Problem with Pye

[Pye]

I have what I think might be a problem, that will more or less emerge in the following tumble.

I am not fond of screen names, having to make them up, endure the posturing nature of others, esp. the overweening kind with all its this-is-what-I'm-about classical or cutesy linguistic thievery. It's just me; I find the whole thing a chore. When I had to make up a screen name here, I fished a nickname someone gave me long ago out of the passing air, and I don't know why, but the registration would not take the first spelling "pie," I swear. I remember my surprise.

I just noticed myself as a suggested guest on the Reasoning Show, and I hasten for the same reasons I have a pseudonym to cut that off at the pass. Even if I think such a discussion could slice hard, and myself a quite capable speaker, in doing this, I could do no less than give out, in essence, directions to my house. Forget it.

To compound matters, there is more at work here, apparently, than just a common-sense understanding of how things might be (different) for women on the net. On top of this is a lifelong weird attribute of mine that treasures anonymity. I write a 'philosophical' novel that drags its feet more in the submission of it than the writing: the thought of publishers' contracts; the thought that I could be bound to publicity duties, sent here or there whether I care for it or not; the thought of my phone ringing too much over it; the thought of having the work directed/demanded at all; the assumptiveness of people over the matter of fame; the matter of fame itself and how I am the opposite worried over it, i.e. running the other way. I'm in an argument right now, insisting on a pseudonym for authorship for the above book and being argued against that; I know of no lawyer versed in these things who is also sympathetic to anonymity; in fact, very few people understand this taste at all. Psychologists would call me anti-social or controlling perhaps. I don't want to control the situation; I just don't want the situation at all. Just write; publish; receive checks; write, etc. I don't want to be near my books - I want them like tired parent-birds would, out of the nest to go affect others. After that, I have nothing to do with them.

I could tell you a couple of stories where I've steered notoriety away, stepped back from a success, let something else roll of it on its own. One thing I got very good at whilst young I stopped doing publicly altogether because it attracted assumptions such as these. My mother, ever-bemused at me, called me "downwardly mobile," but with a weirdly admiring regard.

The great beauty of my situation now is that I've made it so, virtually, all my interfacing with others is conducted on the philosophical level, and myself demanding of its higher planes. I go and teach, I have in every encounter the joy in my own expectations for the way we're going to talk. I have three friends, that's it (2 men and 1 woman), and we expect to talk that way, too. Otherwise, I don't talk. And when presented with small-talk, make it bigger or forget it. My phone does not ring with chatty friends; I eschew academic mixers; as designed, my solitude does not bear hardly any interruptions that are not orchestrated by myself. And I don't effect these measures with angst or ado; this pure taste for the anonymous, the left-alone, and it happens like water or ballet.

There is getting to be a backlog of things-written/to write and I'm considering not-submitting any of it - left in manuscript form. Otherwise, I take the permanent pseudonym and let these things free to find their way. I have to make a living, so I have to do it on paper and not cyber-air. I have a friend who wants literary executor duties; he would insist they see light of day. Myself, it does not matter, dead. It does matter to me that some of this thinking strike a path, but I don't need to be around to promote and/or reap it. Frankly, it was just a few years ago I stopped vaporizing everything I wrote - zen rock-garden style - it always felt good; it didn't matter. But I may be someone who does not live to old age; and these things are beating wings against me now, wanting at least, to get free of me.

I'm open to critique of my "problem"; what do you make of it. Seriously, I think death is the solution :) but if you want to poke at me for some kind of attachments, that's okay. I just don't want to be "known" (and all its attendant assumptions). what do you make of that? I want to do, but not be known.


100% sincere :)

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

You are Pye. Use that pseudonym. You will be the same entity, an ongoing entity, you have enough of a history of the identity Pye to make lawyers a little happier, but the whoever-you-are underneath does not have to come out.

I've forgotten who made the quote, but a famous person was quoted as saying

If someone thinks they want to be rich and famous, let them just try rich first.

Fame, even minor fame, is at best a double-edged sword.

Pye is a body-less entity. For many months when I first got here, I did not know what gender you were. You do have the air of a female - and I do not mean that as an insult (and am mildly annoyed at the state of the forum being such that I would have to make that clarification). Pye is intellect, and opinions - but not a person per se. I'm willing to bet that it was Pye that wrote that book, not you - whoever you are. Therefore it is both truthful and only fair that Pye take the credit (or discredit, as the case may be) for the book. You would not be hiding who you are, so long as you are Pye.

