Regarding those men-only “best of the year” lists …
As a book publicist, I’ve spent the past week steeped in “Best of the Year” lists, anxiety building. First came the slow Amazon countdown of their top 100, then the surprise announcement on Friday of the first-ever top 10 list at Publishers Weekly, and then Amazon’s big top 10 reveal Monday. It’s been a long week. Thank god most publications actually save their “Best of the Year” lists for the end of the year. I need a month off from refreshing websites every 3 minutes.
I was a bit distracted by all of the waiting though and didn’t really have a chance to pour over the lists themselves until this afternoon, when I spotted Connie Ogle’s post over at the Miami Herald pointing out that none of PW’s top 10 books were written by a woman. None? I double-checked. None. The leading book publishing trade magazine failed to include a woman in their top 10 list?
I took a step back and thought about it. Was there really no amazing novels penned by a female author this year? Of course not! It was actually a great year for women authors– Hilary Mantel’s Wolf Hall took home the Booker, and A. S. Byatt’s latest came out to rave reviews (and was nominated for the Booker) as did Lorrie Moore’s A Gate at the Stairs. 2 of the 5 fiction writers nominated for the National Book Award are women. Even Amazon’s top 10 included women: 4 to be exact (for 3 books).
So I’m with Connie in her response at the Miami Herald (and Marjorie Kehe in her commentary over at the Christian Science Monitor)–I don’t buy PW’s flimsy excuse: “We wanted to pick the best 10 and we came ready to mix it up, and although we were surprised that, when the dust settled, it wasn’t the most politically correct list—there are no women authors, for example—the balance of our top 100 reflects a remarkable diversity.”
What diversity? Are there any books in translation? Any from small presses? How many foreign or minority authors are there? I’m not saying that these aren’t great books, because they are. But I am saying that it is curious that 8 white guys from big houses take up most of these spots. I’m sure if PW looked a little outside the box, they’d find that there are plenty of books out there just as deserving, with a wider reach, instead of giving us a list of all the books we expected. And PW, if you really do believe that this list “reflects a remarkable diversity,” you don’t need to point that out in the press release. Because it doesn’t, and it just makes everyone look a little bit closer.
This article raises a question that has been floating around my mind since my first fiction book, Randolph’s Challenge Book One - The Pendulum Swings, was published in May this year. The question is, do the book lists truly reflect the ranking of the books for their entertainment value (however that worth might be determined) or are they a list representative of the authors/agents/publishers who have the best marketing ability, biggest budgets or known names?
This is not intended to denigrate the books that do make the lists, most of which are deserving of much praise, but more to call for some way in which the smaller agent, the less wealthy publisher, the unknown names who have also written books equally worthy of note might get a look in, other than by pure luck.
You raise an important point Megan, which is much broader than just the gender issue.
Chris Warren
Author and Freelance Writer
Randolph’s Challenge Book One - The Pendulum Swings
I think Jane Smiley might have said it best in short, in her comment over at the NYT’s Arts Beat blog:
2009–LA Fiction prize–Marilynne Robinson; Mann Booker International Prize–Alice Munro; Booker Prize–Hilary Mantel; Nobel Prize–Herta Muller; Pulitzer Prize–Elizabeth Strout.
PW–out to lunch.
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/no-1-omission-from-top-10-book-list-women/?partner=rss&emc=rss&apage=2#comment-152401