Yasmine

And college writing is nothing like telling a story. It’s about having an opinion and using other people’s opinions to prove your opinion is right.

It’s a sad state of American education that people have to go to college to learn how to make a sentence.

And is educational pedigree actually being used as a marketing technique? You don’t see “Harvard-educated” splashed across the front of Julia Quinn or Eloisa James’ books. No, it’s “bestselling author of X and X” or the usual blurbs from other romance authors, just like it is for every other writer.

It’s a technique that’s been used enough to make people aware of the authors’ education. I knew about the education background of all three authors mentioned in the post. I think the way the marketing was used in the cases of JQ and EJ provided them with an expanded range of potential readers. As referenced earlier, it was used in JQ’s Time Magazine article. With EJ, her “coming out” as a romance writer made national news as I recall. With that information out there, it gets passed on over an extended period of time, which generates continued publicity.

The educational hook might not be used on the back or front of a book, but it’s seen in other publicity efforts. The question is whether or not the marketing actually creates a bridge for new readers to cross over and read the author. But then that’s the same marketing question one asks for any hook one uses in promoting an author. Most marketing is not easily quantified, but every little bit counts toward the bottom line. I don’t see the educational hook as being any less valuable than a cover quote for the same author. It is what it is—-a marketing hook.

Jane wrote:

I agree that it is a marketing technique and a good one from a marketing and authorial standpoint. But only because we readers respond to it in a positive way. I.e., we readers elevate authors who have the pedigree.

So which readers are elevating authors with this pedigree? No one in this blog’s audience, it seems. And is educational pedigree actually being used as a marketing technique? You don’t see “Harvard-educated” splashed across the front of Julia Quinn or Eloisa James’ books. No, it’s “bestselling author of X and X” or the usual blurbs from other romance authors, just like it is for every other writer. Are there readers out there who check out author bios when they’re deciding whether to buy a book? From everything I’ve read online, it seems like the front and back covers and the first few pages are what help make that decision. So my first thought about this post was, “Why are we having this discussion at all?” I agree that such marketing happens in other genres, such as literary fiction, but I just do not see it in romance.

As for the authors mentioned, I had no idea of educational backgrounds except for Quinn. And I think the only reason I know that Julia Quinn attended Harvard is because I remember being struck after reading Splendid that here was a young woman only a little older than I was with a similar educational background. And it was her youth (very clear from the author photo) that was as much of a draw as her Ivy League education.

I think that the question of whether a college education makes you a better writer is a completely different question.

If we’re going to do the college argument, then I’ll say that colleges would be far better served if they all had apprenticeship programs to send the students out into the real world. One learns a whole lot faster being knocked around by reality than studying about it in books. A writer who learns her craft from college still needs life experience before she can write a word. Unless, of course, she’s writing about college. “G”

IMO the ideal college education would be a mixture of a varied academic curriculum as well as apprecnticeship programs. Yes, one learns a lot by being out in the real world, and there are times I wish my alma mater had provided me with more of that. But my more old fashioned academic curriculum really widened my horizons, taught me how to think critically and how to research, all of which have served me in good stead.

I’ll add that I loved college, and would happily have spent many more years there, not as a graduate student or as a professor, but as an undergraduate, if I could have afforded it. I loved the wide array of subjects my university made available to me — after the more limited selection of classes in high school the scope of the subjects at college seemed breathtaking. There are so many subjects I would have loved to learn more about that I did not take even one class in because I only had room for so many electives.

So yeah, while I agree with you that school (even high school) ought to do a better job of preparing students for the real world, I also wish that the real world presented us with more opportunities for old-fashioned academic schooling.

If we’re going to do the college argument, then I’ll say that colleges would be far better served if they all had apprenticeship programs to send the students out into the real world. One learns a whole lot faster being knocked around by reality than studying about it in books. A writer who learns her craft from college still needs life experience before she can write a word. Unless, of course, she’s writing about college. “G”

Going to college is often a sign that an individual has these behaviors. Or it can help foster the behaviors, if they are not already formed. But it is not the only path to enlightenment.

To see both sides, and recognize learning and respect wisdom, gained or existing, outside of an academic setting is a way to use the critical thinking skills we were supposed to be getting, while in school.