Writing Characters Other Than Your Own Experience: A Roundtable

[The Big Peat]

Admin note: I would like to see posts commenting on what they've listened to/read in the original piece, and whether they agree/disagree with any of those points - rather than simply dive in with their own opinions on social-political issues, which we are not going to do here.

I just found this on Twitter - three authors talking about white authors trying to write PoC characters, some of the things that frustrate them, some of the things people should do and so on. Very worth reading if you were thinking of going there

Writing the Other Roundtable: How To Stay In Your Lane - Writing Charcaters of Color

Should White People Write About People of Color? A roundtable discussion with authors Jaymee Goh, Justina Ireland, and K. Tempest Bradford.

writingtheother.com

 

[AlexH]

I read an article about sensitivity readers before but had no idea how to find the right person. That website mentions a database that's only for their students.

Thanks for sharing - I'll watch the video and read the links.

 

[Abernovo]

Sensitivity readers are a great resource. It's no different from asking an expert to read over technical details to prevent you making a daft, and inadvertent, mistake. In this case, upsetting a community you're representing in print, by writing something unintentionally hurtful, or repeating false (but sometimes widely-believed) myths.

And, yes, I know a couple of people who have worked as paid sensitivity readers. I shall watch the video over the next few days.

 

[Star-child]

I completely understand the issue, but there is a very real danger that raising the bar to writing about others is that it will just incentivize having less depictions of diversity in fiction. If I can't write about a gay character without risk of social criticism for how I wrote about them, why risk including that kind of character? "American Dirt" might be problematic, but should the latina author really have been barred from writing fiction that doesn't perfectly match reality?

There will always be someone who has a more legitimate connection to some topic than most authors - but the world really doesn't have 7 billion people capable of writing publishable fiction. Some sort of allowance ought to be made if there was no disrespectful intent.

 

[Abernovo]

If I can't write about a gay character without risk of social criticism for how I wrote about them, why risk including that kind of character?

See my first two sentences. Get a beta reader from the community you're writing about. A bit like Mary Robinette Kowal talked to NASA folk to get her Lady Astronaut facts right.

 

[Star-child]

See my first two sentences. Get a beta reader from the community you're writing about. A bit like Mary Robinette Kowal talked to NASA folk to get her Lady Astronaut facts right.

Understood, but that won't make me immune to criticism as a non-gay or non-Asian (etc) author that seeks to profit from writing about something that I'm not. It is safer to simply avoid using any real world character descriptions that are outside of my own "lane".

My own inclination (as a sometimes SF dabler) is to avoid any character descriptions that denote an established race, culture, etc.

 

[.matthew.]

The fact is, people can always find fault in how any character is written. Take a stereotypical villain, he's probably a he, probably white, got a good chance of being fairly old (at least compared to the protagonist), and seems intent on some sort of domination. Does that mean that as a white man I should complain that my 'people' are being portrayed as evil imperialist monsters who enjoy torture and whatnot?

 

[Robert Zwilling]

Very powerful article that raises a lot of questions.

Writing for money, for the sheer act of writing, to be artistic, to be a wave of the future, might make it okay, but it doesn't always make it work out right. You got the audience that is going to read the book, and then there is the audience the book is about but maybe it wasn't written for them to read. Which audience deserves more of the author's attention as to what is said and what shouldn't be said.

I wonder if an author sticks to fantasy and slap stick comedy based on things that happen to anyone, maybe you can skirt the whole reality check awareness test that happens when an author tries to writer realistically.

In the case of American Dirt, apparently, sometimes, no amount of research can substitute for the real thing. The dividing line seems to the successful literature world's perfectly orchestrated mega-budget campaign about a book meant to enthrall anyone who hasn't been on the run as a migrant with death coming up right behind you and those who have suffered through that harrowing experience.

‘American Dirt’ is what happens when Latinos are shut out of the book industry
"from the LA Times, Esmeralda Bermudez, an immigrant herself. And she has said - and I'm quoting from a tweet thread - "'American Dirt' has left us with a textbook example of nearly everything we should avoid when writing about immigrants. It is hollow, harmful, an adrenaline-packed cartoon."

Controversy over the Jeanine Cummins novel American Dirt
Oprah put it in her book club to make it a rubber stamped success.
Stephen King, Sandra Cisneros, Julia Alvarez, all big time literary players, have endorsed it.
Anne Patchett, big time player on the New York Times best selling list, said it is a milestone.
#4 On Amazon Best seller List, it is a hot selling product, very profitable for an author's first published story

From the author herself about the controversy

 

[Star-child]

The fact is, people can always find fault in how any character is written. Take a stereotypical villain, he's probably a he, probably white, got a good chance of being fairly old (at least compared to the protagonist), and seems intent on some sort of domination. Does that mean that as a white man I should complain that my 'people' are being portrayed as evil imperialist monsters who enjoy torture and whatnot?

