Gwen's blog

Current Events

January 28, Houston: The book launch party for Lone Star Legend is at Brazos Bookstore, at 7 PM. Y'all are all invited!

February 4, Houston: I'll be reading/signing at the downtown Houston Public Library, at 6 PM.

February 5, Austin: I'll be reading/signing at BookPeople and will undoubtedly stop by the FlipHappy crepe trailer some time after that.

February 5, San Antonio: I'll be reading/signing at the San Pedro Barnes and Noble and will probably buy some coconut candy at Mi Tierra, too.

My other blog: Go read my the Houston Chronicle parenting blog (or my ChronMomBlog, as I like to call it) and find out what I've said to piss off the more conservative commenters this week.

Buy my new novel, Lone Star Legend.

Friday, October 08, 2004
I just lived through my nightmare of the week. And survived!

Last week I was invited to speak on a local radio show. The host of the show asked my publisher for a copy of my book so that she could read it ahead of time and know what to ask me in the interview.

My publisher sent her a bound set of galleys, instead. You see, as I mentioned earlier, the printing of the book has been delayed. To be honest, that's probably at least partially my fault. I made a lot of last-minute changes, including some entire story switch-outs, during the last galley review. So they had to re-edit everything. There wasn't even time for me to review the bluelines. To be absolutely honest with you (like y'all know I like to be), I'm not even sure what exactly the book is going to have in it when it comes out. Because they didn't accept all my rewrites - just "most" of them. So... I won't know what it says until next week's show, when I see the first rush-printed advance copies, along with everyone else.

So, last week's nightmare was that I'd show up at next week's show and find out, there on the stage, that the book was full of the wrong words. I literally had that dream - that I was preparing for the big reading and then saw that my book was full of pornographic paintings and pretentious literature written by someone else.

This week's nightmare has been that, as one of the very first people to read my book in its final form, the host of today's radio show would dislike it.

All the way to work this morning, I idly wondered what I would do if it became apparent to me that the host didn't like my book. How would I defend my work? Or would I just have to accept that it wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea? I finally told myself to quit being so silly and insecure.

Two women were waiting in the studio while the host rushed around. The women told me their names, but not why they were there. One of them I'd actually met before, although I don't think she remembered.

In the very few minutes before we went on air, I saw one of the women skimming through my bound galleys. I made a weak joke about hoping that she'd say favorable things about it. She indicated, at that point, that she most likely would not.

Oh my gosh. She began to tell me why she didn't like my book. I began to try to talk to her about it. But there was no time. The host ran in and we went live.

The host introduced me. Then, she told me that she had found my book "difficult to read."

Oh my gosh. Oh my gosh.

The other woman was her sister. (The third woman left while I was reading my first piece. She never said anything, so I don't know if she didn't like the book, either, or not.) The host had brought her sister on the show to lend supportive comments on why my book was not enjoyable.

Oh... Oh my gosh.

The thirty-minute program went by in a time-warping blur of soundwaves and emotion. I can't explain to you what happened. I said what I had to say, but can't remember what it was.

Because, when nightmares happen to you in real life, you can either cower under the covers and cry, or you can... You can just do what you have to do until the alarm clock goes off. You can sink or swim, basically. All I do know is that, when it was over, the host hugged me and her sister promised she'd go back and read my whole book for real this time. As you can imagine, I was relieved. These are women I respect, and their opinions meant a lot to me.

The radio station's former general manager called the host to tell her it was her best interview ever. A listener called to tell me he couldn't wait to read my book. And then I had to get in my car and hurry back to work.

I won't know anything until I hear the archived MP3 of the program. Y'all listen to it, too, and let me know what you think.
 

1:29 PM #

Comments:

 "Difficult to read?" CAN she READ? I'm thinking this woman skimmed over your galleys on the way to the station and just made a quick assumption based on that. I hate it when people do that and to the author it means the world to them...but as a flaky reviewer, it's just another story. Whatever. I'm glad that in the end it turned out everyone was happy with it.


