I love Elena Ferrante’s work - mostly through the Neapolitan series, but I have read some of her other books, too. I think it’s actually quite wonderful and freeing to be able to read them without having to reference the author’s background. I like being able to enjoy and appreciate art in and of itself and not needing to dig deeper. There is enough deep mess in the words for a lifetime of digging.
I also agree that there would definitely be a tendency to look at whether her life gave her the ‘validity’ to write what she wrote. Could she write about leaving her children if she never had children? Could she only write about abuse and violence if she had experienced it? And so on.
And the power of not having to buy into building a platform, and performing outside of the words she writes? Wonderful! Would that we all had that.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments, Tasha. I agree; so often, an author's biography (particularly women's) are assumed to reflect their fictional characters. I was in fact just reading an interesting interview with Elizabeth Strout, an author I love, where she says it is always assumed that Lucy Barton is autobiographical, which is far from the case. She actually requested that her author photo not be put on the jacket cover, but her publisher refused!
I haven't read her books yet although they are on my short list for next year. I think the use of a pseudonym is perfectly fine and adds to the mystique. It is a personal choice of the author and is a tool that has been used for centuries for various reasons, artistic or otherwise. More power to her, whoever she might be!
I totally agree, Matthew! I think a writer or creator’s work should be allowed to speak for itself. I will be interested to hear what you think of the series when you get to it.
The Gatti story has completely passed me by, but I have read the first three of the Neapolitan quartet - loved the first, felt the second could have done with a little more editing and decided I'd had enough after the third, but these are (obviously) just me personal views. (I did hear the dramatisation on Radio 4 and enjoyed that too.) I was aware of the intrigue about the identity of Elena Ferrante but it didn't affect my reading - that's what fiction is for, to get you involved in the story! As I read your piece, I realised that I hadn't even noticed that Lenu was a diminutive of Elena!
Yes, it does seem that Gatti wanted to claim glory and it has not served his cause at all.
It occurred to me, as I read, that there was relatively little brouhaha when Memoirs of a Geisha was released by the author Arthur Golden.
I write under a pseudonym because my second book (Thinking Straight, 2008), about a gay teen in a religious ex-gay camp, made me fear a radical, right-wing, religious attack. Once that pseudonym was established, it would have been counterproductive to change it because of possible confusion in my reader base.
This is so interesting Kate. Amazing that someone would go to such lengths to try to reveal the author’s identity. Obviously seeking fame for this for themselves.
I loved reading this and I fully buy Orr's argument. What was Gatti trying to prove?! In this particular case, I feel hopeful that as a culture we are sometimes capable of falling on the right side of things.
This is where I admit that I have not yet read Ferrante. I started My Brilliant Friend during the first week of pandemic lockdown (as a mom of a 3 year old then) and I just didn't finish. But I think I am ready to get to it soon!
Mathew, if I don't read it in the next few weeks, I will definitely join you for a co-read into the new year!
Thanks, Petya! I know, I was so pleasantly surprised that so many readers and critics disagreed with Gatti’s investigation! I have to admit, I am not a big reader of Ferrante either…but I love the whole idea around the persona and the way that readers have really connected with that.
In the reasonable country, in the reasonable time, a reasonable author, in this case a woman, (and I love her tetralogy) wants to use a pseudonym. Why is it so troubling? The other and more serious question for me would be of using pseudonyms in the more dangerous circumstances, like what would had happened with Osip Mandelstam or Anna Akhmatova or could it be the cowardice to use pseudonym for B. Pasternak, when his novel Doctor Zhivago was published in Italy? It becomes complicated when you start thinking why, where, when and who used or not used pseudonymes.
I love Elena Ferrante’s work - mostly through the Neapolitan series, but I have read some of her other books, too. I think it’s actually quite wonderful and freeing to be able to read them without having to reference the author’s background. I like being able to enjoy and appreciate art in and of itself and not needing to dig deeper. There is enough deep mess in the words for a lifetime of digging.
