Pseudonyms - yes or no?

[MistingWolf]

I might just use my initials with my last name... I have a nickname [and had others] but none of the suitable for an alias

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I still don't see why pseudonyms would be a problem as a 'general' rule. Most of the examples listed in this thread have to do with the hypothetical situation of someone writing under a pen name and not wanting people to know who they really are.

But what about if you're okay with it? What problems would that cause, (if any)? That is to say, people who use pseudonyms not because they want to hide their identity, but for some other, simpler, reason e.g. because they feel their own name isn't 'catchy' or 'marketable' or 'exotic' enough or whatever.

James Oliver Rigney, Jr. was one of the most successful fantasy writers of all-time. Had he really encountered any significant problems in his career (or life) because of the fact that most people know him simply as Robert Jordan? What were his reasons for writing under a pen name, anyway?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I believe that his reason was, originally, that he didn't want his colleagues to know that he was writing fantasy. Once he became so successful, and writing became his "real" job, then it didn't matter who knew. I have no idea whether writing under another name complicated his life in the beginning, but at the same time, I see no reason to suppose that he would not have enjoyed the same success writing under his real name.

because they feel their own name isn't 'catchy' or 'marketable' or 'exotic' enough or whatever.

I think they should wait to hear from someone (like an agent or an editor) who is in a position to know what is "marketable" or "catchy" enough, before making the choice to use a pseudonym. If you start out using a pen name and someday you think, "You know, I would really rather see my own name on the cover of my books," (and there is a great deal of satisfaction in seeing your own name on the cover), there could be a lot of resistance from your publishers if you want to switch.

I just wouldn't advise putting yourself in that position unless you have a very, very good reason. Such reasons do exist, but, as I have been saying all along, it's not a decision that should be made lightly. If you are successful, you could end up writing under that name for the rest of your life. You need to think about how you might feel about that name years down the line.

In my own experience, the day you first hold that book in your hand, the day you first see it in a bookstore, it's a lot more exciting seeing your own name on the cover than seeing a pseudonym. So much more thrilling. Obviously, if you really feel that your career is on the line or some equally compelling reason, denying yourself that pleasure is a small thing by comparison. But if you are considering it just because you think another name would be more exciting, you might find out too late that this is not the case.

I'm not saying don't do it. I'm saying consider the question from all possible angles before making a decision that could stay with you for a long time. Because doing it is simple -- as MeriPie suggested, it's just a matter of saying, put this name on the book instead of that -- but as with so many other decisions we make in life, living with it can be very different from what you thought it would be.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

You know, I find this idea of 'colleagues not approving' to be quite humourous.

Who, exactly, are these ominous colleagues (cue theme from Jaws), who have such a stick up their behinds that they would take umbrage with you having a published novel? Or is it just fantasy they have a problem with? Would they prefer a thriller, perhaps? Sounds more dashing? Would your bosses be in the meeting room like:

- "I think John's the right man for the promotion. He's been doing some excellent work. Let's bring him in."
- "Wait, haven't you heard? John's written a novel called The Heroic Quest of Grumble Drogan?
- "Don't tell me that's one of those fantasy rubbish with a made-up world and elves and magic and things??"
- "I'm afraid it is..."
- "Well, that's that, then. We can't have someone like that heading up our new branch, can we?"
- "Not unless one of our customers is a hobbit..."
*everyone starts laughing*

There are maybe, like, 11 jobs in the world where you have any sort of a genuine reason to hide your novel from colleagues. Like if you're a scientist who is part of some research team in Harvard or something; surely your colleagues would have trouble taking you seriously if they know you've written a fantasy novel.

However, I agree with you, Teresa, that it is not a decision to be taken lightly. You make a very, very good point; seeing your own (actual) name on a published novel must be a great thrill, one that cannot be matched by seeing a pen name.

In any case, I assume these are decisions which are largely up to the publisher, right? If they think your name isn't quite marketable enough, I guess they will recommend using a pseudonym, and vice versa.

 

[Peter Graham]

Who, exactly, are these ominous colleagues (cue theme from Jaws), who have such a stick up their behinds that they would take umbrage with you having a published novel?

Very few, I suspect. But that's not really the point. I don't trumpet the fact that I write because:-

1. Nearly everyone reckons they are going to write a book and nearly no-one does. And of those who do, virtually none of them get published. I don't want to sound like some drippy dreamer until I've got it signed, sealed and delivered - and by that, I mean published.