You certainly could complain about that, but you're living in an age where you apparently have a privilege, so your protests would amount to passive racism.


I realize this is teetering on the brink of the dreaded "political discussion", but art is unfortunately political - especially when it intends to borrow from or comment on reality as fiction normally does.

The problem with writing fiction is that it is necessarily sensational and unrealistic - because real life is boring enough that we seek out fiction to make things more interesting. If you craft a thriller about immigration, it is simply not going to be realistic, because almost no one experiences events with the dramatic ups and downs of readable fiction.

 

[.matthew.]

You certainly could complain about that, but you're living in an age where you apparently have a privilege, so your protests would amount to passive racism.

Which is my point. I wouldn't complain about it because it's both petty and pointless. I wouldn't rage at an author for writing a character that I didn't like (at least for that reason, cough cough).

Now, if they did it with intent to cause harm, that's a different matter. I could understand if someone wrote about black slavery and had them all being abused by their white owners, while going out of their way to say there was nothing wrong with it, or they deserved it, etc... well, that would deserve some abuse being hurled back at the author.

But for authors who merely try to write the unknown, it's not a crime to get things wrong, or misrepresent a character's background. If you are from that background, and you don't like it, post a review, give it 1 star, say that the representation is wrong, but don't spit your dummy out and spin it into a race thing. You find that most people who do start the kick off about such little things do it for themselves, not for any cause.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

With own voices the current trends are being driven by a desire to open the genre up and remove cultural appropriation. As a voice from an underrepresented region, I do feel that’s important (although NI SF doesn’t seem to be high on the agenda )

Eg, an agent on twitter raved about getting submissions from Northern Irish writers, especially any with a story about a teen in NI facing an abortion (we were the only place in the UK or Ireland without access to abortion** at the time).

Now, access to abortion (see **) is only one of many issues here (the suicide rate is terrible, with unresolved historical legacies and deprivation fuelling that). But what a sellable story! So much conflict.

I felt pretty grubby that that sensationalist storyline was seen as what an NI storyline should be (I knowof no one writing about that, as it happens.) It was not reflective of the genuine NI voice(we angst over identity a lot) but instead reflective of an external view of what our conflict should be. This is a danger - that we set the story we expect and not the story an authentic voice might want to write.

I’m not sure that makes any sense. It’s hard to explain.


**sort of. We could go over to Scotland/England and have a legal abortion at this time - and it would have been funded.

 

[The Big Peat]

I didn't post this to have a political discussion and I'll ask/encourage the mods to close it, and then ask them if I can repost it to the Resource forum in a thread that's automatically locked if it gets too far that way. The aim of me posting it is to help people who want to be better writers when its come to being outside their culture, and there's plenty to talk about there.

Re what @Abernovo said - I'm not trying to be down on sensitivity readers, and indeed they're important, but the big thing I got from all the reading I did tonight is that if you're relying on them, you've probably already made a mistake. They should be there to pick up the small details you've got wrong after immersing yourself in what it means to be them, not the basic research to begin with.

I completely understand the issue, but there is a very real danger that raising the bar to writing about others is that it will just incentivize having less depictions of diversity in fiction. If I can't write about a gay character without risk of social criticism for how I wrote about them, why risk including that kind of character? "American Dirt" might be problematic, but should the latina author really have been barred from writing fiction that doesn't perfectly match reality?

Why indeed?

There's a reason so many PoC authors ask the question "Why do you want to write about X" when talking about non-ethnicity authors writing about that ethnicity. Why does it matter to you? If the main thing that matters to you is the risk of criticism then yeah, maybe you shouldn't write about them. And that's not in a "stay in your lane" way - why are any of us writing about anything we're not passionate about?

And if we're passionate about it, why wouldn't we seek to have the most accurate portrayals of what we're passionate about?

Sure criticism sucks. Particularly criticism on matters of race. But if you're passionate about it, surely you're willing to take that risk. And if you're not - why are you going there anyway?

And as for American Dirt - the author got basic Spanish wrong for crying out loud. It's more that doesn't perfectly match reality, it is that it was nowhere near reality (except in scenes suspiciously like those included in other authors' works). Forget problematic, why would you want to be an author that is that bad at research and mocked by the people they're writing about? And why shouldn't they mock her?

Are we really incapable of reaching a bar higher than that when it comes to diversity?

