Enjoy reading fiction? Try to read if you can (skip if you can't) a few passages from a "serious" new American novel from a prestigious publisher, Knopf, a Division of Random House:

"In my locker in the locker room at Xclusiue lay three vaginas I recently sliced out of various women I've attacked in the past week."

"The mouth opens and not even screams come out anymore, just horrible, guttural, animal-like noises, sometimes interrupted by retching sounds. 'Scream honey,'I urge, 'keep screaming. No one cares, no one will help you...'and with the same pair of scissors I cut her tongue out, which I pull easily from her mouth...Blood gushes out of her mouth and I have to hold her head up so she won't choke on it. Then I fuck her in the mouth, and after I've ejaculated and pulled out, I mace her some more.'

In case you aren't perceptive, the young male author has explained that this nightmare of woman-abuse is "Equal amounts of black comedy and satire of the 1980s." "I used comedy to get at the absolute banality of the violence of a perverse decade," the author told the New York Times in April. "Look, it's a very annoying book. But that is how as a writer I took in those years."

Still following the plot? Here then is the story-in-progress of how this unprecedented celebration of sexual violence against women, American Psycho from Knopf-Random House, soared to the Best Sellers' list, made a few wealthy men a little wealthier, and has finally triggered a national boycott of Knopf, Inc., by people who are saddened and angered by the rising visibility and respectability of real and simulated sexual sadism.

How Knopf Embraced Torture: The Story So Far

Several years ago, another large N.Y. publisher, Simon & Schuster, gave a 26year-old "literary bad-boy" a $300,000 advance, rather unwisely as it turns out, to write a novel. This ivy-educated youth, Bret Ellis, eventually turned in a bizarre first-person account of a rich male yuppie who happens to be unbelievably sadistic in torturing and murdering women. Though there were other themes, and a few other victims (one child, one "bum," one dog), the literally dozens of savagely-detailed, gut-wrenching scenes of sexual tortures and dismemberment of young women were the basic refrain, the which the author had chosen to work. So detailed is the narrative ("It takes very few blows, five or six, to smash her jaw open completely and only two more for her face to cave in on itself) that it reads as a how-to manual, with endless variations in raping and torturing women. The story's rich male hero, who also enjoys watching "rape-slasher" movies on his hi tech VCR, is never apprehended.

An unsolicited manuscript of this nature would have quite certainly been rejected, but a "serious" novel for which a (non-refundable) $300,000 advance had already been paid was apparently a different matter. The assigned editor, Robert Asahina, saw "no major problems" (later citing the large investment) and asked for only a small, "structural" re-write. Division president Charles Hayward also saw nothing problematic here. On the authority of these men, the book was accepted and scheduled for publication. But at a Spring, 1990 company meeting, Asahina had to show a sample chapter to the rest of the staff. In the sample, a woman's breasts were hooked to a high-voltage battery and they exploded and burned; in another sequence, a starving, live rat was stuffed into a woman's vagina. Women employees, seeing the text for the first time, were stunned and horrified.

Xeroxes were leaked to feminist groups, the word spread, and SPY and Time magazines ran advance stories about how misogynist, sadistic and badly-written the book would be. These caught the attention of Simon & Schuster's Board Chairman, Richard Snyder, who then called for and read the manuscript. On November 14, he announced that Simon & Schuster was exercising its legal right not to publish the manuscript it had earlier accepted and paid for, on the grounds of "taste."

The public explanation was a bit lame, but this was obviously an important decision. Within the company, it was a clear rebuke by corporate leadership to Hayward and Asahina for accepting such a manuscript. More importantly, it was a principled statement from a major publisher that sadistic woman-abuse had no place in serious literature. Women's groups and women in publishing collectively breathed a sigh of relief.

Just 48 hours later, however, American Psycho found a new sponsor. "Sonny" Mehta, President of Knopf, Inc., a Division of Random House, announced that Knopfs Vintage division would buy and publish the book. "It seems to me appropriate given the immense coverage and curiosity," said Mehta, "that we bring out American Psycho." Mehta had calculated that Knopf could make a nice profit from the "coverage and curiosity." In this decision, Mehta obtained the strong backing of current Random House CEO, Alberto Vitale.

