Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.7 AVERAGE
3.7 AVERAGE
informative
medium-paced
What a wonderful overview of the uses of Anonymity. As well as an insight into the lives of many people who we all know used different names, but not always the why of the reason they did.
I loved reading about the people. Particularly William Sharp writing as Fiona MacLeod – which felt as if a feminine aspect of himself needed space to exist. That’s interesting!
Additionally, as John Mullan writes: ‘Anonymity is the sinful author’s means of holding himself in check.’
So it was fun to read the examples of times where authors used their writing as a weapon or in defence of something important with the power of their disguise.
It also got me thinking about the way the internet almost changed the whole game when it came to identity… unfortunately, Facebook happened and everyone decided to use their real identities again… which I think is a terrible shame. Anonymity allows you so much freedom. Hopefully not to hurt… but sometimes. But mostly it allows us to bypass our own internal critic and those feelings of panic attached to criticism of your ‘self’ by others. Liberation, it seems… exists in the space before judgement… something to ponder.
In my own life anonymity has been very important. My own identity as a person is in constant flux because of my condition. As such, I’ve been many different names to many sets of people. My writing especially is accredited to many names. I hold to this because I do not want my ‘self’ to pollute the work. I think it is enough to be approximate. I prefer that the reader pays it little consideration; or, ideally none at all, to the author.
Back to John Mullan’s quote: I consider myself a ‘sinful author’ in so far as my efforts are human and therefore manifestly flawed. I find writing easiest when I can hover above the shoulder of the character writing and adjust as we go. Never too much of myself in my work, but not too little either.
I am thankful that we live in an age when identity is moving beyond the restrictive confines of the shape of the body. We’re growing to accept more nuanced expressions of self. I still feel that there is a core of people who want only to read what they deem ‘knowable’, but I think we will always have those people. Additionally, I think that we’ve taken a backward step since the early days of the internet. We seem to have been Facebooked into a space of clear identity rather than the initial handles that helped us start the path towards new expression. Now we’re confused… Wanting to pin ourselves as someone, but being naturally mercurial in nature it doesn’t fit well.
But then my names are only ever slight jumps aside from my daily self. I tend not to stray into the territory of exploiting marginalised backgrounds. But, of course, that is a subjective statement. What do we mean, and is it always kind, to prescribe marginalisation to a group?
The Reverend Toby Forward writing as Rahila Khan, both swapping gender and race much to the ire of Virago publishing in 1987… Taking a perspective that he felt similar to his lived experience. He empathised with the struggle of the fictional Rahila, the construction, but it kicked a hornets nest when Virago saw their ass and realised they’d blindly elevated a voice based only on their eagerness to publish for social credit and kudos.
And sometimes a change of name will be helpful even to the most established writers. Doris Lessing is the example used in the book but it is also a trick famously employed by J K Rowling. They changed their name to see if they could be equally successful in a different genre without the aid of their established career. They took a chance of the fact that they’d never be entirely sure if they were successful because of who they were or because of the writing. J K’s novel flopped. Now she did it again, choosing crime, but it stands… Lessing was more successful but not AS successful as she already had been.
So many things to think about when it comes to a name. A really interesting read.
I’d definitely recommend this one if you are a writer. It will give you a lot to consider.
I loved reading about the people. Particularly William Sharp writing as Fiona MacLeod – which felt as if a feminine aspect of himself needed space to exist. That’s interesting!
Additionally, as John Mullan writes: ‘Anonymity is the sinful author’s means of holding himself in check.’
So it was fun to read the examples of times where authors used their writing as a weapon or in defence of something important with the power of their disguise.
It also got me thinking about the way the internet almost changed the whole game when it came to identity… unfortunately, Facebook happened and everyone decided to use their real identities again… which I think is a terrible shame. Anonymity allows you so much freedom. Hopefully not to hurt… but sometimes. But mostly it allows us to bypass our own internal critic and those feelings of panic attached to criticism of your ‘self’ by others. Liberation, it seems… exists in the space before judgement… something to ponder.
In my own life anonymity has been very important. My own identity as a person is in constant flux because of my condition. As such, I’ve been many different names to many sets of people. My writing especially is accredited to many names. I hold to this because I do not want my ‘self’ to pollute the work. I think it is enough to be approximate. I prefer that the reader pays it little consideration; or, ideally none at all, to the author.
Back to John Mullan’s quote: I consider myself a ‘sinful author’ in so far as my efforts are human and therefore manifestly flawed. I find writing easiest when I can hover above the shoulder of the character writing and adjust as we go. Never too much of myself in my work, but not too little either.
