Anne is a Man on SFFaudio podcast

One of the most exciting things that from time to time happens to me (and I hope to you as well) is that I bump into someone who also listens to podcasts. On such an occasion I immediately find myself engaged in great conversation, in great enthusiasm and invariably come away from the encounter with fresh ideas and new podcasts to explore. You'd want to record such encounters, wouldn't you?

The closest approximation was staged at the podcast SFFaudio (feed), which is a weekly show on which Jesse Willis and Scott Danielson speak with various guests about great audio on the web. Their usual subject is narration audio in general and SciFi and Fantasy stories in particular. Yet, both their blog and their podcast has a wider range than this and also touches upon all sorts of podcasts and audiobooks. On their last show they decided to invite me and talk with me about Anne is a Man, the blog and related subjects, mostly podcasts and podcasts reviewing. (SFFaudio #053 - with Anne is a Man)

We had a couple of lapses in the Skype connection, but other than that this was a very pleasant conversation. Fun to do and when I listen back, as far as I can say, fun to listen to. And we just scratched the surface. I hope we get to do this some more. On this one hour show you can hear us discuss Dan Carlin's Hardcore History, The Memory Palace, podcasting versus radio, podcasting in other countries and languages and much more.

More Jesse Willis:
Five Free Favorites

On writer's block and interaction

Are you following this blog? You are not alone. I guess there are about 500 daily of you - if I can freely calculate the daily returning web visitors (~50) with the RSS subscribers (~250), the Twitter followers (~160), the friends on Facebook (~700) and Networked Blogs (~130). I guess I give you enough value daily, weekly or monthly to cause you to keep following me. But I think that value could be much better. I try to figure out what content you are looking for, but it is all guesswork. I know you are there, but other than that I know hardly anything.

Occasionally a reader turns to me with a question or a recommendation. And almost always I turn that into a post - assuming that if one readers speaks, there must be more that kept silent about it. If I cannot give a reply, I bet that among the 500 followers somebody else could. So if we were to make this blog more interactive, it could be much more valuable for all of us. Hence I have decided to actively try to achieve that.

Over the past weeks I reported I had a writer's block for the blog. I was looking for a new challenge, and more interaction is the challenge I got myself excited about. I will be posting more questions in order to get you to respond, I will post more instructional posts about issues I know or suspect you struggle with (I' ll be listing a set of useful tools for podcast listeners soon) and I will let you know of other ways you can determine the content of this blog (a.o. there will be a new 'report a podcast' method soon). I hope you are going to be as excited about it as I am.

Attempts at more interactions so far:
Help a fellow podcast listener,
Who knows Russian Podcasts,
Help for podcast listeners.

Upcoming:
Who knows more podcasts about (the history of) India?
Looking for recommended poetry podcasts,
Who listens to Swedish podcasts?
Who listens to Spanish podcasts?
More technical tips for podcast listeners and readers of this blog.

Two years, Anne is a Man - podcast reviews.

I started on May 10th 2007. Hence, now it is two years I have been writing this blog. It has been a great ride. I am so happy with the readership - people from all over the world, some of them reacting with really smart feedback. And a continuous inspiration to write. Thanks to all the great podcasters who keep on delivering their excellent content and thanks to the fact I have discovered I can write these reviews naturally. It is what they say about writing: you have to discover your voice and your form.

So... I am glad to be here and I feel privileged that all you readers keep following the blog and I want to especially thank Steve Tuckey, who has marked my history podcast page (which I have to update asap!) on stumbleupon and this has not only given a run of visits right after the share, but somehow, continues to do so.

Stay around. So will I.

Anne is a Man's stable following

I have been reporting every quarter about the growth of Anne is a Man's readership. Last January, I was still hoping I could show more growth, but already then I saw a trend that continued in the past three months: the readership has stabilized. I have around 200 readers hitting the blog every day. That is not bad, but we need more. The kind of material I am offering should interest way more people than actually succeed in finding it. This is why I have started campaigning, trying to get you, the readers, involved in spreading the word. More about this later. (statistics by Statcounter)



Even though the attention for the blog seems stable, there may be an indicator that actually we have more readers than we did before. Many people take an RSS subscription and then read the blog from their feedreader. This readership is not counted as visitors on the site, but they do read. And their number has been continuing to grow ever since we stabilized from around 50 to over 120.

