Retroactive ratings, Y/N/Abort/Retry/Fail?

[megwrites]

I've been considering going back to the books I've reviewed and adding a 1-10 scale for race, gender, and GLBT issues to them. I certainly know that from this point on, any of my reviews will take those three things into consideration, and I'll be adding the rank there.

I really want to stay conscious not just of these things when I'm writing, but when I'm reading. As a reader, or more importantly, as a reader who buys books, my purchases and preferences do, in some small way, matter. And if I send out the message to publishers, editors, and writers that diversity sells, and that books which do a bad job do not, then we'll be seeing a lot more diversity in the literary world, which is a Good Thing^TM.

For instance, the fantasy book I'm reading now (Lies of Locke Lamora by Scott Lynch) has turned out to be a surprisingly fun read - but I'm well past a hundred pages in and there's only one female character who actually speaks, but has few lines and thus far, no significant part in the plot. Were she deleted from (at the very least) those 100 plus pages, nothing would change. Oh, and there was the one fish fighting gladiator woman who I read to be a woman of color who snuffed it within a couple of pages of being introduced. Which is sad, because the introduction of fish-fighting gladiator women made me really happy.

Actually, I could really go for a 700 page novel just about fish-fighting gladiator women. I feel this novel needs to be written.

I've always wondered if it would be appropriate, when someone trying to write an "other" (ie, a male trying to write a female, etc) complains about being in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation to answer them by saying, "Well, let's see. How many authors of [insert group] have you read and how many authors of [insert person's own group] have you read?"

One suspects that the ratio would be rather disappointed. One also suspects that those writers for whom the number is relatively encouraging have never felt the need to say such a thing.

One also, in a moment of sublime snark, would be tempted to type up a list of authors, essayists, and bloggers of [insert group that is being whined about as impossible to write and not write] and hand it to the person, saying (with a very stern and serious face), "There's a secret answer hidden in these books and essays and blogs. Read them very careful, several times over, and you too can learn the clandestine code for Getting It Right".

Of course, the fun is in timing how long it takes the person to realize that the answer isn't in the books, it is the books.

After all, if you were to do exactly that, then you would have taken the most vital step in this whole process, which is Shutting Your Giant Piehole And Listening. Which, let's face it, we all need to do more of.

Comments

[queenoftheskies.livejournal.com]

I think it's very sad how few people actually listen any more, or even seem to take notice of the world around them.

The world is not made up entirely of white males. There is such diversity, and it's that diversity that makes it a wonderful place.

I grew up in the southern U.S. during the very volatile 60's and 70's, saw and learned a lot of things that made me determine NOT to repeat the mistakes of those around me.

I was fortunate to move to southern California when I was 25, so I've had over 27 years to absorb the differences and realize that the world is a kaleidescope of colors and genders and sexual preferences and beliefs.

My novels and short stories must, of a necessity, include a world of people because it is these people I see in my every day life. Even if others aren't so lucky as to experience diversity, I wish they'd take that first step, that first chance and try to learn about other people by writing about them. Make novels true to life.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

I grew up in the southern U.S. during the very volatile 60's and 70's, saw and learned a lot of things that made me determine NOT to repeat the mistakes of those around me.

As a fellow Southerner (though of the 80's/90's vintage), WORD. I think growing up in the South, you either become impertinent or indoctrinated as far as racial attitudes go. Because it seems like I've met a large amount of white people who buy into the racism, but I've also met a lot of white people who, seeing how things worked and still work to some degree, were absolutely disgusted and used that ugliness in the environment to become more sensitive to racial issues, to make sure they double checked their own actions and attitudes.

I know that because I've grown up in that environment, I'm always careful to make sure that I don't slip back into those hurtful Good Ol' Boy behavior and thought patterns - you know, the ones where you check around the room before telling a racist joke and then everyone laughs while assuring themselves they're not racist. *eyeroll*

My novels and short stories must, of a necessity, include a world of people because it is these people I see in my every day life.

I now live in NYC, and I can't imagine writing all white characters. I just can't. Because if you live in NYC, diversity isn't just a nice catchword, it's a fact on the ground.

