Anastasia Niehof
Final paper—WS 590
for Dr. David Schweingruber
due May 7, 2003
Judging Books and Readers by Their Covers:
An Examination of the Intersections of Gender and Readers’ Advisory
Stereotyping is a fact of life. When meeting people for the first time, we make all kinds of assumptions about them—their profession, their family, their tastes, their leisure activities—that may or may not be true. This is no less the case in the library world, where librarians are regularly faced with strangers needing help. Naturally, librarians make assumptions, and some of these assumptions are based on the gender of the person standing in front of them. The awareness of gender in library interactions is perhaps most apparent during the readers’ advisory process. This paper, after some consideration of readers’ advisory history, theory, and practice, will present some preliminary data showing how gender can permeate the readers’ advisory process. To do this, a framework of four possible intersection points has been established: the gender of the advisor, the advisee, and the author and main character(s) of the book(s) being considered.
As a library science student with the goal of working in readers’ advisory who has always been interested in gender issues, I was excited this semester at the prospect of exploring the intersection between reading and gender. My goal was to find, study, evaluate, and synthesize the studies that had been done on reading patterns among men and women. I found much less than I thought I would, and so the focus of my project became to synthesize the theoretical work that has been done on readers’ advisory, some of which includes information on gender, with other sources of information about gender and reading. I began with books and collections of essays from the local university library and then moved on to articles found through the EBSCO Host and Library Literature databases, rounding out this information with a look at some internet sources, the most helpful being the archives of a few listserves.[1] I also did some primary research by conducting personal interviews with local public librarians involved in readers’ advisory and administering a short survey to the members of my class.
I used the listserves as a way of gathering opinions from a variety of people, both readers and librarians, on the subject of how gender intersects with reading and readers’ advisory. The most helpful listserve in this respect was Fiction_L, which describes itself as “an electronic mailing list devoted to reader's advisory topics such as book discussions, booktalks, collection development issues, booklists and bibliographies, and a wide variety of other topics of interest to librarians, book discussion leaders, and others with an interest in reader's advisory” (“Welcome …”). Although its intended audience is librarians, other interested persons are welcome on the list. The two most common thread types are stumpers, in which librarians ask for help from others to determine, from a short description such as “married couple living on a beach who are detectives,” which book patrons want, and requests for help in building a reading list or display on a given topic. I used this list in two ways: directly by posting a query myself and indirectly by searching the list’s archives. The data presented here came from searching “men reading.” My query read as follows: “Currently I'm doing a project on how gender (mainly of the advisee) affects readers advisory transactions. I would be interested to hear from anyone their opinions on this subject.” I received sixteen replies online and three personal replies. In an effort to get a popular view on this subject, I also consulted the Romance Readers Anonymous archive, searching with the string “men reading romance.”
When as a high school student I worked as a page in the local public library, I learned that one major goal of libraries is to increase circulation because those figures are often the basis for funding. Thus, since good readers’ advisory is one way to increase circulation, it’s a practical function for the library to provide. Another reason librarians provide this service is because they often are generally helpful people who enjoy talking about reading.
There are also more theoretical principles that guide readers’ advisory. Saricks and Brown, in their well-respected book, Readers’ Advisory Service in the Public Library, provide a contemporary definition: “Readers’ advisory service … is a patron-oriented library service for adult fiction readers…. in which knowledgeable, nonjudgmental staff help fiction readers with their reading needs” (1). The service should be geared to meeting the patrons’ needs, not the library’s. Although it may include other areas such as nonfiction, music, or movies, service usually focuses primarily on fiction. Staff providing the service should work hard at maintaining a broad knowledge base of popular fiction of all genres as well as mainstream fiction, and they must remain unbiased during readers’ advisory services, allowing for all tastes.
These principles have not always guided libraries. When public libraries first started offering this service in the early 1900s, reigning library wisdom was still didactic and moralistic, and the reading suggestions offered showed this bias. Many librarians were wary of all fiction; it was considered useless and even possibly detrimental. Reading should change the reader for the better, and so “the early goal of this service [readers’ advisory] was the self-improvement of participants through directed reading. Its ambitions went beyond recreational reading. In many circles, the act of reading for pleasure was suspect” (May et. al.)