And finally, to underline that Knopf/ Vintage was not merely publishing Ellis' work, but actively sponsoring and promoting it, the company announced a five city author's tour for Ellis to meet the public and read from his book. (Try to picture it: A well-dressed audience nods appreciatively as the tuxedoed author intones: "I slap her hard and hiss Dumb bitch,' spraying her face with spit but it's covered with so much mace she probably can't even feel it and so I mace her again and then I try to fuck her in the mouth once more but I can't come so I stop.")

Just two days after Simon & Schuster's announcement that this femicide was too repulsive for mainstream publishing, the decision had been effectively reversed. Mehta, Vitale, and the once-respected Knopf-Random House firm had seen a way to make a windfall profit; Ellis had been rescued from disgrace and handed an (estimated) $75,000 more by Knopf.

Women Fight Back

By early December, a letter to Mehta and Vitale from New York feminist leaders Gloria Steinem, Phyllis Chesler, Andrea Dworkin, Merle Hoffman, Kate Millet, Sidney Abbott and others exploded: "We are appalled by your poor taste, bad judgment, and inability to hear what feminists for at least 20 years have been saying about violence toward women, what causes it, and what it causes in return." And within weeks, from the west coast, Los Angeles National Organization for Women president Tammy Bruce announced a national boycott of all Knopf and Vintage publications.

Ms. Magazine editor Robin Morgan joined the boycott, even though her classic Sisterhood is Powerful has sold over half a million copies as a Random House/ Vintage book, and is still selling. "I won't buy Random House titles for the duration of this boycott, and I urge all women, if they want Sisterhood to really be powerful, to do the same," she said. (The boycott has now been officially defined to apply to all Knopf and Vintage titles except those few by feminist writers.)

President Molly Yard and other NOW leaders asked for a discussion meeting with Mehta; Mehta refused to speak with them. "Bret inadvertently offended a certain feminist sensibility..." Mehta explained to the press. In January, 1991 the National Board of NOW voted that the boycott of Knopf "encourages women and men of conscience to protest the massive and unrelenting violence against women." Additional motions applauding the boycott were passed at the NOW Young Feminist Conference, by New York State NOW, and by other feminist groups. The National Organization for Men Against Sexism has also strongly endorsed the boycott.

A Look At The Issues

While this brief history makes rather clear what the "sides" are, it does not answer a number of important questions that many have about this action . Isn't boycotting a publishing company rather unusual? What is the actual harm in publishing such a book, even if a lot of women don't like it? Here are some questions and answers about some of the deeper issues behind the Knopf boycott.

Torture In A Book Is Not The Same As Torture In Real Life. What's So Bad About Violence Against Women In Fiction?

At the most obvious level, choosing to seek out, publish, and sponsor an author's tour on a theme that is clearly and predictably horrifying to more than half the population is hurtful and harmful to those people's feelings. It's a symbolic slap (or mace) in the face to women.

But beyond this, there is growing reason to believe that massive portrayals of sexual violence in "entertainment media" may be a contributing factor to the real and growing incidence of rape and domestic abuse of millions of women.

Rape and other crimes of sex-related violence are now known to be a much more frequent experience of women than was once thought. About one-fourth of all women in the U.S. have been raped, and the rate is apparently increasing. The government believes that 10-15 percent of all women who live with men are experiencing "severe and ongoing" battering; women are more likely to be murdered by their husbands than by other men.

In the past 15 years there has been a great deal of scientific research on the effects, especially on male viewers, of various sexual-and-violence themes in entertainment. The particular type that American Psycho most patently resembles (and often mentions in its pages) is the "slasher" (or "snuff') film. The hero asks at one point, "Have you seen 'The Toolbox Murders?'...it's really quite good." (This notorious "slasher" features many gruesome rape and murder scenes.) In another place he wants to rush home "to watch the video tape I rented this afternoon called 'Bloodthirsty*.. .Bobo will make you die, then eat your body." The book's deadly superficiality seems borrowed from the porno-snuff-slasher film, with anonymous, X-rated sex leading suddenly, without explanation, to the torture and murder of women.

In one scientific study which showed "The Toolbox Murders" and four similar movies to "normal" college males, the researcher found that young men became "desensitized," losing their initial awareness of the degradation and violence against women. After just a few such movies, they rated the films funny and enjoyable, and were interested in seeing additional ones. They also gradually became less sympathetic to a woman who had actually been raped, and were more likely to trivialize her injuries.

