What do pornography and historical fiction have in common? More than one might think!
Frank Santo’s
review of Fifty Shades of Grey (NY Daily News) included this striking
commentary: << But
this is exactly why this book matters. It manages, miraculously, to be at once
pornographic and deeply unappealing to men – it is a kind of pornography that
attracts only women, and thus far it is selling off the charts. >>
Jessica Reaves, writing for the Chicago
Tribune, posed some interesting questions: << Of all the
erotica published in the last couple of years, this bizarrely conservative
sexcapade is the one anointed by a seven-figure movie deal? . . . Why has this
book, of all the thousands of books released this year, caused such a
sensation? Why are so many people — mostly women — reading it? Honestly, I'm
not sure. It could be that American women are tired of listening to
presidential candidates and radio hosts chastising women for having sex. It may
also be that e-reader technology allows readers to download even the world's
most inane books without revealing the reader's terrible taste to fellow
commuters or people waiting in line at the DMV. Whatever the cause of the
book's popularity, one thing seems certain: It has nothing to do with the book
itself. >>
Now, without presenting a critique of the work in question (which I
have neither read nor felt inclined to review), I should like to offer a few
thoughts of my own. These, in some
ways, reflect the reality of the publishing world at present.
Erika Leonard, who authored Fifty
Shades (under the pseudonym E. L. James), was a British television
executive; her husband is a screenwriter.
We must remember that the biggest problem with the publishing world is
that of “connections.” Those
privileged “insiders” who have the “connections” find it far easier to get
published; those who do not are generally consigned to the literary
dung-heap. Does anyone truly
believe that the children’s books by Jill Biden and Michelle Obama were gobbled
up on the basis of their literary merits?
How many equal, if not superior volumes were rejected by the same
publishers?
I marvel at Santo’s naïveté.
Does he not realize that while men (particularly younger men) may enjoy
watching pornographic videos, it is women who read pornographic
literature. Moreover, two
corollaries develop: (1) Most
successful writers in this field are women; and (2) The publishing moguls are
therefore far less inclined to “take a chance” on a male author in this
field.
And this segues to the “bigger” picture. Who actually can get published
these days – on anything? Whether
fiction or nonfiction, name recognition and celebrity status are vital. Former House Speaker and presidential
aspirant Newt Gingrich, for example, has no problem getting his novels
published. Historical fiction,
alas, is always a difficult sell, and the slightest lapses in scholarship can demolish
the credibility of most mortals.
Well, “most” mortals:
In his
review of Newt Gingrich’s Civil War novels, Alan Wirzbicki (Boston Globe) observed, <<
However, Gingrich makes a number of embarrassing historical mistakes. Some are
relatively minor: for instance, he refers to an old fort atop a hill in
Baltimore where there had in fact been no fortifications prior to the war. . .
. Others are more significant: Admiral David Dixon Porter’s name suddenly
becomes John, and a controversial proposal by Confederate General Patrick
Cleburne to free the slaves is referred to as introduced in 1862, when it was
not actually made until 1864. . . . But perhaps the most glaring is that
Gingrich gives Lincoln a new Vice President and somehow replaces Hannibal Hamlin
with James G. Blaine. >>
So many
errors from an author – at that, someone with a Ph.D. in history! Far better manuscripts than The Battle of the Crater are routinely
rejected by editors; many times, the poor authors can’t even get anyone to
consider their work.
With enough "hype," though, anything can be sold to the public. Of course, it is far easier for the publicists and their coterie of hacks to begin with a recognizable name or "credible" source. True, some lucky authors "win the lottery" and become "super-stars," but this, too, is part of the publishing "game." For above us all hovers the remarkable “crap-shoot” – the bonanza, the “great discovery,” the
“new sensation,” the next big thing.”
Out of nowhere, the media decide to “create” someone – and they do!
Erika Leonard was already a media
“insider”; E. L. James is now a phenomenon.
Gingrich was probably both long before his latest scholarly lapses and
omissions. These two authors
illustrate the business of publishing today. They also explain why I have soured on the “mainstream” axis
(aka “New York Mafia”). But stay
tuned; things will get worse. They
always do!