In fact, in order to provide service that would lead to self-improvement, librarians would rely on the outward characteristics of people as a way of determining what they should read. For example, a 1938 study called Helping the Reader toward Self-education, unashamedly classed people into 70 types using “occupation, race, sex, and personality traits…. ranging from … Tenement Dwellers to the Sophisticated Woman to the Criminal in the Making, … Each type was listed with three to four book titles considered appropriate reading suggestions” that would educate and morally uplift readers (Saricks and Brown 5). Saricks and Brown go on to condemn this practice as overly “educational, not recreational.”
More
recently, library theory has begun to validate recreational reading. An official turning point came when “the American Library
Association's (ALA) Public Library Association published Planning and
Role-Setting for Public Libraries in 1987, suggesting that a legitimate role
for a public library was that of a popular materials center” (Chelton). Thus, in the library world, popular fiction
now has value independent of literary or moral merit, simply because it is
popular. One article described the
change this way: “Today the reader’s
advisory transaction has been transformed from a didactic activity aimed at
morally uplifting patrons to one exclusively involved in fiction guidance with
no attempt by the advisor to improve patrons’ reading tastes” (May et.al.).
However, the battle is not
yet over since many librarians still see less value in promoting fiction than
other areas, such as reference. May’s
article continues, “Nonetheless, the historical scorn for pleasure reading has
not been totally eradicated—
vestiges still cling.
Library literature reports that there are strongly held attitudes among
librarians that reader’s advisory is a less worthy endeavor than its reference
counterpart” (May et.al.). She also
notes a discrepancy she found in studying libraries in her area: although “the words recreation or
recreational are employed in five library mission statements … their respective
homepages epitomize the professional predilection for reference and information
over reader’s advisement” (May et.al).
Libraries would do well to listen to their mission statements and give
some attention to fiction reading, since “recreational reading is still the
most common rationale for public library visits” (May et.al.).
Readers’ advisory can be done by almost anyone in the library, including both paraprofessionals and librarians, and encompasses a wide range of activities. Passive readers’ advisory includes setting up displays, arranging shelving so it is conducive to browsing, and providing lists of suggested material. Active readers’ advisory includes approaching people in the stacks as well as talking to patrons at the desk, an activity that is sometimes called the “readers’ advisory interview” and compared with the reference interview. Readers will commonly ask librarians, “Can you suggest a good book?” or “I just finished the latest John Grisham. Can you tell me what I should read next?” Each question presents a unique set of challenges to the librarian. In the first instance, the librarian must ascertain the reading tastes of the reader in order to make an appropriate recommendation. In the latter case, the librarian already has some indication of the reader’s taste since she or he knows one book the reader has liked, but the librarian will have to inquire further to learn why the reader enjoyed the book and may have to do some research to find another book the reader will enjoy.
Several standard techniques
have emerged as ways of drawing out information from the reader. A common starting point was suggested by a
librarian on Fiction_L: “One of the
recommendations I make to my staff members who do reader's advisory is to ask
the patron for titles or authors enjoyed in the past in addition to asking for
a description of his or her preferences. This is usually very
effective and weeds out a good bit of listener error. It also tends to
put the questioning into a gender- and age-neutral zone. Failing
that, and if we're not getting a clear enough description, I have also been
known to ask what movies they've liked. Anything that’ll help!” (28 Apr
2003)
Asking patrons what books they like or have recently read seems to be the minimum required in this situation. However, some librarians suggest that this should not be the end of the questioning, and others think such a question should not be the first one, either. Ross and Chelton encourage librarians to frame their questions toward the future rather than the past, since the goal is to help with the next reading experience rather than to simply repeat the most recent one. They suggest, “When librarians query readers at the desk, they should ask, ‘Tell me what you're in the mood for’ or ‘Tell me what kind of reading experience you're looking for.’ This question should probably precede ‘Tell me about a book that you've read and enjoyed,’ which Joyce Saricks and Nancy Brown suggest in their indispensable Readers' Advisory Services for Adults in the Public Library (ALA, 1997). Asking about books they have previously read may be problematic if readers now want a different emotional experience” (Ross and Chelton).
