Reading and diversity - which author are you reading?

[Fishbowl Helmet]

our - generally liberal and open-minded - SFF community

I don't think that's true. I once thought it was true, now I know it's not.

After interacting with creators both in the real-world and online. After seeing all the rampant sexism and racism couched in arguments about 'realism' and such. After seeing the sh*tstorm that was the sexism of the SFWA Bulletin episode last year. After watching so many comics creators doubling down on their misogyny. After watching all the meltdowns over race or gender changed characters. Gamer gate. I don't think the SFF community is magically privileged with folks who are somehow better than other fandoms or somehow more liberal and open-minded in their worldview than any other. It's simply not true. We have racists and sexists and bigots of all stripes just like any other cross-section of humanity. Ours can maybe talk a slightly better game, but that's it. They're still here.

What really boggles my mind is how this can be considering the generally liberal and open-minded nature of most SF. Or maybe I've just been lucky enough to only see that side of SF. It's like all those messages of understanding and acceptance simply went whistling through the cavern between their ears.

 

[barrett1987]

I read mostly white male authors. I think its because they dominant the genre i enjoy the most. I would also say that you can sometimes tell when the fantasy book is female author'd. Robin Hobb for example felt very female. I have basic tastes in my reading and it reflects in my writing I guess.

 

[Hex]

Um... at the risk of upsetting springs' intentions (again), I think the sff community is getting better -- and some bits are really good -- but a lot of traditional fantasy (especially) is about dominant men with big swords impressing everyone with their ability to murder people. They don't have many feminine skills, and that's what makes them fun to read about. They're not emoting everywhere, they're killing people or they're scaling fortresses or they're having emotionally stunted 'romances'.

There are now, I think, alternatives. I think Daniel Abrahams manages to have tough, soldier characters who are still ultra-manly and murderous but who respect other people too (and he balances them with strong women characters), but maybe that's just the way I read them because I'm not 17 any more.

However. While not everyone who reads those kind of books is a raving misogynist (I hope -- I read them too), they can maybe attract a certain kind of person who isn't that successful at distinguishing between the behaviour of fictional characters and real life. In that situation, I do think some people don't see the message that the books are sending, and since the people they talk to are also fans of the same books, they maybe don't see beyond them to other ways of looking at the world.

It's a kind of tunnel of people reflecting the same values at each other, and the books encourage the whole dominant male fantasy and worlds where women do what they're told and don't contradict men (or if they do, they're marked as strange, and the rest of society condemns them, leaving the strong man to protect them because he's powerful enough not to care).

And maybe that contributes to outrage when someone (particularly a woman) says something unexpected.

As an aside, I don't think books that are different from this small group of sff books are necessarily preachy, or have an explicit message, they're just different.

People tend to absorb prejudices and beliefs from their reading (why else would you do it?) and I'm a bit scared to examine whatever I've been picking up from my romance reading binge, but one of the advantages of reading widely is that you pick up different and contradictory prejudices, and then you have to think about them (probably).

I'm not very keen on reading authors because of colour or gender or sexuality or culture, but I've recently discovered I'm significantly less keen on the belief that only reading a certain kind of book by a certain kind of writer doesn't have an impact on the reader.

(and I don't think all straight white men write the same kind of books, but I think a certain kind of book tends to be written by straight white men).

I'm not criticising anyone, and I don't think it's your responsibility to read things you're not interested in, but I also think the idea of the challenge is worthwhile, and perhaps it's worth examining why an idea like that makes some people so very, very angry.

 

[Brian G Turner]

comics creators ... Gamer gate

Now you're changing the goal-posts - we were originally talking about the choice of reading books in the literary community.

You focus on the extremes, but you might take more heart from looking at the ordinary, such as major SFF awards - and the prize, best novel:

1. Nebula best novel winners
2. World Fantasy Society best novel winners
3. Hugo best novel winners

Gender parity seems to have been the norm - certainly across the past couple of decades. Men have tended to win the Hugo a little more, but women have tended to win the WFS a little more. The Nebulas look even.

I'm afraid English-sounding names give little clue to any presumptions of racial identity - there are quite a few authors I'd never even realised where non-white until recent discussions. Interesting to see that Samuel R Delany won the 2nd and 3rd Nebula awards for best novel.

