Author Recognition Survey Results

METHODOLOGY: On May 26, 2005, during lunch hour, surveyor Edward Champion asked various people in the Embarcadero Center (a multi-block shopping center in San Francisco’s Financial District), if they had heard of eleven authors. The surveyor tried not to discriminate by age, gender, race, or class. Among the participants were a smug investment banker who claimed to be “a literary type” (and who was only able to identify two authors) and a down-to-earth cable car operator catching a smoke between runs.

Ten women and nine men were asked in person by the surveyor to offer a “yes” or “no” answer if they recognized the name of the author. (The gender makeup was tracked separately from the data, so as not to corrupt it. I should again point out that this was an informal study that tried to extend across demographics without preference to makeup.) If they knew of the author’s name, they were then asked to name a book that the author had written.

The surveyor remained impartial, so as not to intimidate the participants, only stepping in at times to urge the participants, “Don’t beat yourself up,” pointing out that there were no right or wrong answers and that this was just an informal survey.

RESULTS:

Six authors recognized (1)

  • One could not name a single book by the authors recognized.

Four authors recognized (2)

  • One could name a book correctly by one of the authors recognized.
  • One could not name a single book by the authors recognized.

Three authors recognized (6)

  • Two could not name a single book by the authors recognized.
  • One could name a book correctly by two of the authors recognized.
  • Three could name a book correctly by one of the authors recognized.

Two authors recognized (3)

  • Three could name books correctly by two of the authors recognized.

One author recognized (6)

  • Four could not name a single book by the authors recognized.
  • Two could name a book correctly by the one author recognized.

No authors recognized (1)

Authors Recognized by Name:

Margaret Atwood (12)

  • The Handmaid’s Tale: 2
  • Cat’s Eye: 1
  • Wilderness Tips: 1
  • “I heard her on NPR”: 1
  • “Cheesy paperbacks”: 1
  • No Book Title Offered: 6

David Gardner (8)

  • “I heard him speak”: 1
  • No Book Title Offered: 7

Philip Roth (7)

  • “Confessions of a Communist”: 1
  • “‘Red’ in one of the titles”: 1
  • “American something”: 1
  • No Book Title Offered: 4

James Robison (6)

  • No Book Title Offered: 6

Michael Chabon (5)

  • The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay: 2
  • “Comic book novel”: 1
  • “Is he the guy who writes gay novels?”: 1
  • No Book Title Offered: 1

Kate Atkinson (1)

  • No Book Title Recognized: 1

Joanne Mitchell (1)

  • No Book Title Offered: 1

Chris Clarke (1)

  • No Book Title Offered: 1

Erik White (1)

  • No Book Title Offered: 1

William T. Vollmann (0)

Sue Monk Kidd (0)

CONCLUSIONS:

The results here are quite interesting. I didn’t realize that Atwood would not only be so known, but that the participants would name books beyond The Handmaid’s Tale. Given his work with the Motley Fool, David Gardner’s recognition in the Financial District isn’t much of a surprise. His book titles, apparently, slip through the mind like a sieve. James Robison’s unfortunate success on the Trinity Broadcasting Network probably plays a hand in name recognition. Since Michael Chabon lives in Berkeley, I had thought he would do better. But participants were able to name a book by him better than the others. Philip Roth was quite the reverse. Participants knew his name, but really couldn’t remember a book title by him. Even more interesting, they came close to mentioning the novel, I Married a Communist, but weren’t quite able to do so. All this despite the alleged critical and popular success of The Plot Against America.

And, of course, I weep for Vollmann.

But does all this mean that a literary crisis is at hand? You make the call. Try this excercise in your neighborhood and see how the results stack up.

In the Works

We’ve finally discovered that we can actually view the Internet on our cell phone and that it actually loads fairly fast (under the circumstances) and looks pretty darn spiffy. The problem, of course, is that this blog isn’t yet designed for those tiny display resolutions (or, rather, a specific URL for you mobile folks does not yet exist). Because of this, when we eventually do redesign this damn site, we’ll be considering those of you with mobile devices.

The other thing: some of you have written in expressing interest in our audio ramblings, whether they be further episodes of the Neurotic Chronicles or additional interviews through the Bat Segundo Show. Please know that we’ve been sitting on a few short author interviews that we’ve been hoping to string together for a solid hour-long future episode of Segundo. The problem is that our narrator, a seminal part of the show, is more reluctant than we are to introduce these things. As soon as we pry him away from the Tecate, we’ll get his lazy ass talking again.

We also plan to continue the Neurotic Chronicles. The next few episodes have been written and ambient sounds have been recorded. Just need to find some time to mix it.

But as to the emails, frankly, we’re shocked that our audio content is not only thoroughly appreciated, but even being dumped onto iPods for this thing called Podcasting. While our feelings about the iPod are on record for all to see, we’re not necessarily against those who use it. And if those motherfuckers at ABC are going to do this, then we figure we should too, if only to preserve the independent spirit. So we’ll be keeping you folks in mind during the next month.

Never let it be said that this place didn’t consider the gearheads.

And if you’re wondering about BookExpo America, for those of you who missed our previous announcement, yes, we plan to be there. Yes, we plan to cover the damn thing with gusto. Yes, we plan in-depth, no-bullshit coverage. And there may even be a surprise interview or two soon after our return to San Francisco. Keep watching the skies.

On Audio Books and Reading

In a heated post, Scott takes audiobooks to task, pointing out that the audio book experience ain’t tantamount to reading. “Listen Jim,” writes Scott, “and all other audiobookphiles out there: If I can barely wrap my little mind around Vollmann while I’m holding the book right before my face and re-reading each sentence 5 times each, how in the hell am I going to understand it if some nitwit is reading it to me while I’m brewing a cappuchino on my at-home Krups unit?”

While I would agree with Scott that there’s a fundamental difference between reading a book and listening to a book, I don’t necessarily believe that audio books should be completely discounted. Personally, I’ve found that reading a book aloud (or hearing another person read a book aloud) allows one to discover or familiarize herself with a book’s particular cant and rhythms. To some degree, it’s a bit comparable to only experiencing a play on the page. Sometimes, the intonations, the delivery and the visual nature of the staging leads the mind to frame the narrative in a new context and unearth a subtext that may not have been as readily apparent from a strict read.

The problem then with audio books, aside from the fact that rewinding can’t beat the exactitude of rereading a specific passage on page, is not necessarily the content, but in the way that the work is often delivered by the author. Too many audio book producers make the mistake of enlisting the wrong voice to read the work. And let’s face it: some authors, even though their text scintillates, are pretty damn horrible readers. (Without naming names, I’ll just say that if you go to enough readings, you experience this unfortuante phenemonon repeatedly. I would even suggest that this is an obstacle that may prevent poetry from being completely accepted. For more on this subject, I refer you to Mark Twain’s famous essay, “How to Tell a Story.”)

Further, for many people (particularly Southern Californians), the audio book serves as a surrogate to listening to an obnoxious FM radio DJ blather on during rush hour. While I bemoan the idea that this may be a person’s sole exposure to a book (as Scott says, the text is the thing and I would add that, if you are a supremely active reader, nothing beats copying passages, looking up words and references, or taking notes to understand an author’s intent further).

The problem here is that the audio book experience isn’t the same as a reading experience. But this does not mean that listening to the text of the book while driving and then returning home to study it further is without value. Further, comfort reads and potboilers may, artistically speaking, offer nothing more in the way of entertaining fluff and, on the whole, may be better experienced in one listening. From this perspective then, the audio book serves as a better use of one’s time, even if the sanctity of reading may be compromised in the process.