Other studies of effects of portrayals of sexual violence against women have found that exposure to some types of sexual violence makes many men: More sexually aroused by subsequent rape scenes; more prone to fantasize about rape; more ready to inflict pain on female co-workers; more likely to say they themselves would rape if they could; more likely to recommend lower jail sentences for rapists, and to believe in myths such as, "All women secretly want to be raped." (Much of this scientific research is summarized in Pornography and Sexual Aggression, Malamuth & Donnerstein, Academic Press, 1984.)

So, You Believe That A Book Will Cause Women To Be Assaulted? No, the facts above don't necessarily mean that this book will directly cause additional assaults; however, it might. There are often "copy-cat" crimes against women after highly-publicized media portrayals.

The major concern is not that one novel will lead to more abuse in itself, but that it is part of a growing pattern of legitimation and proliferation of "chic" sexual woman-abuse, which has already appeared in fashion photography, Bloomingdale's catalogs, rock videos, movies made for teenagers, general Hollywood movies, and TV soap operas. Serious fiction is simply the latest frontier for this concentrated misogyny, but it's a part of a much, much bigger phenomenon that, taken together, contributes to the epidemic of rape and violence. And Knopf has chosen to jump in and make profits from this tragic situation.

But Didn't Ellis Have The Legal Right To Write Such A Book, and Knopf the Legal Right To Publish It?

Absolutely. Ellis has the right to write anything he wishes, and to publish it himself or submit it to a commercial publisher. A publishing company never has to accept, but has a legal right to accept and publish, whatever it chooses. We have no "censorship," or prior regulation by any governmental authority, of what can be published. Knopf violated no laws.

Then Why Try To Punish Knopf, Just For Choosing To Publish It?

Companies are responsible to the public for what they do. Publishing companies aren't sacred, they're corporations which exist to make money. Their future decisions will probably be based on the profitability of current decisions. Like other large corporations, such as Exxon and Union Carbide, they should be held accountable by the public if they are harming society. Women and their supporters have an equal right to express their views in the only language that corporations understand: By choosing not to give Knopf their money.

Is It Legal To Boycott A Publishing Company?

Of course. A consumer boycott of a company or product is a tried and true, typically American, and totally capitalistic form of expression by consumers. Also, the U.S. Supreme Court has clearly held that boycotts are protected by the First Amendment, as a form of political expression.

Won't All This Backfire And Boost The Sales Of The Book?

Unfortunately, more of these books will probably be sold because of the controversy. Soon after its release, American Psycho hit the NY Times Best Seller list. Literary woman-abuse will be profitable, at least in the short term. However, the boycott is of all Knopf products, not just one book. Over the months to come, the boycott will begin to slowly erode the huge profits made on American Psycho, and to gradually push the total balance of Mehta's cynical decision into the red.

Can This Boycott Succeed In Changing The Publishing Industry?

Perhaps. We must try to do something about the growing popularity and legitimacy of violence against women — to work together as human beings to stop it. In a boycott, time, word of mouth, and publicity become our allies. And, unlike waiting for Congress or the courts to act, a boycott empowers us, as individuals. Many people have felt powerless in recent years to stop the spread and commercial exploitation of sexual violence. We can each resolve for ourselves to not spend our money on books from Knopf and to tell them why.

In my own case, as a college teacher, I discovered that I had been assigning a textbook published by Knopf. The book was quite adequate, but there are good alternatives. Knopf makes a lot of profit from textbooks, and I've probably required 300-400 students to buy this text over the years. So I thought: "I've just joined the Knopf boycott." I will no longer buy or ask others to buy any book published by them, and that feels good. In this way I'm adding my economic vote to stop the legitimation of sexual violence.

Now, the obvious conclusion. If you want to buy a book, please check first to see that it's not from Knopf or Vintage. Freedom of expression isn't only for corporations; you and I have a right to be heard, too. Let's just say "NO" to Knopf.

Robert Brannon is a psychologist specializing in sex role research and theory at Brooklyn College CUNY, and is Co-Chair of the Task Force on Pornography for New York State National Organization for Women.

If you really want to be heard, call the two men most responsible and talk it over with them: Sonny Mehta, president of Knopf: (212) 572-2506; or Alberto Vitale, CEO of Random House: (212) 572-2221.