X Close

In defence of grumpy old men The publishing world needs cantankerous codgers

Otto Penzler, centre. (Jimi Celeste/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images)

Otto Penzler, centre. (Jimi Celeste/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images)


February 8, 2024   7 mins

In every culture, in every era, you will find the archetype of the cantankerous old man. He’s ubiquitous in cinema — the aged, scowling hero of Gran Torino; the feuding codgers of Grumpy Old Men; the dementia-stricken patriarch of The Father — but no less so in real life, where you can find him parked in an easy chair on the shady side of the porch, yelling at the neighbourhood kids to get off his lawn. He can be a comic figure or a tragic one, an object of respect or ridicule, but you ignore him at your peril. The next American president, after all, will be a cantankerous old man. We just have to decide if we want the one with the spray tan and the multiple felony indictments, or the one who recently confused the current French president with the one who died in 1996.

Some old men lose their edge as they age, while others develop a sharper one. Otto Penzler, the white-haired proprietor of the storied Mysterious Bookshop in New York City, would seem to be the latter. Now 81, Penzler is a polarising figure within the mystery writing community, the kind of person whose name elicits either a grin or a wince. In addition to building from scratch the biggest mystery bookshop in the world, he has edited dozens of mystery novels and anthologies and overseen multiple publishing imprints. At the height of his power, a good word from Penzler could make a writer’s career.

But his good words, his critics note, were reserved largely for white, male, heterosexual writers — and Penzler has a reputation for being less than reverent about the sacred cows of his more progressive peers. In 1991, he publicly criticised the women’s mystery writer’s group Sisters in Crime in an interview with the Chicago Tribune: “It’s a negative, flawed concept. It’s an organization that espouses non-sexism but is sexist.” In 2005, he described cosy mysteries as “not serious literature”, adding: “Men take [writing] more seriously as art.” More recently, he excoriated the Mystery Writers of America after the organisation, under pressure, rescinded its plans to honour mystery novelist and former prosecutor Linda Fairstein with a “Grand Master” award for literary achievement. (This was part of a broader campaign to cancel Fairstein over her role in prosecuting the Central Park Five, spurred by a Netflix series that portrayed her as the case’s chief villain; a defamation lawsuit brought by Fairstein against the series’ creators is currently making its way through the courts.)

Among those who dislike him, these incidents are seen as damning evidence in favour of Penzler’s defenestration. A recent X thread, prompted by his upcoming appearance at a mystery event called Bouchercon, bemoans his continued influence despite what the author describes as his “terrible opinions and inexcusable behavior” — although the behaviour in question, as I discovered in the course of reporting this piece, is more a matter of rumour than record. For those who remember the MeToo-era debacle of the Shitty Media Men list, it’s character assassination via whisper network: people will tell you that there are stories, but plead ignorance when asked to relate one. Penzler’s status as a Bad Man is entirely vibes-based. A snub here, a brusque comment there. Once, perhaps, there was a confrontation with a female critic who had panned a book written by one of Penzler’s friends, after she showed up uninvited to a party at his bookstore.

Penzler told me he doesn’t remember this incident, but admits that it’s in the realm of possibility. “Did I possibly call her a bitch, yes. Because she was,” he says, mildly — and if a comment like this makes you leap up in outrage, you are almost certainly not a person who would enjoy Penzler’s company. He’s friendly but blunt, impatient with foolishness, and — as he is the first to note — his personality doesn’t always play well in a world where people increasingly expect a soft touch.

When I first stumbled across that X thread, it initially struck me as no different from a hundred other minor publishing squabbles: the tiniest of tempests in the teensiest of teapots. But look through the lens of the zeitgeist, and there’s something intriguing here: an evolving and increasingly fraught relationship between the archetypal codger and a culture that no longer reveres him. We used to extend some grace to society’s granddads, acknowledging the possibility that a person old enough to have watched the moon landing live on TV might reasonably, if not wisely, see things differently from the strident 25-year-olds among us. But that grace has been replaced by a conviction that such opinions aren’t just embarrassing in an “old man yells at cloud” sort of way, but intolerable, harmful, toxic — and that a person who holds them needs to either get with the times, or be ostracised from polite society.

