Regular Jezebel readers will realize I ripped off the title of today’s entry. And I also feel guilty because I think that I am going to violate netiquette by publishing portions of an e-mail, which the writer probably assumed was private. But given that this actually touches on an incident in the very first chapter of LIFE SENTENCES, I feel that’s . . . well, no I don’t feel that it’s justifiable. I just feel like doing it. Here’s the note, with my comments in caps.
“Please do not be
offended by my question. [THAT IS: I AM GOING TO SAY SOMETHING OFFENSIVE BUT INSIST YOU GIVE ME DISPENSATION] Why do you use the photo of yourself (such as the
one on the back cover of “LIFE SENTENCES”) rather that [CQ] a more updated
picture? As a first time reader, are you not misleading the reader about you
and perhaps your writing? [DANGLING MODIFIER, MUCH?]
I am going to climb out on a limb here and say that no one writes the male writers I know about their photographs unless they want to say “Where can I get a shirt like that?” or “What kind of dog is that?” I am also going to say that I am only 30 months older in the photo on my book, and I also happen to be fifteen pounds lighter with darker, longer hair.
I actually do believe that people buy books because of the cover, as I’ve said here before. But if you’re buying a novel because of the author’s photo – -seek help.
How’s your day? Mine is actually going swimmingly. In Houston, did a great midday luncheon with the incomparable Murder by the Book, will be at the store tonight. Weather is gorgeous, too.
I just realized I used the word “swimmingly” because I am under the spell of Elizabeth Strout’s OLIVE KITTERIDGE, a book that is beyond marvelous.
And yet lost to Bolano. The men continue to receive no punishment for all their crimes, in print and otherwise.
Gosh, I only ever buy books based on the font used on the inside flaps. It never occurred to me to be swayed solely by the author’s photo. </snark>
But seriously, what does the author’s appearance have to do with the content of the book? (I know, preaching to the choir here.) Just because I’m a late-30′s white male, does that mean I can’t possibly write about, say, a late-teenaged Japanese woman with any kind of skill or sensitivity? Must I be fluent in trumpet in order to write about a jazz musician? Isn’t part of the joy of writing its transformative power? And I mean that for the author as well as the reader.
Swimmingly would be the word of the day here, too. I’m in the midst of a sketch about Arthur Miller and Saul Bellow that seems to be writing itself.
Also you look gorgeous in both. Duh.
I can’t even begin to follow the thought process in which an author photo, any author photo, has the potential to mislead a reader about the author’s writing. If one gets a haircut, one’s writing is forever changed? Bravo to you for managing to take such idiocy in stride!
I have been meaning to read “Olive Kitteridge” and your enthusiasm for it bumps it closer to the top of my TBR pile. I picked up Abigail Thomas’s “Thinking About Memoir” after you mentioned it here a while back and have been enjoying it. I’m glad I waited till now to dip into it though, because I’m enjoying it that much more after my recent read of “Life Sentences” got me thinking quite deeply about memoir!
Jeez.
While I may occasionally buy wine for the label (okay, they were crap, but I *had* to try Mommy’s Time Out and Marilyn Merlot), an author’s photo, how old it is, or fill in the blank, doesn’t do anything for me, other than provoke an occasional thought (“I wonder how old that retriever is? What a nice glossy coat.” “Wow. He only has one eye.”), and certainly nothing that would cause me to comment. Not yet, anyway.
Mary Oliver has used the same photo for 20, 30? years. When asked about it, quite some time ago, she said that she doesn’t change it (and frankly, would prefer none at all) because she doesn’t want the reader to think about what she looks like; her goal is to share her words.
Did that arse think you were on Match.com?
//karen
When I wrote disapprovingly of the mass hysteria surrounding the death of Princess Diana, I received a letter, unsigned, that read, “I notice you are very plain. I believe this is why you cannot understand the love others feel for the beautiful dead princess.”
When they can’t think of anything else to say, they go after your looks. Always.
It’s good to know this happens to the gorgeous blondes, too.
Well. Good grief. If people buy books because of the author’s appearance, I am doomed. And what about all those mmpb writers who have no jacket photos at all? Sometimes I think that might be the way for all of us to go, so we never have to deal with idiotic e-mails like that one.