Several people have designed studies
in an attempt to discern actual practice in libraries. One such study, published in 2000, reports on
a survey conducted in New York in which the surveyors went into libraries in their
area and tried to initiate readers’ advisory interviews. Their opening question, “‘Can you help me find a
good book?’” was met with a variety of responses: “In certain instances, we were welcomed.
Remarks in this vein included, ‘You've come to the [r]ight place,’ or ‘I'm so
glad to find someone who reads.’ But in other locations, the personnel were
unreceptive. One librarian questioned about a ‘good read’ remarked, ‘That’s a
tall order.’ In several instances, the manner and body language of the staff
member conveyed irritation. We received the distinct impression that the
reference desk was only to be approached as the very last resort…. One librarian … muttered under her
breath, ‘I hate this question’” (May
et.al.) With such a range of
possibilities, is it any wonder some readers hesitate to approach librarians
for advice?
Many librarians (80 percent) followed standard readers’ advisory interview procedure by asking questions similar to those suggested above, such as “‘What kind of books do you read?’ or ‘What kind of books do you like to read?’ But in only one instance were we asked what it was about the books that brought enjoyment” (May et. al.). Those conducting the survey thought that the librarians did not sufficiently inquire into their reading taste, and furthermore, librarians often let their own preferences affect their suggestions. Since readers’ advisory should be a professional service conducted by librarians in a non-judgmental way, the results of the survey are dismaying. Another shortfall in the service provided by the librarians in the survey was their reluctance to turn to resources such as Fiction Catalog and the internet to respond—“Too often staff members relied on their own preferences and personal knowledge in rendering advisement, rather than resorting to professional tools” (May et.al.). Indeed, one of the librarians I interviewed is reluctant to recommend anything she hasn’t read; since such a practice severely limits your recommendation options if you don’t read everything (which no one can), librarians do need to rely on others, including professional tools, to help them out. In addition to the Fiction_L listserve mentioned earlier, other resources such as bookmarks prepared by “Readalikes.Com” and reviews and annotated lists prepared by others can be extremely helpful and should be consulted.
Gender was not a factor considered in the above study, perhaps because when asked specifically, many people and librarians will claim that gender has no role (or at least should have no role) in the readers’ advisory transaction. However, given the propensity of people to judge on outward appearance, including gender, it is reasonable to expect that gender does have some effect. To examine possible areas where gender might make a difference in readers’ advisory, I have established a framework of four possible intersections.
First, let us consider the role played the librarian and
how gender might affect this role. As
the librarian and reader see each other and consider whether or not to begin a
readers’ advisory transaction, each notices external qualities of the
other. Since in our society gender is
one of the most obvious external traits, undoubtedly the gender of the other
will figure into the equation somehow.
Sometimes the reasons for the decision to ask or not are fairly
simple. For example, one woman librarian
told me men readers almost never approach her for advice; she thinks the men
assume she would not be able to offer any helpful suggestions since she’s not a
man (and she herself indicated that she has difficulty advising men).
On the other hand, sometimes more complex matters are at work: as each party tries to determine the advisability of engaging the other, a range of issues may be considered more or less consciously. The first and most thoughtful response I received to my Fiction_L post addresses this subject: “Readers’ advisory is heavily transaction-dependent. As such, all of our relational tendencies enter into the question. So, we are much more likely to engage a patron attractive to us, for whatever reason…. A reader’s advisory transaction is necessarily more affected [than a regular reference transaction] by sociological ‘truths’. For example, men are generally physically larger, women smaller; so perceptions of threat or dominance may follow. Power issues become more pertinent as vulnerability becomes more present. So the same principles implicit in any relationship that moves toward greater intimacy apply in the case of reader’s advisory vis-a-vis reference” (Aaron Smith). Clearly there is much food for thought here. As librarians interact with patrons, they need to keep in mind the messages, both explicit and implicit, they are sending. Practical applications for librarians would include making sure to engage all readers, regardless of personal attractiveness, and taking care to exert enough energy to let the reader know of your willingness to help but not so much that the reader feels dominated.