Mystery writing, like the rest of publishing, has undergone a reckoning in recent years — and what the diversity activists want is nothing less than a metaphorical asteroid hit, an extinction-level event that clears out the pale-male-stale old guard, and ushers in a colourful new world order. There’s just one problem: metaphorical asteroids, unlike their physical analogue, don’t actually kill the dinosaurs. And while it’s one thing to campaign for the ouster of dead white men from their various places of honour in the sciences, or the arts, or atop the lists of history’s greatest works of literature, it’s quite another to be confronted with live white men — men who’ve worked hard all their lives to get where they are, who do not agree that they have outlived both their relevance and respectability, and who are not about to slink off into obscurity just because the passage of time and the sensibilities of a new generation have rendered both their identities and opinions unpopular.

This all-encompassing presentism, in which every person must be judged by his worse offences against the pieties of the Current Thing, has found an even easier target than our oldest living citizens: those who are recently dead. It’s a phenomenon that makes for some interesting reads in the newspaper’s obituary section. “Herman Cain, a former Republican presidential candidate and supporter of President Donald Trump who pointedly refused to wear a mask during the coronavirus pandemic, has died after contracting COVID-19,” reported Reuters in 2020, while a New York Times obituary for former Interior Secretary James Watt informs readers that he “insulted Black people, women, Jews and disabled people”, before it describes his life or contribution to politics. As the writer Oliver Traldi quipped, “before you read about this man’s life, let’s precisely calibrate your sense of to what extent he was on the right side of history as conceived by readers of this absolute rag in the current year”.

Meanwhile, some progressives have taken it as an article of faith that we cannot wait anymore for these living relics to exit the world’s stage; we have to just push them out of the way. This sentiment was palpable in the MeTooings of people like Garrison Keillor, Al Franken, Leon Wieseltier, and Frank Langella, as well as the ouster of older white men from positions of influence in media, the arts, and more during the Covid-era Awokening. Even if you didn’t necessarily think these guys had done much — or anything — wrong, there was a sense that perhaps they should just go away on principle, for the sake of the cause. Hadn’t they been in power long enough? Wasn’t it time for them to step aside, and give someone else a turn?

On this front, Otto Penzler makes for an interesting case study: in 2021, he was fired from the Best American Mystery anthology series he’d edited since 1997, and replaced by editor Steph Cha, a young Korean-American novelist with whom he had butted heads over the MWA’s treatment of Linda Fairstein. In most situations like this, the outgoing editor is expected to go quietly, perhaps releasing an unctuous statement about the importance of making way for a new, more diverse generation of writers. Penzler, on the other hand, immediately launched a competing anthology that sold so well it currently stands at #13 in its category on Amazon. “We buried them,” Penzler says — a statement which, though difficult to truly quantify, seems roughly accurate: the 2021 edition of The Best American Mystery and Suspense, the first in 24 years not edited by him, is ranked #1312.

You come at the curmudgeon, you best not miss.

Of course in a previous, and perhaps less ridiculous, era, this disagreement — Penzler’s opinion of cosy mysteries and the mystery community’s opinion of Penzler — would be chalked up to a matter of taste. There was a time when it was possible to merely dislike someone, for whatever reason, without claiming that your personal animus was actually rooted in a bigger, braver struggle against oppression and isms and phobias. There was also a time when inviting a man to speak at a conference in his chosen field was understood as a narrow acknowledgment of that man’s achievements and expertise, rather than an endorsement by the organisers of his every opinion. Perhaps most important, there was a time when reasonable people would have agreed that if you are still citing the less-than-articulate comment someone made to a newspaper 33 years ago as a top 10 reason to destroy his reputation, you are engaged not in the advancement of social justice but a bizarre personal vendetta.

But in this moment, in which every personal beef is blown up into a proxy war for the ideological soul of the nation — or, in this case, the mystery writing community — the grumpy old men among us are seen less as human beings than reactionary avatars, a blight on progress. The result is a remarkably aesthetic-driven notion of what the proper distribution of power would look like, as with Joe Biden’s 2022 vow to consider only black female candidates as replacements for retiring Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer, or the FAA’s strange attempt to stack the deck in favour of everyone except older white men in its hiring processes. But it also explains the furore surrounding someone like Penzler — who, despite his alleged disdain for women, has published, collaborated with, and championed scores of them over the years. This isn’t about the man himself, but what he represents: the bad old days, and bad old ways, which publishing’s self-appointed new guard have found dismayingly difficult to uproot. To get him booted from the Bouchercon stage would signal a shift in the power dynamic. It would mean that the asteroid had hit at last.

To fail to do this, on the other hand, would signal that the identitarian spasm in publishing — and whatever little power and credibility it once conveyed — is already on the wane. For the vibes, they are a-shiftin’ — but the grumpy old man endures.