# posted by Blogger Datty : 1:17 PM  

 Gwen, I have only heard one of your short stories
from your book at your last book reading. I thought
your story on the ants took a lot of creativity and
imagination. I have not read the rest of the stories
in your book but if the rest of them are
similar to the ant story, I feel that your book
appeals to people with higher creativity and intelligence. Which is a good thing because this is
the type of people you would want to attract anyways.
If anyone feels that the book may be hard to read they
perhaps may not have as high creativity and imagination
as you (no offense to anyone) and maybe that's why
they just "don't get it".

Judging from what I have read on your blog and
the ant story from your book reading, I think you are an excellent writer and I'm sure your book will appeal to many!

Cathee


# posted by Blogger MissCathee : 1:26 PM  

 OK, I'm listening to the archived episode right now.

Those ladies put you in a really, really hard situation, and it strikes me as pretty unprofessional of them to bring you on their show and throw this heap of personal trauma at you and be like, "and now there's a rapist raping single latina mothers in front of their kids and that's why your book really upsets me." What the hell kind of journalism is that? (Also, I think it's sort of ridiculous for her to invite you to be on her show, and then to hog the spotlight for 3/4 of the time...)

Anyway. You comported yourself so professionally and thoughtfully in the face of their weird hostility and hysteria and muddle-mindedness. You were polite, diplomatic, and sharp. And now I *really* can't wait to read your book. So, yeah.

Great work in the worst of circumstances.


# posted by Blogger Calista : 4:15 PM  

 OK, also, I totally just created a blogger account just so I could post on your comments board. Heh.


# posted by Blogger Calista : 4:16 PM  

 I totally feel they kind of ganged up on you, and unloaded *so much* stuff onto you. The emotional baggage was just so fucking unfair! You did beautifully, and I am really really proud to know you.

For myself, I don't understand--have never understood--why people assume that there is One Way to handle adversity. And I think your point--that bravado keeps us from reaching out for help--was a very important point to make.

You did good, and I'm really looking forward to reading your book.

--Michelle


# posted by Blogger Smarticus : 4:45 PM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Blogger Josh : 5:20 PM  

 Thanks, y'all. Y'all's support means a *lot*. (As evidenced by those asterisks. That's as sentimental as I get here.)

I agree, Josh, about them being heart-go-out-worthy. Looking back, I had to guess that they were going through some major stuff in their lives, and that the first few pieces they read just pushed some buttons for them. And that's understandable. Although the book is NOT all about men treating women poorly, I can see how my candid discussion of that might bring up emotions that aren't exactly happy for some readers.

I just wish they'd had time to read the whole thing before the interview. But that's okay. No big deal, now that it's all over.


# posted by Blogger Gwen : 11:39 PM  

 Gosh dang it... I accidentally deleted Josh's post above. Blogger keeps doing that whenever I accidentally click anywhere on the screen. Here's what he said:

"WHOA. That was some harrowing stuff. It's hard to know what to make of all that, I can't imagine how I would've reacted under similar circumstances, and I hope I never have to! I give Gwen major credit for keeping it together the whole time. It seemed like those two women were hell-bent on unloading their baggage on her, which isn't right, but my heart goes out to them too. In any event, I guess it all ended alright, and made for some pretty dramatic radio."


# posted by Blogger Gwen : 12:25 AM  

 Gwen, you are a perfect example of grace under pressure. You really turned that interview around.

I am unsure as to what disturbed Ana Nuñez. Did Nuñez think you were advocating the objectification of women? (It’s difficult to believe that she could be this obtuse.)

Or, did she just object to reading a book that dealt with real issues?

Nuñez must be a very inexperienced reader. Some of the most revered works of literature have been about painful issues such as Harper Lee's "To Kill a Mockingbird", Alice Walker's "The Color Purple", and Toni Morrison's "Beloved".


# posted by Blogger Yvonne : 1:17 AM  

 It's me, Keli, posting anonymously because I don't want to sign up for a Blogger account. The host seems really hihg-strung, like she's about to cry at any moment. And her comment, "All women are alike," was kind of an odd thing for a self-identifying feminist to say. She sounds so upset about these stories, and the objectification of women, and hasn't she ever read Sandra Cisneros? Jesus! And she's audibly whispering while you're reading something completely powerful (the ninja rock star passage), which is just so rude. I think you did an excellent job of holding your ground... she missed a great deal of your sarcasm. She seems fairly out of touch in many aspects. I think you came out on top and explained yourself very well, more than an author should have to defend her work. It's not a fucking dissertation.


