The Oprah Debate

[Grouch]

Let me state right from the get-go that I genuinely admire Ms. Winfrey for what she's done for writers, publishers and readers. By creating a nationally televised book club, she has caused people who wouldn't ordinarily darken the doorway of a bookstore to actively seek out her imprimatured novels (and, publishers hope, other contemporary literature which happens to be sitting on the table next to the Oprafied books). As a writer, my heart nearly burst with joy when I first heard of her plans. While her choice of novels has varied wildly from the mediocre (Vinegar Hill, The Pilot's Wife) to the wonderful (Drowning Ruth, We Were the Mulvaneys), the mere fact that thousands of Americans are reading at all is a GOOD THING. In this regard, Oprah is my heroine.

Not everyone feels the same way I do. Some people regard her as a type of literary fascist: the one dictating the tastes of the many. Oprah is the shepherd guiding the lemmings over the cliff, their noses stuck in the latest Toni Morrison novel as they dash themselves into the sea. Some go so far as to publicly state that they would never buy an Oprah book, no matter what its literary merit might be.

Thus, it seems that the original intent of the club has been reversed. Rather than bringing readers together, it has worked to create a divide: literary snobs on one side sneering at the television-tranced masses on the other side.

(I'll admit that I myself am guilty of occasionally using the Oprah Book Club as an easy target in some of my reviews and for that I feel a measure of regret.)

Perhaps I'm overstating the case here. Perhaps I'm guilty of hyperbole....then again, perhaps not.

The reason I bring the whole thing up is because it seems that the author of her latest pick, Jonathan Franzen (The Corrections), has objected to being an "Oprah commodity." I first learned about this through a daily e-mail I subscribe to, Publisher's Lunch. Here is what was mailed to me:

Oprah Corrects Franzen Off the Air
Farrar Straus was apparently blind-sided by Oprah Winfrey's decision not air a Book Club episode on Jonathan Franzen's THE CORRECTIONS. Last night PW reported this statement from Oprah (even as, earlier in the day, people at Harpo were indicating that the book still would be covered on the program): "Jonathan Franzen will not be on the Oprah Winfrey show because he is seemingly uncomfortable and conflicted about being chosen as a book club selection. It is never my intention to make anyone uncomfortable or cause anyone conflict. We have decided to skip the dinner and we're moving on to the next book."

In a statement just released by FSG, Franzen responds, "I was delighted that Oprah Winfrey picked THE CORRECTIONS for her Book Club. I'm glad that so many of her viewers are reading and enjoying it, and I'm sorry to learn that there won't be a dinner for this particular selection. I was never conflicted about any of this, although the printed logo on the dust jacket did make me uncomfortable. I'm a writer, not a spokesperson. I try to explore complicated emotions and circumstances as honestly and fully as I can. This approach can be productive on the page, but clearly hasn't been helpful in talking to the media, many members of which used the occasion of my book tour to raise questions about Oprah's Book Club and the supposed divisions among American readers. The conflict is preexisting in the culture, and it landed in my lap because of my good fortune. I'm sorry if, because of my inexperience, I expressed myself poorly or unwisely. I continue to be grateful to Oprah for her love of THE CORRECTIONS."

The publisher echoes Franzen's point that the discussion of whether CORRECTIONS was "too good for an Oprah pick" began before Oprah ever actually selected the title, setting up a story that the media couldn't resist and that would have played on no matter Franzen said. CORRECTIONS was seen by many as the kind of earnest contemporary literature that could never get Oprah-style attention and audiences--by picking the book, so early in its publication life even, Oprah's designation forced the issue even more. And it didn't heelp that an author who spent seven years crafting his words suddenly found that Oprah was the first subject on every interviewer's mind as he was touring.

Of course part of the problem is that Franzen's recent remarks displayed a different sentiment from today's statement. Others in the industry are already blaming the publisher for not coaching Franzen better--even as a long and carefully crafted publicity campaign made him very visible--and making clear the responsibilities that goo along with accepting the Oprah designation (Franzen does not own a television and had not seen Oprah's show until her staff sent him a tape).

Franzen's remarks showed both discomfort with the Oprah questioning as well as concerns about what kind of audience it would drive. He recently bemoaned to NPR's Terry Gross the notion that only women read contemporary fiction and said, "I had some hope of actually reaching a male audience and I've heard more than one reader in signing lines say 'If I hadn't heard you, I would have been put off by the fact that it is an Oprah pick.'" When Gross asked about preparations for the Oprah episode, originally set to air in November, he noted "I've done the sort of bogus thing where they follow you around with a camera and try to act natural" but that the "coffee klatsch" portion would come later.

Earlier in the month Franzen had told The Oregonian, "I see this as my book, my creation, and I didn't want that logo of corporate ownership on it. It's not a sticker, it's part of the cover. They redo the whole cover. You can't take it off. I know it says Oprah's Book Club, but it's an implied endorsement, both for me and for her. The reason I got into this business is because I'm an independent writer, and I didn't want that corporate logo on my book." (National Book Award voters take note). Apparently it was the publisher's idea to maintain a supply of Oprah logo-free covers to assuage the author. He also expressed the opinion that, "we feel it does as much for her as it does for us."

Only time will tell how many women (and Oprah loyalists) will respond by leaving those Oprah emblazoned editions on store shelves--there are approximately 800,000 copies in print, and FSG underscores that the book remains Oprah Book Club Pick #43 even thoough there will be no book club dinner episode. But there was already heated discussion at Readerville.com, where site regular Katherine Warren said "Franzen has proven himself rude and arrogant in his dismissal of Oprah and the readers who follow her lead. One doesn't have to love Oprah to see that…. We used to wish Oprah would choose more challenging books. OK, she did, and what happened? The author kicked her in the teeth, saying 'Who needs you? You're not the sort of readers I want for MY book. Go away.' Now we've got to wish Oprah will choose a challenging writer who won't kick her."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Perhaps Franzen was just worn down from his exhausting book tour, but it seems to me he should have been a bit more careful with his words. Even if he objected to being stamped with Oprah's seal, he should have known that he was walking on thin ice by being too honest publicly.

Nonetheless, it does resurrect a debate which has long simmered just below the surface: Oprah's Book Club--the best thing that has happened to Books...or the worst? Does she push the envelope, or does she homogenize America's reading habits?

[kurt_messick]

"I see this as my book, my creation, and I didn't want that logo of corporate ownership on it. It's not a sticker, it's part of the cover. They redo the whole cover. You can't take it off. I know it says Oprah's Book Club, but it's an implied endorsement, both for me and for her. The reason I got into this business is because I'm an independent writer, and I didn't want that corporate logo on my book."

Elitism -- probably.

I'm sure the author has no objection to 'corporate logos' on the book when it is that of the publisher. Independent author, indeed. You mean this book is self-published? And self-distributed? The author is getting no assistance from corporate entities, like bookstore chains, advertising concerns, and the publishers themselves?

Give me a break.

[jennifer_gibbons]

David-
Thanks for that story!
Now it's no secret here-I love the Oprah Book Club. Working so long at a library, it was great to see these people come in and ask for various authors they would've never read if it wasn't for Miss Oprah. Others have come back and asked from more suggestions from librarians, so that to me is just a miracle. My local paper has now had a book club for four years-and they take full credit from Oprah. Their picks have been more eclectic:Ya Ya Sisterhood, Water Carry Me by Thomas Moran, All Over But the Shouting, Rick Bragg.

Like you, there are some picks I've adored: Drowning Ruth, Rapture of Canaan, I Know This Much Is True. Some are just okay-River Cross My Heart, Mother of Pearl. The one I couldn't get through was Black and Blue-and I love Anna Quindlen!

Now on to Jonathan Franzen.... Okay, I'm not crazy about the O label myself(I was lucky that I got a copy before they slapped that sucker on the cover) but... with all due respect....

What a incredibly snobby thing to say! How rude can you get? Maybe that's why I've been having problems reading the book-it's just too much sometimes, and now when I read remarks like that, I'm not in a hurry to read it anytime soon.

Look, there's a time to be very serious, but also there's a time to be professional and gracious. She didn't have to choose his book. But she did, she gave him a chance to be with incredibly fine company of writers.

...I've done the sort of bogus thing where they follow you around with a camera and try to act natural" but that the "coffee klatsch" portion would come later.

I for one like that "bogus thing" we get to see the writer in their life, how they came about writing the book. As a writer it's a great thing to see.

And coffee klatsch?

God, now I'm just pissed. If your biggest problem is that you have the frigging O label on your book, if you biggest problem is that women who watch Oprah is now reading your book, I'm sorry, but count your blessings. There are writers who would love to have that chance, and where the f--k does he get off bemoaning it. Poor Jonathan, poor boy, he has to have a O label on his book! It's now number one! Here, let's pass the Kleenex.

Does he have any idea how much she has helped writers??? Kaye Gibbons with her showing a orphanage in NC helped them raise so much money for a library that they had to hire a librarian. A. Manette Ansay can't read for more than 20 minutes a time, now with her Oprah money she got to hire someone to read to her for hours. Melinda Haynes bought a house. Janet Finch got her husband's teeth fixed.

I could go on and on, but you're getting the idea. I think she pushes the envelope, and if Mr. Franzen doesn't understand that, then tough for him. And tough for him for badmouthing his new readers.

[theworm[$]]

I'm always puzzled by the emotions that are stirred over Oprah's book club. I've read many of her selections, and have enjoyed most, certainly not all, of them.
As David said, Oprah is getting people to read quality books that they might not have otherwise chosen. I can't see anything wrong with that.
For those of us who are active on Epinions, I think that the "hatred" of Oprah's club is especially ironic. We use Epinions to share our opinions about books that we like or don't like. We develop a WOT and use the opinions of selected writers to influence our own purchases. Oprah is doing the same with her book club. She's telling us what she likes. We can choose to trust or not-trust her opinions.
I admit that I do trust Oprah's opinions. I am just about finished reading Cane River, which I'm really enjoying. I loved many of her book club selections. Some of her selections in my opinion are not worthy of her club (i.e.: Vinegar Hill and Icey Sparks) - but that's just my opinion - Oprah is entitled to her own, and none of us have to agree with her.

[vania]

Okay, I'll play the devil's advocate here. Granted, I think Oprah's book club is doing a great thing for reading... but let's think for a minute about who Oprah's target audience is.

I would assume that Oprah is targeted mostly to women aged 30 and up or thereabouts. Lots of them SAHMs, or anyone who has the luxury of being home at 4pm on a weekday.

Soooo, you're an author. You publish a book, Oprah picks it for her book club which is a good thing because it drives your sales and your readership up. BUT at the same time it can be a bad thing because you get your cover stamped with "Oprah Book Club Selection."

Now you're an "Oprah" author which sort of implies that YOUR target audience is women 30 and up who are probably SAHMs. Now you publish a second novel and you're suddenly "that Oprah guy," and you've possibly lost a good portion of your potential readers who are NOT women aged 30 and older, because they think that your novel would not be of any interest to them.

Does that make any sense at all?

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but as a single woman who works full time, rapidly approaching 30, I really DO NOT LIKE the Oprah show and get irrationally irritated when I'm in the same room with a TV turned to that station. It rarely features a topic that is of any interest to me, and therefore I just assume it has no relevance to my life.

Along with that comes the assumption that I would hate her Book Club books, too, so I generally avoid them.

Coming from that frame of (closed) mind, I guess what I'm trying to say is, as an aspiring author, I'm not sure I'd want that stamp on my book, either.

But....then again... that's just me!

valerie

[AuntieEmma[$]]

Originally posted by Grouch
Franzen's remarks showed both discomfort with the Oprah questioning as well as concerns about what kind of audience it would drive. He recently bemoaned to NPR's Terry Gross the notion that only women read contemporary fiction and said, "I had some hope of actually reaching a male audience and I've heard more than one reader in signing lines say 'If I hadn't heard you, I would have been put off by the fact that it is an Oprah pick.'"

Beneath all the anti-corporate rhetoric, this sounds like plain old garden-variety misogyny to me. Being an Oprah pick will bring his book hundreds of thousands of new readers -- but most of them will be women. Ick! What an insult to a "serious" book! <-- (sarcasm, in case that isn't clear)

[Dani257]

Originally posted by theworm

As David said, Oprah is getting people to read quality books that they might not have otherwise chosen.

Well, quality is subjective. I think anything that gets people reading more is good. Personally, Oprah's taste is not my taste. Her books (and I admit, I'm not totally informed, because I get my ideas of her books from a coworker, who likes to tell me the synopsis) are always so dismal.

I'd like to see a Dave Barry book club. I think I could into that

[arianej]

Originally posted by Grouch
Nonetheless, it does resurrect a debate which has long simmered just below the surface: Oprah's Book Club--the best thing that has happened to Books...or the worst? Does she push the envelope, or does she homogenize America's reading habits?

I think it's a bit of both, actually. Like several others, I think that whatever gets people reading is a good thing...but I will add to that it's a good _beginning_, not the end of the journey, so to speak. I hope the same people who enthusiastically participate in the book-club episodes will be equally enthusiastic about reading in general--and that includes books NOT in the Club. Unfortunately, I have no idea if this is the case or not.

In Franzen's comments, I don't see veiled misogyny per se...only an understandable wariness about being pigeon-holed, like vania was talking about. I only know that if I were in his place, I'd have mixed feelings. I'd be ecstatic because I know that being selected will probably do nice things for book sales...but I'd also worry about about being lumped into such a large and varied (in quality) category. I'd also worry about whether or not people read/liked it because of the book itself or because it was an Oprah's pick. Did I mention I'm slightly neurotic?

I've read and reviewed several of the Club Picks. Some I liked, others had visible stink-waves coming off them. I've enjoyed that some of them were different, while noticing a definite and obvious trend in the coverage of certain topics.

Basically, Oprah has a lot of clout and influence, which doesn't make me altogether comfortable. It's got nothing to do with her being a woman, black or a talk show host (okay, maybe a bit of the third), it's just that when people have a great deal of influence, whether or not they use it for good or evil (heh, heh) becomes a major issue. For me, it's not enough that she encourages people to read--although that's a fine accomplishment.* It's WHAT she encourages them to read and the repercussions for the audience, writers and publishers which concern me, too.

Ariane, thinking too much on a lovely Wednesday afternoon


* Again, let me state that I think fighting illiteracy and encouraging people to read is a Good Thing, I just don't give an unconditional "Yay!" because there are other factors and issues at stake here, too.

[Grouch]

Backpedaling? Spin doctoring? or genuine remorse?

Jonathan Franzen Apologizes to Oprah....Sort of

[AuntieEmma[$]]

Around the water coolers of publishing offices, insiders whispered that Franzen's real fear was that the deliberations of the National Book Award jury might be adversely affected by the Oprah award, snooty panelists being notoriously reluctant to vote for popular favorites.

And there's some other interesting, gossipy stuff here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...29/DD63338.DTL

(The caption under Jonathan Franzen's photo in the newspaper, which doesn't show up on the website version, says "Gave gift horse dental exam.")

[Grouch]

Why am I so fascinated by the Franzen-Oprah debate? Is it because it's one of the first times I can remember lit fiction has entered the realm of soap operas and tabloids? Is it because it raises some interesting questions about the gulf between "literary fiction" and "popular fiction"? Or is it because I just have too much time on my hands?

At any rate, it seems The New Yorker can't get enough of the tussle, either. In this article Franzen writes about his experiences filming the Oprah segment which never aired. Here, you'll get an inside look at Franzen returning to his hometown and having a producer yell "Emote! Emote!" while an obviously disinterested Franzen drives 30 mph down the freeway as he passes the St. Louis Arch. Interesting reading....

[ms_n]

Thanks for posting this article. It made me wanna cry. You know, I like that old grump. Now, I'm gonna have to add another book to my list. Grumble, grumble...

[Grouch]

Jonathan Franzen just won't shut up.

Now, in the London Independent, he continues to spout off on Oprah, bad photos and "high art."

"It's complicated. I don't have anything against her. She [Oprah], from her side of the great gulf created by television between kinds of reading audiences in the US, was reaching out towards me, and I wish I'd reached out more towards her. But I was having to accustom myself to success, after 20 years of reconciling myself never to having it. There was a delay of some weeks while I was still imprisoned in old attitudes of resentment and doubt."


.....sigh.....

[AuntieEmma[$]]

I haven't read the article yet, but I did see Franzen on Charlie Rose a few weeks ago, and I wasn't all that impressed.
----------
I think there's also a question here about publicity -- it's not enough for a writer to write -- nowadays they've got to do the publicity tours and tv and radio shows and so on, if they want a large readership. Some writers enjoy this, a lot don't -- I think it's not just situations where Oprah producers are shouting "Emote! Emote," but all of it, it's all a kind of performance, and the experience, I would think, is almost the exact opposite of the experience of writing, which is solitary, and deliberate, and aimed at uncovering underlying truths.

I remember reading somewhere that Philip Roth refuses to do publicity (much to the disappointment of his publishers), and that's cut down his potential readership a lot.

[ms_n]

I think I still like him. No, I hate him. No, I LOVE him. No, no, I can't stand him. No, I am madly driven to read him. No, no, no....

[realtraveller]

As my old grandmother used to say, "This guy has it high in the head".

Sounds like old-fashioned snobbery to me. "If I am liked by the masses, then I can't be a real literary writer".

[pisces]

I am certainly not a fan of Oprah's Book Club. I never made it past the first 100 pgs of Franzen's "Corrections." I've tried, unsuccessfully to read Joyce Carol Oates. I can't stand Toni Morrison's humorless attitude during interviews, so I've never bothered reading her. In short, I've never managed to read a single Oprah's Book Club Book, so what does that make me? Extra Low Brow?

This debate between high brow "serious" literature vs. mainstream "popular" fiction is ridiculous and takes all the fun out of reading. Why can't people just read whatever they want without classifying it? If I choose to read trashy romance novels, why is that any less valid than someone who chooses to read Shakespeare? In the end, reading is reading, so what difference does it make?

And this only goes on, really, in America. This sort of snobbery doesn't exist in other countries. For example: In France they have what is called "Literature Populaire" which is akin to our mainstream fiction here in America.

Not everybody in Paris is reading Proust, and that's ok! In fact, the majority in France are reading the Literature Populaire--the popular, mainstream books. The French are really the least snobbish of all. They also have what is called "Language Ordinaire," which means they don't speak in high-falutin, sort of grandiose language either.

I think it's only in this country (America) where there is this divide between the Cultural Elite vs. the rest of us uncouth masses, played out in the book world as a war between "serious" Franzen type fiction vs. mainstream trash!

[dijinn]

To jump in to the frey here I have to say that this issue really is relevant and it does matter. McDonalds at the end of the day is McDonalds - and Red Lobster is Red Lobster. I agree with Pisces in that one is not innately better than the other - but they ARE different. The whole high-brow low-brow issue is a separate problem in and unto itself.

We are a fastfood culture*. We like our burgers fast and our cars even faster. Instant gratification is the name of the game. Work and Effort? What is that? Maybe its MTV's fault or the media's fault ... blame who you will. But the end result is impatience. In the end it affects our taste in books. Murder/Legal thrillers, mystery who done-its and romances are just the beginning of books that fall into the just add water category**.

Maybe Franzen's "Perchance to Dream: In an Age of Images, a Reason to Write Novels"*** puts it best when he argues that literary fiction is dying. Even in the face of this fact he posits that there could still be room in American Literature for socially intense novels with interesting characters that didn't bore the pants off of readers who are more used to the pace of Hollywood entertainment. This is a proposed detente by Franzen in the cold war between Literature & Pulp Fiction.

To step away from the debate a bit I think its fairly obvious that this whole 'crisis' can be credited to the pride of a single group of writers dubbed the "New White Guys"; David Foster Wallace, Jeffrey Eugenides, Jonathan Franzen, Donald Antrim, Rick Moody and Dave Eggers. Oprah's intentions were fine. Problem is each of these writers would rather be read then widely published and bookshelved. I know Wallace has said many times in regards to the hype surrounding his novels that he worries people will fall for the noise, purchase his books and readers will never get past the first page. Yes this discussion is driven by pride, but its THEIR book, its THEIR pride.

And while it might be great for business, these writers don't necessarily think so. Is bigger sales the end goal anyway? I think that is where it becomes sticky for the N.W.G.

Dij

*My favorite book that discusses this issue directly is Paluhniak's Fight Club... brilliant observations of our consumer society and where it is driving us.

**I must say that I enjoy these types of novels just as much as the next guy. You'll even find I have even given several high marks over at Epins (Tell No One being the most obvious example.)

*** Published by Harpers - all rights reserved.

[phoenixx]

SUCH a touchy issue for so many.

As a former co-person of an independent bookstore and an avid reader, I have a great love of books of every shape and size. My biggest lament is that not enough people read. Reading helps us develop comprehension, language, expansive thought and imagination. With the understanding that all genres are different, I just love to see people read.

I also belong to a local adult literacy advocacy group and help teach countless people from 18 to 80 how to read on a frequent basis. Our attendance has tripled since Oprah started her book club. Before the demise of our bookstore (do not get me started on Crown Books, Barnes and Noble, Borders or the other giant chains pushing out independents...) we also noted a significant increase in sales to a certain demographic we had never seen before, and not all of them of the Oprah stereotype, either.

As much as you hate Oprah, or the type of books she recommends, you have to enjoy seeing so many people reading. Even if all you read is brain candy (mysteries, romances, etc), or feminist fiction, or gay literature, or non fiction or religious books or whatever your genre, every page enriches your mind.

So, for her book club, Oprah is the one I hate to love. For all else she is one I love to hate (along with Martha Stewart and others of that ilk). As far as snob-boy's public 'dissing' of the Oprah label, privately ask her to make your Oprah label a sticker and stop friggin' whinin' already, wouldya?

Leslie

[faireheart]

Hmmm, my first day here and one of my very favorite topics of debate is simmering on the stove. What a lovely stew it is!
Yes, it is a complicated matter, and one with implied and expected PCness.
While I agree that Oprah has brought the joy of reading to the huddled masses, I must wonder- Just how much joy can be found between the covers of most of her hand-picked selections?
Why isn't there a literary board instead of an autocracy in the selection process itself?
Then, we might see books with intrinsically positive themes, not the recycled redemption, the rarely-changing woman in angst posturing.

I sometimes watch Oprah now that I am at home full-time.
I am going out on a proverbial limb here but here goes- hanging on with one hand- I wonder if Oprah is selecting books which validate HER rise from the ashes of poverty and abuse ?
I am extremely glad there is an Oprah Winfrey as a positive role model for a generation of TV viewers, but I am not certain that she isn't presumptious about what the female middle-class would benefit from reading month after month.

As for Franzen's concerns regarding a printed "Oprah Book Club" notation on his book jacket, yes, that too is presumptious. Many a bestseller ends up in a bin with a big ole 50% off sticker ( in red, no less) firmly planted over the title.

If Oprah's main thrust is to help female authors, I think she has accoplished her goal. Don't get me wrong, I am a woman and I enjoy reading works by females as much if not more than those written by the opposite sex.
However, Oprah needs to broaden her horizons, as they used to preach to us in school.
Why can't she throw in a classic work of fiction every now and then?
In my opinion. that would be opening the true doors to literary excellence for her millions of viewers/ book club members.