# JK Rowling Pen Name



## Philip Overby (Jul 14, 2013)

JK Rowling publishes crime novel under false name | Books | guardian.co.uk

This is interesting in the fact that Rowling was said to not get any distorted reviews or sales because of this. This opens up the discussion: would you write under multiple names for multiple genres? 

I expect to see Robert Galbraith to soon reach the Bestseller lists.


----------



## Ankari (Jul 14, 2013)

The article gives the impression that JK Rowling was using the pen name to avoid piggy-backing off the success of her Harry Potter series. Then you read this nugget:



> According to the Sunday Times, The Cuckoo's Calling has sold 1,500 copies in hardback so far



This is since April. You know the publisher _let slip_ the true identity of Robert Galbraith to make up for the lackluster initial sales. I'd even wager the contract for the book has a clause in it that allows for such a thing. "We can reveal your real name in three months if the sales do not reach XXXXX amount."


----------



## CupofJoe (Jul 14, 2013)

I'm not saying they didn't but 1500 HB copies in three/four months for a new author with little/no publicity is not too bad. You can often get on to the UK top ten HB fiction with sales of 2-300 a week...


----------



## Zero Angel (Jul 14, 2013)

Yeah, 1500 isn't too bad. Many initial print runs are only 5000-10000 and you have a year to sell them before they're pulled. I'm sure she was hoping for a runaway success, but at least she got some great critical reviews. 

On the other hand, I am jaded and believe the publisher told them to like it...especially when you have so many reviewers saying things like, "Hard to believe this is his first novel" and "I'm sure we'll find out down the line this is actually a psuedonym of a famous author". 

Anybody read it yet? It's #1 on Amazon


----------



## TWErvin2 (Jul 14, 2013)

I suspect the publisher printed more than 5000 of the hardcovers.

I think it goes to show that even with a writer of talent, it can be difficult to break out of the pack.

In the past I've read about midlist authors that never took off and finally couldn't get contracts for new novels, so they started all over again, writing under another name. This was a few years back before self-publishing was as viable as it is today.


----------



## phillipsauthor (Jul 14, 2013)

On the other hand, Rowling said in one of the interviews that she wished people hadn't found out so soon. She said that she was enjoying getting the reviews and critiques from people who didn't know she was Rowling, and not having the pressure of being scrutinized all the time. I have no doubts that she intended to eventually reveal who she was, but I don't think it was supposed to happen this soon.

It's not like she needed the sales for the money, or anything. She might have been curious as to whether she could succeed without the brand power of her name behind her.


----------



## Tirjasdyn (Jul 15, 2013)

She used JK in the first place because she'd get better sales not having a woman's name directly....


----------



## PaulineMRoss (Jul 16, 2013)

phillipsauthor said:


> On the other hand, Rowling said in one of the interviews that she wished people hadn't found out so soon. She said that she was enjoying getting the reviews and critiques from people who didn't know she was Rowling, and not having the pressure of being scrutinized all the time.



If she really wanted to stay anonymous, she shouldn't have published through her regular publisher. The temptation to spill the beans and sell a zillion more copies instantly must have been overwhelming. Maybe next time she'll self-publish and no one will know until she wants them to.


----------



## Devor (Jul 16, 2013)

PaulineMRoss said:


> If she really wanted to stay anonymous, she shouldn't have published through her regular publisher.



There could well be contract issues.


----------



## PaulineMRoss (Jul 16, 2013)

Devor said:


> There could well be contract issues.



Unlikely, because she submitted the manuscript to at least one other publisher. When it was rejected, she turned to her regular publisher. So it doesn't sound as if she's contractually bound in any way.