I am thankful that we live in an age when identity is moving beyond the restrictive confines of the shape of the body. We’re growing to accept more nuanced expressions of self. I still feel that there is a core of people who want only to read what they deem ‘knowable’, but I think we will always have those people. Additionally, I think that we’ve taken a backward step since the early days of the internet. We seem to have been Facebooked into a space of clear identity rather than the initial handles that helped us start the path towards new expression. Now we’re confused… Wanting to pin ourselves as someone, but being naturally mercurial in nature it doesn’t fit well.
But then my names are only ever slight jumps aside from my daily self. I tend not to stray into the territory of exploiting marginalised backgrounds. But, of course, that is a subjective statement. What do we mean, and is it always kind, to prescribe marginalisation to a group?
The Reverend Toby Forward writing as Rahila Khan, both swapping gender and race much to the ire of Virago publishing in 1987… Taking a perspective that he felt similar to his lived experience. He empathised with the struggle of the fictional Rahila, the construction, but it kicked a hornets nest when Virago saw their ass and realised they’d blindly elevated a voice based only on their eagerness to publish for social credit and kudos.
And sometimes a change of name will be helpful even to the most established writers. Doris Lessing is the example used in the book but it is also a trick famously employed by J K Rowling. They changed their name to see if they could be equally successful in a different genre without the aid of their established career. They took a chance of the fact that they’d never be entirely sure if they were successful because of who they were or because of the writing. J K’s novel flopped. Now she did it again, choosing crime, but it stands… Lessing was more successful but not AS successful as she already had been.
So many things to think about when it comes to a name. A really interesting read.
I’d definitely recommend this one if you are a writer. It will give you a lot to consider.
What a wonderful overview of the uses of Anonymity. As well as an insight into the lives of many people who we all know used different names, but not always the why of the reason they did.
I loved reading about the people. Particularly William Sharp writing as Fiona MacLeod – which felt as if a feminine aspect of himself needed space to exist. That’s interesting!
Additionally, as John Mullan writes: ‘Anonymity is the sinful author’s means of holding himself in check.’
So it was fun to read the examples of times where authors used their writing as a weapon or in defence of something important with the power of their disguise.
It also got me thinking about the way the internet almost changed the whole game when it came to identity… unfortunately, Facebook happened and everyone decided to use their real identities again… which I think is a terrible shame. Anonymity allows you so much freedom. Hopefully not to hurt… but sometimes. But mostly it allows us to bypass our own internal critic and those feelings of panic attached to criticism of your ‘self’ by others. Liberation, it seems… exists in the space before judgement… something to ponder.
In my own life anonymity has been very important. My own identity as a person is in constant flux because of my condition. As such, I’ve been many different names to many sets of people. My writing especially is accredited to many names. I hold to this because I do not want my ‘self’ to pollute the work. I think it is enough to be approximate. I prefer that the reader pays it little consideration; or, ideally none at all, to the author.
Back to John Mullan’s quote: I consider myself a ‘sinful author’ in so far as my efforts are human and therefore manifestly flawed. I find writing easiest when I can hover above the shoulder of the character writing and adjust as we go. Never too much of myself in my work, but not too little either.
I am thankful that we live in an age when identity is moving beyond the restrictive confines of the shape of the body. We’re growing to accept more nuanced expressions of self. I still feel that there is a core of people who want only to read what they deem ‘knowable’, but I think we will always have those people. Additionally, I think that we’ve taken a backward step since the early days of the internet. We seem to have been Facebooked into a space of clear identity rather than the initial handles that helped us start the path towards new expression. Now we’re confused… Wanting to pin ourselves as someone, but being naturally mercurial in nature it doesn’t fit well.
But then my names are only ever slight jumps aside from my daily self. I tend not to stray into the territory of exploiting marginalised backgrounds. But, of course, that is a subjective statement. What do we mean, and is it always kind, to prescribe marginalisation to a group?
The Reverend Toby Forward writing as Rahila Khan, both swapping gender and race much to the ire of Virago publishing in 1987… Taking a perspective that he felt similar to his lived experience. He empathised with the struggle of the fictional Rahila, the construction, but it kicked a hornets nest when Virago saw their ass and realised they’d blindly elevated a voice based only on their eagerness to publish for social credit and kudos.
And sometimes a change of name will be helpful even to the most established writers. Doris Lessing is the example used in the book but it is also a trick famously employed by J K Rowling. They changed their name to see if they could be equally successful in a different genre without the aid of their established career. They took a chance of the fact that they’d never be entirely sure if they were successful because of who they were or because of the writing. J K’s novel flopped. Now she did it again, choosing crime, but it stands… Lessing was more successful but not AS successful as she already had been.