[stevenagy.livejournal.com]

It's going to be interesting to see how he handles her in the next book (if we're talking about the same main female character). Locke's past is supposed to catch up to him in the third volume, which is slated for release sometime this year.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

It's going to be interesting to see how he handles her in the next book

I'm not all the way through the first volume, but I'm glad there's hope now that the Dona will have a bigger, more important role. Again, I'm only about 130 pages in and it's a 700 page novel, so there's time for things to get better. :)

[stevenagy.livejournal.com]

i think you'll like what he does. I know I enjoyed the first book, and the second book offered surprises as well.

[ladyslvr.livejournal.com]

Just an item for thought: in defense of the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" people, I have as a colleague a PoC who is militantly adamdant that if anyone who is *not* a member of her racial group tries to write about or include a member of her group in their stories, then that person has committed the worst of all possible hate crimes. She contends that people have absolutely no business writing or talking about (in any capacity) groups of which they are not members because that's a form of appropriation that is tantamount is committing (or, at least, contributing to the committement of) cultural genocide. Unfortunately, this colleague's attitude is not unique to her, and it *has* scarred me as a writer. No amount of listening on my part is going to make it easier for me to want to/be able to write her racial group knowing that she or her ilk will use that effort as proof of the hatred they are convinced that I and my ilk harbor towards them.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, this colleague's attitude is not unique to her, and it *has* scarred me as a writer. No amount of listening on my part is going to make it easier for me to want to/be able to write her racial group knowing that she or her ilk will use that effort as proof of the hatred they are convinced that I and my ilk harbor towards them.

First off, it's weird, but when I read your comment, I thought, "Actually, reading/listening would help you be less scarred". It won't do crap to soothe your colleague, but who says you have any responsibility to?

I'm not downplaying how personally hurtful it can be when somebody says something like that. Nor am I downplaying that people like that do exist.

My Devil's Advocate^TM question, however, is: why exactly is this person, or this group of people, the spokesperson for their entire race, or all PoC's to you? And is that fair? If I linked you to a post where (for example) a Latina woman said, essentially, "I have no problem with white writers writing PoC" - would this change things for you? Would twenty such posts?

If so, reading and listening more broadly about this topic may be helpful. Maybe you need to listen to more PoC's, not just this one person or that one group.

I think lots of white writers have this issue. I certainly know I do. I want to take something an individual PoC says as though it's the party line for ALL people of that race or all PoC's. that they want to make the assumption that if, for instance, a black person says "I found this offensive" that ALL black people will. And I've had to train myself to stop thinking that way.

Take the controversies that spring up over the use of the "n"-word in songs and other places. Some black people who hate it, and want to make it illegal to say (the mayor of Memphis, notably). Some black people have no problem with it.

You and I wouldn't for one second assume that because one woman said, "Any man who writes about women is sexist and committing gender genocide!!" that all women felt that way. We might think she was off her rocker.

But if a man then said, "I won't ever write women again because she said that! I'm done with women, I'm just going to write male characters!" - how would you react?

I, for one, would be angry that a man decided he'd just completely erase women from his writings because one woman was a complete nutjob. To me, this man would sound like he was giving himself an excuse to do what he wanted to do anyway: avoid delving into the complicated, fraught issues of gender and sexism.

Understand that I'm not accusing you of any of the above. I know you, and I can only imagine that you genuinely want to do what's right and your purpose is not to hurt people.

Nor do I doubt that this colleague is everything you say. But don't let her opinion be the only one. There are a lot of people who've spoken out about this sort of thing. If you want to me to, I'll link you to some of the discussions, because they've been very helpful to me.

There are always going to be people who are professional malcontents, who are militant and extreme and, yeah, even wrong. Any writer who puts words out into the world is going to have at least one person use them as proof of something bad that the author did not intend, whether it's racism, sexism, or Teaching Children Bad Things.

All you can do is consider their viewpoint, check it against what you know to be right and wrong, and if necessary, discard it as being pointless. Logic should tell you that this woman's viewpoint is so extreme as to be absurd.