----------



## Mara Edgerton (Jul 16, 2013)

So, back to the original post. Yes, I use different pen names for different genres. All my stories have gay or lesbian characters--because that's me--but I have one author name for slightly smutty books that deal with power exchange issues. Mara Edgerton, on the other hand, is my pen name for a fantasy-mystery series without any smut or D/s. Some people may read both, but in general these will attract different audiences! (Besides, I wanted to give my Mom the Mara pen-name and say, "It's safe for you to read any of these books." )


----------



## Weaver (Jul 17, 2013)

Tirjasdyn said:


> She used JK in the first place because she'd get better sales not having a woman's name directly....



Why?  Does anyone have any hard evidence that readers care whether an author is a man or a woman, or is this just something that 'everyone knows' and so it never gets questioned?

I'm not saying that that wasn't Rowlings's reason for choosing to use her initials instead of her first name, but was it actually necessary?


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jul 17, 2013)

I really don't care what name she wants to use...

The truth is (I have always said it, and I always will!) that J.K. Rowling is _a freaking hell of a writer_... She has a huge imagination, incredible talent and storytelling skills that most people cannot even dream about, and I am sure that she can be wildly successful in any literary genre that she wants.

My best wishes for her, and for the success of whatever that she wants to write after Harry Potter.


----------



## Zero Angel (Jul 17, 2013)

Ha! I completely missed the question in the OP. I just use Robby Richardson for children's books and Zero Angel for my spec fiction and math books.


----------



## phillipsauthor (Jul 18, 2013)

And just to tie up loose ends from the previous page, here's today's news: the reveal of JK Rowling as Robert Galbraith was NOT a marketing plan, but an actual unintentional error on the part of her litigative firm. She's ticked.

JK Rowling Leak: Tweet About 'The Cuckoo's Calling' Came From Law Firm


----------



## Ddruid (Jul 20, 2013)

Weaver said:


> Why?  Does anyone have any hard evidence that readers care whether an author is a man or a woman, or is this just something that 'everyone knows' and so it never gets questioned?
> 
> I'm not saying that that wasn't Rowlings's reason for choosing to use her initials instead of her first name, but was it actually necessary?



I believe it was her publishers who suggested using her initials. Apparently _they_ believed that people might not be inclined to read a book written by a woman. Of course, nobody would put up with a statement like that today.


----------



## Weaver (Jul 20, 2013)

Ddruid said:


> I believe it was her publishers who suggested using her initials. Apparently _they_ believed that people might not be inclined to read a book written by a woman. Of course, nobody would put up with a statement like that today.




I don't think that it's 'no one would read a book by a woman,' but instead 'nobody would read a book _of this genre _by a woman.'  Some people have some... antiquated notions about who can write what kinds of stories.  And the bias happens both ways; men have to use feminine pen names or just their initials to write romances, for example.  Such biases are _wrong_, but they do still exist.

(This is probably another topic on which I am not qualified to have an opinion.)


----------



## Aosto (Jul 20, 2013)

I think I probably would use multiple names. If I wrote great fantasy, but crap crime/mystery, I wouldn't want that to bleed over into my fantasy writing and people hate me for it. 

Not that I write great anything


----------



## Zero Angel (Jul 20, 2013)

Ddruid said:


> I believe it was her publishers who suggested using her initials. Apparently _they_ believed that people might not be inclined to read a book written by a woman. Of course, nobody would put up with a statement like that today.



Nobody would put up with a statement like that today? Are you kidding? 

The only reason it wouldn't be done would be because the Internet gives us as much information as we would like (and probably more than we would like) about authors.


----------



## Kevlar (Jul 20, 2013)

Zero Angel said:


> Nobody would put up with a statement like that today? Are you kidding?



Yeah I have to agree here. Unfortunately our society is still rather chauvinistic, it's just hidden behind a veil of the politically correct. The idea that all of society views women as men's equal is naive and idealistic considering the long-standing bias. That doesn't go away in a few decades, and while we as a society have made strides that way we've hardly started the marathon.


----------



## phillipsauthor (Jul 20, 2013)

To be a bit more precise, what I heard a long while ago was that the publishers were saying that Harry Potter's target market - preteen to teenage boys - wouldn't be as willing to read a fantasy book written by a female author. I think that that's still probably a fair statement.


