¿Por qué las revistas no incluyen a más mujeres como críticas o como autoras?

El debate sobre la disparidad entre el número de mujeres y el número de hombres que escriben o reseñan en las revistas literarias y culturales también se está presentando en los medios anglosajes (acá en México lo inició Fernando Escalante Gonzalbo). En un reportaje, The New Republic captura esta discusión que se desarrolla en distintos y muy influyentes medios. Un fragmento del texto:

The first shots were fired last summer, when Jennifer Weiner and Jodi Picoult called the New York Times Book Review a boys’ club. (I weighed in then, too, calling on the Times to respond to statistics posted by Double X regarding the disparity between books by male authors and female authors reviewed in their pages.) Now, the war is on. A few days ago, VIDA, a women’s literary organization, posted on its website a stark illustration of what appears to be gender bias in the book review sections of magazines and literary journals. In 2010, as VIDA illustrated with pie charts, these publications printed vastly more book reviews by men than by women. They also reviewed more books by male authors.

The numbers are startling. At Harper’s, there were 27 male book reviewers and six female; about 69 percent of the books reviewed were by male authors. At the London Review of Books, men wrote 78 percent of the reviews and 74 percent of the books reviewed. Men made up 84 percent of the reviewers for The New York Review of Books and authored 83 percent of the books reviewed. TNR, I’m sorry to say, did not compare well: Of the 62 writers who wrote about books for us last year, only 13 (or 21 percent) were women. We reviewed a total of 64 books, nine of them by women (14.5 percent). “We know women write,” poet Amy King writes on the VIDA website. “We know women read. It’s time to begin asking why the 2010 numbers don’t reflect those facts with any equity.”

But let’s slow down for a moment. There’s some essential data missing from these moan-inducing statistics. What’s the gender breakdown in books published last year? It’s crucial to both of the categories VIDA explores, because freelance book reviewers, who make up the majority of the reviewing population, tend to be authors themselves. If more men than women are publishing books, then it stands to reason that more books by men are getting reviewed and more men are reviewing books. So TNR’s Eliza Gray, Laura Stampler, and I crunched some numbers. Our sample was small and did not pretend to be comprehensive, and it may not represent a cross-section of the industry, because we did not include genre books and others with primarily commercial appeal. But it gave us a snapshot. And what we found helps explain VIDA’s mystery.

We looked at fall 2010 catalogs from 13 publishing houses, big and small. Discarding the books that were unlikely to get reviewed—self-help, cooking, art—we tallied up how many were by men and how many were by women. Only one of the houses we investigated—the boutique Penguin imprint Riverhead—came close to parity, with 55 percent of its books by men and 45 percent by women. Random House came in second, with 37 percent by women. It was downhill from there, with three publishers scoring around 30 percent—Norton, Little Brown, and Harper—and the rest 25 percent and below, including the elite literary houses Knopf (23 percent) and FSG (21 percent). Harvard University Press, the sole academic press we considered, came in at just 15 percent.

I speculated that independents—more iconoclastic, publishing more work in translation, and perhaps less focused on the bottom line—would turn out to be more equitable than the big commercial houses. Boy, was I wrong. Granted, these presses publish a smaller number of books in total, so a difference in one or two books has a larger effect on their percentages. Still, their numbers are dismaying. Graywolf, with 25 percent female authors, was our highest-scoring independent. The cutting-edge Brooklyn publisher Melville House came in at 20 percent. The doggedly leftist house Verso was second-to-last at 11 percent. Our lowest scorer? It pains me to say it, because Dalkey Archive Press publishes some great books that are ignored by the mainstream houses. But it would be nice if more than 10 percent of them were by women. (In the 2011 edition of Dalkey’s much-lauded Best European Fiction series, edited by Aleksandar Hemon, 30 percent of the stories are by women. Last year, at least Zadie Smith wrote the preface.)

About Irad Nieto

About me?
This entry was posted in Libros, Reportaje, Revistas culturales. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to ¿Por qué las revistas no incluyen a más mujeres como críticas o como autoras?

  1. Eduardo Ruiz says:

    Irad, hablando de revistas, te escribí un mal hace unos días, sobre los asuntos ya discutidos. Cómo va la cosa?

  2. Irad says:

    Estimado Eduardo:

    No he podido responderte como es debido. Te enviaré un mail para explicarte.

    Saludos!!

  3. Marco says:

    Hay una revista que no incluye a las mujeres porque aquélla simplemente no existe (ja-ja-ja)

  4. Irad says:

    Marco:

    Pero, ¿existirá?

    • Eduardo Ruiz says:

      Tiene que existir, loco. Además, habrá mujeres, ya verán. Ya conseguí las cosas que prometí. ¿Y ustedes? Hay que hablar pronto.

  5. Marco says:

    ¿Qué pasó, jovenazo? Lo estuve esperando el pasado domingo.

  6. Irad says:

    Marco,

    No pude estar por una cuestión familiar. Pero, sin falta, te veré el próximo domingo para platicar bien sobre el tema pendiente.

    Saludos!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s