Sex/Gender in the Writing World

By now, you've probably seen it--the article in Jezebel about V. S. Naipaul's comment, or the one in the NYT, which mention the man's comment that he can detect the gender of a writer before he finished the second paragraph. In response, if you still haven't seen this, there's also the quiz hosted by the Guardian so you can see if you're as "cool" as Mr. V. S.

I'm thinking one of those initials is a tad off.

Naipaul commented that this knowledge is based on how he (mis)understands women, because they aren't "Masters of their own house" and sentimental, and thus will never reach his personal greatness.

Anyone feel like boycotting yet? I have some ideas about what he can do with that personal greatness....

Of course I think he's wrong. In fact, I tried much too hard to look for these silly indicators when I took the Guardian's quiz, and only got 5 of 10 correct--which, if thrown into a probability meter, means that I have mastered the art of random guessing and no more. At least I've got that going for me.

Every writer has his/her own voice, which may lean toward the sentimental or the... what's the opposite of sentimental in this context? Analytical? Anyway, Each writer has her/his own leanings in how they want to narrate a story. Each voice is unique, with different levels of sentimentality v. the-opposite-of-sentimentality.


What do you think? Without foreknowledge, do you think you could tell the difference between men's and women's writing? Do you even care enough to try?

I wonder, however, how much our own experience and the societal limitations of our genders play into our writing. I only bring this up because I'm struggling with male-male dialogue. Frankly, and this shouldn't surprise you, I've never been involved in a conversation that only involved men. How could I? I'm not one. I pondered this on Facebook about two weeks ago. Male buddies I haven't heard from in years stumbled from the woodwork to add their 2+ cents (really, their words were worth more than measly pennies). Of course, they're all different, too, so the answers conflicted, sort of. And perhaps I came out a little more confused than when I began.

So, despite the sexism that prompted me to write this, do you think our genders and the social "restrictions" associated with them affect your work? How do you get around it? What do you do to make your characters' conversations authentic, even if your own gender isn't present for said chit-chat?

Haberdasher (#atozchallenge)

Welcome to today's post on the A-to-Z Blogging Challenge. My challenge, as I have chosen to accept it, is thus: I have asked on my Facebook and Twitter accounts for people to contribute random words beginning with today's letter. From Random.org, I have selected one of these words, and will below challenge myself to connect said word to writing.

For the letter H, I received 75 suggestions. Random.org selected number 20: haberdasher.


Haberdasher

When I think of haberdashers, I envision 18th century dressmakers (or their modern day RenFest equivalents). In terms of literature, I imagine period pieces or authentic works from the canon. A dress maker in a Jane Austen novel, or a minor character for Mrs. Havisham to kick around.

But in complete and bare, honest truth, I have no idea what a haberdasher is. Or I didn't before taking an e-trip to the wonderful world of Wikipedia. It's one of those words that provides me with a vague, amorphous concept, but when it comes to an actual definition, I would stutter and hide behind my hair in shame.

But what if I needed a haberdasher in my work? This brings me to today's connection to writing: research.

Nothing's worse than reading fiction to see, for example, a Ford Cavalier mentioned as the car the character drives (Chevy makes the Cavalier, not Ford), or that England is landlocked, or that a haberdasher works in a casino. The reader instantly distrusts the author, sometimes enough to stop reading.

Research is important. We have to do it. We have to know what we're talking about. If we fake it, there's someone out there who DOES know and will call us out on it.

So, what's the best way to go about doing research?

First, and most importantly, WIKIPEDIA IS NOT ENOUGH! :) First, since Wikipedia's information is organized by volunteers around the world who input data into the site, add sources, etc., it is FALLIBLE. Don't believe me? Here's an example--one of many.

I'm not saying you can't start with Wikipedia, but double check your sources!

Sorry, I'm used to seeing undergraduate students site Wikipedia as their only source. It gets my ire up.

Now, we're all writers, so we're not afraid of books. Where else can we start? Eh hem. The library :)

When you've started, if you've still got unanswered questions, find an expert. Surely you've run across an author's name a few times, or see the same person cited regularly in your research. Contact that person. Chances are the person is either a journalist or an academic. I can't promise the person will talk to you, but the worst that can happen is the person doesn't respond to your inquiry. It's no worse than querying, right? We can handle it.

Do you do extensive research for your work? On what? Have you contacted experts, or stuck to books?


PS--Today I'm taking suggestions for L. Have some? Leave them below.