----------



## Ddruid (Jul 21, 2013)

Zero Angel said:


> Nobody would put up with a statement like that today? Are you kidding?





Kevlar said:


> Yeah I have to agree here. Unfortunately our society is still rather chauvinistic, it's just hidden behind a veil of the politically correct. The idea that all of society views women as men's equal is naive and idealistic considering the long-standing bias. That doesn't go away in a few decades, and while we as a society have made strides that way we've hardly started the marathon.



Now that I think of it, I have to agree too. (sigh) Well, at least I wouldn't put up with a statement like that. And I'm sure most of the people on this forum wouldn't either.


----------



## Mara Edgerton (Jul 21, 2013)

Weaver said:


> Why?  Does anyone have any hard evidence that readers care whether an author is a man or a woman, or is this just something that 'everyone knows' and so it never gets questioned?
> 
> I'm not saying that that wasn't Rowlings's reason for choosing to use her initials instead of her first name, but was it actually necessary?



I was wondering that too. And for this new book, maybe she just chose a man's name because she likes a bit of gender bending.  I mean, as authors, most of us have to gender-bend to one degree or another, anyway, just to write characters of the opposite sex . . .


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 21, 2013)

I don't know that there is hard evidence for reader perceptions based on the gender of the author. I do know quite a few guys who won't read books written by women because they assume they won't like them. So it wouldn't surprise me, based just on my own anecdotal evidence.

Also, I know of at least one female fantasy writer who had her first book published in the last ten years who was asked by her publisher to change her name to make it more gender ambiguous, with the idea that men would be more likely to buy it. So even if there is no hard evidence to support a bias in the marketplace, at least some publishers seem to have the perception that it will make a difference.

Also, if you were to look at the list of best-selling fantasy writers, I suspect the top ten or fifteen are predominantly male. You have Rowling and Meyer on the list to be sure, and then you have people like Robert Jordan, Tolkien, George R. R. Martin, Terry Brooks, C.S. Lewis, Brandon Sanderson, Steven Erikson, and so on (taken from a couple of lists I Googled of top-selling fantasy books; once was from Tor, and presumably includes only their authors).

If you shrink the sample down to 'epic' fantasy of the type written by Tolkien, Jordan, Martin, Erikson, etc. the list seems to be dominated even more by men.

Of course, there are plenty of wonderful epic fantasy writers that are female: Patricia McKillip, Katharine Kerr, Elizabeth Moon (if you haven't read the Paks trilogy you've missed out on what the genre has to offer), C J Cherryh, and maybe Tanith Lee has some books in that category as well. 

Great books and series of books by women writing epic fantasy, but as far as that subgenre goes they don't seem to break into the top ranks very often. Is that because these sorts of books are read largely by males who don't want to read books written by females? I don't know. It doesn't seem impossible to me, based on the people I know who have that viewpoint. But it wouldn't surprise me if it was part of the picture, or if publishers thought that it was.

Move over to urban fantasy, where it seems to me there are a lot of female readers, and female authors are on top of the heap.


----------



## Zero Angel (Jul 21, 2013)

Ddruid said:


> Now that I think of it, I have to agree too. (sigh) Well, at least I wouldn't put up with a statement like that. And I'm sure most of the people on this forum wouldn't either.



Good point there. I apologize if I came off as being overly rude when I responded. I was quite incredulous over your statement, mostly because it was only 16 years ago when she published Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone and I was in high school when I first started reading Harry Potter. To me, "today" still includes 16 years ago.