A rose by any other name...

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Pye,

Some thoughts:

If your intent with your work is to "affect others" and "strike a path" with your thinking through your writing, which is in itself already quite ambitious and idealistic, then you should really consider publishing without hiding out, overcoming yourself in the process. Whatever your intent is to write about, surely it will be affected by the signals given by any anonymity. It might hurt acceptance, scale of publication and most importantly the question arises with the readers: who is the person in the words? You, as one of the proclaimers of subjectivity here should really provide the reader with the possibility to dress down the author (so to speak) as to assist them in dressing down the teaching to bare essentials. How will they otherwise ever deal with the subjectivity in a proper manner? Guess work?

More daring speculation, since you invited it more or less:

How would your dislike of being known relate to the feminine principle of shame? I never have met a woman, especially the ones with strong masculine elements, that didn't have an equally developed shame, rationalized into behavior like overly strong anonymity (non-identity), modesty or decency. Isn't it as much the fear of being found, in terms of home address and stalkers, as it's a mostly irrational fear of being pointed out, underlying uncertainties exposes - a feeling of incapability, lack of defense? In other words: are you using the idea of physical vulnerability - or in general to be 'bothered' - to mask the vulnerability of the mask of femininity itself? That's a psychological pattern deeply ingrained in modern mankind, not just women.

Some other thought:

Did you ever think of dropping this whole bothersome publishing maze and jump in the deep: just put your ideas out there online under a pseudonym? You keep control over all aspects with a price to pay: no guaranteed readership, no guaranteed links from colleagues or college material, no payments; basically just a chick leaving the coop.

[Shardrol]

Pye

I have some thoughts on this subject as it's something I've considered in my own life. At one point (when I was much younger) I invented a pseudonym & used it for just about everything. It felt like an old comfortable coat & I was able to do & say things I would not have done or said as 'myself'.

But I felt like a coward & that gnawed away at me. Eventually I came around to the view that it was vitally important to identify myself with my 'real' name in everything I did & said, as a way of forcing myself to confront the reality of who & how I was. This was sometimes quite painful but I learned a lot about my own neuroses in terms of wanting status & recognition, not wanting to be seen making mistakes or being wrong, not wanting to be thought stupid or silly, not wanting people to think they knew all about me when I thought they didn't, not wanting people who knew me in one context to find out about others, & all the rest of it.

Forcing myself out into the light was difficult but it helped me. I learned to live with all those things. I learned to accept being imperfect & having people know it & perhaps despise me for it. I fell through many layers of what seemed like a solid self-image that would disintegrate in the light of some new perception. Like: 'I may not be perfect but at least I'm honest'. Then I would catch myself bending the truth to a more flattering angle & I'd fall through that concept to another level: 'I sometimes try to distort things to make myself look better but I know I'm doing it & soon I'll be strong enough to stop'. Then that would collapse into something else. At the bottom of all this I discovered the solid ground of 'it is as it is'.

It was worth the trip to get there.

Unpleasant things that have happened to me as a result of people being able to associate my name with things I've said or done in public (mostly on the internet): I've received a few really nasty emails. That's it. It's hard to overestimate the indifference of the world.

What I do now on this forum is to use the name by which I'm known (which isn't my legal name) but not to publicize anything I've said or done elsewhere. The reason is because I don't want to discuss it here so there's no point.

A lot of what you wrote about anonymity had a kind of defensive tone, as if you were anticipating disagreement or had already encountered it. Why is it so important? That might be an interesting question. What would you lose by being known?

[Jamesh]

I was going to say something about Doris Lessing in relation to Pye's "publicity reticence", because last night I watched her get annoyed that she had won the Nobel prize [it was an intro to this interview, which is worth reading].

I've since noticed, that she was recommended for a podcast just before Pye was.

Less than an hour after the Swedish Academy announced Doris Lessing was this year's Nobel Literature prize winner the novelist came home in a London taxi and looked astonished at the small press gaggle outside her house.
It was clear she had not heard the news.

Reuters was the only TV crew on the scene on Thursday morning and there were few other reporters on hand.
I sensed that if I played this right, I could be the one to inform her and the video would get worldwide play. But the 87-year-old author was struggling to open the taxi door.