Perhaps the most obvious and studied intersection of gender and readers’ advisory is the gender of the reader. When I began this project, I hoped to find many studies giving statistics about the differences between what women and men read. While I did not find any far-reaching, scientific studies with clear data, I did get many opinions and some general trends on this subject.
One study of avid readers that was conducted to examine how they choose reading material confirmed the suspicions of many—women read more than men. Specifically, “Most interviewees fall within the ten percent of the North American population who are ‘heavy readers’—people who read upward of a book a week. The demographic profile was consistent with other surveys: 65 percent female, 35 percent male” (Ross and Chelton). Further confirmation of that number came from a librarian who stated that, at their readers’ advisory desk, they “generally get one man asking for RA advice for every two women” (Katherine Stecher).
Even if that is the case, the question of what these women and men are reading remains elusive. Perhaps the most common stereotype is that all romance readers are women. Janice Radway’s Reading the Romance seemed the most likely place to answer that question, and indeed all the people in her study were women; however, her sample was small. The bookstore owner/romance reader advisor who talked to Radway “suspects some of the men who buy romances ‘for their wives’ are in fact buying them for themselves,” but “all of the people she regularly advises are women.” Radway adds that, although publishing houses who conduct reader services do not provide details about their readers, several major publishers have indicated that “the majority of romance readers are married women between the ages of twenty-five and fifty” (55). Thus it seems clear that most people who read romances are women; however, that should not be construed to mean that most women read romances.
Interestingly enough, there is a bit of a gender reversal in the area of reading. Whereas in most areas of life, consideration is often given to what women as a whole are like, do, or prefer, and men are considered as individuals rather than a group, in the world of fiction men are considered as a group. Such considerations often come in the form of somewhat exasperated queries, as in, “What do men like to read anyway?” Since men are the minority among fiction readers and are thus often seen as reluctant readers, perhaps we should not be surprised.
In any case, librarians attempt to answer that question with a variety of responses that are based on their theories about men’s reading tastes. A thread on Fiction_L last year entitled, “Manly Men Doing Manly Things Manfully” included Red Green, James Bond, The Gangs of New York, and Ernest Hemingway (10 June 2002-12 June 2002). A more recent thread (Jan 2003) was begun with a plea for “Discussable books for senior men”; this plea engendered nearly as much discussion as suggestions. One person suggested “senior men much prefer nonfiction to fiction,” (9 Jan. 2003) and another one commented, “For older men I think you would do better to stay away from anything that smacks of ‘Women's books’ and stick with non-fiction and action” (10 Jan. 2003). The very existence of these threads, as well as these particular comments, lend credence to the notion that it is possible to describe “what men read.” However, a dissenting opinion in the discussion stated that, “I don't think it's fair to assume that all men just want to discuss ‘manly men’ types of fiction” (10 Jan. 2003).
The root question seems to be, then, does gender influence reading taste? This question was part of the survey I gave to my class; given just “yes” or “no” as possible responses, the total responses were almost equal. (See charts below).