There will always be someone who has a more legitimate connection to some topic than most authors - but the world really doesn't have 7 billion people capable of writing publishable fiction. Some sort of allowance ought to be made if there was no disrespectful intent.

First off, if the research is really bad, then is there really no disrespectful intent?

Second, there's not a shortage of authors out there who want to write fiction that promotes diversity and who do it in a way that's accurate. Many more than are published. Turning to them - or people who do research well - wouldn't cause a shortage of writers willing to do diversity.

 

[AlexH]

Understood, but that won't make me immune to criticism as a non-gay or non-Asian (etc) author that seeks to profit from writing about something that I'm not. It is safer to simply avoid using any real world character descriptions that are outside of my own "lane".

My own inclination (as a sometimes SF dabler) is to avoid any character descriptions that denote an established race, culture, etc.

I strongly disagree with the people who say you shouldn't write outside your own point-of-view. Offending people shouldn't be seen as a risk, as long as you're sensitive and aware of not causing harm. Ursula K. Le Guin has some great related interviews and/or Q&As. I understand it can be an emotive topic though, considering the point-of-view of people from historically (and still) oppressed people, nations and cultures, for example. With creative works, marginalising black musicians in the 1950s is one of the most obvious. Although he was great, Elvis isn't really the king of rock 'n' roll (the blame goes to media and record companies - I believe Elvis cited his influences).

Things are improving in mass media e.g. one of the lead writers for the new Bond film was female. I don't think big franchises should have an excuse to get things wrong - the Terminator 3 (or Dark Fate) ending was a bit of a fail, especially given what James Cameron thought he was doing with the film. There is still a long way to go in getting representation right (did anyone see the lesbian kiss in the new Star Wars film? Probably not without knowing about it).

I think it is more difficult for solo writers. I try to see things from other people's perspective however small (e.g. they were rude = maybe they're having a very bad day). Writing from other points of view has in my opinion, made me a better person (for want of better words). For example, I wrote a story set in the 90s about a teenage girl who wants to be a pro wrestler. I listened to and read interviews of female wrestlers from the era and more recently. Much of what I learnt (sadly) didn't surprise me, but I was shocked at some things. The story was also edited by a female (and feminist) editor who gave me excellent feedback. I wanted to get it right, and as a result feel I have a better understanding of what it's like to be a girl/woman in a male-dominated world. I'm proud of the story and despite the lack of suitable markets (the story's sitting doing nothing), I already started work on the sequel. But I'd rather write about something I care about. But for other stories, I find it difficult to find the right reader(s). I agree with @The Big Peat that it's up to us as writers to do the research, then (hopefully) find a sensitivity reader.

And finally, how much would never have been written if we couldn't write outside our own point-of-view/culture? Middle-earth wouldn't exist! And the modern world is a multitude of cultures.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

The point of Own Voices is that white (often) male (often) straight authors have had a larger publishing footprint, on every level - advances paid, numbers published, numbers bought* - than those from less represented communities.

As a white female writing sf (supposedly under represented) I have way more access to the publishing world than a POC would, in many/most countries. I am privileged. I am lucky and I know it.

I know it sucks if you are the demographic getting hammered by current trends. I totally get that. I believe this should all be about merit and our words and stories.

But it’s *never been about merit. It’s been about being the demograph publishers think they can sell. That’s *really* it.

That is not to say there are not amazing white male author. Much of my library is from them. But it is to question if they are such better writers than anyone else to allow such a wide skew in the market.

* which is not an indication we all want to but books from that demograph - we might but how do we know until authors outside that are promoted, paid and as likely to be published?

Pete, sorry if this post nukes your cool thread.

 

[AlexH]

Own Voices are necessary, but that's different to cultural (mis)appropriation. I seek out own voices, and I think it's important to read them whether we're writers or not (and whether we write outside our own culture or not). And going back to your previous post @Jo Zebedee - I've heard that from everywhere. E.g. a writer was born in Africa but has lived in the US most of their life; the publisher still wants a story set in a little sandy African village. I believe culturally relevant stories (such as abortions being illegal) are important (and I find them interesting). Knowing about the conflicts (and culture) of other countries gives me a better world view, and creative mediums are a good way to highlight important issues. I posted a thread about 'own voices' films for those reasons and got a couple of NI recommendations from you.

Lightspeed Magazine have a series of "Destroy" issues from people of colour, queers and women: PEOPLE OF COLO(U)R DESTROY Special Issues - DestroySF
"The People of Colo(u)r Destroy special issues exist to relieve a brokenness in the genre that’s been enabled time and time again by favoring certain voices and portrayals of particular characters."