Kat Rosenfield is an UnHerd columnist and co-host of the Feminine Chaos podcast. Her latest novel is You Must Remember This.

katrosenfield

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

26 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
J Bryant
JB
J Bryant
2 months ago

To get him booted from the Bouchercon stage would signal a shift in the power dynamic.
Probably true, which is why a follow-up article would be interesting. Is Penzler ultimately cancelled from Bouchercon or not? Is his cancellation met with the usual shrug from the silent majority, or is there pushback to cancellation of such a significant figure in this particular teacup?
There’s a growing number of articles/podcast episodes claiming peak woke has arrived, and perhaps has been passed. I can’t figure out if they’re reporting a real trend or just wishful thinking.

Martin Bollis
MB
Martin Bollis
2 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Wishful thinking, its basic worldview is absolutely entrenched. There is now a resistance movement, which people who read Unherd will be picking up from various places, but for most, DEI, unconscious bias training etc., are just unremarkable parts of their day.

Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Chantrill
2 months ago

“The next American president, after all, will be a cantankerous old man.”
Correction. The current American president is a cantankerous old man.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
2 months ago

She means either main candidate, but i think you know that, so not sure what your point is.

Josh Allan
JA
Josh Allan
2 months ago

The current president may also be the next president.

Samuel Ross
Samuel Ross
2 months ago

This author is a dope.

RM Parker
RP
RM Parker
2 months ago
Reply to  Samuel Ross

Thank you for your trenchant analysis.

Nell Clover
NC
Nell Clover
2 months ago

All those considered by others to be woke and all those who are critics of woke can probably agree that what we are witnessing is an attempt to consign to the dustbin old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits. And those willing these changes no doubt agree that to rebel is justified. Is any of that just written debated? I think not.

Of course history is the story of old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits declining into insignificance as the generations pass away. Rarely though are society-wide attempts made to purge living people simultaneously of their current ideas, current culture, current customs, and current habits. So rare are these occurrences that they burn brightly in the history books; these events progress far beyond mere rebellion and are recorded as revolutions.

The main reason for such prominence in history is that purging living people of their old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits is always and everywhere a bloody affair. The rebellion can never be complete until the soul of everyone is purified, and checked to be pure. And building windows into men’s souls requires the butchering of their bodies.

Looking at our own times, ostracising the old and the white dinosaurs won’t be enough for many. The old and the white dinosaurs will still have each other, their children, and their old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits. The question is, do the rebels have enough influence to turn our tomorrow into a revolution and us dinosaurs and our children into another pile of bones marking the way of the long march towards utopia?

NB: For those who don’t know the reference, in 1966 Chairman Mao announced that to rebel was justified and so began the attempt to consign the four olds to the bin. A decade later and at least 2 million had been murdered, 10 million forced from their homes, and 30 million made social pariahs because of their old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits. A posterised rainbow image of Mao is pinned to the government department kitchen wall I will be visiting today. I am told it is my “exclusionary ideas” that are the real problem when I complain about a mass murderer being iconised.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
2 months ago
Reply to  Nell Clover

I was going to say something about a society that purged its set of “olds,” and then saw your reference to Mao. People may want to be careful what they wish for.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
2 months ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

You are asking people to think and know a bit of history apart from racial grievance. Ain’t gonna happen.

Clare Knight
CK
Clare Knight
2 months ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

“People” what people? Please speak for yourself.

R Wright
RW
R Wright
2 months ago
Reply to  Nell Clover

The four ‘olds’have been replaced with ‘white’ ‘male’ ‘straight’ and ‘cis’. We even have struggle sessions, except this time corporations do it too.

Richard Craven
RC
Richard Craven
2 months ago

I distinctly remember watching the moon landings as a kid, and have so far kept the promise I made to myself two or three years ago only to read novels by White men (although I’m quite tempted to read Percival Everett and some more Edith Wharton).

Richard Calhoun
Richard Calhoun
2 months ago

‘Grumpy’ is not important, either in men or women … but what is important, is they/we always open our minds and understand it’s the young people that are running things.
We were all young once!

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
2 months ago

The young running things, how’s that working out?