Of course, the SFF community isn't perfect, and that's not my argument - simply that, as before, it is "generally liberal and open-minded" by comparison to mainstream Western society. There will always be room for improvement.

 

[Toby Frost]

A practical problem with this, to my mind, it that it leaves out is the huge number of people who don't think much about "issues" in fiction, and cheerfully watch A Game of Thrones or Twilight or whatever else is big in SFF, and may or may not soak up whatever messages those big books and shows depict. They, to my mind, are the people worth talking to if there is going to be widespread change, and addressing them in jargon or condemning them as morons, as both sides have done in the past, won't help.

I really want to write a short story now, where Dwight Bullneck, author of the Leather Laser Chicks series, gets trapped in a lift with Cassandra Boudicca, author of the blog Un-norming The Normative: De/gendering Hegemonic Arcologies. I see romance.

 

[Ursa major]

As an aside, I don't think books that are different from this small group of sff books are necessarily preachy, or have an explicit message, they're just different.

I think the problem is not that "books that are different from this small group of sff books" are preachy, but that some books are preachy and they tend to be ones where the author is trying to make a point, whatever it is. To me, the point being made is immaterial; it's how the point's being made that's important.

For example, I found Stranger in a Strange Land very preachy. I have no idea if what was being preached was the author's own opinion. The issue was less that one particular character was allowed to opine at great length (though it didn't help), but that those characters with differing opinions either didn't argue them well (or much at all), or were too easily persuaded that they'd been wrong all along. Basically, the book was preachy because, in terms of certain views, it was one-way traffic. This spoiled the book for me (and probably would have done whatever the opinion being expressed had been).

 

[Hex]

No, I agree. I can't bear preachy books. I even find it difficult in YA when there's a huge fuss about consent ("It's sexy to ask") when I know it's a massively important issue, and one I wholeheartedly support and everything. Still, working it in so obviously to the things characters say is just... painful.

Brian -- I think one could argue that major SFF awards are another end of the extreme, where a conscious decision has probably been made (somewhere behind the scenes) to ensure prizes reflect diversity so that the SFF community is seen as progressive and diverse. Which is a good thing. It's just unlikely to be any more normal than fbh's examples.

 

[MWagner]

It's curious that there's a lot more anxiety about race and gender in the SFF world these days than in other genres. I'm not really plugged into the Mystery community, but I don't get a sense there's a lot of fretting going on over the representations of gender and race. No Mystery genre civil wars raging across the interwebs. Or in Romance.

Is it because SFF is more misogynist than other genres? I don't know. Maybe. If so, I think that's due to its appeal to a largely male and young audience. Escaping to dangerous worlds and being vicariously empowered with mad fighting skillz has traditionally appealed to boys more than girls. And the approach to sexuality at that age tends to be pretty juvenile. But that's as true of girls as much as guys. The Twilight series is hardly a nuanced and sensitive depiction of sexuality and gender roles. But what's the solution? Browbeat young men into being more mature? Good luck with that. You have as much of hope of turning young women away from brooding bad boys. And I don't recall any demands that Stephenie Meyer make her books more appealing to boys.

It seems to me that much of the passion with which the subject is regarded in the SFF world is due to the age of the fans, and the very intensity of the fandom itself. Again, Mystery fans tend to be much older, and not nearly as plugged into fan forums, blogs, and other talking shops. I doubt many Mystery readers regard themselves as fans at all, or have any deliberate contact with writers or other readers. To them, a book is just something to read and then set aside. That's the case for many SFF readers as well, but there is also a large and active fan community that spends a lot of time on the internet. And for a generation that looks to the internet and social media for community, the stakes seem much higher. That intensity is one of the strengths of the genre, but it also makes disputes far more rancorous than in other genres.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

The Queen of Mystery is Agatha Christie and she has female MCs in the form of Miss Marple and also Tuppence.