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 1:35 AM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Blogger R.T. Lemur : 8:24 AM  

 Before I jump into the dog-pile, I will say that taking an extreme or negative position on something is a conventional talk radio trick to get a good show out of people. Otherwise it'll be like, "Gwen, your book is good, what did you think?" And Gwen will be like, "Thanks!" And then the host will be all, "My favorite part is when I read it! What about you?" And Gwen would totally go, "My favorite part is when I wrote it!" And then the host wouldn't be getting calls from her producer on what a great show she just did.

That said, unless it's something she does all the time, bringing in her sister was weird. But at least it got a good show out of it for you, Gwen, even if it was harrowing.

-- Mike


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 11:10 AM  

 Are they going to let you host your own talk show when this lady goes on vacation? You were infinitely more composed than the Emotional Twins. Way to take control of a wacky situation. They had their own agendas, but you managed to cut through the BS and get some "hostile" interview experience out of it. Kudos. Now I *really* can't wait for my Amazon copy to come.


# posted by Blogger Pat : 4:34 PM  

 Gwen,

I have to agree with a lot of the previous posters wrote — the woman who interviewed you seemed inexperienced and rather unprofessional, especially considering she gave you such little time to talk and YOU were the guest. They also seemed to be interested in pushing their own interpretation of the work, rather than letting viewers draw their own conclusions based on your readings — and if that was the case, then why bother having you on at all?

Anyway, I thought you handled it like a champ, and I'm looking forward to reading it myself. :D

Candice


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 7:53 PM  

 That interviewer chick needs to get some serious therapy and stop using her guests as therapists. I can not imagine anything as inappropriate as announcing you are pregnant out of wedlock and having baby daddy drama trauma in the middle of an interview. It is just flat rude. I am flabbergasted. If they wanted to talk about themselves why did they bother having you on at all!?! I hope the rest of your interviews are not this psycho.


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 8:23 PM  

 I've been anxiously awaiting the release of your book! I can't wait to see it tank. It's going to be great.


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 10:03 PM  

 Wow. What an eerily awesome feeling it is to find out that, while I'm sitting here reading a transcript of the last debate, someone is sitting somewhere else actively wishing failure on me.

Since we're both awake, Anonymous person, you should email me and tell me more of your thoughts. At what sales figure will you decide that my book has tanked? Where will you get your statistics - from Amazon's sales rank, or somewhere else? If my book doesn't sell well but leads to a second contract, will you be sad? If the critics hate my book, but it sells well, how will that affect you? Are you a writer, yourself, or is your dislike of me based on other differences/similarities between us? How often would you say that you think of me? I am absolutely fascinated by what you've said.

To the rest of you: thank you for your support!


# posted by Blogger Gwen : 12:21 AM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Blogger Gwen : 10:52 AM  

 I clicked on the mp3 link and nothing happened. Then I downloaded several items that claimed would play it and all I got was a Billie Holiday tune. Mind you, I like Lady Day, but I wanted to hear the piece on your interview.

I don't know what i am doing wrong, but I apparently am doing something wrong.

sniff.

Oh yeah, one more thing. That person who wants your book to tank is a "wanker".


# posted by Blogger artist7 : 2:08 PM  

 Oh my god, was that woman about to burst into tears the whole time she was interviewing you? Because she sounded like it. You sounded much more professional than the lame host. And you know why she found it uncomfortable to read? Because sometimes seeing something in print you know to be true in your own life can be very uncomfortable. And "Pity Me" writing? Can someone be the pot calling the kettle black a little more? That whole radio segment was her crying out for her own little pity party! She never even let you speak, she just kept yammering on about herself and her sister and their horrible lives and how they are stronger because of it.

Is there anywhere I can send her hate email?

-Nicole


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 7:37 PM  

 "I will write a story about a pregnant cat having a Quinceanera." Ha!

Damn, Gwen, that was one harsh experience. As others have said, you handled that with so much tact and patience. Good for you. And I'm glad it ended amicably.

Also, the odds that anyone else will be such a wacky interviewer with such lopsided perspectives just aren't that great, so don't let that throw you. If someone has some *real* reasons for disliking the book, at least you've shown you can defend yourself.