----------



## rhd (Jul 22, 2013)

I saw this a while ago
Romance novelist 'Jessica Blair' is an 89-year-old man
His name is out but he's going to keep writing under the same pen name, but what's nice is he's going to keep doing what he loves. Plus they asked nicely and he felt he couldn't say no once he had found a publisher. I suppose it's because the 'romance' genre is considered frivolous, even though at some point it also meant adventure and a significant backstory. I read that even Daphne du Maurier didn't like being labeled as a 'romance' author back when. It's usually the publisher's choice and they have to categorize people's buying choices, and perhaps studies show they're right. I'd believe otherwise though, I mean there's Neal Stephenson's _The Diamond Age: Or, A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer _ that explores motherhood at some level, and it's got a great girl protagonist. I suppose they do this because they want make sure it hits the target audience, young adult males in HP's case, and when it hits mark, it's safe to reveal the gender of the writer. Plenty of men and women writers have proved this wrong, so perhaps it's just conservatism/caution on part of the publisher.


----------



## Zero Angel (Jul 22, 2013)

rhd said:


> Plenty of men and women writers have proved this wrong, so perhaps it's just conservatism/caution on part of the publisher.



Have they "proved" this wrong or have they shown that they can succeed in spite of their real name?


----------



## Trick (Jul 22, 2013)

phillipsauthor said:


> To be a bit more precise, what I heard a long while ago was that the publishers were saying that Harry Potter's target market - preteen to teenage boys - wouldn't be as willing to read a fantasy book written by a female author. I think that that's still probably a fair statement.



I agree, when I was a teen I was less likely to pick up a fantasy book about a female main character than I am now. The sex of the authors never really mattered to me but I think FMCs scared me a bit back then because women in general baffled me. I can admit there has been many a time I have failed to understand women, characters or real, but that's half of the enjoyment now. I like following an MC with different experiences than me and I can get a lot of that from a FMC. That does not, however, mean I like romance novels; never have, never will, I don't think, but to each their own. 

I think I've come across one female author that I didn't continue to read when I felt that all her male characters seemed like the same person. But I see that same flaw so often from male authors writing about women that I wasn't surprised by it and I still feel equally attracted to books regardless of author gender.


----------



## rhd (Jul 22, 2013)

Zero Angel said:


> Have they "proved" this wrong or have they shown that they can succeed in spite of their real name?


You're right to point out that subtle distinction. Perhaps it's not just the writers but the audience that have 'proved' this wrong. Do you know of many boys who went "oh, no, a chick wrote this book, I hate it now." I remember reading a bunch of letters from grateful little boys published in the initial HP books and assuming it's only a few of many. I know UKL set out to write for a young adult audience with a male protagonist resulting in a generation of very grateful kids and that was like...more than thirty years ago? I'd still blame this orthodoxy on the publishers. (BTW JKR published under 'Joanne Rowling' for her first book and then they asked her to change it, which goes show how constipated they can get). 
As for the writers and names, they're probably not in a position to argue if they're in dire straits or simply desperate to find any publisher. My personal priority wouldn't be my name but the integrity of my manuscript?


----------



## PaulineMRoss (Jul 23, 2013)

An interesting take on the whole Rowling/Galbraith business, and the response of traditional publishing to it:

The Business Rusch: Blame The Writer Ã‚Â« Kristine Kathryn Rusch


----------



## phillipsauthor (Jul 23, 2013)

That's a great article! Thanks for posting it!


----------



## LucasHunt (Aug 11, 2013)

I doubt her regular publisher would feel the need to make any sort of contractual obligations with a client that has made them millions. 1,500 from a "first time" author is very respectable in the first 3-4 months.


----------



## Scales (Sep 18, 2013)

I am thinking of writing under a pen name.


----------



## Amanita (Sep 19, 2013)

I can understand very well why Rowling wants to use another pen name so she can write something without the HP connection and see how people like it without fans buying it because of the HP hype so nothing wrong there.

I have no idea how common this is and I don't care but I consider it completely unethical to claim a military background you don't have and imply personal experience about things you never had to do with. I don't even understand why this kind of blatant lying is allowed at all. Many readers are more likely to read books dealing with real-life subjects if they believe that the writer has first-hand experience about the subject matter which is the reason why it's done of course.


----------