Previously:
Hoping for more growth,
Rss following at the beginning of 2009,
October 2008: continued growth,
July 2008: small but growing.

The Podcast Parlor

Here is something new in our world of podcast reviews that hopes to be an addition to this blog and also to that of other reviewers of quality audio on line such as Do It Yourself Scholar and The Re-education of Baxter Wood. We have begun our blogs, not just to relate to cyberspace what we think of the podcasts we find, also to exchange thoughts with people who enjoy the same material.

What this demands is, apparently, more than just the comment option in our blogs. We have comments, but no serious dialogs have been kicked off there. And so, we want to invite you all to join us in an on-line community, where you can discuss and write your thoughts on the material we bring to the forefront or the content you want to present yourself: The Podcast Parlor.

Signing up is easy and discrete. From there you can observe the discussions we trigger, participate and instigate discussions and posts yourself. Feel invited and than ks in advance for joining.

Anne, Dara (DIY Scholar) and Baxter.

Anne is a Man - hoping for more growth

I have been reporting every quarter about the growth of Anne is a Man's readership and this time around I am not sure if I can really report actual growth. The feeling is that we are stabilizing and however nice that is, I am still hoping for more. The graph below shows the blog statistics (by statcounter) which is only one of the indicators. What you see is a stable interest that boils down to around 200 visitors per day.



Other indicators are the feed statistics (by Feedburner) which indicates the amount of regular readers who follow the blog not by visiting, but rather from an RSS reader. These are not caught by Statcounter and, once a visitor decides to start following through RSS, he or she will far less frequently visit the page. In other words, the blog stats are bound to lose to RSS readers. This is indeed what seems to be happening in the last three months. While my the amount of visitors stabilized around 200, the amount of feed readers shot up from a little over 50 to around 100.

The last two indicators are for one my Technorati rating which counts how many sources on the web point to the blog over the last 180 days. This number has gone down from 22 to 18. (Hey, where are those links?!) The second indicator is the following on Networked Blogs, which I set up only recently and has added already over 30 followers.

Previously:
Rss following at the beginning of 2009,
October 2008: continued growth,
July 2008: small but growing.

At the beginning of 2009 - Anne is a Man's rss following

When 2008 started, my RSS following was floating around 10 readers per day. This amount has risen over the year, especially over the last weeks.

The number, though not exact, is an indicator of the amount of permanent readers my blog has. On the last day of the year, there were 110.

There are a couple of funny things about the number. It can sharply vary from day to day, though the weekly average is very stable and has been going up steadily. Those who read the blog through RSS, are likely to read within their reader, so that they actually drop out of the web statistics that are collected for the blog pages. That last number has gone up as well and its rise preceded the rise in RSS readers. I have seen that before and it makes sense: a reader first finds the blog over the web and then after a couple of visits decided to follow through RSS.

More:
What is RSS; explanatory video,
Follow Anne is a Man through RSS - instructions.

Anne is a man and profile sites

I am frequently asked whether I am also available on one profile site or another. It seems my readers want to be able connect to me not just through the blog comments and email. I am indeed available on a range of profile sites, many of which I mainly use to promote the blog. I have decided to let you know where you can link up with me, below.

If you consider to do so, I would be pleased. I would be even more pleased if this linking up could result in something more than just a link between the readers an me. I would love to see the readers linking up with each other. My profiles on Facebook and Hyves, would allow that to a certain extent, but we could expand and join up on a Anne is a Man dedicated Facebook Page, or a Hyve on Hyves. In LinkedIn there is also the possibility to set up a group. Would you be interested in a Anne is Man-group, or better even yet, a podcast reviewer group?

In case there is some interest for one of these options, I will move along and set them up. While at it, this raises another question I have in my mind: would you be interested in getting an email newsletter from me, or be part of a Anne is a Man mailing list?