In any case, that was freakin' surreal.


# posted by Blogger Cate : 10:46 PM  

 Gwen, applause for your grace under pressure! What a weird way for the host to run an interview show, I must say.

-- Anita Rowland


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 12:21 AM  

 You did an incredible job of turning that around. It seemed like the host didn't understand the book at all and wasn't really listening to your answers but you were strong and stayed in there and made yourself heard and you also seemed to talk the host down from her emotional ledge. I think I would have just blacked out with sheer panic. I look forward to reading the book.


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 8:39 AM  

 The host of the show appears to be emotionally and mentally disturbed. Having worked as a journalist, that is my professional opinion.
For the host to go on and on about herself and a woman who was raped hinged on the insane. She seems like the epitome of the victim syndrone. God, so sorry for herself she could hardly keep from crying.
The thing that blows me away is the inability of the host to grasp that writing about sluts and whores doesn't mean you are one or think women are s and w's... that you're writing about life experiences as an empowered woman speaking out. She totally didn't get it. You handled it really well, I would've resorted to calling her a poo-poo head and/or slapping her. She needs professional help - and not from a journalist.


# posted by Blogger TJ : 10:01 AM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Blogger TJ : 10:01 AM  

 I woke up this morning with several things I wanted to accomplish. First, make an eye doctor appointment, Second, wash the dogs, Third, figure out why I can't listen to Gwen's mp3 of the interview on KPFT. In that order.

I clicked on the her web site, clicked on the link and I'll be damned, it worked. I don't know why and I did not question it.

First, I'd like to say that the woman interviewing her sounded as if she was about to burst in to tears, almost throughout the entire interview. Odd at best.
Second: why in the hell did she even mention the women being raped on the east side of town. Tragic and horrific, yes, relevant to the work of fiction, no.

Third, why did she come back to it several times? I can only guess she did not understand the piece of work being discussed in any way, shape or form. Or perhaps she only likes the glossed over versions similar to Sandra Cisneros (see House on Mango Street). Mind you, I liked the book, but that would be comparing apples to oranges.

I found the interviewer to be transferring her own experiences on the book, therefore clouding any true understanding of the piece.

Mind you, I was born in to a family of privilege. Indeed. In the same vein, I emancipated myself from a crazy family at the age of 14. So I know what it is like to be poor (and I still am). I also know what it means to be viewed as an object as opposed to a human, and to suggest that one randomly becomes an item of objectification on their own accord is ludicrous at best.

We are indeed (in my opinion) a product of our environment. That environment may not always be in our best interest. To suggest that this is a choice is sophomoric. Once we are old enough to choose, and grow, we often go in different directions. Speaking the truth does not objectify individuals, or solidify a position of being subordinate (is that correct, hey, I'm not a writer, OK?)

I do indeed hope that she reads it again and try not to place herself within the characters. I do indeed hope that she will look at this piece of work in a different light and realize that it is not about her or perhaps the tragic individuals in her life. If nothing else, it's not necessarily about her. Perhaps here and there, she may gleam something that feels like home, and if not, try not to judge.

Thanks for posting that mp3, and I'm thanking my little notebook computer for allowing me to hear it. You rose above this situation,Gwen, and I commend you.

tracy


# posted by Blogger artist7 : 2:17 PM  

 Damn, I entered a good long post earlier today but it doesn't seem to be there.

The host of the radio program seems to be emotionally and mentally disturbed. It was the most unprofessional interview I've ever heard. As a journalist who has conducted many interviews, this is MHO.

For her to call you a victim-writer and then spend the whole show sobbing about her unplanned pregnancy and totally feeling sorry for herself was insane! She says she's a feminist, right? If she's so miserable about it why didn't she have an abortion?! That's what choice is all about.

Then, there was the whole thing about accusing you of being some sort of non-feminist b/c of the subject matter and honesty of your work. I don't even know where to begin. It was like saying, if you write a piece that has slut and whore in it and you're referring to yourself or other women in general, you must not be a feminist. How could she not see that your stories are defending the woman? Some are filled with healthy righteous feminine anger -- how could a feminist have a problem with that? It was just painfully obvious that the Radio Lady didn't get it, was ill-prepared, and acted way unprofessionally.

