Elena Ferrante (post 5) vs. Anita Raja: Why is anonymity more important to this writer than it is to other writers who have published under pseudonyms?

“Supporters Of Ferrante Are Irritated by Exposé” is the headline of an article in today’s New York Times. But that misses the real story (assuming that Ferrante’s insistence on anonymity is not just a publicity stunt).

The real question is why anonymity is more important to Anita Raja/Elena Ferrante than it is for J.K. Rowling/Robert Galbraith, Nora Roberts/J.D. Robb, and the many other novelists who have published under a pseudonym.

The key is that pseudonyms are the names of alternate personalities.

In the case of J.K. Rowling and Robert Galbraith, both personalities are novelists; the same is true for Nora Roberts and J.D. Robb. And the pseudonymous personalities have evidently agreed that the regular personalities will be their spokespersons.

But if the Anita Raja personality is primarily a translator who does not see herself as a novelist—and, in particular, does not see herself as the author of the Elena Ferrante novels—she might not want to take credit for them. Moreover, the Elena Ferrante personality may have insisted that she, herself, get the credit for what she writes.

Anita Raja has refused to do in-person interviews because she is not the author of the novels, and has not been authorized to be Elena Ferrante’s spokesperson. Elena Ferrante, herself, has refused to do in-person interviews, because Elena Ferrante looks, to other people, like Anita Raja. Although the Elena Ferrante personality may think that she looks quite different from Anita Raja, she knows that other people are always mistaking her for Anita Raja.

If you have a better explanation for why anonymity is more important to this writer than it is to other writers who have published under pseudonyms, please submit your comment.