Allison Barrows
AB
Allison Barrows
2 months ago

My husband and I have been working within publishing for our entire careers. About halfway or so in, the very best art directors and editors left or retired and young women filled those spaces.
They would demand silly, nonsensical changes to book cover illustrations merely to appear to be doing something. They didn’t read the manuscripts to determine what the artist should illustrate but instead sent the entire unedited version to the artist to do their job for them. The editors seemed completely unfamiliar with the material they were responsible for editing.
The great American novelists often had genius editors without whom the novels would never have been published. They were very cranky men, and some of them may have even been considered old. They’re mostly gone now, and quality went with them.

Fiona Leishman
FL
Fiona Leishman
2 months ago

In response to your comments, I cite Max Perkins, without whom the world may have been deprived of the works of Ernest Hemingway and F. Scott Fitzgerald amongst others. Whether Mr Perkins was a grumpy old man, I know not, but he was certainly a man whose support and encouragement of these authors was invaluable.

Allison Barrows
AB
Allison Barrows
2 months ago
Reply to  Fiona Leishman

Perkins was precisely who I had in mind, FL. And several others went off to Hollywood to “punch up” subpar scripts and turn B movies into spun gold.
Even the artist who created the charming children’s book, “Stellaluna”, acknowledges that she didn’t have a story, just an idea and pretty illustration. Her unsung editor essentially wrote the story.
Quick thing: My agent arranged a meeting with Big Publishing House to discuss turning my syndicated comic strip into a book series. The two girls playing at being editor and art director hadn’t read any of the strips – in syndication for about nine years at that time – before they started suggesting massive changes to the two main characters. Whilst my (female) agent kept saying things like “We can do that”, I scowled through the entire ordeal and ended it with an emphatic NO.
Fired the agent.

Alex Lekas
AL
Alex Lekas
2 months ago

Penzler has a reputation for being less than reverent about the sacred cows of his more progressive peers.
Clearly, we can’t have that. The cult of groupthink is always on the lookout for heretics who dare question any aspect of the dogma, whether that criticism is warranted, constructive, or crazy.

Daniel Lee
DL
Daniel Lee
2 months ago

I am available and plenty grumpy.

Caro
Caro
2 months ago
Reply to  Daniel Lee

Congrats. Have fun, I did as fly on wall with international publisher ‘80s-90s
Ha! Maybe we shouldn’t be?
Jonathan Miller 1971 Caveat Show @8.30min and JM @9.50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEPtyb9OHP8

Peter Samson
PS
Peter Samson
2 months ago

I did watch the moon landing on tv and still have a copy of the New York Times from the day after. I have to disagree, however, about James Watt and his obituary. The insults referred to were not some random comments over the years, they were made while he was Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of the Interior and got him fired (forced to resign). He said of a panel reviewing coal-leasing policies that it had “every kind of mixture—I have a Black. I have a woman, two Jews and a cripple.” The comment and his resignation made him famous/infamous from that time on. Otherwise he would hardly have received a Times obituary at all.

Mark epperson
Mark epperson
2 months ago

An interesting point. We, the human race, used to have “Characters” and now all we have are boring “arseholes” with no personality, leadership skills, or real intellect. We need a hell of a lot more Characters, no matter what the age!

Jerry Carroll
JC
Jerry Carroll
2 months ago

Pared to its essentials, “pale and stale” is anti-white racism as well as anti-meritocracy with the goal of dumbing down as well as transforming makers of Western culture into footstools for emotional women and People of Colour.

Matt Sylvestre
Matt Sylvestre
2 months ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

You lost me at “Women and People of Colour” as if such trivial distinctions of melanin levels and dangley bits means anything at all…

Stephen Doiron
SD
Stephen Doiron
2 months ago

So sad to count the number of hackles scrunched atop your neck. But then I realized, that’s most of what’s on offer from your set. We certainly welcome your getting out there and having a go at it, much as we have these past five decades. Oh, but then -again, so sorry to report- you too will be considered “old” and worthless, by that – as yet not even coined – younger crowd. Have no doubt, they’ll be there, just waiting for a chance to get even for all those cookies they’ve been denied.
In the meantime, please know that neither Mr. Biden nor Mr. Trump run anything. They’re chosen by the fiat politicos to blare out some distracting noise while they scramble about the abattoir’s stockyard, picking out the best for themselves. Their noise is but a distraction to what’s really going on…but then, you’re too young to have realized that fact – yet.
I leave you a note emboldened by a task still strange to you: Experience. The elders are never in place to mark success. First, there’s too little of that stuff to go around in any age. Second, learning of failures might just help you avoid one yourself; a greater value than any success. But, have heart, dear Kat, we’re all about to exit the coop, and leave it to you. That way the mud-slingers will have a fresh target for the childhood game.