Do you think your gender affects your reading interests—both what you choose to read and what you enjoy reading?
|
|
Men |
Women |
Total |
|
Yes |
4 |
6 |
10 |
|
No |
1 |
8 |
9 |
Do you think, for most people, gender affects reading interests?
|
|
Men |
Women |
Total |
|
Yes |
2 |
9 |
11 |
|
No |
3 |
5 |
8 |
It is interesting to note
that twice as many men thought that their gender affected their reading
interests than thought this was true in general. However, with such a small sample, few conclusions
can be drawn.[2]
Of course, there are many
exceptions to any rules in reading tastes among men and women, and in the
replies to my query on Fiction_L, I was regaled with many tales of the more
interesting ones along with injunctions to remember that there are quite a few
such exceptions. One librarian states
her current opinion thus, “The longer I do RA [readers’ advisory] the more I
realize that gender really has very little to do with it. Yes, there are
some women who only want to read female authors, and vice versa, but I have
ceased being surprised when a little old blue haired lady asks for books on
serial killers, ‘the bloodier the better,’ or when a young hunk with bulging
biceps asks for the latest Danielle Steel book, or when a 12 year old girl has
exhausted all the Zane Grey and is
looking for readalikes. IMHO [in my humble opinion], good RA is an
individual process, and should preclude making assumptions based on
gender” (27 Apr. 2003). Many other librarians concurred with her
ideas and experiences. Perhaps the most
dramatic story goes as follows. “‘Miss
Mary’ was the town’s schoolteacher for as far back as anyone could
remember. When she retired, she moved into senior citizens’ housing which
was served by the library’s Outreach department. The first time the
Outreach librarian (who, of course, had been Miss Mary’s student, as had been
both of her parents) asked Miss Mary what kind of books she liked to read, she
was told, ‘I want ones where Indians do it to white women.’ (!)” (28 Apr.
2003). Such stories make it clear that
librarians need to be vigilant in maintaining a nonjudgmental attitude about
reading tastes, which includes not assuming that the outward appearance of
readers, including their gender, has an obvious connection with their reading
interests.
Various other sources I examined offered clues to the question of whether there is a gendered pattern to reading habits. Buried in a footnote in the first chapter of Genreflecting, an important textbook detailing genres and subgenres in fiction, I found the closest approximation of what I’d been seeking: details of a survey reporting which types of fiction men like as opposed to (assuming they would be different) the types of fiction women like. The footnote cites an article which describes a survey done for a publishing company. According to the summary of the survey, “women reading light fiction wanted romances first, then historical novels; men preferred thrillers and mysteries, followed by war and adventure stories. Mann [the author of the original article] concludes that readers of light fiction want escape and relaxation in a story that conforms to their mores and values” (Herald 14). Apparently Mann assumes that women’s values correspond with romance, whereas men’s values include being thrilled and dreaming of war.
The question of whether men ever read romance came up in
nearly source I consulted. The thread
about manly reading began by specifically requesting that no romances be
included (10 June 2002). On the thread I
started, one librarian offered the general observation that, “There definitely
are tendencies by gender in reading. Men
will almost never touch romance. Women seldom read military adventure,
though quite a few (I know some) are into Westerns, sf, and/or fantasy” (27
Apr. 2003). (Again, note that this quote
reinforces that it is acceptable for women to read broadly.)
A search through the archives of the listserve “Romance Readers Anonymous” (RR_A) with the search string, “men reading romance” yielded some interesting opinions. Several people (including at least one man) shared stories of men they knew or had seen reading romances, as well as speculating why men did not generally read romance. Stigma was noted by people as a reason for both men and women to avoid reading romance: “I think more men would probably read romances if they had the guts to actually be seen reading them” (14 Feb. 1996). Reasons for and effects of reading them were also speculated upon: “One of my ex-boyfriends confessed to me that he enjoyed reading romances, and used to sneak them from his mother’s bookshelves. He fancied himself a Knight in Shining Armor, and he was for me during a hard period in my life. So maybe the romance novels had a lasting effect!” (31 Oct. 1997)
To conclude this section, I would like to share the quote from Fiction_L that best approximates my position on this issue: “I think RA is a bit like the news. The very *reason* it surprises us when a man asks for ‘books like Danielle Steel’ (like the recently deceased 97-year-old patron mentioned earlier), or a woman for bloody military adventure and serial-killer stories, is that it’s out of the ordinary” (Christine Jeffords 4-29-03). In other words, we have stereotypes of women and men readers for good reason—there are some gendered patterns of reading. However, focusing on these patterns to the exclusion of recognizing the large number of people whose tastes fall elsewhere is not beneficial for readers nor librarians trying to provide reading guidance.
