George Eliot

[AspieAndProud]

On the thread on ‘actresses’ the fact that many female authors wrote under Male pseudonyms got me thinking.

What would people think about rebranding George Elliot’s books as by ‘Mary Anne Evans’?

The need for a male pseudonyms seems to be past but would this be erasing a part of history?

Hasn't she already been retrospectively transed?

She was Marian Evans as an adult, wasn't she? But no - I think it's right to continue using the pseudonym she chose for herself, just as we call Alice in Wonderland's author Lewis Carroll, not Charles Luttwidge Dodgson.

I wouldn't want the name George Eliot to be erased from history. It is important imo for people today to understand why she used a male pseudonym and why that was necessary. To remove that would be to enable people to imagine it never happened and to be unaware of the way women were treated in the past.

I think it’s correct to use the pseudonym as it’s what she called herself - albeit partly to help her succeed under the patriarchy.

I love her so much!

They will struggle to deadtrans her - as far as I know she used her male name for writing, didn’t talk about feeling like a man, in fact fought for rights for women and the equality of the ‘sexes’, and she had heterosexual affairs with men who called her and thought of her by her actual name. Doesn’t mean they won’t try but they’ve not got much of a leg to stand on.

I’d prefer to stick with George Eliot too, I was just curious. That’s the name she chose and, whatever the reasons, we should respect it.

Trickier one: I have two copies of Swastika Nights, the one shown here by Katherine Burdekin and published by Feminist Press and one by ‘Murray Constantine’ published in Gollancz’s SF Masterworks line. Both acknowledge that Constantine is a pseudonym for Burdekin and Gollancz published the first edition in 1937.

So Constantine or Burdekin?

Sorry, forgot the picture.

SF Masterwork edition.

I think it’s an important history lesson especially as the prejudice still goes on. That’s the reason JK Rowling wasn't published using her own full name, in case boys didn’t want to read a book about a boy wizard written by a woman.

Excellent point Noteven. I keep forgetting about that now that JK Rowling is so famous.

‘JK Rowling’ is writing in the tradition of fantasy writers like JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis. Most of them wrote under ‘gender neutral’ names even if that wasn’t the intention.

I think it’s more curious that she chose to write thrillers for adults as ‘Robert Galbraith’. There are as many successful female thriller writers than male.

I am sure I’ve read several times that her publishers wanted a ‘gender neutral’ name so as not to put off boys, Aspie, though she does have a rich heritage there with CS and JRR. Lots of respect though to Dianna Wynne Jones and to Ursula Le Guin and also to my husband for loving Ursula Le Guin when he was a child and as a grown up!

Just remembered Le Guin died earlier this year. One of my favourite SF authors too.

Wow, isn't it interesting that the book cover with the female (real) name features a woman and the cover with the male pseudonym features a hypermasculinised man?

As in it's not just the name that differs, but the whole presentation of the book, so I assume each publisher went with whichever name was going to appeal most to their target audience. You couldn't pay me enough money to be seen reading the Murray Constantine one in public.

I agree, history should never be erased. It is also part of our heritage that is important to keep.

I think it is important that (assuming the author is dead) that people realise that for example George Eliot was a woman, but I don't think changing the author name is the way to do that. Perhaps noted in an introduction, or in smaller writing under the pseudonym?

The use of pseudonyms is still happening. JK Rowling also writes as Robert Galbraith...
The Brontes books were originally published with neutral names too.
It's interesting and has meaning but has nothing to do with trans.

They've tried to deadtrans George Eliot? FFS - she was a woman who lived happily with a man for many years while not married to him....a massively courageous thing for a respectable adult human female in the 19th c.

When Emily Bronte wrote Wuthering heights, a male critic stated that it was a masterpiece of written by a man but a complete disgusting travesty if written by a woman. This attitude should also be remembered.

Someone who seems to think performing femininity is what women do seems to be discussing it. Can’t tell through all the random word salad what this person actually thinks about Eliot.

english.berkeley.edu/profiles/386

Honestly, I thought literature was postmodern nonsense when I was at uni 20 years ago. I am so grateful I didn’t have to deal with this level of self indulgent twaddle.

Wonder why trans groups aren't falling all over themselves to claim Riley Sagar??

I agree it would be wrong to erase from history the fact that Marian Evans had to hide her sex to get published.

I would though like her books to show the author's name as 'George Eliot (Marian Evans)' to emphasise this and to educate people who think George Eliot was a man!

OMG that pic of Grace Lavery! Is that what we women do?
Reminds me of Larry Grayson!

Apologies if that is offensive and gets deleted but the ridiculous 'womaning' that these people attempt just really pisses me off.

There is a hospital named after George Eliot and the local hospice is linked and named "Mary Ann Evans hospice". The hospice has shops and a good presence locally. This seems a good lasting legacy. I wouldn't want to change her name, plenty of writers use pseudonyms.