Questions, questions, questions - here are a few places you can give me answers:

Facebook
Hyves
Twitter
LinkedIn
Plaxo
StumbleUpon

Anne is a Man - continues to grow

Dear Readers,

Three months ago, I happily reported that Anne is a Man is a small but growing blog. I had a hundred readers on a good day. In the past three months, the blog has continued to spread and I can now divulge that, on a good day, I have two hundred readers. So the trend is maintained and I take this as a great encouragement of what I am doing.

The below graph shows the visitor statistics for Anne is a Man! (thanks to Statcounter):



I'll keep on blogging and hope to keep you reading. Thanks,

Anne

The first Anne is a Man audio Promo - by Jim Mowatt

38 seconds PROMO for Anne is a Man:


This is my first audio promo. Jim Mowatt of the Historyzine podcast did the text and I fumbled with some podsafe music by Muzyka Dawna from Poznan (Poland). If you appreciate my blog and especially if you were happy with a review you found here, I invite you to play this promo on your podcast or place it on your website. Let me know, when you do.

You can download the promo or embed it. To embed, first click the 'SHARE' link on the player above. Then copy the code to clipboard and then paste it into the code of your web page.

I'll continue to work on the subject of audio promo's, so keep posted.

More about the blog:
About Anne is a Man,
Why don't I give ratings to podcasts?,
What to write about a podcast?,
When do I write in my blog?,
When do I listen to podcasts?,
Time to start again.

Mail from a happy reader on Anne is Man!

From: Karen Roth
To: Anne Frid de Vries
Sent: Sunday, 7 September, 2008 18:39:06
Subject: your reviews are indispensable to me

Dear Anne,

I can't thank you enough for your blog. I'm lucky enough to have a job, hobbies, commute, and home life that allow me to listen to podcasts several hours a day. Until I found your site (via recommendation on the Historyzine podcast) I was running out of quality shows. I have found other podcast reviewers focus either too narrowly on a specific subject (e.g. physics for physics majors/professionals) or too broadly to a general (and, though it sounds patronizing, pedestrian and tasteless) audience. Your reviews are, for me, just right. Your taste is excellent, your reviews informative and honest, and your site setup makes it so easy for me to locate and subscribe to casts.

I am amazed by all the altruism on the web. From freeware to reviews so many people have enriched my life out of the goodness of their hearts. Thank you again for your help and all the time and effort you put in to making quality podcasts known. You're a mensch.

--
Karen Roth
Scottsdale, AZ


More Feedback:
Jan Oosthoek (Environmental History),
Dan Carlin (Hardcore History and Common Sense).

About Anne is a Man!

Anne is a Frisian name for men. The Frisian language is still spoken in the north of the Netherlands and that is where my grandfather came from after whom I was named. Myself, I was born in the east of the country, in a small village with a narrow horizon.The story of my blog is the story of a broadening horizon.

In 1984 I moved to Amsterdam in order to study Law, which soon I enriched with studying some sociology and psychology on the side. Eventually I turned to the philosophy of Law, but failed to finish my PhD. What I did next was rediscover computers. Before 1984, I had done some basic programming on the one computer we had in high school. While engaging in Law, my only work on computer was word processing, but in the late nineties I took up programming again, C++ and Java.

In 1998 I got married and moved with my wife to Israel. I continued to work in computers, but on the side I kept my other interests alive. I made a study of the history of Israel, which fitted neatly on to my previous spare time studies into the history of World War I. I also scoured the internet for good content in Dutch - keeping in touch with my origin.

While looking for Dutch audio, I discovered podcasts. When investigating the iTunes directories, I soon discovered the history and science podcasts I came to like so much. Among the first were Berkeley's History 5, Shrink Rap Radio and the Dutch podcast Simek 's Nachts. After many months of listening, I began this blog and dedicated it to reviewing the majority of podcasts I find.

More about the blog:
Why don't I give ratings to podcasts?,
What to write about a podcast?,
When do I write in my blog?,
When do I listen to podcasts?,
Time to start again.

Like the blog? Publish the PROMO.

Why don't I give ratings to podcasts?