I’m one of those old-fashioned types who buy a book because it promises to be a helluva good story, and if a book has the name Laura Lippman on the cover, I take that as an ironclad guarantee. I think you look just fine, Laura — and wow, what a brilliant smile you have — but you could look like a bulldog and I wouldn’t care.
When I was working as a bookseller, I learned early not to try to recognize visiting authors on the basis of their jacket photos — but the worst offenders were ALWAYS men. (I’m thinking of a particular bestselling author of thrillers, but no names.)
I hope your response was, “I knew I shouldn’t have grown the beard.”
Note: Nance’s newspaper column carried the same damned cute photo of her for, like, fifteen years!
As one of her loyal readers, I always felt that that was unfair and misleading; my hair was thinning and my waist was thickening – while my only view of her visage revealed enduring youth and beauty….and the REALLY unfair part is – then I met her, and saw that the newspaper photo did her no justice at all – so that in the end, it was DOUBLY unfair (and misleading!)
Having now seen Ms Lippman, that same unfairness revealed itself….but that’s OK. As they say in the shampoo commercial, I won’t hate you because you’re beautiful
Best I can determine, I am smiling on my book cover, leading one to believe I write happy books. People — men — used to complain that I looked too serious in my author photograph. (The Marion Ettlinger, which did, in fact, flatter me outrageously.)
Next book, I think I’m going to ask to sub out my photo with a cartoon I once drew of myself: It showed my head as a large rectangle, sectioned off like a month on a calendar and I had a worried little frown. Now that looks just like me.
You now have “darker, longer hair.” Men often cannot see past the blond.
I hope you’re having fun at MBTB in Houston. Judy and I are in Houston, too, but we’re not having fun where we are. Judy’s having a lot less than I am, however.
I got a blog review recently that ranked on my author photo, calling me “a bleached California blond who’s obviously had too much Botox.”
I was all, “Dude, like I could *afford* Botox? Dream the hell on…” Unfortunately, the blog refused comments.
FWIW–When Diana Gabaldon stopped using a glamour shot on her covers and switched to a picture of her with straight hair (straight is how she normally wears it) and little makeup, she began receiving inquiries from worried fans who assumed she had been ill.
Sandra raises an interesting point. Once you’ve crossed the threshold into someone’s home, they own you somehow. A TV anchor I know was doing some extended plumbing repairs at home and took his wedding ring off for the duration. He got a daily call from one viewer or another, wondering if everything was OK in his marriage.
That Ettlinger photo was the bomb. Noir Laura.
At first I was going to suggest you give the emailer some slack as she is likely an evolving, developing reader who doesn’t know yet where to focus her comments (it was a woman, right?) However, as I read thru the comments, I conclude the emailer was only a bit jealous. Does she have an author photo?????
Bill,
I had a great time at MBTB, but I always do. My thoughts are with you and Judy.
Marjorie-
A professor of mine did that at the FSF Conference last fall. although she confused LL for me based on book photos (i assume). When she told me the story, I had a good laugh. I couldn’t think of a better person to be confused with (for me–not such a good deal for LL!)
//kjl
Bitch is a pretty good wine, as are almost all Molly Dookers.
Marjorie, hold your head up! There’s a world of difference between those two stories. Yours is a common one, that I hear frequently. No one has ever before suggested that the dissonance between my image and my real face would mislead readers, however.
Wow, I feel so misled.
What a moron.
[hanging head]
I am not going to defend that yahoo’s email, but since I did once post a comment about Laura’s book jacket photo, I feel the need to explain why it mattered at all to me. The most recent Bouchercon in Baltimore was my first and I was very excited to be attending and to be seeing some of my favorite authors in person for the first time. Until an author was seated at a panel with a sign in front naming them, I did not know who was who unless I reemembered their book jacket photos. Well, in Laura’s case, the real Laura was so different (and so much better IMHO) from the photo’ed Laura that I would never have known it was her.
In my defense, I have never bought a book based on an author’s photo. I pinkie swear it.
–Marjorie
I admit that I often buy wine based on the label, and have found some nice ones that way. But, to buy a book based on the author’s photograph? No. Based on the cover, maybe.
It can’t be coincidence you got this email after the Morning Edition segment on author photos, can it?
Still, no getting around that the note is unjustified and unwarranted crap.