2. It's not about me or my sense of self or the image I wish to portray to others. I write because I enjoy writing and wouldn't mind doing it instead of my real job, although I know that is not likely. I don't do it because I want people to think I'm very clever, or that I'm an "artist" (god forbid), or because I want to be the centre of attention. It's no-one else's business.

Or is it just fantasy they have a problem with? Would they prefer a thriller, perhaps? Sounds more dashing?

Let's be honest here. Fantasy is stereotyped as being the favoured genre of spotty teenage boys who aren't very good with the girlies and who like Death Metal. As with all stereotypes, it is a grossly unfair image (and is not one I subscribe to), but nevertheless it is widely held, even amongst people who actually read some of the "big" fantasy (Tolkien, Pullman, Rowling, Peake et al). My guess is that once a fantasy book goes stellar, is is seen primarily as a classic, or as a piece of popular fiction, rather than as fantasy per se.

So yes, your putative directors probably would view a thriller in a more positive light. Because, unfair or not, on the face of it a thriller would seem groovier.

Regards,

Peter

 

[The Judge]

But that's not really the point. I don't trumpet the fact that I write because:-

1. Nearly everyone reckons they are going to write a book and nearly no-one does. And of those who do, virtually none of them get published. I don't want to sound like some drippy dreamer until I've got it signed, sealed and delivered - and by that, I mean published.

2. It's not about me or my sense of self or the image I wish to portray to others. I write because I enjoy writing and wouldn't mind doing it instead of my real job, although I know that is not likely. I don't do it because I want people to think I'm very clever, or that I'm an "artist" (god forbid), or because I want to be the centre of attention. It's no-one else's business.

Ditto. Not that (1) prevents you using your real name, Peter, since no one need know about it until it's there on the shelves. As to (2) - quick disclaimer - I don't think those who do want to see their real name on a book are doing it for egotistical reasons, but I'm very happy for no one but a few close friends to know the person named on a book cover is really me.

I'm intrigued that you found so much difference in your emotions, Teresa, between seeing your real name and seeing your pseudonym on the cover of your books. Is that perhaps because the false name was imposed on you and it was something you remained very upset about? After all, you willingly changed your name when you married** and it was your husband's name, not your birth name, you saw on your very first book. I'm not intending to cause offence in saying that, and I hope I didn't, and I do recognise there is a world of difference between the two things - but perhaps it's a question of 'ownership' of the name, as much as identity?

As a matter of further interest were there practical difficulties in using the pseudonym? I know in your particular case there was real secrecy involved, which must have been oppressive to say the least, but I was thinking in terms of receiving cheques and opening bank accounts and so on. Here in England it's possible for a person to give himself whatever name he wants, as long as there is no intention to defraud, but the draconian rules Governments have brought in supposedly to prevent money-laundering (ha ha) make life difficult in that respect. I recall reading somewhere that in the US it's an offence to use a name without a formal change of name deed or something - but that seems a bit odd.

** I assume this from your comments about your birth-name beginning with 'W' - and frankly, Edgerton is so wonderfullly distinctive anyone would be happy to take it!

 

[Toby Frost]

A lot of writing strikes me as very much the writer's own business, and this is one of those things. There are of course writers who want to keep their own life very seperate from the authorial one, for whatever reason, and others who may write two or three different sorts of book as different - and to all extents separate - people. I cannot think of a bad reason to use a pseudonym (except perhaps fraud!). On the other hand, I can't think of a situation where you must use one. At the end of the day - your choice, just be aware of any repercussions.

(Death Smash by Mike Clawhammer, the 36th novel to feature Detective Phil Blitzer (LAPD homicide) is now available in all good bookshops. Mr Clawhammer denies all knowledge of Faye Drippy's earlier work).

 

[MeriPie]

I actually do think writing fantasy is quite likely to knock your credibility a bit in certain jobs. Despite it being very unlikely that anyone who would judge you harshly for it would be in the SFF section long enough to spot your name, I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that it could cause a bit of a problem in the workplace, especially if you're doing quite a serious job with important clients.

 

[Nik]

I posted my 'plausible vampire' novel on a public-readable forum with a munged name --semi-pseudononymously (sp?)-- because it included an orgy and other behaviour that fitted that romp of a tale, but did not belong *near* my beloved, but stalled Hard_SF Arc...

Took me a year to get over the embarassment of turning out something that briefly bordered on soft porn...

