Tuesday News: Future looks grim; Bridget Jones’ next book has a big spoiler; Does Veronica Roth have a whitewashing problem?
Publishing NewsAmazon / dystopian / multicultural16 Comments
What’s Terrifying Teens In Today’s YA Novels? The Economy. Poverty Echoes In Young Adult Fiction – I once saw a pictoral comparison on reddit between the vision of the future in the 1950s (which was rosy and awesome) and the vision of the future now (which is basically the end of the world). This NPR article suggest that the rise of dystopian book success in YA novels speak to a teen’s fear of a doomed economy. I think that this is a big stretch but it is true that the future that is foreseen by movie makers is one of doom.
In this article, 60% of working adults hate their jobs. Wharton Business School professor Richard Shell suggests that is because people didn’t ask the right questions when they started out. I actually like what Shell is saying in this article and that is decide what success means to you because it is different for everyone (and usually a balance of feeling fulfilled and gaining external achievement markers). NPR
Fans hit by Bridget bombshell – If you are a big Bridget Jones fan, you may want to read this. You may want to pretend this last book doesn’t exist. Look, I’ve been there. I’ve bought the rage t-shirt. I’m sure it is still in my closet somewhere. The Bookseller
Why did this author do a 180 in her stance against whitewashing? – This is a rather unique situation. In Veronica Roth’s series there is a character named Four which Roth herself described as biracial even though in the book there is no specific designation of race. The actor picked to play Four is white. Maybe it wouldn’t be so important if Roth herself hadn’t said that she was against whitewashing and that she’d actively be against it in her movie:
After affirming in a Tumblr post last year that the character was actually biracial, Roth noted that she pictured him having light skin but later vowed to “use her words” to make sure that her wishes for a diverse cast were known in the event of a movie. “I really hate whitewashing,” Roth wrote. “I really do. It’s VERY important to me that it not happen.”
But Roth is thrilled with the actor picked to play Four and there is very little furor in fandom over this. So is it a big deal? The Daily Dot
Digital publishing news and views from the Firsty Group – From this post it sounds like Amazon has removed its most favored nation requirement for Marketplace sellers. I’m not sure if that means that will also extend to Kindle Direct Publishing at some point or publishers that have a direct relationship with Amazon. The Marketplace is where small businesses offer goods for sale through the Amazon portal.
“The outcome is a relief for Marketplace sellers like small traders and other online retailers, who will now be free to price as they like on Amazon, their own websites and anywhere else. One of those is FirstyFish, Firsty’s eBookstore for publishers and that offers lots of flexibility in selling to consumers. Firsty is committed to making the site an even better known and appealing option for those seeking eBooks, and it can provide an important extra revenue channel for publishers over the next few years. The site has also been re-developed and launching in the Autumn with a new catalogue of over 600,000 eBooks.” FirstyNews
I think the future has looked grim for a long time. One of the first paperbacks I remember owning was Andre Norton’s Daybreak 2250 A.D. (original titled Starman’s Son, pubbed 1952 but my copy was from 1962). The cover showed a teenagers in a leather loincloth steering a raft down a river surrounded by a decaying, shattered cityscape. We were going to bomb ourselves back to the stone age.
There were also a lot of stories that suggested we were going to create an ecological disaster that would threaten the future.
Basically the dystopian view of the future has always made for better fiction although the shape of that future has changed with the source of anxiety.
I wonder if it’s film fans, for whom Bridget Jones is a romance with HEA, who are more upset. The writing is more observational comedy, and the fact Fielding allowed Bridget – years ago – to get pregnant with Cleaver’s baby must have signalled to most of her readership that they should expect the unexpected.
(I’m on the fence about the book – her observational stuff can be blissfully good, and I’d like to read her take on parenthood. But Olivia Joules was a terrible book…)
@Marianne McA:
I think your right that film fans will be the more upset individuals. I didn’t read the book and only watched the movie for one reason. Now I know that reason will not be in the next film (if made).
I never read the books, but did enjoy the movies (the first more than the second). I read about the baby debacle (was that actually published or just an idea she was shopping around?) on one of the movie boards and thought it sounded awful. I honestly cannot decide if this is worse.
Either way I am going to live in SelectiveAmnesiaLand where this book (and the whole baby debacle) do not exist. It’s a happy place where there was also no 4th Indiana Jones movie, no Pirates of the Caribbean sequels, and no third movie in The Mummy franchise. And where certain books were never read, too.
I live in SelectiveAmnesiaLand when it comes to third Anne of Green Gables series
I’m still in for the ride RE: Bridget. This series (the books at least) has always always been about her and if she’d moved on, I’m ready for the ride. I’m sure they had many a fab year together before Darcy died. Also, Cleaver as devoted and naughty godfather to their children? Yes please.
