I’ve been prompted to do this because of another project I’m working on and the thing that strikes me is the subtlety of the language required. There are so many levels to the job – on the face of it you have a brief pen portrait of the person concerned but there is so much more to say.
As writers, we need to understand that however good your book is, it is the person who wrote it that will appear at literary festivals, be interviewed in the press and pop up on TV. A good, marketable writer will shift copies. Someone the audience can’t connect with will struggle.
So, we make much of our back story meeting at a quango and being made redundant. It’s a tale that many people can relate to and provides a positive spin and unusual outcome that has already appealed to the local press.
My biog mentions that I worked for “a vegetable research company that bears absolutely no resemblance to HIA in the book” with the obvious implication that it might have been, as well as letting the reader know we are writing what we know.
Candice on the other hand, includes something about half-marathons that doesn’t involve old choccie bars and “managing her husband and one year old daughter” as a way of reassuring people that we are “an unusual, non-romantic, couple” and it’s politer than saying “Look at our blog header, I’m the glamorous one. Of course I’ve done better than him!”.
I console myself that at the quango, even though I am the owner of a model railway, she still considered me the most interesting person to talk to. Which says something about everyone else…