On the other hand, Gwen, you were gracious and professional and totally showed them up to look like asswipes.

-TJ, your pal in Atlanta


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 2:35 PM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Blogger artist7 : 2:36 PM  

 I also agree with what Nicole said (in addition to what I added, which did not post)

tracy


# posted by Blogger artist7 : 3:03 PM  

 I'm listening to the interview right now and...wow. Just...wow. The unprofessionalism of the interviewer is really astounding. I would have *freaked out* if I had been in your place, but you handled yourself so well and were so calm on the outside, even if you were thinking, "What the hell??"

The interviewer sounded like she was going to cry throughout the interview. I don't understand what her problem was. She seemed to completely miss the point of your writing. I personally found your readings to be incredibly powerful.

I'm really looking forward to reading your book.


# posted by Blogger polarcanuck : 9:43 PM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Blogger artist7 : 12:14 PM  

 Hey Gwen, it's me, Amy D. I am listening to the interview right now. Man, that interviewer is a little nutty. She doesn't get your writing at all. I'm sorry you were kind of ambushed in that interview. That is really not fair, and the interviewer doesn't sound professional. You came off sounding really smart and polite in the face of that.


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 12:18 PM  

 Hey, y'all.

1. Thank you! Thanks, everybody, for your support.

2. Mike - I meant to say earlier that you're totally right in that antagonism makes for a much more interesting interview than a mutual admiration society would.

3. Steven - I love you, buddy. But I feel compelled to correct your assumption that my chapbook contains selections from the about-to-be-released book. Not because I want to show you up -- only because I don't want people who bought the book to feel cheated. None of the chapbook stories are in To the Last Man I Slept with and All the Jerks Just Like Him. Two separate works.

4. So sorry for all the late and then multiple posts, y'all. Blogger was weirding out this week. I've deleted all multiples above. Again - y'all are awesome and rule my galaxy.

(5. She was crying. Is it horrible for me to mention that? She did, though.)


# posted by Blogger Gwen : 10:53 PM  

 Sorry to be late to the party, but I'm not online every day. Just listened to the show, and I think the hosts' primary problem is that they felt that all women's stories should be Oprah-ized: inspirational works about the triumph of fully-realized women independently living up to their potential, tales of the way things ought to be. Instead, your book told a story of the way things actually are, the way it feels like to be inside the head of a woman who is not independent, not fully-realized, not living up to her potential -- the way most of us live -- and they couldn't wrap their heads around why anyone would want to read that, to read the truth.

This is the classic confusion of the amateur critic who doesn't get that a depiction is not an endorsement; the best example of this is when Bob Dole proclaimed that the movie Trainspotting "glamorized" heroin use.

The problem is that if no one is able to be honest about their darker thoughts and impulses, they become pathologized to the point where those who harbor them feel like sick, distorted human beings -- and then they can't heal themselves, of course, because they feel hopeless.

Obviously the host was dwelling on the rapist who targeted a single woman with a newborn because soon she herself will perfectly fit the victim's profile. The story obviously shook her up and she wanted to talk about it, but this show shouldn't have been about Her Anxieties, it was ostensibly about your book. Instead she tried to clumsily tie the two topics together by saying that women are objectified, which leads to rape and also your book is about a woman who objectifies herself. I got livid listening to her do this, so kudos to you for not snapping at her.

The passages you read were amazing. I can't wait to read the whole collection.

-- kim rollins


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 1:53 PM  

 Sorry to be late to the party, but I'm not online every day. Just listened to the show, and I think the hosts' primary problem is that they felt that all women's stories should be Oprah-ized: inspirational works about the triumph of fully-realized women independently living up to their potential, tales of the way things ought to be. Instead, your book told a story of the way things actually are, the way it feels like to be inside the head of a woman who is not independent, not fully-realized, not living up to her potential -- the way most of us live -- and they couldn't wrap their heads around why anyone would want to read that, to read the truth.

This is the classic confusion of the amateur critic who doesn't get that a depiction is not an endorsement; the best example of this is when Bob Dole proclaimed that the movie Trainspotting "glamorized" heroin use.