Many readers enjoy genre fiction because its series of books by the same author allow for many “safe bet” reading choices. Therefore, it seems like a good place to start examining the effect that the gender of the author has on the readers’ advisory experience. Again, romance provides an obvious starting point. A collection of essays written by romance authors called Dangerous Men & Adventurous Women: Romance Writers on the Appeal of the Romance offers an interesting window into the world of romance authors. The acknowledgments and introduction in particular illumine how the editor, Jayne Ann Krentz, views romance novels as well as those who read and write them. Of the authors, she says, “We are part of an unbroken female line dedicated to passing on an ancient tradition of literature written by women for women” (Krentz xi). She is clearly of the opinion that romance is a woman’s world from all angles, and makes no apologies for this fact.
Women writing in other genres have faced more obstacles. Genreflecting offers some background on this history: “Women have always written genre fiction,” but in the 1980s, women “gained recognition in science fiction and fantasy, no longer having to resort to male pseudonyms or to using only their initials. It became more acceptable in those genres for authors to have first names like Margaret, Sherri, or Pamela” (Herald 13). In the mystery subgenre, a large group of women mystery writers have banded together for support and encouragement: “According to our by-laws, the purpose of Sisters in Crime is: ‘to combat discrimination against women in the mystery field, educate publishers and the general public as to inequities in the treatment of female authors, raise awareness of their contributions to the field, and promote the professional advancement of women who write mysteries’” (Flora).
Those readers who do not read in the traditional genres also seek readers’ advisory, and sometimes these queries are more difficult. My local library, Ames Public Library, relies heavily on bookmarks prepared by the Readalikes.Com company to provide readers’ advisory to common questions such as, “Can you suggest someone like John Grisham?” Many of the bookmarks’ topics are as straightforward as the one by that name, but a visit to the company’s website reveals that they tackle the gender issue with some interesting results. One bookmark is called, “LITERARY FICTION : FEMALE AUTHORS”; its description reads, “More character-driven than plot-driven, these novels concentrate on interpersonal relationships, universal themes, and superior writing. If you want to experience some of the most innovative writers in contemporary fiction, try one of these.” Contrast that with another bookmark description, “LITERARY FICTION : MALE AUTHORS: Written with careful characterizations, detailed descriptions, and universal themes, these novels have humor and pathos and deal with realistic relationships. If you want to experience some of the great truths of all time, try one of these.” The messages sent by these bookmarks are mixed and confusing. Are they simply drawing a distinction between the authors to create lists and then writing a description of the books on the list? Are they attempting to make some statement about how men write vs. how women write? If so, the distinction itself is not clear since both descriptions use the words character, relationships, and universal themes.
I asked my class to comment in this area, as well.
Does the gender of the author and/or main character influence your choice of reading matter?
|
|
Men |
Women |
Total |
|
Yes |
1 |
3 |
4 |
|
No |
4 |
11 |
15 |
Most students who wrote more than “yes” or “no” to this question made a comment to the effect that they don’t care or don’t remember who the author is while they are reading. Others commented on the “main character” aspect of the question, noting that sometimes they were better able to identify with someone similar to themselves. However, one woman commented that most of the books she read had men as main characters because those books were more likely to be packed with action.
Often,
especially in genre fiction, the gender of the author is the same as the gender
of the main character; however, examining main character gender on its own is
worthwhile. While it can be easy to
forget the author’s gender, most readers are aware of the main character’s
gender both during and after the reading experience. Turning again to Genreflecting for clues about
women characters, we find that “Women have always been featured in genre
fiction, but the 1980s saw a tremendous surge in the popularity of the woman’s
role…. By the end of the decade,
thrillers featuring women as private investigators or amateur investigators
were appearing weekly. Who by now has
not heard of V.I. Warshawski or Kinsey Milhone?” (Herald 13) While it is interesting to note that women as
main characters are appearing in more types of books, I was not able to
determine whether the fact that these main characters are women makes any given
person more or less likely to read them.
