This is a pretty strong statement for a 17/42 outcome. You do realize that 17/42 is not significantly different from 21/42, statistically? Do a chi-square test - you'd expect at least this much deviation from the expected value (21) about half the time. Hardly conclusive proof you f'd up.

Did you ever get around to reading Deborah Solomon's Norman Rockwell bio?

Joe @3: I didn't. In fact, I think one of my coworkers still has the book, unfortunately.

Paul, I read Hild for you. it's really good and made me want to know more about early British history.

I realize, of course, that you would want more for a review.

I would think you only "failed" in 2013 if your ratio of reviews of books by women declined compared to 2012. If it improved, you made progress.

It's hard for me to believe you found Hild boring. I read it twice straight through. But I like Nicola Griffith quite a bit and have read all her books. I'm not generally a fan of historical or fantasy fiction and probably wouldn't have read it if it had been by someone else.

Out of your 42 reviews, you'd need to have reviewed four female authored books instead of male authored to have met your goal. Yes, you failed. But spectacularly failed? I dunno.

Have you read Anjelica Huston's memoir yet? Just started - a simple but vivid and lovely read so far.

So what the fuck do you intend to do about it? You failed at the resolution last year, and are making the exact same resolution this year. You are going to have similar results unless you do something different

When i had a crappy book blog and realized the same thing, i added a rule of thumb that i would start a book by someone non white or non male for every book i finished by a white male.

That's probably not appropriate for The Stranger, but you could do something else. For every issue with a book review, there will be at least two reviews and one of the authors will be a woman. Or no review of a male author gets scheduled for publication until you've decided on a book by a woman o review. Or every month the stack of books considered to be reviewed will have an equal number of men and women authors. (I.e., that sets a consideration time that you are actually thinking about gender parity.) Or you hire another reviewer who has a better track record for parity than you do to balance and push you in the right direction.

What are you actually going to commit to?

No Life After Life either. It was my favorite book of the year by a very long shot. Still, this is always a good resolution to strive for.

I am now reading The Luminaries (also written by a woman) and loving it so far.

@13: I read Life After Life while on vacation this summer and didn't like it as much as everyone else did. It was well-written, but I didn't even think it was Kate Atkinson's best book.

@11: Let me restate, then, for clarity: Last year, I didn't take the resolution seriously. I just figured I could do it without even trying. That turned out to be an incorrect assumption. This year, I'm going to achieve gender parity by being conscious about it.

@14: Thanks for the tip. I'll take a look at that one, but I probably can't review it in the paper, as it came out last year and Stranger reviews tend to be of books that are brand-new or that are featured in upcoming events. If I do read it, I'll definitely mention it on the blog, though, where those constraints don't apply.

I've been trying to do this for years, am a recovering English Lit major and a proud member of VIDA. Part of the reason it's challenging are as stated - there are fewer books published by women. Sometimes for other reasons too, like I want to read about an experience that a woman hasn't had the good fortune of having (Herzog On Herzog, for example.) Some great ones you might have missed in 2013: The Flamethrowers, Wave, Lean In, 41 False Starts. Also, what about assigning a few book reviewers so you ensure women get read?