Tethered to the camera by a microphone, I was in an awkward position: if I helped her out of the cab I'd have to drop the microphone and ruin the soundbite, so I looked at a colleague to my right who took my hint and moved to the door.
The new Nobel laureate was helped out of the cab. If you have seen the video, you will know that I asked her if she had heard the news and when she said no, I shared it with her.

"Oh Christ!" she said in an exasperated tone that I certainly was not expecting."It's been going on now for 30 years, one can't get more excited than one gets," she said, referring to the decades of speculation that she would win the prize.
She shooed me away. I realized if I wanted the soundbite, I'd have to work for it.

Lessing's son, his arm in a sling, walked past carrying an artichoke. He and his mother had been vegetable shopping and missed the phone call from Stockholm.

"Isn't this a recognition of your life's work?" I persisted.

"Yes, it is. See, you've said it all for me," the feisty and prolific author responded, turning to head indoors.

A radio journalist asked her to appear on air. She snapped back that she would have to think of something suitable to say.
Clearly she was not going to make it easy.

I managed to get her to turn around when she was half-way up the garden path by asking her if prizes meant anything to her as obviously they were not the reason she wrote books.

"Look I have won all the prizes in Europe, every bloody one. I'm delighted to win them all, okay?" she responded testily.
As an afterthought she turned around and mumbled:

"It's a royal flush."

[Jamesh]

Eliz:

Pye is a body-less entity. For many months when I first got here, I did not know what gender you were.

At first I assumed she was male, but she soon straightened me up on that front. Soon after, I saw a more feminine floweriness in her writing style (a kind of new agey mystical style - though without the insanity of new agers).

Bit surprised to see her make the above post - I thought she was more self-decisive - but then again we all have our little foibles.

I think she'd write a good book. I'd read it. More importantly the new ageyness about her writing style, and her rationality that is of the form acceptable to both sexes, would sell books, so I guess she has a reason to be concerned about being pestered.

[Imadrongo]

If it isn't even spelled right why would you use that name? Unless you have become attached to it on this forum.... I would probably pick something original and somewhat meaningful.

[Dan Rowden]

Pye,

When you lecture and grade other people's ability in a tertiary education setting, you have no anonymity. And, seemingly little or no reticence save the criticism of the system that any intelligent lecturer ought have.

So, what's the difference between here and there, do you think? Do you feel more personally exposed and vulnerable here, without the fallback of that system, however flawed it may be? Do you feel more explicitly held to account, as opposed to being part of a system within which you can dissipate and dilute any sense of personal account?

I don't recall how old you are. Mind saying? Just for the sake of fitting you into a generational context, which may be pertinent.

[Pye]

Shardrol, I thank you for your gentle post, and if you sense "defensiveness" it is only from the frustration of not being understood on this point in the 'regular' world. I wondered if perhaps the 'non-regular' people here on the genius forum might have an easier time understanding what I'm getting at (and have suggestions for redress, too).

It seems that this Lessing-style attitude (if not Pynchon in proportions) has no hope of standing outside of implications of vulnerability and fear and cannot be considered a straightforward matter of values. I've looked at it (fame - and felt it to a certain degree) and do not want the thing, but this does not seem possible to most all people. Even some 'healthy' niggling from Diebert to 'put myself out there' and 'come clean' shows how deeply embedded the notion of fame/notoriety belongs in our lexicon of what decent humans do; and that there is some malfunction with the opposite value.

What I find really interesting in people's reactions is their own 'defensiveness' - at least in this sense: they seem irritated that I would not seek their attention/regard/validation, and since it appears I am 'blowing them off' in this, they blow it off as non-valuable in return. It appears that no sane person would eschew notoriety, and perhaps they are even cowardly if they do. It's my fault, I started it. I don't value the attention of persons who flock toward fame for its own sake and the famous for their own sakes in return.

So, I understand your words about vulnerability and hiding and things, Shardrol, but I register very little of those feelings in comparison to the overwhelming distaste for what happens in fame. Dan's questions help me explain that indeed, I am "out there" to the fullest degree in my teaching work, and as hard as it is to know the difference, there is a difference. There, I do not court public favour. Courting public favour makes you public property. And publishing contracts place commensurate demands upon authors' time, appearances, activities, even what they subsequently write and when - it's a whole circus of publicizing and courting the public (to assure sales) and meeting the demands/expectations of others. Diebert is right to call this bothersome. In the small scale, I have had people stop me on campus to tell me they know who I am simply from reputation and they stand like children awaiting something pleasing in return. Care to talk a little philosophy? I don't know what to say. It reminds me of the old cafe joke where the fame-loving are watching the people coming in the front door. "Is that anybody?" one asks? "No, that's nobody," comes the reply.

