24 October 2005

Right Voice, Right Direction: Women Writing in the Genres
by Lettie Prell

This summer I had a great dumpster-diving experience. A guy was moving out of my apartment building, and he had thrown dozens of science fiction books into the recycling bin. I discovered my benefactor was indeed a "he" when he came out of the building and caught me in the act, with six novels already in my "keeper" pile. Understand, these were quality books he was throwing away, the majority well-maintained hardbacks. His smile at my activities and the few words we exchanged confirmed to me he wasn't tossing the goods because he had outgrown his interest, but rather out of the need to unload some of his accumulated burden in order to expedite his departure. It's a lesson many of us in this moveable society learn; sometimes it's easier to let go of things than take them along.

I made off with some real gems. Gregory Benford, Fred Pohl—and Ursula K. LeGuin and C.J. Cherryh. Yes, men do read women authors, I was reminded, recalling my chat with a male colleague earlier this year, who I found loved to read science fiction and fantasy. I had asked who his favorite authors were, and the first writer he mentioned was Kate Wilhelm; he had read tons of her books. In both these cases I was pleasantly surprised, but why that reaction? What is so remarkable about men reading books written by women? In answering that for myself, I fall headlong into the conundrum of old feminist versus new feminist. The new feminist says, "That's all in the past. Sure, men didn't use to read books written by women, but we're over that now."

"Oh, yeah?" says the old feminist. She's been around. She has plenty examples of how things certainly have not changed, and to suggest otherwise is to be in denial.

Which of these voices is right? My August issue of Asimov's contains four stories written by men, three by women, and one by a male/female pair. These results are far better than the 26% female author bylines Sue Linville found in 2002 when she researched the subject and reported her findings in the SFWA bulletin. Score one for the new feminist.

But wait. The September issue of F&SF yields one woman author to seven men. At this year's Writers of the Future event, there were two women writers honored, and thirteen men. Score two for the old feminist.

Sure, other issues of Asimov's and F&SF, and other WOF years, would show different results than the percentages here. If a full random sample were drawn to get up-to-date stats, however, I doubt if they would be far different from Linville's 2002 findings. This issue of women's presence (or lack thereof) in the genres of fantasy, science fiction and horror has been well-discussed, fueling at least one lively Con panel discussion, and thoughtfully mulled by Diane Silver in her November 2003 Broadsheet editorial, "It's the Wimp Factor--Or Is It?" Silver's "wimp factor" is the suggestion that women themselves are responsible for any overrepresentation of male writers in the field. By one publisher's account, only about a quarter of submissions he sees are from women. In the case of Writers of the Future, the stories are judged blindly, so it can't be intentional gender bias (too, many men these days write stories with female protagonists, so women writers cannot be readily tagged in blind judging). While ultimately, Silver does not let editors off the hook in her essay—and some editors certainly may be a factor—it appears that these places are not getting a lot of submissions by women.

Publishers are focused on putting out good literature that sells, and not with the gender of the person submitting the work. Yet there's enough old feminist in me that I choose to belong to Broad Universe, and donate some time to promoting awareness of women writers. It can be a challenge, however, to do so. Broad Universe is a diverse bunch. We rally around a central mission, but that's the only thing we have in common. Some Broads are "newbie" writers, hoping to sell their first story. Others are strewn along the full length of the publishing spectrum, from self-published through small press, to mass market. Some writers have found a place in amateur publications, and others are established professionals. Many are the in-between, mid-list, mid-career writers.

Because of this diversity, it's nearly impossible to come to a nice conclusion about the issue under discussion—not one that will ring true with everyone. Advise one and all to submit non-stop to the pro markets? Not if the writer isn't ready—that would only lead to frustrations for both the writers and the editors who end up wading in the stuff. I started out getting stories published in a regional zine, which eased the dissatisfaction of not being published, and kept me writing.

On the other hand, submitting to the pro markets in spite of rejection is what some of the rest of us certainly should do. But sprout a speculative third hand, and consider the sensibilities of a writer grown weary of the constant pursuit of "pro" who found fulfillment in small press. There are only so many professional markets, good writers, even big-name writers, are showing up in unexpected places—and some of those places regularly receive attention in Locus.

I'll therefore end this piece with a predictable exhortation to each writer to submit stories. Er, somewhere. And more often. At the same time, some self-assessment—with the help of a trusted and knowledgeable listener if need be—may be in order to suss out appropriate directions in the subtler realms. Seek fertile lands.