If I was still working, I would have *had* to post under a pseudonym, as such a saucy tale would have drawn unwanted notoriety to my small corner of Big Pharma...

I was already considered 'a bit strange' but, fortunately, I'd found a useful niche. Had 'Project Lorraine' been published, it might have been a quirk too much for some of my managers...

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Is that perhaps because the false name was imposed on you and it was something you remained very upset about? After all, you willingly changed your name when you married and it was your husband's name, not your birth name, you saw on your very first book. I'm not intending to cause offence in saying that, and I hope I didn't, and I do recognise there is a world of difference between the two things - but perhaps it's a question of 'ownership' of the name, as much as identity?

No, I wasn't upset about the use of the pseudonym. All the problems that I've mentioned had not yet come up at the time I first saw my name on the cover. And it isn't that I need other people to see my name on my books -- it's something that I need to see. I feel a very intense connection with my work. I think all writers should. And when you finally hold the finished product in your hand, seeing your own name on the cover is an expression of that connection, and it feels good. To me, seeing the pseudonym on the cover did nothing to confirm that connection. And I missed it. I didn't know that I would, but I did.

As for using my married name: I was twenty-two when I married. Part of my decision to take my husband's name was related to the fact that we intended to have children. (For me, it seemed important that we should all have the same name.) And, yes, I liked the look and sound of it better than the name on my birth certificate Of course the change took a little getting used to, but I was still at an age when one's identity is a little more fluid. By the time my first book was published, I had been Teresa Edgerton all day everyday for a long time. It was who I was. It was certainly who I was when I was writing the book.

As a matter of further interest were there practical difficulties in using the pseudonym ... I was thinking in terms of receiving cheques and opening bank accounts and so on. Here in England it's possible for a person to give himself whatever name he wants, as long as there is no intention to defraud

The same rule applies here. But usually the contract and the checks have your real name on them, anyway, so that isn't a problem. Unless you didn't want your even your publisher to know your name, but I would think the situations where that would come up would be very, very rare.

If they think your name isn't quite marketable enough, I guess they will recommend using a pseudonym, and vice versa.

Unless a publisher wants to relaunch an author under a new name in order to shed any baggage associated with previous books, the chances they will ask you to completely change your name are very, very small -- with the notable exception of romance novels, where the publisher always wants a woman's name on the cover, and often they want you to use a "house name," a name you can only use on books they publish, so that if you switch publishers you can't take your readers with you.

However, once the decision is made to use a pseudonym, the publisher may become heavily involved in the process of choosing that name. Editors who wouldn't so much as suggest that you change your real name (whatever it might be) suddenly insist that you choose a pen name to suit them. Mine was quite adamant that I have a last name that began with "I" or "H" so that my books would appear on the shelves between Hobb and Jordan.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Mine was quite adamant that I have a last name that began with "I" or "H" so that my books would appear on the shelves between Hobb and Jordan.

Well, it seems to have worked out...

@MeriPie

I actually do think writing fantasy is quite likely to knock your credibility a bit in certain jobs. Despite it being very unlikely that anyone who would judge you harshly for it would be in the SFF section long enough to spot your name, I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that it could cause a bit of a problem in the workplace, especially if you're doing quite a serious job with important clients.

I think your assumption is based on a flawed premise. You're vastly over-esimating how well-known fantasy writers are. As someone who is a relative newcomer to the genre (I only really got into it a little over a year ago), I can attest to the fact that most authors - even the big names - are quite unknown to the masses.

I've been reading novels for over a decade (since my teens), and it wasn't until I actually starting reading fantasy that I knew who George R. R. Martin, Steven Erikson, Stephen Donaldson, Robert Jordan et al were. They might be big names in the world of SFF, but John Grisham or Dan Brown they ain't. It's only the writers whose popularity transcends the genre who are known to the 'outsiders', e.g. J. K. Rowling, Tolkien etc.

If your colleagues/clients are people who have a negative impression of the genre, the chances are they won't even be aware of your work to begin with, so question of pseudonym/no pseudonym is moot. And anyone who actually checks out the SFF section of the bookstore is obviously not critical of the genre, so they shouldn't mind, anyway.

Of course, there's one important point that negates any fear of ostracism: you will only really be known to the general public after you've achieved a certain level of fame and success, at which point you'll probably be doing this for a living anyway, so your colleagues are really now your former colleagues.

All in all, writing under a pen name because of what co-workers or clients might say is, in my humble opinion, the single worst reason to do so.