If we can't write/talk about groups we don't belong to, then no one can write/talk about anything but themselves. Under that logic, I couldn't write anything about my grandfather and great grandmother (who were Eastern Cherokee), even though they're part of my family.

But that's half of all human wisdom, isn't it? Sorting out who genuinely has a good point (about anything, not just race) and who is talking out of their rear end.

I'd hate to think this one person (or one small group of people) has caused a great writer like you to limit herself.

[ladyslvr.livejournal.com]

My Devil's Advocate^TM question, however, is: why exactly is this person, or this group of people, the spokesperson for their entire race, or all PoC's to you?

She's not the spokesperson for all PoCs to me, by any stretch of the imagination. PoCs are not members of the same community simply because they're PoCs, and to treat them as such would defeat everything everyone has worked for.

She is, however, the spokesperson of her community to me because that is her hired role. She was sent out by her community to try to change cultural representations of her group and to educate people on how her group has been wrongly stereotyped (and, as such, injured by said stereotypes), so when she tells me that her community holds the views I described above, I have to accept that. One of her community given directives is to get outsiders to stop representing them since they want to be allowed to speak with their own voice, and that apparently means to start by silencing the voices that already exist.

Since, in the absence of other information, I try to respect the desires of the community, knowing that one such as my colleague's exists makes me very wary of all the other ones that I don't know much about--which practically be definition, is nearly all of them out there.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

so when she tells me that her community holds the views I described above, I have to accept that.

Uh, why? I hate to sound rude (I'm really not trying to be, promise!), but what kind of position did this woman get hired for that she's apparently the Pope of PoC's and speaks for them?

I don't care if she's the department chair of Diversity, it doesn't make her individual voice the end all be all of anything, and honestly, if her views are something that can't hold water logically, I'm not sure why you wouldn't seek second opinions by seeking out other writings, other viewpoints.

Who said you have to accept what she says?

I guess I'm a little lost as to what it is that gives her such authority to speak for an entire community, and when you say "she was sent out by her community" - was she elected, was there a community group that specifically picked her? I guess I'm just wondering what the circumstances are here and what community you're referring to.

Because the thing is? We're discussing PoC's in such broad terms as to be really sort of useless to both ourselves and anyone else. It might help to be more specific here. What community, specifically, sent this woman? Because even if she speaks for her specific community (let's suppose for a moment she speaks for, perhaps, the Native American community), she has no authority to speak for, say, the Latino, Hispanic, Black, Asian, or any other community and you have no obligation to listen to her opinions on those.

Maybe there is a community of, say, Native Americans who want these things - who very stringently believe in them. There are other communities, other groups and subgroups and people who believe completely different.

I don't feel as a writer or a person looking to be a positive anti-racist ally that there's any obligation to believe any one single person, or to accept any one single person as the representative of their race or community - no matter what they say. I promise you, whatever demographic she belongs to, I could point you to someone of that same demographic who would disagree with her.

If Obama himself doesn't speak for all black people, then this one woman who works at this one university certainly can't say she speaks for anyone but herself and maybe a small subgroup.

Again, I go back to the woman thing. What if there was a radical, separatist lesbian who was the chair of Women's Studies? Would you feel that a man was obliged to believe that everything that department chair said was the opinion of all women just because he didn't know many others?

knowing that one such as my colleague's exists makes me very wary of all the other ones that I don't know much about--which practically be definition, is nearly all of them out there.

I see sort of a problem in this, because it seems a little unfair, both to you and to EVERY OTHER PoC out there that this woman is mediating your entire interaction with several different communities, especially your interaction as a writer. That's what I think listening/reading more widely would help there. Because you could bypass one unhelpful person and get down to the heart of the matter.

Why is that, because you don't know all the others, that your views of what that "community" wants or doesn't want, what would be beneficial or hurtful to that community should be decided by the one person you're coming into contact with?

And why should this be where you stop, when you could go out and talk to other people of that community, other people of other communities, and read their books and listen to their voices and, at the very least, verify whether this woman is right or wrong in her assertion that this is how other people feel.

I hope you don't feel like I'm deliberately trying to be argumentative and difficult, because you're obviously expressing to me what it is that's giving you difficulties and why - and that you believe you're doing the best you can given the information you're getting. And I'm asking questions, because if nothing else, it helps me to see what other things pertaining to this topic are cropping up for other people.