There are several places where you can go for podcast reviews (directories, podcasts and blogs). A lot of those have a rating system, just as you see with reviews of books, movies and so many other products. On-line reviewing seems to beg for a rating system, yet I feel very uncomfortable to apply such over here. I cannot bring myself to use one and I think I must explain why.

There are enough relatively objective standards one could measure podcasts by. Audio quality can be very easily rated. One could give an indicator to represent the informative and entertainment value, but I think you cannot add these up. One element may compensate for the other. One element may be more important than the other, or so strong in particular situations, it saves (or ruins) the whole thing. Most of the university lectures have rather poor audio and little entertainment value, but they are so good. Most of the radio shows turned podcast, are great on audio levels and entertainment, but yet can be so bland and predictable, I feel they are not so good.

I have noticed, not just with myself, some podcasts do it for you. What is more, whatever podcast does it for me, may not do it for somebody else or even for me at another moment in time. What I am getting at is that podcast quality is fluid and when starting to compare, it becomes more fluidly so. I am so interested in history, I may enjoy a rather poor podcast in history more than an outstanding one about physics - or just the other way round, it may make me more critical of history podcasts and enjoy a rather mediocre on about physics. And for you it may be different in a whole range of other aspects.

However, when you read my impression, you can get a feel of what I like, you get an impression of what the podcast does and you will get an idea, enough idea I suppose, whether it is worthwhile for you to check the reviewed podcast out. And a rating of 4 out of 5, or 3.5 doesn't make any difference. Only, maybe, an extreme rating, but most of the time, you can't give them, otherwise the whole system is moot. So what remains are those that are trumped by the content of the review anyway. Hence, I concentrate on writing about podcasts, say about them what I have to say and leave it at that. That is all you need.

More about the blog:
About Anne is a Man,
What to write about a podcast?,
When do I write in my blog?,
When do I listen to podcasts?,
Time to start again.

What to write about a podcast?

How do I decide what to write about a podcast? Every podcast I listen to leaves a trace, stuff I remember from the podcast, reactions in the form of associations, comparisons, questions, thoughts, appraisal and critique. Most of the time, some of this is most strong and that is what lay the basis for what I write, but i do try to stick to a couple of criteria.

If I review a podcast for the first time and especially if I expect not to go and follow and review episodes frequently, I will try to describe some general impressions about the podcast. If I intend to focus on episodes, I will be more specific. In any case I want my readers to get some idea of what they can expect. And then, I want to mention at least something what may make them like the podcast.

This is important, I decided, also for podcasts that are not exactly my taste. The aim for this blog is to help you find podcasts you like and it hardly helps you to be told this or that podcast is no good. What is no good in my ears, could very well be good in yours and what I did not like today, may appeal to me some other time. Therefore, any opinion on a podcast can never be definitive, neither good or bad. However, if I mention what is good about the podcast, you can decide for yourself whether that might work for you or not. If I give you only what is bad, you have nothing to go on.

If I have nothing good to say about a podcast, and couldn't even think of any reason why other people than myself may like it, I'd rather not write about it at all. There are millions of podcasts, there are millions of millions of qualifications I can apply to them. Why choose of all those options, the negative ones - I wouldn't see any point. Choosing the positive ones, means it might apply to some reader and it may help somebody to find what he likes.

That doesn't mean I shun being critical. Together with good points, I see no problem to mention some of the weaker aspects; anything that can give you a more complete idea. And if I have written an overall negative review (which I have done occasionally) then it is only for this reason, that the podcast would seem, off hand, to be really good and I felt I should sort of warn you. For example, there is a really good Dutch newspaper, NRC. The NRC podcast, however, is so unbelievably amateurish, you would never anticipate - so this is where I have chosen to write a bad review.

More about the blog:
About Anne is a Man,
Why don't I give ratings to podcasts?,
When do I write in my blog?,
When do I listen to podcasts?,
Time to start again.

When do I write in my blog?

Right now I am on vacation and have a series of posts that are regularly coming out while I am away. But normally pieces are written within the 24 hours preceding the publication date. With the occasional backpost, you may have noticed. I try to post at least once a day and that usually works out.