 

[ratsy]

Just an interesting thing that happened this morning - my wife reads, not a lot but she always has a book on the go...she has read the classic YA books, Twilights, Divergents, and a couple others...she mainly reads paranormal-y romance-y things...Deborah Harkness, and Nora Robers...I just ordered her a Paula Brackston book last night (the sequel to Witches Daughter i think)

Anyways, she seems to have a hard time finding books that she really enjoys, and this morning, since I'm reading a Dresden book, I suggested she give the first one a try since it fits in with the paranormal, vamps, werewolfs, magic, theme that she reads typically. She looked at me and said "I prefer Female MC's" Of course I called her sexist right away. But it's true...And I suppose you could throw all of those kind of books into the SFF category couldn't you? If so, there are a tonne of female authors out there in the genre. You could add Kelly armstrong and Charlene Harris into it too, maybe Audrey Niffenger...and all of them have sold a lot of books.

Just wanted to share the fact that, it works both ways as well. Some people, especially ones who read as a minor hobby, really just want to read what they are comfortable with.

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

Now you're changing the goal-posts - we were originally talking about the choice of reading books in the literary community.

That's not what shifting goal posts means. I don't see them as separate. Many* of the geeks who read SFF also read comics and play video games.

You focus on the extremes, but you might take more heart from looking at the ordinary, such as major SFF awards...

No, I just choose not to ignore them. Further, 'ordinary' and 'major award' are something of a contradiction. Ordinary implies typical and normal, which don't quite apply to annual awards ceremonies like the Hugo's, which are nominated by one set of paying members and voted on by another set of voting members**. To vote in the Nebulas you have to be a SFWA member.

Gender parity seems to have been the norm - certainly across the past couple of decades. Men have tended to win the Hugo a little more, but women have tended to win the WFS a little more. The Nebulas look even.

Consider how those awards are decided and remember the to do with the most out there racist and sexist SFF voice nearly gaming the Hugo vote last year.

There will always be room for improvement.

First step is admitting there's a problem.

ETA: Near as I can tell there aren't many active mystery readers forums in which to have these kinds of debates.

*Since apparently a few counterexamples means a generalization is wrong.

**WorldCon supporting membership required to vote on this year's Hugo's and to nominate next year's Hugo's.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

Most of the geeks who read SFF also read comics and play video games.

not at all!
Only for a certain demographic.
Other demographics of SF&F readers my read no comics and play no videogames!

 

[AnyaKimlin]

I played computer games before I read SFF and I think comics are dumb!

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I suspect @AnyaKimlin that he doesn't mean Beezer, Topper, Hotspur, Beano, Dandy, Mandy, Tammy, Judy, Bunty
or even Boy's own paper.

Possibly not even 2000AD or the Eagle.

Did any girl's comics not end in a "y"? Today's "girls comics" appear to be dumbed down versions of dumb magazines for women, but maybe that's sexist talk.

I'm ancient, so when I started reading SF&F the only computer games were on inaccessible mainframes, though I "played" poker dice on a mainframe at an exhibition perhaps in 1969 on a teletype. That was about 2 years after I stopped reading the Beano.

Today American comics dominate the market in the UK, while the more traditional British comic are becoming less popular as they are seen as too immature and unsophisticated.

When I was a kid, we didn't even call Marvel and DC imports "comics" as they were so different in format, content, expensive and rare. The adverts were amusing. Did American kids buy that junk in the 1960s or were the adverts fake?

 

[AnyaKimlin]

I don't mean Beezer, Topper etc either - I love them and The Bunty. (I know someone who has written for the Beano). It's the "real" comic books I mean.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

My tongue was firmly in cheek. I was fairly sure you both referring to the "super hero"/fantasy hero type adventure strips of US origin. Though some are not USA.

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

Many* of the geeks who read SFF also read comics and play video games.

I don't, unless you count the occasional game of Free Cell when I'm on the phone and can't write.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

My tongue was firmly in cheek. I was fairly sure you both referring to the "super hero"/fantasy hero type adventure strips of US origin. Though some are not USA.

Absolutely. I'm currently reading them to my middle child. (currently Spiderman) Thinking of applying for a job as my dialogue and story construction is better than the current one.

The Bunty on the other hand had some gripping stories and is part of dialogue influence.

