and or read….the word has no sex discrimination label.

The power of the pen is only as strong as the author wishes, and the success of that author is determined by public acceptance.

If there is a difference between male and female writing styles and skills…it is perspective, as this world needs perspective of both sexes, in order to relate and understand the world as we make it and perceive it though different eyes.

So the answer is simple… Perspective is the key…and through this viewpoint does the female writer achieve a perception that differs from their male counterparts.

AWW notes:
Before publishing, I contacted Peter Karsten about his mistaking PD James for a man. Karsten - being the very good sport he is - agreed to have his mistake stand uncorrected as it so well demonstrates his argument: that a woman may choose to write differently from men, but the way she writes isn't biologically determined; when she chooses to write using a unisex name in a genre dominated by men or which attracts male readers (such as crime), her gender is not immediately - or even over an entire oeuvre - obvious to the reader.

Female Australian writers who have chosen to publish under unisex gender neutral names recently include PA O'Reilly, PM Newton and Favel Parrett. (O'Reilly, whose book The Fine Colour of Rust has just been released, wrote a guest post for AWW yesterday.) In the reviews posted by booksellers throughout 2010-11, Newton and Parrett featured highly. In Parrett's case, her novel, Past The Shallows, also featured male protagonists and depicted settings associated with male-dominated activities such as fishing and surfing.

What do you think?