Normally I write in the early morning. I get up at 6 am, wake my kids and then have about 30-45 minutes to sit down and flesh out a post, while they are having a cereal, get dressed and ready for their respective school and daycare. Around seven I bring one of them to their place for the day and proceed to work. While I have a breakfast at work, I review the post and click the button to publish. Hence, you see, most posts are stamped between 6 and 7 in the morning, Jerusalem Time (GMT+2).

When I sit down to write, I have the ideas more or less ready in my head. They mostly present themselves while I am listening and I make a mental note of them. If there is nothing specific, I write some general impression that was left on me. What I always try to do is write something positive. I do not believe in negative reviews of podcasts. There may have been an exception or two to the rule and I will not completely rule it out, but in principle I write what is good about a podcast. I try to figure what reason one (if not me, then anybody) might have, to want to listen to this podcast and enjoy it.

More about the blog:
About Anne is a Man,
Why don't I give ratings to podcasts?,
What to write about a podcast?,
When do I listen to podcasts?,
Time to start again.

When do I listen to podcasts?

Keeping this blog involves quite some time and since I have a full time job and a family, people naturally ask how I manage to get so much listening done. The answer is that I squeeze listening to podcast in, into every spare moment I can and there turn out to be quite a lot.

I listen during my commuting, which half an hour back and forth, five days a week. Then, I listen during some menial tasks: a weekly two hour (at least) regular shopping at the supermarket, more time during additional shopping, during cooking, laundry and other car rides. Every fortnight we clean our apartment, which takes us about five hours. In addition, every month there is a day I spend around the house doing repairs, maintenance - what have you. I reckon I put in about 15 hours of listening each week, at the minimum.

On average podcast episodes last around 45 minutes (though some considerably less), which means that I manage to listen to around 20 issues a week. This would give material for up to 20 blog posts, though I hardly ever reach that. I post a little over one post per day. Many posts address more than one podcast episode, and here and there I decide not to write about an episode that I heard, at all.

More about the blog:
About Anne is a Man,
Why don't I give ratings to podcasts?,
What to write about a podcast?,
When do I write in my blog?,
Time to start again.

Anne is a Man! - Small but growing

Dear Readers,

There are not terribly many of you. A hundred on a good day, but from what I see, your numbers are gradually increasing and you generally seem to appreciate what I am doing. I want to take this opportunity to express my appreciation and satisfaction you keep coming here.

The below graph shows the visitor statistics for Anne is a Man! (thanks to Statcounter):



I'll keep on blogging and hope to keep you reading. Thanks,

Anne

Anne de Vries de schrijver

"Ben je familie van Anne de Vries, de schrijver?"
Tegenwoordig wordt de vraag me niet meer zo vaak gesteld. Nee ik ben geen familie van de Schrijver van 'Bartje' en de kinderbijbel. En ik bid niet voor bruine bonen, al eet ik ze best graag, want ik bid niet voor het eten. Al zeg ik de ברכה voor de חלה op ערב שבת, maar of dat telt....?

Anne de Vries is een naam die je kunt associeren met schrijven. Een speciaal soort schrijven. De streekroman, het gereformeerde proza. Ik kom uit een gereformeerd nest en heb tot en met de universiteit binnen mijn zuil onderwijs genoten, maar heb me nooit met DE Anne de Vries geidentificeerd. Toen ik bedacht dat ik wilde schrijven (na het zien van de film 'The Prize', wat een giller!), dacht ik aan ander soort schrijvers. Ik heb Hesse geprobeerd te imiteren. Thomas Mann, Albert Camus en later Erich Maria Remarque, maar nooit Anne de Vries.

Ik heb in 1992 een verhaal gepubliceerd in De Lift over een lesbienne die verliefd wordt op een man -- geen regionale literatuur en gereformeerd was het ook niet erg. Er moeten dit jaar vier verhalen van mij uitkomen in een bundel van ervaring van Nederlanders in Israel, verder hbe ik geen grote daden verricht op schrijfgebied. Om met Jan Hanlo te spreken: ik ben micro-produktief. Daarbij heb ik ook altijd een maniakale kloof gehad tussen het niveau waar ik naar streefde (het allerallerallerhoogste) en het vertrouwen dat ik had in mijn eigen capaciteiten (nihil). Een tocht met meer klippen dan zee. Er zijn een paar verhalen langs de klippen geglipt, misschien dat ik ze nog wel eens ergens on line zet. Op mijn site http://www.k1k.nl of anders hier.

