“Every few years, someone counts up the titles covered in the New York Times Book Review and the short fiction published in the New Yorker, as well as the bylines and literary works reviewed in such highbrow journals as Harper’s and the New York Review of Books, and observes that the male names outnumber the female by about 2 to 1. This situation is lamentable, as everyone but a handful of embittered cranks seems to agree, but it’s not clear that anyone ever does anything about it. The bestseller lists, though less intellectually exalted, tend to break down more evenly along gender lines; between J.K. Rowling and Stephenie Meyer alone, the distaff side is more than holding its own in terms of revenue. But when it comes to respect, are women writers getting short shrift?” (more @ Salon)
Related
This is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Bestseller lists aren’t necessary anything to do with “great”; they’re what’s popular. Since the general population is roughly 50/50 male/female, and the average reader reads junk about things they personally identify with, I’d expect bestseller lists to match the audience.
However, great is something very different. To make a great work, you need to be the best in your field, regardless of what’s popular. I’m NOT saying that women can’t make great work, but if there happen to be more male writers than female writers, or even just more male writers trying to write great works, rather than trying to write an enjoyable, pleasurable book, then the end result is obviously going to match your observation.
Now, having said THAT… if, after following that line of logic and eliminating other reasons for the mismatch, THEN I’d agree that women are getting a short shrift, and something needs to be done.
Lee – Thanks for your comment, but the observation is not mine: it is the question posed by Laura Miller in her Salon essay (see link) prefacing her review of Elaine Showalter’s new book, “A Jury of Her Peers: American Women Writers From Anne Bradstreet to Annie Proulx.”