So many things to think about when it comes to a name. A really interesting read.
I’d definitely recommend this one if you are a writer. It will give you a lot to consider.
I loved reading about the people. Particularly William Sharp writing as Fiona MacLeod – which felt as if a feminine aspect of himself needed space to exist. That’s interesting!
Additionally, as John Mullan writes: ‘Anonymity is the sinful author’s means of holding himself in check.’
So it was fun to read the examples of times where authors used their writing as a weapon or in defence of something important with the power of their disguise.
It also got me thinking about the way the internet almost changed the whole game when it came to identity… unfortunately, Facebook happened and everyone decided to use their real identities again… which I think is a terrible shame. Anonymity allows you so much freedom. Hopefully not to hurt… but sometimes. But mostly it allows us to bypass our own internal critic and those feelings of panic attached to criticism of your ‘self’ by others. Liberation, it seems… exists in the space before judgement… something to ponder.
In my own life anonymity has been very important. My own identity as a person is in constant flux because of my condition. As such, I’ve been many different names to many sets of people. My writing especially is accredited to many names. I hold to this because I do not want my ‘self’ to pollute the work. I think it is enough to be approximate. I prefer that the reader pays it little consideration; or, ideally none at all, to the author.
Back to John Mullan’s quote: I consider myself a ‘sinful author’ in so far as my efforts are human and therefore manifestly flawed. I find writing easiest when I can hover above the shoulder of the character writing and adjust as we go. Never too much of myself in my work, but not too little either.
I am thankful that we live in an age when identity is moving beyond the restrictive confines of the shape of the body. We’re growing to accept more nuanced expressions of self. I still feel that there is a core of people who want only to read what they deem ‘knowable’, but I think we will always have those people. Additionally, I think that we’ve taken a backward step since the early days of the internet. We seem to have been Facebooked into a space of clear identity rather than the initial handles that helped us start the path towards new expression. Now we’re confused… Wanting to pin ourselves as someone, but being naturally mercurial in nature it doesn’t fit well.
But then my names are only ever slight jumps aside from my daily self. I tend not to stray into the territory of exploiting marginalised backgrounds. But, of course, that is a subjective statement. What do we mean, and is it always kind, to prescribe marginalisation to a group?
The Reverend Toby Forward writing as Rahila Khan, both swapping gender and race much to the ire of Virago publishing in 1987… Taking a perspective that he felt similar to his lived experience. He empathised with the struggle of the fictional Rahila, the construction, but it kicked a hornets nest when Virago saw their ass and realised they’d blindly elevated a voice based only on their eagerness to publish for social credit and kudos.
And sometimes a change of name will be helpful even to the most established writers. Doris Lessing is the example used in the book but it is also a trick famously employed by J K Rowling. They changed their name to see if they could be equally successful in a different genre without the aid of their established career. They took a chance of the fact that they’d never be entirely sure if they were successful because of who they were or because of the writing. J K’s novel flopped. Now she did it again, choosing crime, but it stands… Lessing was more successful but not AS successful as she already had been.
So many things to think about when it comes to a name. A really interesting read.
I’d definitely recommend this one if you are a writer. It will give you a lot to consider.
It was good, but his voice is so much funnier in his speeches.
I spotted Anonymity: A Secret History of English Literature by John Mullan at the library right after I had been part of a couple interesting discussions on male vs. female authorship. What had come up in all the discussions was that it's not always easy to guess the sex of an author especially if the author is writing either anonymously or under a pen name. So in light of those online discussions, I checked out Mullan's book.
Each chapter covers a different reason for writing anonymously. The chapters include examples of authors who fall into the category being illustrated. There are lengthy notes and citations to back up the examples.
In fact I have to admit to being surprised by the scholarly nature of the book. The cover's light-hearted illustrations of all sorts of authors and the blurb in the dust-jacket set up an expectation of an informative but quick read. The book ended up requiring more time than I had budgeted.
Sometime when I have more time and I'm in the right mood to really think about the nature of authorship, pen names and anonymity, I would like to revisit the book.
Each chapter covers a different reason for writing anonymously. The chapters include examples of authors who fall into the category being illustrated. There are lengthy notes and citations to back up the examples.
In fact I have to admit to being surprised by the scholarly nature of the book. The cover's light-hearted illustrations of all sorts of authors and the blurb in the dust-jacket set up an expectation of an informative but quick read. The book ended up requiring more time than I had budgeted.
Sometime when I have more time and I'm in the right mood to really think about the nature of authorship, pen names and anonymity, I would like to revisit the book.