1998 is het jaar geworden van de totale omslag. Het jaar dat ik van burgerlijke status, vak, land, taal en werk veranderde. Het schrijven leek even dood te vallen, al zou blijken dat het bloed kruipt waar het niet gaan kan.

Israel werd mijn nieuwe land en omdat ik niet joods ben (dat zullen nog wel eens zien) had ik geen ander ticket om het land binnen te komen dan mijn huwelijk met Rachel Frid. Toen dat huwelijk werd erkend, konden we onze achternaam veranderen. Dat is iets dat in Israel zoveel makkelijker gaat dan in Nederland. In Nederland wilden we onze beide achternamen al combineren, maar ging dat niet zo een, twee, drie en heten we allebei zoals oorspronkelijk, met de toevoeging 'echtgenoot van'. Op die dag, daar op het kantoor van de immigratie, toen ons huwelijk werd erkend voor de Israelische wet, toen konden we ter plekke een nieuwe naam aannemen. Het had ook De Frid kunnen worden -- achteraf was dat misschien wel handiger geweest, maar ik hing meteen naar instandhouding en samenvoeging.
Is dat symbolisch? Is dat waar ik naar neig? Alles bewaren en de verworven elementen samenvoegen? Zoals ik de kwaliteiten van mijn ouders probeer samen te brengen al lopen ze uiteen en gaven ze in de gezinspraktijk van mijn jeugd meer frictie dan harmonie. Wil ik een jood-niet-jood worden zonder mijn calivinistische template op te geven? Ik denk het wel, al houd ik niet van dat calvinisme in heel veel opzichten, maar sinds ik wat van de basis (Erasmus, Geert Groote, Thomas a Kempis, Luther, Calvijn) ben gaan begrijpen (daarover later een keer meer), zie ik dat onversneden individualisme en die insteek ligt me wel, dat individuele kennen kenmerkt mij en dat is mijn kracht, geloof ik.
Hoe dan ook. Het werd een keuze tussen De Vries Frid en Frid de Vries, waarbij we er in vijf minuten uitwaren dat het tweede beter bekte.

Sindsdien ben ik Anne Frid de Vries. Hoe anders klinkt dat dan de schrijver van Bartje -- met alle respect. Nu maar eens kijken of al mijn geschrijf ook nog ergens toe leidt.

Oh ja, het bloed kroop waar het niet gaan kon. Israel eiste al mijn energie op, al had ik er meer van dan ooit, want dit land bruist en kolkt en kookt, maar aan schrijven kwam ik niet meer toe. Ook niet aan roleplay, al miste ik het wel. Bij een zoektocht op het web naar een computerspel kwam ik een Nederlandstalig rollenspel via email tegen (Crazbyia), waarik meteen aan mee kon doen en waar ik binnen een jaar de spelleider werd. De verhalen die ik daar schreef kwamen on line te staan. En ik herontdekte mijn schrijven en ontwikkelde de technieken die ik o.m. bij Het Colofon geleerd had.

Nog steeds heb ik geen serieus schrijfproject dat ik af heb, of zelfs maar bezig ben af te ronden, zodat je ooit nog eens aan publicatie kunt gaan denken. Maar met de komst van het interactieve internet is dat ook eigenlijk niet meer nodig. Ik kom op forums, ik heb dit blog, ik leid mijn PbeM en al dat materiaal staan on line. Waarom zou ik me geen schrijver noemen?

Anne Frid de Vries, de schrijver. Ha!

Time to start again

It is the third or fourth time I start a blog. There is so much I write about and so much more I want to write about, I have to have a blog. I figured that out years ago, it just didn't work so far. It is your proper self-doubt, mixed in with more of the rest of a fears and lethargy that haunt me, which has kept me from maintaining, blogs or otherwise.

