Below is an extended note to a sub-editor who sent a piece of my writing to a second editor, who ‘outed’ to the sub-editor one of my pen-names used within the article written in my name, suggesting it to be unnecessary as I would be quoting myself. Unfortunately, the piece has been sent for print already. Ironically, the sub-editor also writes using many pseudonyms for the same publication. It’s probably just that the second editor doesn’t know they are all him!
‘Also, _____ is a pen-name, and as with many writers, it is perfectly alright to use multiple names (for multiple reasons). Many respectable writers also address themselves as third parties, including the Buddha, for good reasons. Now, the cat is subtly out of the bag to readers that I’m also _____, which is unfortunate, as using a pen-name was meant to be a skilful means, to reverse perceptual dogma of how I’m expected to express myself.’
The right to retain pseudonymity and anonymity is also perhaps one of the most fundamental forms of privacy – especially when the identity or non-identity is not for use with ill will, but out of good will instead.