Below are the words of PR Editors and PR Interns in an exercise we’d like to call “blogging is easy when you spitball ideas”. We don’t actually call it that, but enjoy!

A recent article at flavorwire (via htmlgiant) had the interns and editorial team talking about author photos and the pros and cons of them.

Why doesn’t the Potomac Review publish author photographs?  Other journals have; some journals have even published baby photos.

So many authors have taken pictures being an “author” that there is now a generic display most authors go for. We prefer the smoking— while head rested on hand— while typing.  Having friends that are photographers or being able to afford great photographers gives them an unfair advantage and a disadvantage to the less wealthy and photogenic authors. Not that any of us are in that category.

Instead of just their head shot, why can’t more authors pose in interesting places? We’re thinking about the Hunter S. Thompson, buck naked, shooting clay pigeons on the back cover of Kingdom of Fear. Doesn’t that tell you all you need to know about Mr. Thompson?

Another thing about author photos: we resent when authors keep their same photo for 30 years. Keep it real, or relevant (meaning last 10 years?) so we won’t be surprised when we come to your reading. When we think we’re schmoozing your mother, it’s really you.

Of course, these are glamour shots more than what authors look like working. But some of our writer friends write in their worst pajamas because they want to trick themselves into not being seen. Wouldn’t that be a great author shot? The PJs with no makeup holding a plate of eggs before a morning of writing, that shouldn’t be a new author photo staple?

It brings up a great question: do you want people to see you in your writing habitat? A picture of an author in his natural habitat is like taking a picture of a lion when he’s tearing into a carcass: it’s not usually a pretty sight.