Jamesh, I'm actually quite self-decisive on this topic, but as mentioned above, I thought others (here) might have a better understanding of this than mainstream psychologizing like "fear of success" (and have other publishing ideas for me, too) That's how deeply embedded the want of notoriety is with our external seekings. Within myself, I am the most "successful" person I know and do not require repetitive evidence from others to make it so. (BTW, I recall your saying you "liked this guy" - had my head screwed on straight or something like that when I first started writing here; I recall David as well remarking one paragraph of mine as "beautiful writing." Both of you made those comments before you knew I was femme. Since then, you don't read me the same way (and you might take note of that). I have a colleague that describes my writing as dense and compound instead, so if it is not an easy read, there is at least some reward in substance getting through it (to him). But no, novels come off entirely differently. There, writing as writing needs to disappear in favor of the story.)

Elizabeth and Neil, no, good-naturedly laughing I reply that "Pye" is, as I mentioned, the screen name plucked from the air the first day I wanted to make a post here at the Genius Forum. I have a different writing pseudonym that is composed of both of my parents' first names, and I used it once or twice in juvenile publications years ago. I turned 51, Dan, not too long ago.

Thanks for your considered replies, all of you. Perhaps this is a taste that even a genius forum finds unpalatable, but you've all given me considered things to think about anyway.


.

[Leyla Shen]

Pye, this vid is so dynamically pertinent to the subject matter of your post, I reckon--and why I consider it to be one of the best concept albums ever produced.

Sure hope you appreciate it as much as I do!

The Wall

Click on the “Comfortably Numb, The Wall” icon then select “Video.”

[Kevin Solway]

Hey Pye,

I'm curious about something.

For all my fantastic wisdom, and having never used a pseudonym, I'm not the slightest bit famous anywhere in the world. What is it about your work that makes you so easily famous?

Anyway, if you want to, you can dictate to publishing houses the terms under which you will allow them to publish your work. They will still publish it so long as they believe they can make money out of it. Otherwise, publish it yourself, under a pseudonym if that is your choice.

It's up to you to take control.

[Pye]

Kevin writes:

It's up to you to take control.

Indeed. The difficulty regarding the contract terms you mention above is that they are virtually non-negotiable unless one is already a writer of note. I need to study some contract law or find a sympathetic contract lawyer to assist, if I choose to resolve this in any other way than death.

The friend who nags (lovingly) the most is the one who volunteered to take care of things as literary executor after me. He is also the one most knowledgeable of 30 years of my writing, as well as the current novel, which he describes as "the Slaughterhouse 5 of the gender wars" (no one will come out unscathed:). I don't know that fame is the natural outcropping of putting my work into the world, but it has been so in everything else I've undertaken that way thus far.

What about the value-of I'm mentioning here, Kevin? What do you think - for yourself - about it? Want to be famous?

Leaving a pile of manuscript has always been fine with me, even if it ends in the bin. The re-rearing of this issue is the age-old thing: I have to teach too many classes to meet basic living expense, and when I have too many classes to teach, I have less time to write. So, every once in awhile, I wish I could eat as a writer.

Leyla :)
Yep, I cut my teeth on Floyd.
Thanks for hearing :)

.

[Jamesh]

(BTW, I recall your saying you "liked this guy" - had my head screwed on straight or something like that when I first started writing here; I recall David as well remarking one paragraph of mine as "beautiful writing." Both of you made those comments before you knew I was femme. Since then, you don't read me the same way (and you might take note of that).

Yes, I said that and still think it, and it is true I don't read you the quite the same way. Perhaps I'm judging you too harshly - I tend to seek out and concentrate far too much on negatives than positives. It also might be that you were tighter in what you said initially, but then loosened up and thats where some slight newaginess (not quite the right word) crept in.

For the record I actually respect what you say more than many of the guys here, though there was a period where I was annoyed with you - perhaps you were too strong on the feminine side, in just the same way I think the QRS are too strong on the masculine side, or perhaps I was just being moody.

