guy writers vs lady writers poll

that's kinda bullshit

It's total bullshit but it's amazing how regularly you see it trotted out.

here's a crazy suggestion: women writers don't write any differently than male writers, but we read women writers differently than male writers. like i think these ideas are about readers, not writers.

As an aside I see that thrown around almost as much by sub-Julie Burchill types making a hamfisted point about male ego as much as I do by male readers being sniffy about girls.

fwiw in my initial formulation guy writers guy refers to the audience not the writer, and guy is not synonymous w/any sort of essential masculinity but rather a cultural subset, you know guys, stuff guys like - i feel like it was a p visionary term but this thread may be destroying its shot at canonization

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/00/Liz_Phair_-_Exile_in_Guyville.jpg/220px-Liz_Phair_-_Exile_in_Guyville.jpg

no you are a total visionary, totally, all the way, lagoon

thank you

oh craye isn't real she was one of bertie wooster's accidental fiances

there's a funny part in that SCENT OF A WOMAN'S INK article where there's a "blind taste-test" and you're supposed to guess which passage is by a woman and which by a man, but the one you're supposed to think is by a man is 1) so full of stereotypical man-indicators (blood, harshness, dialect) that it would clearly be trying to trick you even if it weren't 2) obviously by flannery o'connor

yah that's one of the reasons i posted it

pretty funny!

like thomp and lagoon i think it's true that the sprawling facetiousness in service of DeepThoughts that pynchon or wallace truck in can particularly appeal to... a certain type? and that that certain type, v generally, might also be into things like the huge detailed busy shallowly-characterized world of comic books or the large numbers in tool's time signatures or nietzsche or idk other things we associate with "guys" (which is why i half-joked in the other thread that i was embarrassed that my answer to the poll was DFW, although i guess in that sense all the other answers were just as embarrassing) but since we all know that girls like that stuff too and since setting up a dichotomy doesn't really work cuz we don't really know what "lady writers" would mean we should prob think of some other way to describe it unless we just really don't want to give james wood the satisfaction (what's being called "guy2" here is p much his "hysterical realism", right? "hysterical"!)

anyway i voted for option three but not out of any hostility to thomp; just cuz it was either that or abstention and i wanted to do my civic duty

norman mailer we can probably call a guy writer though.

i voted lady writers, just seemed like the write thing to do

I've been taking 'lady writer' fairly locally - meaning something like one strain of British mid-twentieth-century literary fiction - domestic, familial, thwarted passions, manners and embarrassment, affairs, late-blooming love, village/small town life - persephone prints a lot of it. I definitely think this idea of the lady novelist was a thing in British literary culture for a long time, & dismissed by dominant 'serious' male culture (but with exceptions - like Larkin and Amis stanning for Elizabeth taylor or Barbara Pym). Who else… Bowen, Joanna Trollope?

obvs I don't think this is some 'natural' state of affairs where women write books like this. men write books like that - it's p clearly the product of social gender roles, expectations, industry structure etc; and that the dichotomy collapses v quickly (which, as a provocative poll head I think it's designed to do?) - so idk Taylor's Angel isn't a 'lady novel' (and is quite meta, destructive of some of these traditions), and again (shit, I need to stop and do some work before 5.30) they're also existing in a british fiction world that includes Ann Quin, Anna Kavan, Christine Brooke-Rose, etc etc etc so I'm not sure what I'm saying.

Yeah, see, those last three are the sort of female writers I do actually bother to read. I don't really know what else goes on...

(Actually, by that I mean they're the sort of *writers* I bother to read. Though I have more of a history of reading guy literature in my teens, so I'm more confident with critiquing the mainstream of that culture.)

This thread shows the most action ILB has seen in many weeks. Kind of sad, really.

gay writers vs. guy writers

sky writers

that spark's work shares a tendency with a lot of the ppl we're (i'm?) calling 'guy writers'

See, Spark seems very female to me, in the sense of the way women are actually more likely to be coldly realistic than men when it comes to the big decisions, whereas men tend to jump in with a 'It'll be fine!' attitude (big generalisation here, I know); which is why, for example, men start waaaaay more businesses than women, but those businesses women start are waaaay more likely to succeed.

I am drunk, this may not make sense

Also, Jennifer Egan seems to have crossed into the blokey Franzen HER BOOK IS A BIG DEAL AND CAUSE FOR OP-ED PIECES territory

I am still drunk

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

too close.

well i guess that conclusively proves that guy writers are better

ill have to look into this fuck you