Erin Smith (a student of Janice Radway) is trying to answer that question for the mystery genre. She “is interested in exploring why women read mysteries that have female detectives as the protagonist…. the women in her study tended to focus more on the character of the female detective than the plot of the novel” (Smith 49). This observation seems intuitively true since we often think that men focus on action and women on characterization.
However, we need to remember that many people of both genders have broad reading interests. Saricks and Brown, in their helpful, detailed chapters on how they do readers’ advisory at their library, describe how they’ve recently added a new genre to their reading lists. It’s called “Women’s Lives and Relationships”; their rationale for creating this genre sheds some light on our question: “Over the past several years, we have experienced a growing interest, among both male and female readers, in novels by women that explore women’s lives and their relationships…. They focus on relationships—with family, friends, and lovers—and portray women trying to make sense of their lives. A range of popular authors, such as Danielle Steel, Barbara Delinsky, and Barbara Kingsolver, exemplify these characteristics” (Saricks and Brown 26). Their analysis shows that some books do focus more on relationships and people than action, that these books are often about and by women, but points out that such books are enjoyed by both women and men. Therefore, perhaps it is more likely that gender stereotypes hold true for the book itself than the readers reading it.
An
intriguing related question is whether authors can persuasively create main
characters of the opposite gender. A
romance reader on Romance Readers Anonymous raised this issue in relating a
discussion she had with her boyfriend about the priest in the Mitford series by
Jan Karon: “He said as he was reading it he was
thinking that NO man would act that way and that the author didn't understand men at all” (31 Aug. 2000). While I cannot offer a commentary on that
particular situation, I can say that I have read several books written by men
with incredibly persuasive women main characters.
With the rise of Amazon’s, “If you liked this, try this” approach to selling, some librarians see it as a form of readers’ advisory and will even make use of Amazon as a readalike tool. The commercial world in general seems to capitalize on gender stereotypes: bookstores offer “his and her” sections, Publishers’ Weekly creates separate lists for Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, etc. (Kinsella) The Amazon approach, as well as that of other Internet vendors such as AOL, seems to operate on the general principle of “assume first, finesse later” in that the first suggestions they give you are based on the gender, age, and marital status you provide; once you have searched for and purchased a few things, they will refine their suggestions based on the choices you have made. Perhaps a rule of thumb would be, the more remote the person is, i.e. an anonymous person on the Internet or someone you barely know but for whom you need to buy a gift, the less likely you know what they really like and so the more likely you are to rely on preconceptions.
Since librarians are often confronted with people whom they barely know, the temptation to rely on preconceptions is strong. To combat this tendency and conclude this section, consider “Rosenberg’s First Law of Reading: Never apologize for your reading taste” (Saricks and Brown 16). Betty Rosenberg was the author of the first edition of Genreflecting, and the idea behind this quote is that people should be allowed to read what they want, whether librarians think they should be reading it or not.
As we’ve seen while examining the different intersections of gender and readers’ advisory, there is opportunity for much more research to be done in this area. Particularly lacking is literature on the theory behind reading and advising: “The professional literature is largely practical in nature, with the goal of improving the skills of those rendering advisement” (May et. al.) Experiments similar to the one by May et. al. composed of “posed” readers’ advisory transactions should be conducted in different areas and with larger samples to determine the present state of readers’ advisory in our libraries; gender should be a variable in these studies. A further study of reading habits by gender, perhaps starting with a question list similar to the one I gave the class and then asking regular fiction readers to track their reading habits, including noting the gender of the author, main character, and reader, would shed light on many questions. The fields of women’s and men’s studies, sociology, and library science would benefit from such study, which makes one wonder why more has not been done in this area. Patron confidentiality could be one reason. Another reason could be that recreational reading is still seen as not worthy of study, especially by academic librarians, who do most of the research in the library field.