Ignoring the “happy marriage doesn’t work in fiction…” quote for a second – if there really is so little that the author can write about in a sequel after the hero and heroine get their HEA, why even bother with writing a sequel? Is it just a money grab then? I find the whole thing off-putting and I’m not even invested in the Bridget Jones books or movies.
ETA: I know this quote isn’t from Helen Fielding but I just find it strange that this is the kind of quote that is circulating in the conversation about the book.
@DS: I don’t remember the Norton book, but do remember reading a lot of other end-of-the world type books back in the day–On the Beach and Alas Babylon for starters. Back then, we all thought we’d be nuked. Now it’s pandemics, financial meltdowns, environmental collapse, etc. Same story, different tune.
Well, based on these comments and Divergent’s fan base, I guess whitewashing continues to be a non-issue. I find it unacceptable and will vote the only way open to me, by not seeing the movie. It’s especially disheartening for the author to so drastically change her viewpoint.
@library addict.
Yes, the books were taken from her columns in the Independent. I didn’t read all of the later columns, because I’d become a Guardian reader by then, but I did buy the Independent for Bridget when I remembered and the baby stuff happened. (Though I have just checked on Wikipedia, just in case I’d remembered it incorrectly: “Bridget Jones gave birth to a baby boy, fathered by Daniel Cleaver. She moved in with Daniel.”)
When I heard the spoiler for the third book I was genuinely surprised, because in my head she’d ended up with Daniel. (Bad move, but her perogative.)
Thing is, I seem to remember there being a kerfuffle about it back then, which is why I think the current kerfuffle must be coming from a different fan base. (Either that or Fielding’s just got an ace publicist who manages to create a media storm each time she publishes.)
To me, your view of the future decides what Sci-fi you enjoy. My sons grew up watching Star Trek with my husband and me, so we all at one time bought into Gene Roddenberry’s rosy view of a future when mankind has stopped fighting each other (of course, AFTER the 3rd World War when we nuked each other), and money is no longer important. People choose jobs based on their interests, and everyone does work they enjoy. No one is wealthy anymore because no one wants for anything, nor cares how much money anyone has. I know it’s fiction, but really?
Babylon Five was our favorite show for a while because it presented the opposite view. Instead of Star Trek’s clean corridors, Babylon 5 had a “below deck”, where the poor, the destitute, the drug-addled, and the criminals resided. So in this view when we moved out into space we took our problems, endemic to humankind, along with us.
The very best sci-fi makes you think in new directions. It looks at the situations around us today, and extrapolates into a future where something has grown to its logical conclusion. IE, Margaret Atwood’s “Oryx and Crake”, followed by “After The Flood”, in which genetically altered foods move to their ultimate expression, and altering humans is the next logical step. It’s scary and thrilling at the same time, and I fervently hope it’s all wrong, as many predictions from when I was young, including flying cars and food in pills, were wrong…at least to date.
@DS: “Starman’s Son” – I read that book! I think it was my first science fiction book. I also read Alas, Babylon at some point. But then I later watched Star Trek and Babylon 5 (yeah, my kids call me a geek). So I think it’s possible to like and identify with both strains of SciFi. And if the young adult science fiction is dystopian, what do all the paranormal books signify?
Just to add, if you haven’t read the books – do. Forget the films, and don’t expect them to be romance, but Edge of Reason is one of the few books that has reduced me to tears of laughter. Objectively, I can’t see why it’s that funny, but every time I read Bridget writing her Christmas cards it cracks me up. And Fielding’s observational stuff is good – there’s a moment where Bridget rhymes off the calorie content of something – boiled egg ?- banana? – then reflects that she’s been on one diet or another for so long that she almost sees wanting to eat as a moral failing – it’s funny, but there’s an uncomfortable truth behind the thought.
Don’t, however, be seduced into reading Olivia Joules: Fielding’s a great columnist, but she isn’t – wasn’t at that point – able to do plot.
I’m a little amused by the premise that dystopians are a modern thing. The Cold War era spawned any number of them, in books and movies. I have a healthy collection of pulp from that time period validating that, not to mention those of the authors who wrote in what’s generally referred to as the Golden Age of SF/F.
@Lada:
Lada,
It’s a very big deal to me. That’s why I take the money earned from my multicultural novels and purchase film equipment. Hollywood will always be Hollywood, but independent filmmakers are and can make inroads. And believe me, this isn’t something I’d ever thought I’d be doing, just like going into self publishing. But I’m game for another big adventure :)
ETA: From some of the twitter conversation I’ve read, there are many diverse commenters voicing their opinion on this. It may be a small group, in relation to those who have no opinion either way, but they’re quite vocal.
I don’t know the details of her movie deal, but I’ll wager Veronica Roth – like most authors whose books are turned into movies – doesn’t have any say about how (and with whom) the movie is actually cast. She may indeed still have misgivings about the whitewashing but likely has zero control (especially since the movie is in post-production) over the final product.