[ladyslvr.livejournal.com]

but what kind of position did this woman get hired for that she's apparently the Pope of PoC's and speaks for them?

Please note, that I'm not putting this person in the position of speaking for all PoCs, nor have I ever. She speaks only for her subgroup. And, no, I will not identify that community as that's rather beside the point.

I'm not sure why you wouldn't seek second opinions by seeking out other writings, other viewpoints.

Who says I haven't? What I've found is that she is speaking the views that her community officially holds. Now, individuals within her community no doubt hold different views, but they're not the individuals who could destroy my academic career by pasting the label of racist on me.

and when you say "she was sent out by her community" - was she elected, was there a community group that specifically picked her?

I mean what I said. Because of her credentials that allow her to move in the world of academia, she became the voice of the people from her community who would not otherwise be heard. She does this with the full authority of the leaders in her group.

she has no authority to speak for, say, the Latino, Hispanic, Black, Asian, or any other community and you have no obligation to listen to her opinions on those.

Not to sound snippy, but where did you get the idea that I was generalizing to all those communities? I thought I'd made it clear that this colleague was speaking only for her community. Except, knowing that one group holds the views that she does means that others could as well, and without knowing which groups hold which views, writing PoCs becomes a minefield.

I promise you, whatever demographic she belongs to, I could point you to someone of that same demographic who would disagree with her.

Of course you could. But I don't need your help on that. I've had contact with lots of communities--but only a small fraction of what's out there.

Would you feel that a man was obliged to believe that everything that department chair said was the opinion of all women just because he didn't know many others?

That's not an analogous situation. The colleague I mention isn't a radical voice in her community. I kind of understand her logic, though I've spent hundreds of hours arguing with her on her position.

Why is that, because you don't know all the others, that your views of what that "community" wants or doesn't want, what would be beneficial or hurtful to that community should be decided by the one person you're coming into contact with?

You're massively overgeneralizing.

Because I know that me (as a white person) writing about my colleague's group is viewed as harmful by the group, then I'm going to respect their position and not write about them. And, because I know that one group of PoCs holds that view, I've now become concerned that others could as well. Since I have no way of knowing where groups fall on that continuum, it puts me into an untenable position. Unless I know that it's safe to write about a certain group, it's better to not.

Then, to have you (as a white person) judging me negatively because you only see the results of the decisions I've made doesn't exactly provide the positive encouragement to take risks with characters.

And why should this be where you stop, when you could go out and talk to other people of that community, other people of other communities, and read their books and listen to their voices and, at the very least, verify whether this woman is right or wrong in her assertion that this is how other people feel.

Again, why do you assume I haven't? Why do you assume that anyone hasn't?

[ladyslvr.livejournal.com]

To clarify:

but they're not the individuals who could destroy my academic career by pasting the label of racist on me.

So, it's the individuals to whom I can cede. If the leaders of the group hold a certain view, and they're the ones who get to judge how outsiders impact their group, then it's their view I must respect (even if I don't agree with it).

[ladyslvr.livejournal.com]

Erk. It's not the individuals to whom I can cede.

Why do I keep finding the dropped words after I hit post?

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

I'm actually rather confused by your reply, and I think there are some specifics to your situation which I may be misunderstanding or not quite catching on to.

Then, to have you (as a white person) judging me negatively because you only see the results of the decisions I've made doesn't exactly provide the positive encouragement to take risks with characters.

I don't think I was necessarily judging you negatively as posing some questions so I can understand where you're coming from. And if I came across as being judgmental or otherwise harsh, I apologize. I was trying to get a feel for what you might be dealing with.

I hope this won't sound rude or snarky, but from what you told me, you feel like writing CoC's will result in you being labeled as a racist by a person (or group of people) at your university who can get you fired.

If this is so (and if it's not, I apologize for making that kind of assumption), is my encouragement or discouragement really going to change anything? I don't mean to make you feel bad, but it sounds like you're telling me you're in a situation where writing CoC's could jeopardize your job, and is against the wishes of this person and the group they represent.

