Old Site


Bookninja 2.0:



.

Hearsay:

July 15, 2009

AKA

In American Fiction Notes, Mark Athitakis has a bit to say about the nom de plume (which is what Nom de Guerre’s been calling himself so we won’t find out he’s secretly a sissy writer) and its various uses. Aside from the usual reasons of privacy and nonculpability, some of your more prolific authors will put them on, like hats out of a trunk, to dress up for different genres. Of course if you’re as prolific as, say, Joyce Carol Oates, you run the risk of having two stories under two different names being accepted by the same journal. But most of us don’t have to worry about that particular scenario. Mostly the pseudonym is a small flirtation with multiple personalities — or, as Nora Roberts says, “It’s marketing. There’s Pepsi, there’s Diet Pepsi, and there’s Caffeine Free Pepsi.”

It’s also a useful distancing tool for writers who do hack work to pay the bills, so as to avoid the old crap showing up on their Amazon page when they finally sell that literary fiction. Which is not to be confused with distancing tools used by literary fiction authors writing under their own names who would just rather stay home, thanks.

Still, for a really good smokescreen you can’t beat plain old anonymity. Taking that idea and running with it is The New Anonymous, a new journal that blind screens and edits all submissions and then publishes them — you guessed it — anonymously: “At The New Anonymous we celebrate the text. We are at once a literary journal and a literary act.” The first issue is out, and you can order it through their website. It’s also on sale at newstands, but we’re not allowed to tell you which ones.

Share the 'Ninja with your 2.0 friends:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • RSS
  • Print
  • email

2 comments on “AKA”

  1. Mary Soderstrom says:

    I mean, who worries about being so bothered by followers that they want to be anonymous? Not most of us writers who would consider running, er, unclothed through Chapters, or Barnes and Noble or McNally’s if we thought it would make us better known.

    Mary

    (No, no, you do it first. I’m too old.)

  2. Trollope says:

    Um, I don’t think you’re getting the concept of the magazine, Mary. If you go to their website, it’s clear that they’re working in a post-modern conceptual zone, an area that questions the concept of authorship and text, etc. The French are to blame, not groupies.

Discuss

Latest comments:
George on
News catchup
Monica on
News catchup
Andrew S on
News catchup
Shelley on
On the dangers of writing about the past
Steven W. Beattie on
Get out there, nerds!
Sean Dixon on
Facebook claims it owns the word "book"
Sean Dixon on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Franklin Carter on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Steven Jensen on
Facebook claims it owns the word "book"
Rob Payne on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Rob Payne on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Brian Busby on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Blake on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Aaron on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Aaron on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Bart King on
How to be a good loser
A.G. Pasquella on
Facebook claims it owns the word "book"
Fred on
Facebook claims it owns the word "book"
Zachariah Wells on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Steven W. Beattie on
Under-rated Canadian writers


Search blog:
Archives:
Old site archive:

January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003

Feeds: