--- In
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, "hardcasecrime"
<editor@...> wrote:
>
> DJ-Anonyme wrote:
>
> > how do you decide when to use
> > an author's pseudonym and when
> > to use his real name in the
> > books you publish? For example,
> > why Richard Stark, but not
> > Robert Kyle?
>
> If an author is alive, we leave it up to him. I
asked Robert
Terrall,
> and he said he'd like to see the book come out under
his real
name.
> Don Westlake would probably have been fine either
way, and in fact
we
> used both names on the front cover ("Donald E.
Westlake writing as
> Richard Stark"), but the book in question was part
of the Parker
> universe, and the Parker books are known for having
been written
under
> the Stark name, so it would have felt wrong somehow
not to
have "Stark"
> on the spine.
>
> In the case of a dead author, we generally go with
the name that's
> better known -- so, Erle Stanley Gardner rather than
A.A. Fair
(though
> we did say "writing as A.A. Fair" on the front
cover), and Cornell
> Woolrich rather than George Hopley.
>
> I can't comment on *why* a given author prefers
using either a
> pseudonym or his real name -- I'd need to be a
psychologist for
that.
> But wherever possible, we honor our authors'
wishes.
>
> --Charles
I hadn't replied to this thread because I'd assumed
everyone knew the common reasons. In the pulp days a writer
might use a pseudonym because his/her because a magazine
editor might not want to have two or more stories by the same
author appear in the same issue, I know in science fiction
Robert Heinlein wrote some stories under the Anson MacDonald
byline. Similarly, it might be difficult to publish two books
or more books by the same author in the same year or even by
the same publisher.
In Westlake's case THE Hunter was orinally submitted as a
stand alone with Parker dying. Westlake's editor told him it
had potential to begin a series. Westlake altered the book so
Parker survived. The name Stark was originally chosen to
describe the story and Parker's character. The Grofield books
were ascribed to Stark because Grofield had a sometimes
appeared as an associate of Parker.
Westlake started a very different series with another
publisher as Samuel Holt When the publisher let slip Holt was
Westlake, Westlake stopped writing the series. I was in a NYC
bookstore which had the Starks, Coes and Westlakes together
but not the Holts. I asked the owner why they had them like
that, and she said Westlake sometimes came to her store and
became upset if the Holts appeared with others he had
written. Mark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 15 Mar 2008 EDT