To semi quote Neil Gaiman, “[the author] is not your bitch.”

This is a ‘you shouldn’t have let your shitty ex-boyfriend take nude photos of you if you didn’t want them online after you broke up’ kind of argument. You know what everyone does have the right to? Their privacy. Especially when they go out their way, like Ferrante has, to keep it.

There’s a fundamental difference between a person who becomes famous and purposefully invokes celebrity, attaching it to their own name, and a person whose art becomes independently famous. You can say it’s unfair that certain art forms don’t allow for anonymity like others—acting vs writing, for example—but that…

You wrote a thing strangers can read. Please provide us with your name, address, tax records and video of your latest physical, asap. You obviously owe it to us.

Your opinion is incredibly misguided. Authors tend toward introversion and social anxiety. We are observers and commentators. Many of us use pen names because we do not wish to link our work to our “real” identities for any number of reasons. Women writers, you may not be surprised to learn, are often subjected to…

Let’s keep in mind that making a public appearance for an interview does not open someone to having their entire lives be fair play. People are interviewed for many reasons on many subjects. There’s no good reason to publish Stephen King’s sex tape or the teacher of the year’s home address.

For those who are disagreeing with this opinion, do you avoid celebrity gossip, which is built around ignoring the right to privacy?

If I’m not mistaken - and I very well could be! - James Frey pitched A Million Little Pieces as a novel, but it was the publisher who decided that it would sell better if fraudulently marketed as a memoir, and Frey went along with it because he felt like defying them would jeopardize his book deal.

—We expect to know all about the life of an author in part bc we want to know if they are “qualified” to tell a certain story.—

These are truly interesting points. I would have preferred that Elena Ferrante’s identity remain private as that is that which was amenable to the author. And she should be respected in this.

I mean, she’s given interviews before that made it pretty clear that she was a woman, so I don’t think that “is Elena Ferrante really a man?” was a question that interested the guy who doxxed her.

Totally agree, I always say “if you don’t want guys to smack your ass at 9 AM, don’t become a waitress”

There is a big difference between people who want to be famous themselves and people who want their art to be famous.

if you’re trump or Brad and Angelina, you want to be famous yourself. You go out and do interviews and court the attention. While the general public is not owed every detail of their personal lives,…

Think of all the really, I mean REALLY, famous people whose lives we don’t see in gossip columns. Or if we do, it’s speculation.

So, I’ve never read Ferrante. But this brings up some interesting conversations re: “literary truth”. We expect to know all about the life of an author in part bc we want to know if they are “qualified” to tell a certain story.

You acknowledge that yours is an “incredibly unpopular opinion,” but did you ever ask yourself why it is?

The author has an agent and a publisher; both are recognized avenues to reach an author. Anything else is rude or unprofessional.

Writers have always used pseudonyms though. Being an author is not the same thing as being on a reality show.

There’s a distinction between wanting your art to receive attention/appreciation and yourself to receive attention/appreciation. It’s cruel to insist that every person who wants their expression to be heard must also open up themselves, even against their own wishes. It’s not necessary.

No. Artists create art for people to enjoy. Beyond that they don’t owe people shit.