OK, so here goes one more time. Let's hope this time is for real.

The blog is not going to be about one thing. Fun as it may be that my name is Anne, while being a man. And though I could extend this whole identity blur with more stuff: I am Israeli, but no Jew. I may look Israeli, but I was born Dutch. I may be Dutch, but I am so glad to be away from that land, and wouldn't want to return, not for a million dollars. I want to regard myself as a Jew, although I was baptized as a Protestant Christian, but I live the life of any average secular Jew and then הלכה gets in the way. I flirt with conversion, but usually I am put off -- lots to write about that. I wish I could convert from a secular Christian, or a secular Nothing for that matter to a secular Jew, but for the time being no such thing exists.

And I could go on. There is and has been so much confusion around my person, that I could endlessly write about my identity.

I'd like to write about my creative writing as well. I'd like to publish my recipes; I write down what I cook anyway, so why not on the web? And I'd like to write about podcasts. I am an avid podcast listener.

Oh and one more thing: this blog is not going to be in one language. Expect English, Dutch and Hebrew. That's me.

More about the blog:
About Anne is a Man,
Why don't I give ratings to podcasts?,
What to write about a podcast?,
When do I write in my blog?,
When do I listen to podcasts?.

'A boy named Sue' wordt 'the Man called Anne'

Mijn naam is Anne. Ik ben een man. Ik kan me herinnneren dat ik op de kleuterschool wel eens uitgejouwd werd: "Anne is een meisje! Anne is een meisje!" Op mijn werk heb ik een collega die me wel eens plagerig toevoegt: "Maar Anne is eigenlijk een vrouwennaam." Het zegt iets over mannelijkheid en vrouwelijkheid. Er is een scheiding tussen die twee en het mannelijke wordt hoger ingeschaald. Een vent uitmaken voor een meisje is in die context denigrerend. Het omgekeerde vaak ook, maar dat is toch anders.

Als we het toch over namen hebben. Ik zie om mij heen al jaren een trend dat traditionele mannennamen ook door vrouwen gebruikt worden en aan meisjes gegeven worden. Ik hoor mensen hooguit klagen over de verwarring die dat met zich meebrengt, maar nooit over de gender problematiek die dit bij een meisje zou kunnen teweegbrengen. Vrouwennamen worden daarentegen nooit aan mannen gegeven. En in de beroemde song 'a boy named Sue' eindigt het relaas ondanks de ontdekte goede kanten van de naam met een hartgrondig: 'I still hate that name!'

Er zijn vrienden (opmerkelijk genoeg vooral vrouwen) die me wel eens gevraagd hebben of zo'n vrouwennaam me geen problemen met mijn mannelijke identiteit bezorgd hebben. Ik vind wel dat ik de nodige problemen met mijn mannelijke identiteit, mijn seksualiteit en zo meer heb gehad, maar ik zie dat niet origineren in mijn naam.

De naam is trouwens geen vrouwennaam. Ik ben vernoemd naar mijn Friese grootvader. In het Fries is Anne een jongensnaam, verwant aan Arne in noordse talen. De naam betekent Adelaar en is daarmee een volwaardig viriele naam als in de beste tradities. De verwarring ontstaat doordat men de Friese oorsprong niet kent of vergeet en zich laat verwarren door de klankmatige overeenkomst met de vrouwennaam Anne die komt van Anna.

Naarmate men verder van Friesland verwijderd is, is de associatie met de naam Anne er een van een vrouw, zonder enig voorbehoud. Met name buiten Nederland komt het bij een zinnig mens niet op om te denken dat Anne een man zou kunnen zijn, maar zelfs in Nederland is dat toch meer een secundaire, wat theoretische, mogelijkheid en is by default, om het zo maar een te zeggen, elke Anne een vrouw.

Je ziet hier ook een kloof tussen rationeel weten en ervaren. Zelfs ik denk bij een Anne aan een vrouw. Ik kreeg een keer een brief ondertekend door 'Anne' en veronderstelde met een vrouw van doen te hebben en kwam er tot mijn grote verrassing achter dat ook achter deze Anne een man school. Kortom, de vrouwelijke gender van de naam is een sociale conventie.