At the same time, you said: "Since I have no way of knowing where groups fall on that continuum, it puts me into an untenable position."

I suppose that's where my confusion comes in. Again, there may be something I'm missing or not getting - forgive me if I am.

It sounds like you're saying, for example, there is a Blue People woman (I don't know her group, so I'm making something up) who is at your university in some position of authority to speak for Blue People. Not sure why, but she is. Maybe she is department chair of Blue People or Blue People liaison or something. Whatever she is, she's made it known she and some other Blues feel white people shouldn't write Blue characters, and that no one should write a group they don't belong to. Thus, you feel constrained by the consequences for your job and your desire to respect their wishes. Hence, not only do you not write Blue people - but you don't write Purple, Green or Orange either because you don't know what they think.

That's where I should cut the comment off, and give you space to answer so you can tell me if I've misunderstood something or have it wrong.

Because I want to make sure that a) I'm not making you, my friend, feel bad about something that you genuinely can't do anything about and b) that I've got a good grip on what you're saying.

My entire post was for the point of saying that I think white writers have a responsibility to step out of their comfort zones and not to shy away because they're afraid of criticism and want to find a way to write something without having people point out any flaws in it.

A lot of this stems from comments made during the Cultural Appropriation Debate of Doom (aka Racefail 2009). Several white writers commented in a post about writing the Other respectfully that they felt "damned if they do, damned if they don't" - when what they meant by "damned if they do" is that they felt that PoC's would read their work and always say "You're doing it wrong, this is racist!" when they felt they were doing their best.

That (specifically) is hogwash to me, because if you're looking for a way to write characters of color that will never garner any criticism, you're doing it wrong. Everything will garner criticism from someone, either for racism, sexism or just plain old bad writing. There will always be people who say you wrote the worst novel in the history of novels.

I felt that shouldn't be an excuse for white writers never to try and thus erase PoC's and cut them out of a narrative they have a starring role in.

Not to mention that I, having lived in NYC, can't see how it's possible or even ethical to write a novel about this city, set in this city, without having lots of characters of color in my writing.

But if your reasons are that you're afraid for your job, or respecting the wishes of a community, that's perhaps separate from what this post was intended to address.

[ladyslvr.livejournal.com]

There's a lot of confusion that needs to be address, and some of that is sloppy semantics. By not being clear when I was using a generic you (as in people) versus a specific you, I made things sound like accusations, and I'm sorry about that.

Let's go in order:

I said: Then, to have you (as a white person) judging me negatively because you only see the results of the decisions I've made doesn't exactly provide the positive encouragement to take risks with characters.

This was meant to be a generic you. As in, as much as other general dominate culture people might want to write PoCs, should those people have a respectful reason to decide otherwise, then they have to face negative criticism from other dominate culture people who aren't privy to the reasoning, only to the absence of the PoCs. So, while the dominate culture person is trying to make the right decision in regards to the wishes of the subculture, he draws ire. This is part of the damned if you do dilemma.

you feel like writing CoC's will result in you being labeled as a racist by a person (or group of people) at your university who can get you fired.

Not at all. That was just meant as an example. Look at my fiction and you'll see plenty of diversity, much of it well beyond the color line.

The point I was trying to get to was the other side of the dilemma. Where there are certainly people within the subculture who share my (Generic Privileged White Person) perspective on whether I (GPWP) should include them in my (GPWP) work, the people who are effectively the gatekeepers for that culture say I (GPWP) shouldn't, and they're the ones I (GPWP) have to listen to because they have the power in this situation. Where many GWPWs will say "I didn't want to write X group because I was afraid of offending them," in this situation it's been made very clear that "if I write X group, I will offend them, and they can retaliate in very real ways."

Though I have no way of knowing for sure, I suspect the latter is the case in an alarming number of circumstances.

there is a Blue People woman (I don't know her group, so I'm making something up) who is at your university in some position of authority to speak for Blue People. Not sure why, but she is. Maybe she is department chair of Blue People or Blue People liaison or something.