The problem is that if no one is able to be honest about their darker thoughts and impulses, they become pathologized to the point where those who harbor them feel like sick, distorted human beings -- and then they can't heal themselves, of course, because they feel hopeless.

Obviously the host was dwelling on the rapist who targeted a single woman with a newborn because soon she herself will perfectly fit the victim's profile. The story obviously shook her up and she wanted to talk about it, but this show shouldn't have been about Her Anxieties, it was ostensibly about your book. Instead she tried to clumsily tie the two topics together by saying that women are objectified, which leads to rape and also your book is about a woman who objectifies herself. I got livid listening to her do this, so kudos to you for not snapping at her.

The passages you read were amazing. I can't wait to read the whole collection.

-- kim rollins


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 1:55 PM  

 Listened to the radio show and all I have to say is thank goodness you were able to sum up your defense in a few minutes because for someone who wanted to understand where you were coming from, it took her 20 minutes to give you a chance to speak. Good job, Gwen, I hope it drives a lot of traffic to your table at the Latino Book Fair at the George R Brown Convention Center in Houston, TX on Sat. Oct. 16 at 3:30p.m. I figured I'd post the date and time since she didn't make it real clear to us that you'd just be there on Sat. I'm glad you won them over, but she didn't make me a fan of hers in that 30 minutes.


# posted by Blogger Tiffany : 3:26 PM  

 And one more thing to say.... Hello, feminist lady, where was your pro-choice condom?????!!!!!!! To take issue with one of the post's above... abortion is NOT what pro-choice is all about. Pro-choice is about all the choices you make (and some of the ones that aren't given to you to make). The first choice in any pregnancy (besides rape) is wearing a freaking condom or using some form of birth control. So, she should be lauding Gwen's book for letting her live in her stereo-typical trapping-a-man-that-I-love-and-he-doesn't-love-me-back-so-I'll-just-get-pregnant-and-then-he'll-have-to-marry-me-scenario and it backfired. Yeah, I'm gonna put the message in her head, "You're Stupid." But thank God for Gwen who even empowers her where she's at. And what a great way to explain the book, Gwen, that it's about what's happening inside of us when we're planning to swim but when we're still treading water and weighing our options. OK, now, that's all I have to say about it.


# posted by Blogger Tiffany : 3:52 PM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 10:47 PM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 11:21 AM  

 This post has been removed by a blog administrator.


# posted by Anonymous Anonymous : 4:14 PM  

 (Those were more flame posts above, mostly about me being a fat slut and whatnot, but they weren't amusing so I went ahead and deleted them.)


# posted by Blogger Gwen : 7:38 PM  

 Here's the thing about the hosts at KPFT: they're largely volunteers with little to no journalism training. Had this idiotic woman, earnest as she is, received any sort of education in journalism, she wouldn't have dreamed of sharing so much of her private life on the air. That's just hugely inappropriate in any reportage situation. And railroading her guest based on a gross misreading of the text is embarrassing.


# posted by Blogger mrsallard : 6:07 PM  

 p.s. gwen, if you're coming to the texas book festival, please drop me a line at mojomariposa AT yahoo.com


# posted by Blogger mrsallard : 6:10 PM  

 Lord, I couldn't even listen to that whole thing, starting from when she mentioned 'how this book came apart.' I can't imagine how you must have felt- what a nightmare.


# posted by Blogger Hannah : 6:40 PM  

 Hey, peeps. I do appreciate y'all's support.

You know, ever since that interview happened, I've been thinking about how it exemplified one of the points I tried to make with the book. And that is: Despite all that we as women have accomplished, we're still constantly bombarded by the message that it's wrong for us to express anger or pain.

I'm not gonna hate on Ana for the stuff she said - she was reacting in a perfectly natural way, considering our culture. She was expressing, "If I'm not allowed to be sad or angry about what's happened to me, then how dare you do it in writing? That's not what strong women do."

And I just wanted to get across that we can talk about things without it making us weak.

I mean - who knows what kind of pressure she's been under from people around her? I think some of the ideas in the stories she read were contrary to what she's been always heard, and therefore alien, and therefore initially hate-able. But, as an intelligent and open-minded woman, she was obviously able to take in an alternate viewpoint and then take something beneficial from it.

Which is good. So - I'm glad. All's well that ends well, etc.