Dit betekent dat het jongetje dat nageroepen krijgt dat hij een meisje is, weerloos is. Hij weet dat het niet zo is, hij zou het zelfs kunnen uitleggen, maar hij kan de conventie niet veranderen. En zo verkeert hij in een soort fundamentele eenzaamheid: de mannelijke kant van zijn naam en dus van een deel van zijn identiteit is niet afdoende erkend in de sociale realiteit. De mannelijkheid is niet vanzelfsprekend en moet steeds opnieuw aangetoond worden.

Een essentiele kern van de identiteit moet dus als het ware steeds opnieuw bevochten worden. En ook al is de overwinning zeker; doordat het gevecht eindeloos is, is het in zekere zin ook een verloren zaak. Als een vreemdeling die bij voortduring naar zijn papieren kan worden gevraagd. De papieren zijn in orde maar de legitimatie is nooit definitief. Het is elke keer een legitimatie tot aan de volgende barriere. En dan moet er opnieuw gelegitimeerd worden. En daarmee, hoewel legitiem, blijft de aangesprokene tweederangs, een voortdurend geval van twijfel.

Een dergelijke vreemdeling zal in een mate van vrees leven: dat de dag ooit komt dat de legitimatie faalt en het gewonnen gevecht alsnog verloren gaat. Een dwaling in de bureaucratie, een onwillige controleur of een veranderde regel en dan wacht hem alsnog het lot van de vreemdeling zonder geldige papieren. Zo heb ik visioenen dat ik een vrouwelijke identiteit moet aanvaarden om mijn naam te kunnen behouden.

Het gekke is dat ik nooit mijn naam heb willen veranderen. Daarvoor is de realiteit te sterk dat het die Friese naam is die mij verbindt met de voorouders. Er kleeft een onuitgesproken trots en eigenheid aan die naam. De naam veranderen voelt aan als onzuiver en als een knieval aan een conventie die onwetend en dus eigenlijk dom is. Het voelt als een definitief verlies. In dat opzicht is de eenzaamheid dus ook verkozen.

Het alternatieve verlies is het verlies aan mannelijkheid. Het is iets dat zo vaak gebeurt dat het voor mij een alledaagsheid is. Het verlies is nooit definitief. In onze analogie: de vreemdeling wordt nog wel eens naar zijn papieren gevraagd en degene aan wie hij de papieren toont, neemt aanvankelijk aan dat ze niet in orde zijn. Pas na nader onderzoek is de legitimiteit hersteld. Als ik mijn naam invul op een formulier, word ik door de ontvangende instantie steevast als vrouw geclassificeerd. Daar waar ik opereer op het internet onder mijn echte naam, veronderstelt men een vrouw. Ja zelfs waar ik de gelegenheid heb om mijn geslacht aan te geven, wordt de door mijn opgegeven mannelijkheid regelmatig genegeerd en neemt de ontvanger mij als vrouw.

Zelfs als men niet gelooft in een direct effect van naamgeving op een kind, toch word je als persoon door die naam gekend en dus ook door de associaties die anderen bij die naam hebben en in dat opzicht is Anne heten obscuur en problematisch. Mijn innerlijke trots is eenzaam. Hij bestaat voor mij, maar is geen ervaring die ik delen kan. De manier waarop ik van binnen Anne heet is onkenbaar, zoals een zieke zijn ziekte beleeft, zoals een gevangene in zijn cel leeft en zoals een gek een psychose heeft.

Men zou kunnen tegenwerpen dat dat te ver gaat. Tenminste binnen het familieverband is de naam Anne erkend mannelijk en erkend als die van de patriarch. In mijn situatie echter wil het geval dat mijn neven en mijn vader ook naar mijn grootvader zijn vernoemd en dat ik de jongste van alle Annes in de familie ben. In mijn kindertijd, waarin ik dus buitenshuis voor meisje werd uitgemaakt, was ik binnenshuis weliswaar geen meisje, maar heette ik wel 'de kleine Anne' en daarmee was ik misschien wel man, maar toch niet meer dan een kind.