Many SF&F magazines do. Uncanny is another: Uncanny Magazine Issue 24- Disabled People Destroy Science Fiction Cover and Table of Contents! - Uncanny Magazine

I'm not sure where the term "Destroy" came from for this!

There are also greats of the past from marginalised societies, such as Octavia Butler.

 

[etaylor]

@AlexH the word Destroy is being used in this sense according to U.S. millennial slang. It means they've done it so well that it can't be done any better.

...it makes no sense. I know. But it is what it is.

 

[-K2-]

SInce I have commented on this subject often--and had virtually every post deleted while others more inflammatory are left untouched--I'll respond with the singular post that was not circular filed... yet. So read it quickly

'Cultural appropriation' is a real thing, but ONLY when it is used to abscond with another peoples' culture to 'shut them out (shunning authors of that culture), or, disparage them unjustly.' If I pick my nose, it's not wrong of you to say, "Kay is a nose-picker." So, as long as someone doesn't try to color a people by their worst--OR BEST--traits, manner, or history alone... instead, offering a fair assessment, then no one should take offense. That said, there are those who will try to claim unless you are of that group, you cannot even mention them. Well, I say buffalo-chips to that

You'll likely find the people who find the most offense--at anything--usually have little to no relation to it. My guess is, that's how some people try and atone, cover-up, and maybe even try and change the worst parts of themselves.

K2

 

[The Big Peat]

I dunno, maybe this thread does need to touch on the politics of the issue to truly discuss the "how" of doing this. I leave that to the mods.

In any case -

I started wanting to include diversity in my books because all the cool kids were doing it. Lets not beat around the bush here.

So I did some research and discovered some cool myths, and started thinking about who'd be great to play X (which I rarely do) and got ideas, and was all "Wow, I should do this".

And then I saw some of the stuff that got said about sloppy use of non-European myths. And I hmmed and hrrhed and thought about it - and did feel that it was unfair to expect a higher standard of accuracy to other people's myths than is applied to NW European myths (hi @Jo Zebedee , please remind me how you feel about American UFs featuring the Sidhe again!), and that good intentions should count, and a bunch of other stuff - and arrived at a conclusion that ultimately, any book I want to publish I want to stand by. I want to be able to say "I thought about what I'm doing, and this is worthy of love". Did sloppy stereotypes fall into that? No. And I no more wanted my Chinese friends to be "Dude, what the hell" at what I'd written about their culture than I wanted my military friends to be "Dude, what the hell" about theirs.

Hence me reading about stuff like this. Hence me thinking about what I really, honestly care about. What I'm genuinely interested to know. And how to do it. I used the word immersion earlier, and I think in many ways its the best way to approach whatever you're writing. That's as true for filling in the gaps of my knowledge about the military, as it is for researching the occult, or 15th century commerce, as it is for a culture.

And as worldbuilders - the more we know about many different cultures, the more able we are to represent many different cultures ourselves...

 

[Star-child]

I know it sucks if you are the demographic getting hammered by current trends.

To be clear, I am not bemoaning the plight of the white male.

The danger isn't that whitey isn't going to get his book published, but that the book that he does get published contains even less diversity, lest the author risk attracting negative attention. The goal should be to normalize the inclusion of diverse character types, not punish anyone who gets the details wrong.

In the case of American Dirt, not only is the latina author getting killed for writing a book that draws attention to the plight of immigrants, but Stephen King is getting criticized for saying it is an entertaining and well written book. The lesson isn't "do better", but "shut up about anyone who you're not".

And if we're passionate about it, why wouldn't we seek to have the most accurate portrayals of what we're passionate about?

Well, no. We don't even demand that SF authors write science based stories, so why would we demand that JK Rowling (for instance) write an accurate depiction of fictional Native American wizards? She isn't passionate about Native Americans, but creating fantasy. There is no real magic culture anywhere to get right - it's made up.

 

[AMB]

I'm part of a minority group (not racial, but one that definitely squeals a lot about bigotry). I highly dislike the idea of sensitivity readers. Very few people in my group speak for me or anyone I know, and their activism is taking us down a bad path, one supported by just the sort of people who endorse sensitivity readers. And my circle includes PoC who find the "stay in your lane" levelled at others thing divisive and insulting to everyone.

You will not please everyone, and that in taking steps to pander to a group you are just as likely to upset other members of that same group, because these groups and their experiences are not a monolith. In my opinion, while it some level of authenticity validation won't hurt, it is far better to do things the old fashioned way: thorough research and observation of human nature, and hope you can portray what you learn in your writing.


This is not intended as a political comment, just a reminder that diversity is not just skin deep. Diversity of thought means you will upset people within any group regardless. So don't sweat the details too much or let minority "facts" get in the way of a good story.