Whether one chooses to admit it or not, a person's physical appearance plays an increasingly significant role in numerous aspects of their life. We make countless snap judgments of people every day - the disheveled homeless guy laid out in the alley with an empty bottle of Thunderbird next to him; the stunning, six-foot tall woman walking down the sidewalk in front of you; the teenaged girl next to you on the subway with tattoos on her neck - it's just part of being human. Just as we make conclusions about aspects of a person's appearance, those same people are prejudging us in the same way - forming opinions based on our height, weight, clothing, hair color, demeanor, etc.
We live in a shallow society. That much is obvious. We've all heard, for example, about the studies that show taller men and women get more promotions and earn more money in their careers than their shorter counterparts. But that's just the tip of the superficial iceberg. I just overheard my wife and mother-in-law talking about a section of Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner's newest, SuperFreakonomics, that concludes women with bad teeth and obesity issues are penalized more in the workplace than men with similar conditions. It really got me to thinking about how far this insane superficiality extends - like how much an author's appearance influences their success (or lack thereof)...
- If an attractive 25-year old woman and a 90-year old man with a nose like an overripe eggplant wrote comparable paranormal fantasy novels, would be a literary agent or publisher sign the beautiful young woman faster than the old man? Is the young woman's novel more marketable because of her appearance?
- Do attractive writers (male and female) draw larger crowds than their unsightly or just plain ordinary counterparts at conventions, book signings, etc.? And, if so, why?
- Can an author's picture on the back of the book - or inside the dust jacket - compel a potential reader to buy it? Or can a "bad" headshot turn a reader off?
I'll admit it - I've decided to read a book largely based on an author's picture. I'm drawn to highly original and "unusual" works of genre fiction so if I see an author who looks unusual - i.e. interesting - I'm immediately intrigued. That's how I discovered brilliantly talented writers like Patrick Rothfuss, Nathan Singer, Brian Keene, Cherie Priest, Christa Faust, Justine Musk, Duane Swierczynski and, most recently, Kirsten Imani Kasai.
Just take a look around. Sensationalized sexuality and superficiality are everywhere - on television, in movies, advertisements, video games, music lyrics... If you're not one of the beautiful people, well, what's wrong with you? This skin-deep mindset has unarguably seeped into our collective subconscious and twisted the way we perceive reality (For those of you who haven't seen the Dove Self Esteem Fund video please click here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U).
Back in the days before MTV, cable television, and the Internet, an artist's physical appearance was irrelevant. I remember listening to albums and having no idea what the artist looked like - The Moody Blues, Christopher Cross, Roxy Music, etc. - and not caring one bit either. We live in a different world now, one where a person's outside is sometimes seemingly just as important as their inside.
Here are my questions to you (and please be honest):
1. Have you ever purchased a book, in part, because the author was attractive to you? Or, have you bypassed a book because the author was unattractive or unappealing to you?
2. Do you think the appearance of an author could potentially persuade - or dissuade - an agent or press from publishing their work?
3. Ever wonder about books and/or writer websites with no pictures of the author?
4. Are you slightly sickened that we're even talking about this?
5. I'm looking to publish a new collection of poetry - should I invest in a razor and hair plugs?
Melissa_W
on
Pfft, you've never met some of the poets in the IWP.... (don't change a thing 
)
Author appearances usually don't bother me unless I go to a reading and the author turns up looking like an escapee from a mental institution sans bath (has happened). What actually bothers me are the author head-shots that looks very "Glamour shots" with make-up, very posed, and the author looks a shade on the uncomfortable side. I would rather have an author picture that looks like the author is enjoying themselves.
Margaret Atwood's current author photo is great, looks smart, a little twinkle in her eye, and natural. Jasper Fforde's shots look good, too (I think his wife does his photos if I'm not mistaken).
Paul,
You really come up with some interesting topics! Another great one by the way!
Honestly, I've never chosen a book by the author's picture. This hasn't changed in all the years I've been reading and never will. I can say that I never have a visual of the author. I do however, have visuals of the characters That's why I'd never see a movie based on a book unless I'd read the book first. Then I'd only see it to see if they kept to the story in the book. I'd want them to be good actors and make me feel the story as I'd done while reading .
The first thing I see is the cover, so yeah, that gets my attention. Secondly, I'm looking for the blurb on the back to relate to that picture in some way. It has to grab my interest as well. Thirdly, when I open that book the writing has to be good. It has to grab my attention right off the bat and never let go. Fourth, if it's an established author that I've read, then I don't even bother with the other three, because usually the book's going to be good. It's definitely writing. Therein lies the crux of it all for me. Poor writing is a waste of my time and my money.
Yes, I do think the author's appearance can dissuade an agent from publishing their work. Everything these days is based on first impression and physical appearance above all else. We always hear and try to teach our kids that the inside of a person is most worthy. The outside is just superficial. Unfortunately this superficiality has become the way of the world in so many ways. Which is terrible, because there maybe a diamond in the ruff somehwere.
No, I've never wondered about websites or books without pictures. It just never occurred to me. If there is a picture of the author, I consider that a nice boon. I'm to overjoyed to get their newsletter (if there's one), so that I can keep up with their books!
Another no. I'm not put off by this subject. Like I said, I've never thought about it at all.
If you published your poetry and it said something to me, I'd buy it. Personally, I like beards as long as their trimmed and kept up nicely. Facial hair doesn't bother me. Now the ears, yes. I'd advise ear plugs. To be honest, I never knew there were such things! 
melissas
on
1. No and no. Though I will admit that I watch all movie adaptations of Paul Auster's books (after I read them) since it seems he likes to make cameos. He's probably the only author I've ever thought about in those terms.
2. Unfortunately, yes. But I'd like to think that the publishing houses are more intrigued with the actual work than the appearance of the one creating it.
3. Nope, never crossed my mind.
4. As a matter of fact, yes. When I first saw the title of the blog my first thought was, "Seriously!?! Please tell me this is a Mischief Night prank!"
5. HA! I'm not going to justify that with an answer!
I haven't saw the video, so I have no opinion on that. I've used Dove for many years and still do. As one of those geek misfits from days gone by, I try very hard to encourage my young relatives to be themselves and like who they are. Everyone brings something special to this mix called life and that's what makes it interesting. If we were all the same with the same ideas, thoughts and opinions, it would truly be beyond boring. Now that is depressing!