 

[Mouse]

It's curious that there's a lot more anxiety about race and gender in the SFF world these days than in other genres. I'm not really plugged into the Mystery community, but I don't get a sense there's a lot of fretting going on over the representations of gender and race. No Mystery genre civil wars raging across the interwebs. Or in Romance.

There is in gay romance. As I've already said (can't even remember if it was in this thread now, but I think it was), there are many gay men who won't read a m/m romance novel if they know the author is a woman. There's lots of talk about character representation too, race, gender etc. I know there's been a call for more gay black characters.


edit: @ratsy your missus might like Alexis Hall's Kate Kane books.

 

[Randy M.]

It's curious that there's a lot more anxiety about race and gender in the SFF world these days than in other genres. I'm not really plugged into the Mystery community, but I don't get a sense there's a lot of fretting going on over the representations of gender and race. No Mystery genre civil wars raging across the interwebs. Or in Romance.

Can't say about Romance, but the mystery may have dealt with this a long time ago. For instance,

Belgian detective: Hercule Poirot
Chinese detective: Charlie Chan (in fairness, the Chinese community in the U.S. have not taken kindly to this character and the stereotypes it either used or created)
Priest detective: Father Brown
Female detective: Hildegard Withers; Mrs. Marple
Jewish detective: Rabbi David Small
Blind detective: Max Carrados
Native American detective: Jim Chee & Joe Leaphorn
Dwarf detective: Dr. Robert "Mongo" Frederickson
African-American detective: John Shaft; "They-call-me-Mr.-Tibbs!" (see also, In the Heat of the Night); Gravedigger Jones and Coffin Ed Johnson -- note, only the last two were written by an African-American, Chester Himes

I think the latest of that list appeared in the mid-1970s. More recently, Alexander McCall Smith has had some huge best-sellers with his series starting with The No. 1 Ladies' Detective Agency which feature Botswanan Precious Ramotswe. I haven't read them, but they sound charming.

Since the 1970s there have been a lot more women detectives (Vic Warshawski; Sharon McCone; Kinsey Millhone -- look up fictional female detectives in Wikipedia; until I did I didn't realize there were so many) and gay detectives have appeared, too, in novels by Nelson Aldyne (a.k.a. the late Michael McDowell, known for his horror novels of the 1980s) and Charles Baxt, among others. (Not finding as reliable a list for that and my memory isn't helping, but I know of at least one more.)

Both SF and mystery derive from the Gothic novels and stories of the 18th and 19th century, but mystery got out of the gate faster and developed sooner than genre sf/fantasy/horror.

Is it because SFF is more misogynist than other genres? I don't know. Maybe. If so, I think that's due to its appeal to a largely male and young audience.

I think this is a good point. With mysteries, the audience was adult and so more adult themes and subjects were explored.

[...]

It seems to me that much of the passion with which the subject is regarded in the SFF world is due to the age of the fans,

But even the average age of SFF readers may be advancing: I haven't seen any reports on how many YA readers follow YA SFF to more adult SFF. And I wonder if this thread, which has occasionally shown some heat and irritation but no verbal grenade tossing, isn't an indication of the maturity of the posters here.

Really, it's been an interesting thread to follow because of that.

and the very intensity of the fandom itself. Again, Mystery fans tend to be much older, and not nearly as plugged into fan forums, blogs, and other talking shops.

For a time rec.arts.mystery was a pretty good place to discuss mysteries. I'm not aware of an equivalent anymore. In any case, these are good points, but ...

I doubt many Mystery readers regard themselves as fans at all, or have any deliberate contact with writers or other readers.

This one I'm not sure of. There are organizations like Baker Street Irregulars who dote on Sherlock Holmes, but I don't know if there are other more broad based groups.

To them, a book is just something to read and then set aside.

A point made to me a few years ago by a used bookseller. In his experience SF/F readers hang onto their books forever, mystery readers read and recycle.

That's the case for many SFF readers as well, but there is also a large and active fan community that spends a lot of time on the internet. And for a generation that looks to the internet and social media for community, the stakes seem much higher. That intensity is one of the strengths of the genre, but it also makes disputes far more rancorous than in other genres.

Yup. If we include the gaming and comics crowds, the average age may drop quite a bit, so no disagreement there.


Randy M.