# posted by Blogger Gwen : 8:47 PM  

 I came across this post via Bookslut. I couldn't finish listening to that archive. I was hoping to hear YOU talk about YOUR book but that interviewer wouldn't shut up about herself. Her blatant narcissism was totally unprofessional. You handled the situation well, Gwen, and I'm looking forward to reading your book.


# posted by Blogger Neva : 9:59 PM  

 Okay, so as a public radio professional, this interview makes me cringe and cringe some more. I mean, hello??? Interview-er, right? But she's clearly not in control of what she's doing. Besides monopolizing the brunt of the time to talk herself, about herself, after the first few minutes, she's still given no inkling of Why she doesn't like the book, just that she "had a a hard time getting through it." Wha-?

In siutations like these, we like to imagine the people in charge just somehow, know what they're doing. It must have felt like going to the dentist and having the hygeinist have a hissy-fit about having to put her fingers in your mouth.

And I've just got to say as a feminist, that the whole business of attempting to hide one's opinion behind those two ever-so sensitive words, "I feel that..." is just The most grating, passive-aggresivisima thing.

All this being, (breath), entirely beside the basic point that it seemed to me your writing was about how an experience felt. And it rang bone-honest to me. And if stating that truth is somehow equivalent to the magical act of objectifying all women everywhere, in one fell swoop of the pen; if we're supposed to be That careful about what we write and what we choose to share, then maybe we're still in ages darker than I thought.


# posted by Blogger Alice : 2:20 PM  

 Okay, so as a public radio professional, this interview makes me cringe and cringe some more. I mean, hello??? Interview-er, right? But she's clearly not in control of what she's doing. Besides monopolizing the brunt of the time to talk herself, about herself, after the first few minutes, she's still given no inkling of Why she doesn't like the book, just that she "had a a hard time getting through it." Wha-?

In siutations like these, we like to imagine the people in charge just somehow, know what they're doing. It must have felt like going to the dentist and having the hygeinist have a hissy-fit about having to put her fingers in your mouth.

And I've just got to say as a feminist, that the whole business of attempting to hide one's opinion behind those three ever-so sensitive words, "I feel that..." is just The most grating, passive-aggresivisima thing.

All this being, (breath), entirely beside the basic point that it seemed to me your writing was about how an experience felt. And it rang bone-honest to me. And if stating that truth is somehow equivalent to the magical act of objectifying all women everywhere, in one fell swoop of the pen; if we're supposed to be That careful about what we write and what we choose to share, then maybe we're still in ages darker than I thought.


# posted by Blogger Alice : 2:20 PM  

 I was so incensed after listening to the "interview" that I wrote the host. Her reply was basically, I'm sorry you didn't like it, go listen to something else:

"Thank you for your comments. I read the book with the other chapters and I hope you also read it in its entirety. We are all entitled to our opinions and I respect yours and appreciate your comments of disagreement. I meant no disrespect towards Gwen and simply wanted to gather an understanding. It was difficult for my sister to understand how a woman could write so lightly about a man beating up a woman without her, herself, having experienced such a brutal situation firsthand. Regardless, we were both able to come to an understanding of each other's position and in the end, I think that's what it's all about. We can agree to disagree and I am sorry you didn't like the show, but I gently encourage you to listen to other programming that would like better. Take care."


# posted by Blogger Stephanie : 4:05 PM  

 Wow. That's weird. Especially:
"It was difficult for my sister to understand how a woman could write so lightly about a man beating up a woman without her, herself, having experienced such a brutal situation firsthand."

Her sister kept asking me, before the interview, "Which one is you?" I kept telling her those parts were fiction. So then she'd say, "Well, which one do you AGREE with??" And I said I obviously couldn't write about a character with whom I didn't empathize.

On the one hand, during the interview Ana seemed affronted by someone using the "gift" of writing to even broach the subject of women being treated badly. But now I'm to understand that, per her sister, it would have been okay if I'd been beaten, myself?

All I can say is that I can't wait to participate in an interview that addresses my actual writing, as opposed to an on-air discussion of whether or not I have the right to write about any given subject.

Thanks, Stephanie.


# posted by Blogger Gwen : 7:50 PM  

 Post a Comment