Although I found less concrete evidence than I expected, it seems clear that gender does indeed play some roles in the readers’ advisory transaction. However, the picture is much more complex than just the simple assumption most people make that women read different books than men. Our society’s heavily gendered nature makes it at once difficult and necessary for librarians to separate themselves from their preconceptions as they work in readers’ advisory. Further study and discussion of the four gendered areas (librarian, patron, author, and main character) will raise awareness of these issues, allowing librarians to serve patrons better.
Works Cited
“Books for men.” Online postings. 22 Apr. 2003-23 Apr. 2003. Fiction_L
mailing list
archive. 3 May 2003.
http://www.webrary.org/maillist/menus/Re.Booksformen.html.
Chelton, Mary K. “Read any good books lately?” Library Journal 118.8 (May 1993):
33-37.
“Consideration
of gender while doing readers advisory.”
Online postings.
26 Apr. 2003-30 Apr. 2003. Fiction_L mailing list archive. 3 May 2003.
http://www.webrary.org/maillist/menus/Re.Considerationofgenderw.html.
Flora,
Kate. “Sisters in Crime.” http://sistersincrime.org/ 3 May 2003.
Krentz,
Jayne Ann, ed. Dangercous Men &
Adventurous Women: Romance Writers on
the Appeal of the Romance. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press,
1992.
“Manly
Men book list.” Online postings. 10 June
2002-12 June 2002. Fiction_L mailing
list archive. 3 May
2003. http://www.webrary.org/MaillistF/msgcur/2002/6/Re.ManlyMenbooklist.html
May, Anne
K. et. al. “A Look at
Reader's Advisory Services.” Library
Journal 125.15
(Sept. 2000):
40-43.
“Men Reading Romance.” Online postings. 13 Feb. 1996-31 Oct. 1997. Romance
Readers Anonymous
mailing list archive. 3 May 2003.
http://listserv.kent.edu/scripts/wa.exe?S2=rral&q=men+reading+romance&s=men&f=&a=&b=
Kinsella, Bridget. “Motherhood be Praised.” Publishers Weekly 244 (17 Mar. 1997):
52+.
Kinsella, Bridget. “Suiting Dad to a Tee.” Publishers Weekly 244 (17 Mar. 1997):
56-
57.
“Miscellaneous Popular Fiction.” Read-a-Likes website.
http://www.readalikes.com/misc.htm
3 May 2003.
Radway, Janice A. Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature.
Chapel Hill,
NC: The University of North Carolina
Press, 1991.
“Real Men Don’t Eat Quiche.” 31 Aug.
2000. Romance Readers Anonymous mailing
list
archive. 3 May 2003. http://listserv.kent.edu/scripts/wa.exe?S2=rra-l&q=men+reading+romance&s=men&f=&a=&b=
Ross, Catherine Sheldrick and Mary K.
Chelton. “Reader's Advisory: Matching Mood
and
Material.” Library Journal 126.2
(Feb. 2001): 52-55.
Saricks,
Joyce G. and Nancy Brown. Readers’
Advisory Service in the Public Library.
Chicago: American
Library Association, 1997.
Smith, Aaron. “Re. Consideration of gender while doing readers advisory.” E-mail to
the author. 26 April
2003.
Smith,
Duncan. “One Reader Reading: A Case Study.” Guiding the Reader to the Next
Book. Kenneth D. Shearer, ed. New York:
Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc., 1996.
Stecher,
Katherine. “Hello Anastasia!” E-mail to the author. 29 Apr. 2003.
“Welcome to Fiction_L!” http://www.webrary.org/rs/FLmenu.html. 3 May 2003.
[1] LCSH subject headings that I found particularly helpful in this area include Reader Guidance, Fiction in libraries, Reading interests, and Women—United States—Books and reading. Database search terms included Books & reading and Libraries & readers.
[2] I did also ask them specifically to list what types of books they liked to read, but the answers were so broad and various that a summary would be impossible. Also, a future rendition of the survey might be better with a range of answers allowed, i.e. “How much, on a scale of 1 to 5, does gender affect your reading interests?”