I also agree that there would definitely be a tendency to look at whether her life gave her the ‘validity’ to write what she wrote. Could she write about leaving her children if she never had children? Could she only write about abuse and violence if she had experienced it? And so on.
And the power of not having to buy into building a platform, and performing outside of the words she writes? Wonderful! Would that we all had that.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments, Tasha. I agree; so often, an author's biography (particularly women's) are assumed to reflect their fictional characters. I was in fact just reading an interesting interview with Elizabeth Strout, an author I love, where she says it is always assumed that Lucy Barton is autobiographical, which is far from the case. She actually requested that her author photo not be put on the jacket cover, but her publisher refused!
I haven't read her books yet although they are on my short list for next year. I think the use of a pseudonym is perfectly fine and adds to the mystique. It is a personal choice of the author and is a tool that has been used for centuries for various reasons, artistic or otherwise. More power to her, whoever she might be!
I totally agree, Matthew! I think a writer or creator’s work should be allowed to speak for itself. I will be interested to hear what you think of the series when you get to it.
The Gatti story has completely passed me by, but I have read the first three of the Neapolitan quartet - loved the first, felt the second could have done with a little more editing and decided I'd had enough after the third, but these are (obviously) just me personal views. (I did hear the dramatisation on Radio 4 and enjoyed that too.) I was aware of the intrigue about the identity of Elena Ferrante but it didn't affect my reading - that's what fiction is for, to get you involved in the story! As I read your piece, I realised that I hadn't even noticed that Lenu was a diminutive of Elena!
Yes, it does seem that Gatti wanted to claim glory and it has not served his cause at all.
Thank you for reading, Nicola. Yes, when I'm jumping into a book, it's the story within it that I care about most.
This was such a good read. I do think that if someone wants to remain anonymous then they have the choice.
Thanks 😊 I agree!
It occurred to me, as I read, that there was relatively little brouhaha when Memoirs of a Geisha was released by the author Arthur Golden.
I write under a pseudonym because my second book (Thinking Straight, 2008), about a gay teen in a religious ex-gay camp, made me fear a radical, right-wing, religious attack. Once that pseudonym was established, it would have been counterproductive to change it because of possible confusion in my reader base.
Interesting! You clearly have first-hand knowledge of this topic, Robin 😀
This is so interesting Kate. Amazing that someone would go to such lengths to try to reveal the author’s identity. Obviously seeking fame for this for themselves.
It does make you wonder, doesn’t it…thank you for reading, Maureen! :)
There is also the question of safety. It could be unsafe for a woman, particularly, to use their true identity. Did Gatti even think of that ?
Good point. I doubt he gave that a second thought.
I loved reading this and I fully buy Orr's argument. What was Gatti trying to prove?! In this particular case, I feel hopeful that as a culture we are sometimes capable of falling on the right side of things.
This is where I admit that I have not yet read Ferrante. I started My Brilliant Friend during the first week of pandemic lockdown (as a mom of a 3 year old then) and I just didn't finish. But I think I am ready to get to it soon!
Mathew, if I don't read it in the next few weeks, I will definitely join you for a co-read into the new year!
Thanks, Petya! I know, I was so pleasantly surprised that so many readers and critics disagreed with Gatti’s investigation! I have to admit, I am not a big reader of Ferrante either…but I love the whole idea around the persona and the way that readers have really connected with that.
In the reasonable country, in the reasonable time, a reasonable author, in this case a woman, (and I love her tetralogy) wants to use a pseudonym. Why is it so troubling? The other and more serious question for me would be of using pseudonyms in the more dangerous circumstances, like what would had happened with Osip Mandelstam or Anna Akhmatova or could it be the cowardice to use pseudonym for B. Pasternak, when his novel Doctor Zhivago was published in Italy? It becomes complicated when you start thinking why, where, when and who used or not used pseudonymes.
Thank you, Larisa. I agree; it seems that the anonymity of Ferrante was a perfectly reasonable decision.