She's an educator within her specific diversity field who has been charged with the task, by the leaders of her community, of going around and drawing as much attention to incorrect portrayals of her people. She, and her community, feel that any portrayal not done by someone who is a member of that community is inherently maliciously incorrect.

Comment continued below. I ran way long.

[ladyslvr.livejournal.com]

Hence, not only do you not write Blue people - but you don't write Purple, Green or Orange either because you don't know what they think.

Almost. I won't write Blue people because I know their feelings on the subject. And, because I know how strongly one group feels, I am forced to wonder about other groups. That wondering, then, makes any attempt to write other groups fraught with anxiety, that will then color my portrayals. Further, each time I consider writing Purple, Orange, or Green people, I have to ask myself--not if I'll offend them by doing it wrong--but if I'll injure them by doing it at all. This goes beyond challenging one's comfort zone right into committing a willful disregard for their spirits, perhaps even (metaphorically) using their religious object as my paperweight because I simply can never know enough about their lives and their perspectives to see their religion as sacred.

Am I going to stop writing diversity? No, because I'm the kind of person who will predictably push any rule I'm given. Other people very well might, though, not because they're racists, but because they do respect the humanness in the other groups and because they don't trust themselves to know the line between offense and injury.

My entire post was for the point of saying that I think white writers have a responsibility to step out of their comfort zones and not to shy away because they're afraid of criticism and want to find a way to write something without having people point out any flaws in it.

*nods* And I was trying to point out how the "damned if you do" people might well have some good reasoning that isn't about their racism, as you've suggested elsewhere.

That (specifically) is hogwash to me, because if you're looking for a way to write characters of color that will never garner any criticism, you're doing it wrong.

Possibly. Though, generally speaking again, with the current cultural climate, being called a racist is just about the worst thing one person can say to another. Being afraid of garnering the label is quite reasonable, in my mind, because--much like sex offender, the other worst tag--the label can't be scrubbed off with all the soap and water in the world. A bad writer can get better. A person who can't plot to save their lives might be able to improve. Even boring books can find an appreciative audience. But racist sticks, never has any redeeming qualities, and, too often, can become the sole determining feature when discussing a person's real life character.

Not to mention that I, having lived in NYC, can't see how it's possible or even ethical to write a novel about this city, set in this city, without having lots of characters of color in my writing.

OK. That's you and your situation.

I don't live in NYC. I live in rural mid-America where finding a PoC is a challenge. So should I be punished as a racist if I don't include PoCs in my stories that are also set in rural mid-America?

More importantly, why should I (GPWP) be punished as a racist for the decisions made in choosing my characters at all? You (generically) don't know on what grounds that decision was made. It could very well have been a conscious choice to respect a group that is tired of seeing themselves misused.

[denoue-moi.livejournal.com]

I was reading what ladyslvr said, and all I can really add is this.

I don't know much about writing or being a minority, but if I said, "Hey, you cannot write about a 6'1" out of work software developer/dogwalker with a bad dye job because you are not one!!" then I'd be kind of, well, being a jerk. I have faith in your ability to imagine what my life is like. I couldn't imagine telling a man or a lady of a different color that they couldn't write about me because they weren't an estrogen victim or all pasty.

Even if that would be a boring story.
denoue_moi woke up with her feet hanging off the bed. She sighed as she thought of the day to come. More searches on job boards for some kind of paying gig. What did she really want, she asked herself. "IDK, an API?" she said aloud. An early walk was scheduled with Rocky the Mastiff puppy. She sighed as she pulled back her fire engine red tresses. She would have to be vigilant. Rocky loved eating rocks, twigs, and bottle caps when left to his own devices.

Whew, boring.

Honestly though, some people are bent on finding proof that they are hated. :(

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

I couldn't imagine telling a man or a lady of a different color that they couldn't write about me because they weren't an estrogen victim or all pasty.

Yeah! I mean, there have been lots of really good books about women written by men. The book I mentioned not withstanding, I've read plenty of excellent novels with female characters penned by men.

Shakespeare wrote some pretty memorable and wonderful women. Good women, bad women. Flaky women. Strong women.

Honestly though, some people are bent on finding proof that they are hated. :(

Precisely!

Also, I love your icon so MUCH.