Although there is a big part of me that wants fame, its egotistical dumbness. The media these days are incredibly shallow, with their childish questions and intrusions and this is enormously frustrating and irritating. One is better off not being widely known.

[Kevin Solway]

What about the value-of I'm mentioning here, Kevin? What do you think - for yourself - about it?

I think that everything depends on your purpose in life . . . if you have settled on one.

Once you know what your purpose is - what you want to achieve - then any questions about fame, publishing, etc, are answered a lot more easily.

Want to be famous?

No, but I'd like to be widely known, and to be able to speak to the entire world and have everyone interested to listen to me whenever I have something I'd like to say to them.

[Kevin Solway]

The media these days are incredibly shallow, with their childish questions and intrusions and this is enormously frustrating and irritating. One is better off not being widely known.

It's possible to be famous without being too badly mistreated by the media. Take Matt Damon, for example. He seems intelligent enough to be famous, and yet be a respectable enough human being that the media, and probably the general public, too, don't take too many liberties with him.

Celebrities generally bring all their woes upon themselves, through their foolish behaviour.

On the other hand, if the material you are putting out there is very controversial, you might prefer to stay under cover.

For example, Esther Vilar says: "So I hadn't imagined broadly enough the isolation I would find myself in after writing this book. Nor had I envisaged the consequences which it would have for subsequent writing and even for my private life - violent threats have not ceased to this date."

[Shardrol]

Pye

Okay I understand better what you mean. It seems to be a question of whether you would trade your anonymity for the freedom of not having to spend so much time teaching, yes? I know two writers who have dealt with similar issues, in different ways. One has decided being unknown is worth more than having a lot of people read her work, or getting money from it. Like you, she shrank from the idea of having to publicize it, being chosen as an Oprah book-of-the-month & all the rest of it. She publishes her stuff herself (through one of those publish-on-demand companies) & sends it to people she knows. This way she has only a very few readers but they mostly appreciate her work & don't cause her any hassles.

The other is a writer who stopped publishing because he said that having his work discussed & dissected in the public marketplace was so disturbing that it made it almost impossible for him to write. Now he still writes but hasn't published anything in years. He says that can all happen after he's dead. Since at one time he was extremely famous he has enough money so as not to need more.

I got sidetracked into blathering on about my own story, which is actually quite different from yours. I don't crave fame but I do crave communication. I do want people to read what I write; that matters to me. I can understand your being repelled by fame & notoriety but I don't understand your (apparently) not wanting communication.

I do want it, for some of the same reasons as Kevin: there are things I want to communicate. I guess that's why it's worth it to me to make myself accessible, real name & all. It doesn't sound as though you have that motivation, so I can't see that you would gain anything positive by putting your work out in public - except possibly money. But you could probably get work as something like a ghost writer that would use up less of your time & pay better than teaching.

Of course what you've written here has had the (no doubt unintended) effect of making me want to read this novel of yours & other stuff you write.

Just as a side note: I too have noticed a change in the way people react to me on this forum after finding out I'm female. It's amost funny but not quite.

[Pye]

.

Thanks especially, Shardrol, for the stories of the two writers you know (Kevin's Esther Villar quote is not of small help, either). I understand you fully on the difference between fame and communication, and indeed, communication-r-us is my daily teaching and speaking affair. I remember an extremely intelligent ex-jesuit professor I once knew express relief that he had finally reached the place in life where he did not have to write anymore. That thought has often captured me, and would continue to do so, if the whole project of expression did not bring me the foundational joy that it does. But, "writing one's way to silence" - now there is some wisdom in there I have but a fingertip grasp upon.

Pye asked Kevin:

Want to be famous?

Kevin replies:

No, but I'd like to be widely known, and to be able to speak to the entire world and have everyone interested to listen to me whenever I have something I'd like to say to them.

You lost me there.
or
You are displaying considerable wit.

You will have to listen as well to everything the world wants to say in return. That's you, and 6.5 billion replies . . . .

(not a desk-day for me today, so brevity all around, pardon . . . )

[Kevin Solway]

You will have to listen as well to everything the world wants to say in return. That's you, and 6.5 billion replies . . . .

I don't have to listen.

Though it's a lot easier living in a very small and isolated town, like I do, than in a place like New York city, and being recognized and pestered by every forthright and vocal American on the street.

[Leyla Shen]

Leyla :)
Yep, I cut my teeth on Floyd.
Thanks for hearing :)

Hey, no worries. :)